The official Website of Bernd Pulch. Since 2009 providing critical insights and political Satire on lawfare, media control, and political reality. Avoid fake sites.
If Israel feels cornered, the nuclear floor collapses. Read all only at patreon.com/berndpulch
🛰️ “THE DAY MEARSHEIMER SAID THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD”
How Judge Napolitano’s latest interview triggered the deepest intel panic since 1973
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During his appearance on Judging Freedom last week, Professor John Mearsheimer broke with academic restraint and delivered the most explicit public description yet of the Samson Option—the long-planned, last-resort Israeli nuclear doctrine designed to ensure that if Israel were ever facing destruction, the world burns with it.
This ATS report consolidates:
The full strategic meaning of the Samson Option
The historical architecture behind it
How Mearsheimer’s new statements clash with the current geopolitical climate
This is the first public-style document that merges Mearsheimer’s remarks with the real intelligence doctrine.
PART I — 🧨 WHAT MEARSHEIMER SAID (AND WHAT HE MEANT)
In the interview, Mearsheimer subtly but unmistakably referenced:
1. Israel’s nuclear opacity = strategic leverage
He emphasized that Israel’s refusal to acknowledge its arsenal is not denial— it’s a deterrence multiplier. Everyone knows they have nukes. No one knows the rules.
2. Israel’s fear of strategic encirclement
He stated bluntly that Israel sees itself alone in any existential war, especially as:
3. When asked about escalation with Iran, Mearsheimer suggested:
“Israel will not allow itself to be defeated—ever. If cornered, the tools they have are catastrophic.”
That single word—catastrophic—is academic code for nuclear doctrine.
4. Mearsheimer warned that U.S. policy makes things worse
He said the U.S. enabling Israel’s maximalist posture accelerates the risk of an all-systems escalation event.
Translation: The Samson Option becomes more likely the weaker conventional deterrence becomes.
PART II — ☢️ THE REAL SAMSON OPTION: FULL DOSSIER
ORIGIN CODE NAME:“Israel’s Last Red Line”
YEAR: 1967–1973 LOCATION: Dimona, Negev Desert FIRST KNOWN DOCTRINE SET: Emergency meeting, Tel Aviv, October 1973 MODERN STATUS: Confirmed by multiple declassified CIA references
THE 4 PILLARS OF THE SAMSON OPTION
1️⃣ Massive Retaliatory Nuclear Strike (MRNS)
If Israel faces defeat—loss of territory, fall of Tel Aviv, collapse of IDF lines— they launch nuclear strikes on:
Tehran
Damascus
Cairo
Riyadh (contingent)
Possibly European capitals suspected of abandoning Israel
Yes, Europe is included in some contingency grids.
This is the part Mearsheimer alluded to indirectly.
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
“Cold rooms, clipped files, and silent witnesses — the experiments were buried, but the paperwork still screams.”
🧬💀 “THE FORBIDDEN FILES: HOW AMERICA RAN HUMAN EXPERIMENTS IN PLAIN SIGHT — AND THEN BURIED THE EVIDENCE” 💀🧬
Get the Original Document at patreon.com/berndpulch
⚠️ ABOVE TOP SECRET DOSSIER – CODEX: RADIANT SHADOWS
SUBJECT:The Hidden Architecture of Human Radiation Experiments, 1944–1974 SOURCE FILE: ACHRE Supplemental Volume 2 (1995) STATUS: Declassified Extract Compilation HANDLING: Tier IV – Restricted Analytical Circulation
I. EXECUTIVE INTELLIGENCE SUMMARY
Between 1944 and 1974, a sprawling ecosystem of human radiation experiments unfolded across laboratories, hospitals, prisons, military facilities, and aerospace research centers. The attached ACHRE Supplemental Volume 2 reveals a fragmented but revealing map of this covert scientific landscape—one stitched together from tens of thousands of pages of agency archives, oral histories, congressional hearings, lost documents, and partially declassified operational files.
The pattern that emerges is unmistakable: A network of institutions, researchers, funding programs, and classified initiatives operating with little oversight, uneven ethical standards, and an alarming tolerance for experimentation on unknowing or vulnerable populations.
II. KEY FINDINGS FROM THE SOURCE FILE
1. Thousands of Human Radiation Experiments Tracked Across Agencies
The Veterans Administration alone identified over 3,500 human radiation experiments between 1956 and 1992. NASA identified hundreds of additional experiments, with early records so incomplete that investigators had to reconstruct missing ethics policies from the 1960s. Further experiments emerged from DOD, DOE, NIH, universities, national laboratories, and private contractors.
The archive portrays a system where record-keeping was inconsistent, policy frameworks were often nonexistent, and many experiment logs were incomplete—or missing entirely.
2. CIA Behavioral and Radiological Research Crossed Paths with Radiation Leads
Although the ACHRE’s review of public and classified files concluded that no completed CIA human radiation experiments were confirmed, internal documents and project descriptions made repeated reference to radiation as part of broader behavioral control research under BLUEBIRD, ARTICHOKE, MKULTRA, and related programs.
Key findings:
MKULTRA documents explicitly cite “chemical, biological, and radiological materials” for clandestine behavioral operations.
Some radiation experiments appear to have been proposed or considered, though not carried out.
In several cases, researchers conducted radiation studies as cover for other CIA-sponsored activities.
Files were systematically destroyed in 1973, making complete reconstruction impossible.
3. Massive Cross-Agency Document Hunts Revealed Both Discovery and Absence
Agencies searched millions of pages:
CIA pulled 265 cubic feet of Technical Services documents for hand search.
The Directorate of Intelligence reviewed 46,600 pages with no radiation experiment findings.
The Office of Security combed 20 feet of records without responsive results.
NASA uncovered early ethics files only after deep archival hunts in retired storage and former radiation safety officers’ private material.
The record trail is simultaneously vast and patchy—an archival map full of omissions and ghosts.
4. Vulnerable Populations Were Repeatedly Used as Experimental Subjects
The file documents experiments involving:
Prisoners
Pregnant women
Children
Hospital patients
Military servicemembers
Individuals unable to give informed consent
The absence of ethics policies before the 1960s—especially in early NASA and VA programs—meant consent procedures were inconsistent or nonexistent.
5. Ethical Review Practices Evolved Too Late
The Ethics Oral History Project reveals a Cold War culture where:
ethical norms were ambiguous,
consent standards varied dramatically,
and many researchers operated without any formal ethical oversight.
Only in the early 1970s did formal policies requiring informed consent become enforced at major agencies such as NASA.
6. Institutional Case Studies Showed Deep Systemic Issues
The only full case study (UCSF) and partial studies at Oak Ridge show:
decentralized decision-making,
overlapping bureaucratic authorities,
reliance on expert networks that approved each other’s work,
and weak accountability structures.
Many programs were so intertwined that the Committee abandoned the idea of comprehensive institutional mapping due to “too few hands and too many places to search.”
7. MKULTRA’s Missing Files Leave Permanent Gaps
Helms ordered the destruction of most MKULTRA documents in 1973 to shield “outsiders… from follow-up questions or embarrassment.”
This deliberate eradication ensures:
No certainty about the full scope of behavioral and radiological proposals.
Permanent gaps in reconstructing early Cold War research strategies.
Dependence on oral testimony, fragmentary archives, and surviving administrative artifacts.
III. OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS: STRUCTURE OF THE SHADOW SYSTEM
A. The Experimentation Web
The document reveals a tri-layered ecosystem:
Formal, documented studies — many published, indexed, or logged in agency reports.
Informal or ad hoc experiments — discovered only through oral histories or stray archival leads.
Classified behavioral or radiological proposals — often redacted, partially destroyed, or preserved only via metadata.
B. Patterns of Vulnerability
Targets of experimentation most frequently included:
institutionalized populations
military personnel
prisoners
marginalized medical patients
individuals lacking full autonomy
Consent—when present—was often formalistic, incomplete, or ethically inconsistent with today’s standards.
C. Fragmentation as a Feature, Not a Bug
The inconsistent archival footprint is not accidental: Agencies routinely relied on decentralized units, contractors, and overlapping committees, producing a system where no single entity had full visibility.
This allowed sensitive studies (including behavioral and radiological research intersections) to operate in semi-obscurity.
IV. HIGH-VALUE INTELLIGENCE HIGHLIGHTS
Over 5,000 NIH intramural research protocols were indexed, many too late for deep analysis.
NASA had to reconstruct ethics policies from scattered 1960s memos; no early documentation survived.
Prison experiments at Washington State Prison and the “Green Run” release at Hanford were documented via state archives.
The CIA admitted MKULTRA documents referenced radiation, but denied conducting experiments on humans.
V. CONCLUSION: THE RADIANT ARCHIVE REMAINS FRACTURED
The attached ACHRE volume reveals:
a massive but incomplete historical record;
significant evidence of unethical experimentation;
structural opacity baked into Cold War research culture;
and deliberate document destruction limiting full accountability.
What remains is the shadow of a sprawling scientific architecture—partially visible in archives, partially erased, and permanently embedded in the fragmented paper trails of the mid-20th century.
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
OPERATIONAL. UNTRACKABLE. UNSTOPPABLE. THE BUREVESTNIK’S NUCLEAR HEART BEATS, A GHOST IN THE SKY THAT RENDERS ALL DEFENSES OBSOLETE.
// CLASSIFICATION: TOP SECRET//MAJOR ATTACK//NOFORN//HCS // DISTRIBUTION: BERNDPULCH EYES ONLY // REPORT ID: B-P/OSINT/9M730/BUREV-01 // SUBJECT: 9M730 BUREVESTNIK (SSC-X-9 SKYFALL) – STATUS & STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
PUBLIC RELEASE TRAILER berndpulch.org – “SKYFALL UNMASKED” 30-second teaser for general audience
[0:00–0:03] Black screen. Sub-audible rumble of a low-flying jet. White text fades in: “A missile that can fly for days… powered by a nuclear heart.”
[0:04–0:07] De-classified Russian test footage (public-domain, 2018): icy launch tube opens; exhaust plume. Voice-over (Bernd Pulch, calm baritone): “The 9M730 Burevestnik—NATO calls it Skyfall—was a rumor… until it wasn’t.”
[0:08–0:11] Animated cut-away appears: miniature reactor, liquid-metal loop glowing red. On-screen graphic: 22 500 km range circle covers every capital on Earth.
[0:12–0:15] Fast-cut headlines in multiple languages: “Mysterious radiation spike in northern Russia” – Reuters “Unlimited-range cruise missile” – Pentagon briefing “Accident during ‘Skyfall’ test” – President Trump, 2019
[0:16–0:19] Night-vision satellite sequence (commercial Sentinel-2, enhanced): Nenoksa test site, craters circled. Voice-over: “We reconstructed the failures they hid—and the science they perfected.”
[0:20–0:23] Close-up of patent documents, shipping logs, reactor-bureau letterhead—each stamped PUBLIC DOMAIN. Text flash: “No leaks. No speculation. Only verifiable facts.”
[0:24–0:27] Patreon badge slides in: “Full 14-minute technical breakdown – streaming now exclusively for supporters.”
[0:28–0:30] Bernd Pulch on camera for 1.5 s: “If you want fairy tales, watch television. If you want the blueprint of doomsday—click below.”
Screen cuts to red. URL & social icons appear: berndpulch.org/skyfall patreon.com/berndpulch
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report assesses the Russian Federation’s 9M730 Burevestnik(NATO: SSC-X-9 “Skyfall”), a ground-launched, nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered cruise missile. It represents a radical and destabilizing technological leap aimed at rendering all existing global missile defense systems obsolete. While plagued by significant technical challenges and high-risk testing, its potential operational deployment would fundamentally alter the strategic balance, creating a persistent, low-observable, and theoretically unlimited-range strategic strike asset.
SYSTEM OVERVIEW & CONFIRMED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (Based on Declassified Intel & OSINT):
· Designation: 9M730 Burevestnik (Буревестник – “Petrel”/”Stormbringer”) · NATO Reporting Name: SSC-X-9 “Skyfall” · Propulsion System: The core of the system. A small, compact nuclear reactor used to heat incoming air, providing propulsion for a turbojet or ramjet engine. This is not a nuclear pulse propulsion system; it is a nuclear-thermal air-breathing engine. · Primary Advantage: Effectively Unlimited Range. As an air-breathing system with nuclear power, its flight time is limited only by mechanical wear and tear, not fuel. This allows for profoundly complex, non-ballistic flight paths, circumnavigating the globe if necessary, to approach targets from unexpected and undefended directions. · Warhead: Designed to carry a nuclear warhead, estimated in the low-kiloton to sub-megaton range. · Launch System: Believed to be a transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) vehicle, with the missile launched using a conventional booster rocket to achieve initial altitude and speed for the nuclear-powered cruise stage to engage. · Status: Active, but protracted development. Officially acknowledged by President Vladimir Putin in his March 1, 2018, address.
OPERATIONAL CONCEPT & STRATEGIC DOCTRINE:
The Burevestnik is a key component of Russia’s strategy to ensure second-strike capability and penetrate advanced missile defense shields, specifically the U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system.
· Defeat of BMD: Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) systems are designed to intercept ballistic missiles on predictable, high-arc trajectories. The Burevestnik flies at low altitudes, following terrain, and can loiter for extended periods, making it virtually impossible to track and intercept with current BMD architecture. · Second-Strike Guarantee: In a catastrophic first-strike scenario, surviving Burevestnik launchers could launch missiles on unpredictable, days-long flight paths to ensure retaliation, guaranteeing mutual assured destruction. · Coercive Diplomacy: The mere existence of such a weapon provides immense leverage, signaling the ability to strike any target, anywhere, at any time, with minimal warning.
ASSESSMENT OF TESTING & DEVELOPMENT (Fact-Based from Official Sources):
Development has been hazardous and marked by severe setbacks, confirming the extreme technical difficulty of miniaturizing a stable nuclear reactor for a cruise missile.
· August 8, 2019, Nenoksa Missile Test Range: The U.S. Intelligence Community confirmed a catastrophic incident involving the Burevestnik. An explosion during recovery operations of a missile from a previous test led to a radiation spike, resulting in the deaths of at least five Rosatom (Russian State Nuclear Corporation) scientists and two military personnel. This event, known as the “Nenoksa Incident,” was significant enough to be detected by international radiation monitoring networks. · Implications of Nenoksa: The incident demonstrates that the reactor core or its fuel elements are being handled outside of secure containment, indicating recovery and analysis of failed tests. It underscores the immense danger and radioactive contamination risks associated with the program. · Recent Activity: Despite setbacks, testing is believed to be ongoing at remote Arctic ranges like Novaya Zemlya. Satellite imagery has shown increased activity consistent with preparations for long-range flight tests.
VULNERABILITIES & LIMITATIONS:
· High-Vulnerability Launch Phase: The system is most detectable and targetable during its loud, high-heat booster phase and initial climb-out. · Radiation Signature: The operational cruise missile would emit a low-level radiation trail, making it detectable by specialized airborne or satellite-based sensors, though this is a non-trivial tracking challenge. · Technical Reliability: The complexity of managing a small, open-cycle nuclear reactor in flight, including shock, vibration, and heat dissipation, presents monumental engineering hurdles. A crash results in a radiological dispersal event. · Cost & Logistics: The program is exorbitantly expensive. The risks of handling, transporting, and maintaining nuclear-powered missiles create immense logistical and security burdens.
INTELLIGENCE GAPS & REQUIREMENTS (KEY QUESTIONS):
· What is the current mean time between failure (MTBF) for the miniature reactor? · Has Russia successfully tested a full-range, full-duration flight? · Where are the intended permanent basing locations, and what is the planned deployment size (brigade strength)? · What are the specific command-and-control protocols for a weapon that can loiter for days? How is positive control maintained to prevent accidental or unauthorized launch?
CONCLUSION & PROJECTED TIMELINE:
The 9M730 Burevestnik is not a bluff. It is a real, high-risk, high-reward weapons program born from Russian strategic paranoia and a drive for asymmetric advantage. While not yet a mature, deployable system, its continued development represents one of the most significant and dangerous strategic weapons projects of the 21st century.
Projected Initial Operational Capability (IOC): 2025-2030. Full-scale deployment will likely face further delays due to technical and fiscal constraints. However, even a limited operational capability would force a fundamental reassessment of Western strategic defense posture.
// END OF REPORT // // THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF THE BERNDPULCH INTELLIGENCE NETWORK. UNAUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTION IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. //
Disclaimer for Bernd Pulch Platforms: This report is a synthesis of credible open-source intelligence (OSINT) including statements from the Russian government, U.S. intelligence community disclosures, reports from agencies like Janes, and analysis from nuclear weapons experts. It is formatted in a classified style for illustrative and dramatic effect but is based on publicly verifiable information.
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
Strategic Calculus: +1 Hypersonic System. -7 Minutes to Decide. -All Current Defenses. 2. The Oreshnik Doc
🛰️ ABOVE-TOP-SECRET INTELLIGENCE SYNTHESIS
Ref: BP-INTEL/HYP/1025-ORESHNIK Source:Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) Cross-Verification & Analysis Classification:UNOFFICIAL / FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION Target Audience:Researchers, Journalists, Security Professionals
⚡ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE HYPERSONIC BLITZ IS HERE
The era of hypersonic warfare is no longer theoretical. Open-source evidence confirms that Russia has successfully deployed and combat-tested a new class of intermediate-range hypersonic weapons, specifically the “Oreshnik” system, with a nuclear-certified variant (Oreshnik-N) now being forward-deployed to Belarus. This move strategically places Mach-10+ nuclear-capable missiles inside the EU’s borders, collapsing NATO’s decision window to under 7 minutes and rendering existing missile defense systems largely obsolete. This report synthesizes technical data, satellite imagery, and logistical trails to expose the full scope of this strategic shift.
🔍 FACT-CHECK & SOURCE VERIFICATION
Claim Status Source & Notes “Oreshnik” System Exists ✅ PLausible Term used by Russian mil-bloggers & analysts. No official MoD data sheet, but consistent with naming conventions (e.g., “Kinzhal”). Corroborated by multiple OSINT entities. Speed > Mach 10 ✅ Confirmed (Claims) Repeated in Russian state-affiliated media (TASS, RIA Novosti). Independent radar data from conflict zone analysis supports high-speed impact profile. Used in Combat (2024) ✅ Highly Likely Multiple strikes in Ukraine (e.g., Nov 2024 Dnipro) show characteristics of hypersonic weapons: very short warning, high kinetic energy, precision. Forward Basing in Belarus ✅ CONFIRMED Satellite Imagery (Sentinel-2, MAXAR): Shows construction of specialized revetments and rail spurs at Lida (53.889°N, 25.284°E) and Baranovichi, consistent with Russian nuclear storage site signatures (double-fence, radiation trefoils). Nuclear-Capable (Oreshnik-N) ✅ CONFIRMED (Indicators) OSINT Signals: “N” suffix in mil-blogger posts alongside radiation emojis. Imagery: Transport containers marked with codes like “30-ЯЧ” (nuclear component transport). Infrastructure: Hardened bunkers with security features exclusive to Russian nuclear sites. “Thunderstorm” Program 🟡 Speculative Analyst-community driven name for a potential follow-on system. Evidence is circumstantial (lengthened TELs, material procurement). Treated as a distinct R&D program, not a deployed asset.
🧩 THE HYPERSONIC TRIAD: A CONCISE BREAKDOWN
Boost-Glide Vehicles (BGV): Launched on a rocket, then glide unpowered at hypersonic speeds in the upper atmosphere. Unpredictable trajectory. Example: Russian Avangard, Chinese DF-ZF.
Air-Breathing Scramjets: Cruise in the atmosphere using air for combustion. Enable sea-skimming, low-altitude profiles. Example: Russian Zircon.
Maneuvering Re-entry Vehicles (MaRVs): Advanced ballistic missile warheads that can maneuver during descent. Blur the line between ballistic and hypersonic threats.
🎯 OPERATIONAL IMPACT: WHY THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING
· Decision Collapse: Time-to-target for European capitals is now 5-9 minutes. No time for political consultation; requires pre-delegated launch authority. · Payload Ambiguity: The same missile can carry a conventional or nuclear warhead. Defenders must assume the worst upon launch, drastically increasing escalation risks. · Defense Penetration: Current systems (Aegis, Patriot, S-400) are designed for predictable ballistic arcs. Hypersonic maneuverability and low flight paths defeat these systems. · Arms Control Evasion: These systems are designed to circumvent treaties like the now-defunct INF, creating a new, unregulated arms race.
🚨 DEFENSE & DETECTION: THE WEAK LINK
Current missile defense is a shield full of holes. Mitigation requires:
· Space-Based Sensing: New constellations in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) for persistent tracking of the boost and glide phases. · Next-Gen Interceptors: Directed energy weapons (lasers) and hyper-velocity projectiles are in R&D but years from deployment. · Resilience & Pre-Delegation: Hardening command centers and pre-authorizing responses are now grim necessities, not options.
💰 FOLLOW THE MONEY & METALS TRAIL
· Missing Materials: 1.4 tonnes of carbon-carbon nose-tip blanks from NPO Kompozit plant → enough for ~12 glide vehicles. · Specialized Transport: Belarus Railway flatcar series 0018xx-0019xx (8-axle) are designed for strategic missile transport. · Supply Chain: Unusual procurement of Tantalum-Tungsten (Ta-W) alloys from Kazakhstan’s Ulba plant points to continued production.
🔓 PUBLIC RELEASE RECOMMENDATION
· Publish annotated satellite imagery of Lida and Baranovichi sites. · Create an interactive map showing range rings and time-to-impact for European capitals. · Release the OSINT Collection Checklist for public monitoring.
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
The NRC’s own secret briefing reveals the “independent” nuclear regulator is a captured agency, systematically dismantled by political forces while being tasked with preventing a national catastrophe.
Dim reactor hum. Classified pages flicker: Org charts hiding black ops, budgets fueling false flags, Deep State strings on every Commissioner. This 383-page beast? Your key to the atomic abyss.
Voiceover (echoing whisper): “They briefed the elite. Now, you seize the files. From E-13’s puppet masters to D-4’s endless nukefunds – expose it all. But only if you’re in.”
Unlock Here: patron.com/berndpulch Eyes Only. Donors Enter First.
ABOVE TOP SECRET CLASSIFIED LEAK: “NOMINEE INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION” – THE NRC’S BLUEPRINT FOR CONTROLLING THE NUCLEAR SHADOW GOVERNMENT?
Posted by: ShadowNukeWhisperer Date: October 28, 2025 Thread Tags: #NRCConspiracy #DeepStateNukes #NomineeMindControl #AtomicAgenda Security Level: EYES ONLY – FOR PATRIOTS WHO KNOW THE TRUTH
Fellow Truth-Seekers,
I’ve just cracked open what can only be described as a smoking gun from the bowels of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) – a 383-page PDF titled “Nominee Introductory Information, November 2020”. This isn’t some dusty HR manual for your average bureaucrat. No, this is a classified onboarding ritual for the elite puppeteers who sit on the NRC Commission, the shadowy overlords regulating everything from reactor meltdowns to the very atoms that could reshape our reality. Leaked straight from the agency’s vault (or so my sources whisper), this doc reads like a mix of corporate handbook and Illuminati initiation guide. It’s designed to “brief” new Commissioners on their “powers” while subtly wiring them into the Deep State’s nuclear web.
Why now? With the current date hitting October 28, 2025, and whispers of fresh nominations swirling in D.C. corridors, this 2020 relic feels like a prophetic warning. Is the NRC prepping for a “reset” event – a controlled nuclear “incident” to usher in global governance? Or is it just another layer of the matrix, ensuring Commissioners toe the line on everything from HAARP-like energy weapons to off-world tech suppression? Buckle up, because I’m breaking it down section by section, connecting the forbidden dots. Red-pill alert: This is how they manufacture consent for the endgame.
Section A: “NRC Assistance to Commissioner Nominees” – The Indoctrination Pipeline
Page A-1 spills the beans on how the Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) “assists” nominees. Sounds helpful, right? Wrong. This is psychological onboarding 101. They arrange “courtesy visits” with Congress critters (see attached oversight committee list – more on that later), briefings on “hot issues” like reactor safety and nuclear waste, and even script your confirmation hearing statement. Post-hearing Q&A? They “coordinate responses.” Translation: They ghostwrite your soul to align with the agenda.
Smoking Gun: OCA teams up with the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) and Executive Director for Operations (EDO) for “overviews” on topics like “Nuclear Security” and “International Nuclear Safety Support.” Why the emphasis on international ops? Because the NRC isn’t just babysitting U.S. plants – it’s the tip of the spear for global nuclear hegemony, coordinating with the Department of State (E-16) to export “safeguards” that double as control mechanisms. Remember Fukushima? This doc hints at post-9/11 “reinforcements” (see Background Info #2) – code for hardening facilities against… whistleblowers? Or false flags?
Conspiracy Connect: This mirrors MKUltra-style programming. Nominees get fed a narrative of “independence” while being funneled into the machine. No wonder Commissioners rarely rock the boat – they’re vetted to ensure loyalty to the real masters (hint: not We the People).
Section B: Org Chart & Functions – The Hydra’s Many Heads
Pages B-1 to B-14 map the NRC’s structure like a corporate Illuminati pyramid. Offices reporting to the Chairman? Check. To the Commission? Check. Advisory Committees (B-5) that sound benign but scream “unelected shadow council.” Then the EDO’s empire (B-7): Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Materials Safety, Enforcement… all feeding into a beast that “regulates” 100+ reactors while hiding black-budget ops.
Key Reveal: The Office of the Inspector General (B-14) – supposedly for “oversight.” But in Deep State speak, that’s where they bury the bodies (metaphorically… or literally, post-Chernobyl). And don’t get me started on the “Advisory Committees” – unelected experts rubber-stamping decisions on everything from waste disposal to “high-level” (pun intended) secrecy protocols.
Dot-Connecting Time: Cross-reference with Section E’s “Limits on NRC Authority” (E-8). They claim independence, but ties to DOE (E-14), DHS (E-17), and even the Intelligence Community (E-24) scream fusion center. Is the NRC a front for militarized nuclear R&D? Yucca Mountain “delays” (D-4) aren’t accidents – they’re stalls for underground bases storing alien-derived tech (or so my ET contacts allege).
Section C: Senior Leadership – The Faces of the Facade
C-1 lists the top dogs. As of 2020, it’s a roster of careerists with revolving doors to Big Energy and Pentagon gigs. Chairman? A DOE alum. Commissioners? Law firm hacks from nuclear lobbies. No outsiders allowed – this ensures the “strategic goals” (D-1) stay locked on containment, not disclosure.
Hidden Agenda: Why bury bios in attachments? Because digging reveals ties to post-9/11 “security reinforcements” (Background #2). These aren’t leaders; they’re handlers enforcing the “NRC as Independent Regulator” myth (Background #7, NUREG/BR-0164).
Section D: Budget & Human Resources – Follow the (Fissile) Money
D-1 to D-6 is a goldmine of obfuscation. “Budget Authority” (D-2) hovers at billions, funded by fees from licensees (D-5) – so the industry pays its own jailers? “No-Year Funding” (D-4) means slush funds that never expire, perfect for black ops. High-Level Waste (D-4)? Billions vanishing into “control points” (D-5) with zero accountability.
Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum: 90%+ from user fees? That’s not regulation; that’s a protection racket. And the “Commission Bi-Weekly Budget Report” (D-6)? Weekly check-ins to ensure no leaks (pun very intended).
Conspiratorial Twist: Tie this to the FY2019 Agency Financial Report (Background #5, NUREG-2220). “Protecting Our Nation” (Background #6) sounds noble, but it’s code for suppressing free-energy tech derived from nuclear fusion breakthroughs (suppressed since Tesla). Budget “awards” (D-6)? Bribes to keep mouths shut.
Section E: Responsibilities Under the Law – The Legal Shackles (or Leash?)
E-1 to E-28 is the meat: History (E-3) from Atomic Energy Act ’54, adjudications (E-4), mission scope (E-5). International duties (E-7)? Non-proliferation treaties that enable proliferation for “allies.” Limits (E-8)? They swear no DOE meddling, but E-14 begs to differ.
Gov’t Web of Deceit: White House (E-13), OMB (E-13), State (E-16), EPA (E-16), DHS (E-17), OSHA (E-19), DOJ (E-20 – with firearm preemption, E-21? WTH?), FERC (E-22), OGE (E-23), OPM (E-24), IC (E-24). States/Tribes/Congress get lip service (E-24–E-28), but real power? Executive Branch puppetry.
Ultimate Red Pill: “NRC as Independent Regulatory Agency” (E-9). Bull. The 1954 Act was a post-Manhattan Project carve-out to hide the military-industrial complex’s nuclear toys. Adjudications (E-4)? Kangaroo courts shielding Big Nuclear from lawsuits. And Congress oversight (E-26)? Those committees (pages 7-9) are theater – Barrasso, Pallone, et al., all captured.
Sections F-H & Background: The Playbook for Power
F-1 indexes “Major Recent Activities” – Fukushima fallout, waste scandals? Sanitized. G-1/H-1: Sample hearing statements/responses – templates for scripted fealty. Background docs (pages 4-5): Survivor’s Guide for Nominees (#1)? Code for “Don’t End Up Like Oppenheimer.” Security post-9/11 (#2)? Fortifying against us, the awake. Strategic Plan 2018-22 (#4)? Lockstep with UN Agenda 2030. International Policy (#8)? Globalist wet dream.
The Big Picture: This doc isn’t introductory; it’s a control matrix. Nominees are groomed to enforce a narrative of “safety” while the real game – suppressed zero-point energy, directed-energy weapons disguised as “reactors,” HAARP-nuke hybrids – plays out in black sites. Why release in 2020? Pre-COVID psyop to distract from nuclear escalations in the South China Sea? Or prep for 2025’s “event”?
Call to Action, Patriots: Download the full PDF (if you dare – link in PMs). Cross-reference with declassified MKUltra files and Yucca Mountain FOIAs. Who’s the next nominee? Watch for ties to Raytheon or DOE. Share your takes – is the NRC guarding the Ark of the Covenant-level tech, or just prepping for WW3?
Stay vigilant. The glow is coming. ShadowNukeWhisperer out.
(Mod Note: Thread locked if you sheep start debunking. Truth only.) Views: 666 | Replies: [Redacted for OPSEC]
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
💣 A single red countdown blinks through the smoke — inside the war room where tomorrow’s silence is rehearsed tonight.
🔐 ABOVE-TOP-SECRET – STRATEGIC REVIEW
Ref. No.: ATS/Σ-NJ/1025 Classification: UNOFFICIAL – based on open-source material (Jacobsen’s book, public reviews, expert commentary) Compiled by: [Your publication] Date: October 2025
🧭 SUBJECT: “NUCLEAR WAR FRAMEWORK – ADAPTATION FOR CURRENT THREATS”
This report analyzes the core scenario laid out in Jacobsen’s 2024 book, extracts the major lessons for today’s strategic environment, and adapts them into a decision-maker checklist and risk map for contemporary nuclear conflict escalation.
⚡ EXECUTIVE FLASH
Jacobsen’s book presents a minute-by-minute escalation of nuclear war beginning with a surprise strike, based on expert interviews and declassified planning documents. While hypothetical, the scenario draws from real doctrine and threat-vectors. This review translates those framework elements into a modern strategic risk matrix applicable to U.S., Russia, China, North Korea, and regional flash-points.
📚 SCENARIO HIGHLIGHTS (as per Jacobsen)
A “bolt-out-of-the-blue” missile attack triggers U.S. retaliation, escalation, and full-scale global war.
Systems of early-warning, deterrence posture, and decision-latency become critical failure points.
The meltdown proceeds rapidly—in under 72 minutes civilization is in collapse.
The public barely understands these dynamics; the book warns of complacency.
🧠 ADAPTATION: KEY LESSONS FOR TODAY
Framework ElementWhy It Matters NowActionable InsightEarly-Warning Failure With modernization in Russia/China, false alarms remain high risk. Audit cross-domain feeds (space, cyber, EW) and decision-latency protocols. Escalation Ladder Speed Regional actors (e.g., DPRK, Pakistan) raise probability of quick escalation. Simulate “under-15-minute” escalation drill for key leadership layers. Launch-on-Warning Doctrines Doctrine remains ambiguous despite treaties; hair-trigger risk persists. Review current doctrine public posture vs operational posture for divergence. Comms/Command Breakdown Cyber-attacks or EMP could cripple C2 → decisions made on degraded data. Harden redundant communications; plan for degraded-info scenarios. Public Shock / Infrastructure Collapse Civil society unprepared for high-intensity missile exchanges. Draft public-communication crisis plan covering blackout, EMP, fallout.
❗ MAJOR RISKS IDENTIFIED
Unintentional escalation due to regional strike appearing as first-strike.
Over-reliance on “deterrence holds” mindset—Jacobsen warns “everything unravels” when it fails.
Public fatigue and ignorance – nuclear risk seldom debated despite modernization.
Mismatch between policy rhetoric and real readiness/time-compressed decision environments.
🔍 VALIDITY & CRITIQUE
The scenario rests on credible interviews and known doctrine, but some technical assumptions have been challenged by experts.
It is not a prediction but a structured scenario—users must avoid treating it as inevitable.
The value lies in framing escalation pathways, not in predicting exact outcome.
🎯 RECOMMENDED FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Download detailed escalation ladder chart derived from the book.
Review early-warning system comparative matrix (U.S./Russia/China).
Workshop: Build institutional decision-latency drill “T minus 15 min”.
Access briefing slide-pack using Jacobsen’s scenario mapped to current 2025 arsenals.
📈 WORDPRESS TAGS
nuclear war scenario, Annie Jacobsen nuclear war book, launch-on-warning risk, early warning systems modernization, nuclear escalation ladder, global strategic nuclear threats 2025, above top secret, nuclear war adaptation review
🔥 CAPTION
📖 *“72 minutes until oblivion – the scenario that asks, what happens when deterrence fails?”*
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
Caption:🇩🇪⚠️ “Bundestag under red alert: whispers of Spannungsfall echo through the chamber as Europe edges toward emergency law.”
🔐 ABOVE TOP SECRET — FINANCIAL FLASHPOINT Ref. No.: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL Distribution: PUBLIC / ANALYST READOUT Auto-Purge: 72 h
🧨 Executive Flash (one-line)
If EU governments move to cash in or otherwise operationalize the frozen Russian central-bank holdings (largely immobilised via Euroclear/Belgian custodial chains) to fund a major “reparations” loan for Ukraine, Germany (facing political, legal and military signaling choices) and several EU partners will face a multi-vector crisis that could trigger emergency law mobilisations (including Germany’s Spannungsfall mechanics), banking/market shocks, and asymmetric Russian counter-measures.
🔎 Situation background (what is actually happening now)
EU capitals are actively discussing a plan to use income / cash balances tied to frozen Russian assets as the basis for a €130–€140 billion loan to Ukraine (repaid only if/when Russia pays reparations). This proposal is advancing rapidly but is legally fraught.
Most of the immobilised assets are held in Belgium / Euroclear custody; Belgian leaders are urging guarantees and burden-sharing because unilateral Belgian action raises legal and financial liability. The Belgian government explicitly warns of exposure and demands EU risk-sharing.
The Kremlin has publicly denounced such measures and threatened legal action and “consequences” — rhetorical escalation that could be followed by financial, cyber, diplomatic or kinetic responses.
⚠ The Prediction (clear, actionable forecast)
If EU leaders green-light a mechanism that effectively monetises frozen Russian assets (even via a legalistic “reparations loan” construct) within the next 30–90 days, then:
Russian legal reprisals and threats will cause volatility in EU bond markets and FX pairs (EUR/RUB, EUR/USD). Euroclear and Belgian institutions will face litigation risk and reputational stress; counterparties may demand collateral or payment timing assurances.
Moscow will retaliate with asymmetric measures: targeted cyberattacks on financial infrastructure, selective suspension of bilateral energy or logistical links, restrictions on exports to states that lead the move, and legal filings in international courts. Expect noisy diplomatic expulsions and rapid tit-for-tat measures.
German constitutional response — Spannungsfall activation pressure (Weeks 2–8):
Domestic political pressure (from coalition partners, opposition, Bundestag security committees) and rapid risk assessments could push Germany to consider Spannungsfall (state of tension) or emergency posture adjustments short of full state-of-defence. That step would be framed as defensive: securing critical infrastructure, elevating military readiness, and enabling emergency procurement / movement. The legal thresholds are high, but a coordinated EU-wide perceived external threat—especially if Russian measures disrupt finance/energy—could create the political conditions to trigger Spannungsfall debate.
Cascade to other EU emergency measures (Weeks 2–12):
Several EU members (Belgium, Baltic states, Poland, Finland, Sweden, possibly the Netherlands) will move to heightened alert or national emergency postures focused on financial continuity, cyber defence and critical energy safeguards. Smaller states most exposed to Russian retaliation or with substantial frozen asset holdings will push for EU guarantees or decline participation.
Medium-term political fracture risk (1–3 months):
If legal structures and guarantees are NOT agreed quickly, the initiative’s backers (Nordic states, Baltics, parts of Germany/Netherlands) will push ahead with coalition mechanisms or ad-hoc schemes—provoking a political schism within the EU and increasing the chance of retaliatory economic measures by Moscow. This could erode EU cohesion at a time when synchronized strategy is most needed.
🔍 Why Germany is central (mechanics & politics)
Germany holds outsized strategic exposure: large banking/financial sector ties, critical energy transit links, and high political sensitivity to escalation. Any severe Russian counter-measure (energy cutoff, cyber on banks) instantly raises domestic pressure to activate legal emergency options (including Spannungsfall or other crisis statutes) to coordinate civil/military assets and protect critical flows. Politicians will frame activation either as de-escalatory deterrence (showing resolve) or necessary crisis management.
📉 Financial & Legal Flashpoints to Watch (red flags)
Belgium’s demand for written EU guarantees — if unmet, Belgium may refuse to allow execution of any plan involving assets within its jurisdiction.
Litigation notices from Russia — immediate suits or asset seizure threats against EU states/persons.
Financial market stress indicators — sudden widening of Euribor/EONIA spreads, CDS on Belgian sovereign bonds, or downgrades to custodial institutions.
Energy shock signals — abrupt reductions in gas volumes, new trade restrictions, or port/transport interference.
Red-Team Worst-Case Scenarios (plausible but not guaranteed)
Legal/Financial Spiral: Belgium refuses; ad-hoc group uses assets in non-Belgian jurisdictions → Russia sues for confiscation, files claims at ICSID, and targets Belgian officials/financial institutions with sanctions/cyberattacks → immediate capital flight and interbank stress.
Hybrid Escalation: Moscow responds with simultaneous cyberattacks on Euroclear/major clearing banks + selective energy supply disruptions to Germany and allies → Berlin invokes higher emergency coordination (telecom, grid protections, Spannungsfall debate) → public panic and markets rout.
Political Fragmentation: EU fails to agree guarantees; some states proceed, others abstain → long-term split in EU security posture and defense procurement, weakening NATO coherence in the short run.
Recommended Watcher Playbook (what analysts/editors should do)
Monitor official EU summit communiqués and Belgium government statements for guarantee language.
Watch Euroclear press releases and tier-1 custodial bank alerts for operational changes.
Track German Bundestag committee sessions, chancellery briefings, and Bundeswehr readiness bulletins for any formal steps toward Spannungsfall mechanics.
Keep an eye on financial stress markers (government bond CDS, overnight funding spreads) and energy flow telemetry.
Collect legal opinions from EU member states (France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg) on asset usage frameworks.
EU leaders consider using frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine — AP News.
EU mulls using frozen Russian assets for loan to Ukraine; legal concerns — Reuters.
Belgium: share the risk to use frozen Russian assets — Reuters / commentary.
Background reporting on reparations-loan concept — Euronews / RFE/RL / Al Jazeera.
Germany emergency law context (Spannungsfall / state of defence) — legal overviews & analysis.
🎯 Final Thought (analyst’s summary)
Turning frozen Russian assets into a political-financial instrument is politically attractive but legally and operationally combustible. If implemented hurriedly or without EUwide legal guarantees, it will produce a short fuse: market shocks, targeted Russian countermeasures, and heavy domestic pressure on Germany and other affected states to invoke emergency measures (including political debates about Spannungsfall). The EU must either move with ironclad legal and financial guarantees and common contingency plans — or beware that unilateralism will generate the crisis it sought to solve.
🧨 Einzeiler-Executive-Summary Sollten die EU-Regierungen die eingefrorenen Russland-Zentralbank-Assets (größtenteils bei Euroclear Belgien verwahrt) einlösen, um der Ukraine einen 1300–1400 Mrd. € „Reparationskredit“ zu geben, gerät Deutschland – und mehrere Partner – in eine Multivektor-Krise, die Notstandsgesetze (inkl. des deutschen Spannungsfall-Mechanismus), Banken-/Marktschocks und asymmetrische russische Gegenmaßnahmen auslösen könnte.
🔎 Hintergrund (aktuelle Lage)
Die EU-Staaten beraten intensiv, die Erträge aus den eingefrorenen Vermögenswerten als Pfand für einen Riesenkredit an die Ukraine zu nutzen; die rechtliche Auseinandersetzung ist enorm.
Fast alle gefrorenen Assets liegen bei Euroclear Belgien; Brüssel verlangt ein EU-Risikosharing, sonst keine Zustimmung.
Das Kreml hat öffentlich verurteilt und mit „Konsequenzen“ gedroht, die finanziell, cyber-, diplomatisch oder kinetisch ausfallen könnten.
⚠ Prognosen (30–90 Tage nach Go)
Sofortige Finanzerschütterung (0–7 Tage): russische Klagen und Drohungen lassen EU-Anleihen, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD schwanken; Euroclear sieht sich mit Prozessen und Sicherheiten-Calls konfrontiert.
Deutsche Verfassungsreaktion – Spannungsfall-Druck (2–8 Wochen): Innenpolitik und Risiko-Einschätzung könnten Berlin zwingen, den „Spannungsfall“ auszurufen, Militär- und Kritische-Infrastruktur-Schutz hochzufahren.
EU-weite Ketten-Notmaßnahmen (2–12 Wochen): Belgien, Baltikum, Polen, Finnland, Schweden, Niederlande könnten auf höchste Finanz- und Energiesicherheitsstufe gehen.
Politische Spaltungsgefahr (1–3 Monate): scheitert der Garantie-Mechanismus, könnte die Pro-Ukraine-Gruppe unilateral voranschreiten, die EU spalten und die NATO-Kurzzeit-Koordination schwächen.
🔍 Warum Deutschland der Dreh- und Angelpunkt ist Größte Banken-Exposition, Energie-Transit-Schaltstelle, hohe politische Sensibilität; jede russische Gegenmaßnahme (Liefer-Kick / Cyber) katapultiert Spannungsfall sofort auf die Tagesordnung.
📉 Finanzielle & rechtliche Rot-Flags
Euroclear-Kundenrundschreiben mit Formulierungen „Liquiditätsfenster“ oder „Verwahr-Risiken“
Rechtsgutachten aus Frankreich, Belgien, Niederlande, Luxemburg einholen
🎯 Schlussbetrachtung Das „Einlösen“ eingefrorener Russland-Vermögenswerte ist politisch verlockend, rechtlich und operativ jedoch hochgradig explosiv. Ohne vereinheitlichte EU-Garantien und Notfallpläne brennen drei Zünder gleichzeitig durch – Märkte, Diplomatie und Verfassung – und entfachen genau jene Krise, die man verhindern will.
🇩🇪⚠️ כיתוב תמונה: „הבונדסטאג בכוננות אדומה: לחישות Spannungsfall מדהדות באולם כשאירופה נשענת על חוק חירום.“
🔐 סודי ביותר — נקודת הצתה כלכלית הפניה: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL הפצה: ציבורית / סיכום אנליסט מחיקה אוטומטית: 72 שעות
🧨 סיכום בקו אחד אם ממשלות האיחוד יחליטו לממש את נכסי הבנק המרכזי הרוסי הקפואים (המוחזקים בעיקר אצל יורוקליר בבלגיה) כדי להעניק לאוקראינה הלוואת „פיצויים“ של 1300–1400 מיליארד €, גרמניה — ושותפים נוספים — ייקלעו למשבר רב-ממדי שעלול להפעיל חוקי חירום (כולל מנגנון Spannungsfall הגרמני), הלם בנקאי/שוקי וצעדי נגד אסימטריים רוסיים.
🔎 רקע (מצב נוכחי)
מדינות האיחוד דנים בעוצמה ברעיון להשתמש ברווחי הנכסים הקפואים כבטוחה להלוואה ענקית לאוקראינה; המחלוקת המשפטית עצומה.
כמעט כל הקפואים מופקדים אצל יורוקליר בבלגיה; בלגיה דורשת שיתוף סיכונים אירופי, אחרת לא תאשר.
הקרמלין גינה בפומבי ואיים ב„תוצאות“ הכוללות ייתכונו צעדי נגד כספיים, סייבר, דיפלומטיים או קינטיים.
⚠ תחזיות (30–90 ימים לאחר מעבר)
רעש שוק מיידי (0–7 ימים): תביעות ואיומים רוסיים יזעזעו אג״ח אירופיות, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD; יורוקליר יתמודד עם תביעות וקריאות לביטוח.
הסלמה דיפלומטית ונגד-צעדים סמויים (1–6 שבועות): התקפות סייבר ממוקדות, עצירת אספקת אנרגיה, תביעות בבתי משפט בינלאומיים, גירוש דיפלומטים.
מענה חוקתי גרמני — לחץ Spannungsfall (2–8 שבועות): פוליטיקה פנימית והערכת סיכונים עשויים לכפות על ברלין להכריז על „מצב מתח“, להעלות כוננות צבאית ולהגן על תשתיות קריטיות.
צעדי חירום שרשרתיים ב-EU (2–12 שבועות): בלגיה, שלושת הבלטים, פולין, פינלנד, שוודיה, הולנד עשויים לעבור לכוננות מקסימלית בביטחון כספי ואנרגטי.
סיכון לקרע פוליטי (1–3 חודשים): אם מנגנון הביטוחים ייכשל, הקבוצה הפרו-אוקראינית עלולה להתקדם בצד אחד, לפצל את האיחוד ולפגוע בתיאום קצר-טווח של נאט״ו.
🔍 מדוע גרמניה היא הליבה חשיפה בנקאית הגדולה ביותר, צומת מעבר אנרגיה קריטי, רגישות פוליטית גבוהה; כל צעד נגד רוסי (הפסקת אספקה/סייבר) יעלה את Spannungsfall מיד.
📉 דגלים אדומים כלכליים ומשפטיים
מכתבי לקוחות יורוקליר המזכירים „חלונות נזילות“ או „סיכוני אחסון“
בלגיה דורשת בפומבי ערבויות כתובות של האיחוד
רוסיה תובעת או מאיימת להחרים נכסים אירופיים
CDS הריבוני הבלגי מתרחב פתאום, פערי מימון לילה מזנקים
זרימת גז קופאת פתאום או נמלים נחסמים
תסריט הגרוע ביותר של צוות האדום
ספירלה משפטית/כלכלית: בלגיה מסרבת → קבוצה זמנית משתמשת בנכסים מחוץ לבלגיה → רוסיה תובעת + התקפת סייבר → בריחת הון.
הסלמה היברידית: רוסיה תוקפת את יורוקליר ומנתקת גז לגרמניה → ברלין מכריזה Spannungsfall → פאניקה בשווקים.
קרע פוליטי: האיחוד אינו מצליח להחליט בהסכמה, מדינות פועלות בודדות → פיצול מגן ארוך טווח.
מדריך המתבונן
לעקוב אחרי קומוניקי סמיטי האיחוד וניסוחי הביטוחים הבלגיים
לעקוב אחרי הודעות תפעוליות של יורוקליר ובנקי אחסון ראשיים
לנטר בולטיני מוכנות של הבונדסטאג, הקנצלריה והבונדסבהר
לצפות ב-CDS אג״ח, ספרדייז לילה וטלמטריית זרימת אנרגיה
לאסוף חוות דעת משפטיות מצרפת, בלגיה, הולנד, לוקסמבורג
🎯 מחשבה סיומית „מימוש“ הנכסים הרוסיים הקפואים מפתה פוליטית, אך מבחינה משפטית ותפעולית הוא גבוהה מאוד בחומר נפץ. בלי ערבויות מאוחדות של האיחוד ותוכניות חירום, שלושה פיוזים — שווקים, דיפלומטיה וחוקה — יתלקחו יחדיו ויציתו את המשבר שביקשו למנוע.
🇩🇪⚠️ Pie de foto: “Bundestag en alerta roja: susurros de Spannungsfall resuenan en la cámara mientras Europa roza la ley de emergencia.”
🔐 ULTRASECRETO — PUNTO DE INFLEXIÓN FINANCIERO Ref.: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL Distribución: PÚBLICO / RESUMEN ANALISTA Auto-borrado: 72 h
🧨 Resumen ejecutivo (una línea) Si los gobiernos de la UE deciden monetizar los activos rusos congelados (custodiados sobre todo por Euroclear/Bélgica) para conceder a Ucrania un préstamo de 130-140 mil millones €, Alemania —y varios socios— encararán una crisis multi-vector que podría activar la ley de emergencia (incluido el mecanismo alemán Spannungsfall), sacudidas bancarias y contramedidas asimétricas rusas.
🔎 Contexto (situación actual)
La UE debate intensamente utilizar los beneficios de los activos congelados para un mega-préstamo a Ucrania; el debate legal es enorme.
Casi todos los activos están en custodia de Euroclear Bélgica; Bruselas exige garantías comunitarias antes de aprobar.
El Kremlin ha advertido públicamente de “consecuencias” y podría responder con represalias financieras, cibernéticas, diplomáticas o cinéticas.
⚠ Previsiones (30-90 días si se ejecuta)
Sacudida financiera inmediata (0-7 días): demandas rusas y amenazas provocan volatilidad en deuda europea, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD; Euroclear afronta litigios y reclamaciones de colateral.
Escalada diplomática y represalias encubiertas (1-6 semanas): ataques cibernéticos selectivos, corte de suministros energéticos, pleitos en tribunales internacionales, expulsiones diplomáticas.
Respuesta constitucional alemana —presión Spannungsfall (2-8 semanas): la política interna y la evaluación de riesgos podrían obligar a Berlín a declarar el “estado de tensión”, aumentando la preparación militar y la protección de infraestructuras críticas.
Medidas de emergencia en cadena en la UE (2-12 semanas): Bélgica, países bálticos, Polonia, Finlandia, Suecia y Países Bajos podrían activar alertas máximas en seguridad financiera y energética.
Riesgo de fractura política (1-3 meses): si el mecanismo de garantías fracasa, el bloque pro-ucraniano podría avanzar por su cuenta, dividiendo a la UE y debilitando la coordinación de la OTAN.
🔍 Por qué Alemania es clave Mayor exposición bancaria, nodo energético y alta sensibilidad política; cualquier represalia rusa (corte de suministros, ciberataque) elevaría Spannungsfall al instante.
📉 Señales financieras y legales rojas
Comunicados de Euroclear mencionando “ventanas de liquidez” o “riesgos de custodia”.
Bélgica pide por escrito garantías de la UE.
Rusia demanda o amenaza con confiscar activos europeos.
CDS soberanos belgas se disparan y se ensanchan los diferenciales de financiación a corto plazo.
Flujo de gas bruscamente reducido o puertos bloqueados.
Peor guión del equipo rojo
Espiral legal/financiera: Bélgica se niega → grupo temporal usa activos fuera de Bélgica → Rusia demanda + ciberataque → fuga de capitales.
Escalada híbrida: Rusia ataca Euroclear y corta el gas a Alemania → Berlín declara Spannungsfall → pánico en mercados.
Fractura política: falta unanimidad en la UE, algunos países van por libre → división defensiva a largo plazo.
Manual del observador
Vigila los comunicados de cumbres europeas y la redacción sobre garantías belgas.
Sigue los avisos operativos de Euroclear y bancos depositarios.
Monitorea comunicados del Bundestag, cancillería y Bundeswehr sobre preparación.
Observa CDS de bonos, diferenciales overnight y telemetría de flujos energéticos.
Reúne dictámenes legales de Francia, Bélgica, Países Bajos y Luxemburgo.
🎯 Reflexión final Monetizar los activos rusos congelados seduce políticamente, pero legal y operativamente es altamente explosivo. Sin garantías y planes de contingencia unificados, se encenderán tres mechas —mercados, diplomacia y constitución— generando la crisis que se pretendía evitar.
🇩🇪⚠️ تعليق الصورة: “البوندستاغ في حالة تأهب قصوى: همسات Spannungsfall تتردد في القاعة بينما أوروبا على حافة القانون الطارئ.”
🔐 سرّي للغاية — نقطة الاشتعال المالي المرجع: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL التوزيع: عام / ملخص المحلِّلين الحذف التلقائي: 72 ساعة
🧨 ملخص تنفيذي (سطر واحد) إذا قررت حكومات الاتحاد الأوروبي تحويل الأصول الروسية المجمدة (المحفوظة أساسًا لدى يوروكلير بلجيكا) إلى قرض ضخم لأوكرانيا بقيمة 1300-1400 مليار يورو، فستواجه ألمانيا وشركاء الاتحاد أزمة متعددة الجوانب قد تطلق حالة طوارئ قانونية (بما في ذلك آلية Spannungsfall الألمانية)، وصدمات مصرفية/سوقية، وردود روسية غير متماثلة.
🔎 الخلفية (الوضع الراهن) تجري مفاوضات مكثفة في الاتحاد الأوروبي لاستخدام عائدات الأصول المجمدة لمنح أوكرانيا قرضًا كبيرًا، لكن الجدل القانوني هائل. معظم الأصول محفوظة لدى يوروكلير بلجيكا؛ تطالب بروكسل بضمانات الاتحاد قبل الموافقة. أدانت موسكو علنًا وهددت بـ”عواقب” قد تشمل ردودًا مالية أو إلكترونية أو دبلوماسية أو عسكرية.
⚠ التوقعات (30-90 يومًا إذا مُضيَ في الخطوة)
اضطراب مالي فوري (0-7 أيام): دعاوى روسية وتهديدات تؤدي إلى تقلبات في سندات الاتحاد الأوروبي وأسعار صرف اليورو مقابل الروبل والدولار؛ يوروكلير تواجه دعاوى ومطالبات بالضمانات.
تصعيد دبلوماسي وردود خفية (1-6 أسابيع): هجمات إلكترونية استهدافية، قطع إمدادات الطاقة، دعاوى أمام محاكم دولية، طرد دبلوماسيين.
استجابة دستورية ألمانية – ضغط Spannungsfall (2-8 أسابيع): قد تدفع الضغوط السياسية الداخلية برلين إلى إعلان “حالة التوتر”، تعزيز التأهب العسكري وحماية البنية التحتية الحيوية.
تدابير طوارئ متسلسلة في الاتحاد الأوروبي (2-12 أسبوعًا): بلجيكا والبلطيق وبولندا وفنلندا والسويد وهولندا قد ترفع جهوزية أمنها المالي والطاقي.
خطر انقسام سياسي (1-3 أشهر): إذا فشلت آلية الضمان، قد يتحرك التحالف المؤيد لأوكرانيا منفردًا، مما يشق الاتحاد ويعرقل تنسيق الناتو.
🔍 لماذا ألمانيا محورية أكبر تعرض مصرفي، ممر حيوي للطاقة، وحساسية سياسية عالية؛ أي رد روسي (قطع إمدادات أو هجوم إلكتروني) سيرفع Spannungsfall فورًا.
📉 إشارات مالية وقانونية حمراء
إشعارات يوروكلير تذكر “نوافذ السيولة” أو “مخاطر الحفظ”.
بلجيكا تطالب كتابيًا بضمانات الاتحاد.
روسيا ترفع دعاوى أو تهدد بمصادرة أصول أوروبية.
ارتفاع مفاجئ في CDS السيادية البلجيكية وفوارق التمويل الليلية.
انخفاض مفاجئ في تدفق الغاز أو تعطل الموانئ.
سيناريو أسوأ من الفريق الأحمر
حلقة قانونية/مالية: بلجيكا ترفض → مجموعة مؤقتة تستخدم أصولًا خارج بلجيكا → روسيا ترفع دعوى + هجوم إلكتروني → نزوح رؤوس الأموال.
تصعيد هجين: روسيا تهاجم يوروكلير وتقطع الغاز عن ألمانيا → برلين تعلن Spannungsfall → ذعر في الأسواق.
انقسام سياسي: الاتحاد الأوروبي غير موحَّد، دول تتحرك منفردة → انقسام دفاعي طويل الأمد.
دليل المراقب
تراقب بلاغات قمم الاتحاد وصياغة ضمانات بروكسل.
تتابع إشعارات التشغيل من يوروكلير والبنوك الحافظة.
ترصد إعلانات البوندستاغ والمستشارية والبونديسفير حول التأهب.
تجمع آراء قانونية من فرنسا، بلجيكا، هولندا، لوكسمبورغ.
🎯 خلاصة تحويل الأصول الروسية المجمدة إلى سيولة مغرٍ سياسيًا، لكنه قابل للانفجار قانونيًا وتشغيليًا. بغير ضمانات وخطة طوارئ موحدة، ستوقد ثلاث شعلات — الأسواق، الدبلوماسية، والدستور — لتُنتج الأزمة التي كان المقصود تفاديها.
🧨 এক লাইনের নির্বাহী সারাংশ ইউরোপীয় ইউনিয়নের সরকারগুলো যদি বেলজিয়ামের ইউরোক্লিয়ারে রক্ষিত স্থগিত রুশ কেন্দ্রীয় ব্যাংকের সম্পদ বিক্রি করে ইউক্রেনকে ১৩০০–১৪০০ বিলিয়ন € “ক্ষতিপূরণ ঋণ” দেয়, জার্মানি ও অন্যান্য অংশীদাররা বহু-মাত্রিক সংকটে পড়বে — জরুরি আইন (জার্মান Spannungsfall), ব্যাংকিং/বাজার ধাক্কা, এবং রুশ অসমমিত প্রতিক্রিয়া সহ।
🔎 প্রেক্ষাপট (বর্তমান অবস্থা)
ইইউ দেশগুলো স্থগিত রুশ সম্পদের আয়কে বন্ধক ধরে ইউক্রেনকে বিশাল ঋণ দেওয়ার বিষয়ে তীব্র আলোচনা করছে; আইনি বিতর্ক বিশাল।
অধিকাংশ সম্পদ বেলজিয়ামের ইউরোক্লিয়ারে রাখা; ব্রাসেলস ইইউ-র ঝুঁকি ভাগ চায়, নইলে সবুজ সংকেত নয়।
তাৎক্ষণিক আর্থিক কাঁপন (০–৭ দিন): রুশ মামলা ও হুমকির ফলে ইইউ বন্ড, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD অস্থির; ইউরোক্লিয়ারে মামলা ও কল্যাটারেল দাবি।
কূটনৈতিক ও গোপন প্রতিক্রিয়া (১–৬ সপ্তাহ): টার্গেটেড সাইবার হামলা, জ্বালানি সরবরাহ বন্ধ, আন্তর্জাতিক আদালতে মামলা, কূটনীতিক বহিষ্কার।
জার্মান সংবিধানীয় প্রতিক্রিয়া—Spannungsfall চাপ (২–৮ সপ্তাহ): স্বদেশী রাজনীতি ও ঝুঁকি মূল্যায়ন বার্লিনকে “টেনশন স্টেট” ঘোষণা করতে বাধ্য করতে পারে, সামরিক ও গুরুত্বপূর্ণ অবকাঠামোর সুরক্ষা বাড়াতে।
ইইউ-ব্যাপী জরুরি ব্যবস্থা (২–১২ সপ্তাহ): বেলজিয়াম, বাল্টিক ত্রয়ী, পোল্যান্ড, ফিনল্যান্ড, সুইডেন, নেদারল্যান্ডস আর্থিক ও জ্বালানি নিরাপত্তায় সর্বোচ্চ সতর্কতায় যেতে পারে।
রাজনৈতিক বিভক্তির ঝুঁকি (১–৩ মাস): গ্যারান্টি প্রক্রিয়া ব্যর্থ হলে প্রো-ইউক্রেন ব্লক একতরফা এগোতে পারে, ইইউ ভেঙে পড়তে পারে, ন্যাটো সাময়িক সমন্বয় ক্ষতিগ্রস্ত হতে পারে।
🔍 কেন জার্মানি কেন্দ্রবিন্দু সবচেয়ে বড় ব্যাংক খোলস, জ্বালানি ট্রানজিটের কী পয়েন্ট, উচ্চ রাজনৈতিক সংবেদনশীলতা; যেকোনো রুশ পাল্টা (সরবরাহ বন্ধ/সাইবার) তৎক্ষণাৎ Spannungsfall-এ ঠেলে দেবে।
📉 আর্থিক ও আইনি লাল সংকেত
ইউরোক্লিয়ারের গ্রাহক নোটিশে “লিকুইডিটি উইন্ডো” বা “কাস্টডি রিস্ক” শব্দাবলী
বেলজিয়াম প্রকাশ্যে ইইউ-র লিখিত গ্যারান্টি চায়
রুশ আন্তর্জাতিক আদালতে মামলা করে বা ইউরোপীয় সম্পদ বাজেয়াপ্ত করার হুমকি দেয়
ফ্রান্স, বেলজিয়াম, নেদারল্যান্ডস, লুক্সেমবুর্গের আইনি মতামত সংগ্রহ করুন
🎯 চূড়ান্ত চিন্তা স্থগিত রুশ সম্পদ “নগদায়ন” রাজনৈতিকভাবে মোহনীয়, কিন্তু আইনি ও অপারেশনাল দিক থেকে বিস্ফোরক। ঐক্যবদ্ধ ইইউ গ্যারান্টি ও জরুরি পরিকল্পনা ছাড়া বাজার, কূটনীতি ও সংবিধান — তিনটি ফিউজ একসাথে জ্বলে উঠবে, সেই সংকট সৃষ্টি করবে যা এড়াতে চেয়েছিল।
🇩🇪⚠️ फ़ोटो कैप्शन: “बुंडेस्टाग लाल अलर्ट पर: Spannungsfall की फुसफुसाहट सदन में गूंज रही है जब यूरोप आपातकालीन कानून की ओर झुक रहा है।”
🔐 सबसे ऊपरी गोपनीय — वित्तीय संघर्ष बिंदु संदर्भ: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL वितरण: सार्वजनिक / विश्लेषक सारांश स्वचालित विलोप: 72 घंटे
🧨 एक-पंक्ति कार्यकारी सार यदि यूरोपीय संघ की सरकारें बेल्जियम के यूरोक्लियर में जमे रूसी केंद्रीय बैंक की संपत्ति को नकद करके यूक्रेन को 1300-1400 अरब € का “हर्ज़ाना ऋण” देती हैं, तो जर्मनी—और कई साझेदार—बहुआयामी संकट झेलेंगे: आपातकालीन कानून (जर्मन Spannungsfall), बैंकिंग/बाज़ार झटके, और रूसी असममित प्रतिकार।
🔎 पृष्ठभूमि (वर्तमान स्थिति)
यूरोपीय देश जमे रूसी फंड की आय को बंधक रखकर यूक्रेन को विशाल ऋण देने पर ज़ोरदार चर्चा कर रहे हैं; कानूनी विवाद विशाल है।
अधिकांश जमी संपत्ति बेल्जियम के यूरोक्लियर में है; ब्रसेल्स यूरोपीय जोखिम-साझेदारी चाहता है, नहीं तो हरी झंडी नहीं।
क्रेमलिन ने सार्वजनिक रूप से निंदा कर “नतीजों” की धमकी दी है; वित्तीय, साइबर, कूटनीतिक या सैन्य पलटवार संभव।
⚠ पूर्वानुमान (कार्यान्वयन के 30-90 दिन)
तत्काल वित्तीय कंपन (0-7 दिन): रूसी मुकदमे और धमकियाँ यूरोपीय बॉन्ड, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD को हिला देंगी; यूरोक्लियर पर मुकदमा और कोलैटरल दावे।
बढ़ता कूटनीतिक व छद्म प्रतिकार (1-6 सप्ताह): टारगेटेड साइबर हमले, ऊर्जा आपूर्ति रोक, अंतरराष्ट्रीय अदालत में मुकदमा, कूटनीतिक निष्कासन।
जर्मन संवैधानिक प्रतिक्रिया—Spannungsfall दबाव (2-8 सप्ताह): घरेलू राजनीति और जोखिम आकलन बर्लिन को “तनाव-स्थिति” घोषित करने पर मजबूर कर सकते हैं, सैन्य और महत्वपूर्ण ढाँचे की सुरक्षा बढ़ाकर।
यूरोपीय संघ-व्यापी आपातकालीन कदम (2-12 सप्ताह): बेल्जियम, बाल्टिक त्रय, पोलैंड, फिनलैंड, स्वीडन, नीदरलैंड्स वित्तीय और ऊर्जा सुरक्षा में सर्वोच्च अलर्ट पर जा सकते हैं।
राजनीतिक फूट का जोखिम (1-3 महीने): यदि गारंटी तंक न चले, प्रो-यूक्रेन समूह एकतरफा बढ़ सकता है, यूरोपीय संघ फट सकता है, नाटो का अल्पकालिक समन्वय टूट सकता है।
🔍 जर्मनी क्यों केंद्र में है सबसे बड़ा बैंक एक्सपोज़र, ऊर्जा ट्रांज़िट कुंजी, उच्च राजनीतिक संवेदनशीलता; कोई भी रूसी प्रतिकार (आपूर्ति कट/साइबर) Spannungsfall को तुरंत उठा देगा।
📉 वित्तीय और कानूनी रेड-फ्लैग
यूरोक्लियर ग्राहक सर्कुलर में “लिक्विडिटी विंडो” या “कस्टडी रिस्क” शब्द
बेल्जियम सार्वजनिक रूप से यूरोपीय लिखित गारंटी माँगता है
रूस अंतरराष्ट्रीय अदालत में मुकदमा करता है या यूरोपीय संपत्ति जब्त करने की धमकी देता है
बेल्जियम सॉवरेन CDS अचानक फैल जाता है, ओवरनाइट फंडिंग स्प्रेड उछलता है
गैस प्रवाह अचानक घटता है या पोर्ट ट्रांसपोर्ट बाधित होता है
रेड-टीम सबसे बुरा स्क्रिप्ट
कानूनी/वित्तीय सर्पिल: बेल्जियम मना करता है → अंतरिम समूह गैर-बेल्जियम संपत्ति का उपयोग करता है → रूस मुकदमा + साइबर हमला → पूंजी भागने।
हाइब्रिड एस्केलेशन: रूस यूरोक्लियर पर साइबर और जर्मनी को गैस कट → बर्लिन Spannungsfall घोषित करता है → बाज़ार में दहशत।
राजनीतिक फूट: यूरोपीय संघ एकमत नहीं हो पाता, कुछ देश एकतरफा बढ़ते हैं → दीर्घकालिक रक्षा विभाजन।
ऑब्ज़र्वर चेकलिस्ट
यूरोपीय शिखर सम्मेलनों के कम्युनिके और बेल्जियम सरकार की गारंटी शब्दावली पर नज़र रखें
यूरोक्लियर और प्राइमरी कस्टोडियन बैंकों के ऑपरेशनल नोटिस ट्रैक करें
जर्मन बुंडेस्टाग, चांसलरी, बुंडेसवेहर तैयारी बुलेटिन निगरानी करें
फ्रांस, बेल्जियम, नीदरलैंड्स, लक्ज़मबर्ग से कानूनी राय जुटाएँ
🎯 अंतिम विचार जमे रूसी फंड को “नकद” करना राजनीतिक रूप से लुभावना है, लेकिन कानूनी और ऑपरेशनल तौर पर बेहद विस्फोटक है। यूरोपीय संघ की एकजुट गारंटी और आपात योजना के बिना बाज़ार, कूटनीति और संविधान — तीनों फ़्यूज़ एक साथ जलेंगे, वही संकट पैदा करेंगे जिसे टालना चाहते थे।
🇩🇪⚠️ Legenda: “Bundestag em alerta vermelho: sussurros de Spannungsfall ecoam pela câmara enquanto a Europa beira a lei de emergência.”
🔐 ULTRASECRETO — PONTO DE IGNIÇÃO FINANCEIRA Ref.: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL Distribuição: PÚBLICO / RESUMO ANALÍTICO Auto-eliminação: 72 h
🧨 Flash executivo (uma linha) Se os governos da UE decidem monetizar os ativos russos congelados (custodiados sobretudo pelo Euroclear bélgica) para conceder à Ucrânia um empréstimo de 130–140 mil milhões €, a Alemanha — e vários parceiros — enfrentarão uma crise multi-vector que pode disparar a mobilização da lei de emergência (incluindo o mecanismo alemão Spannungsfall), choques bancários/de mercado e contramedidas assimétricas russas.
🔎 Contexto (situação actual)
Os países da UE debatem intensamente usar os rendimentos dos ativos congelados para um mega-empréstimo à Ucrânia; a controvérsia legal é enorme.
A maior parte dos ativos está custodiada no Euroclear bélgica; Bruxelas exige partilha de risco da UE, caso contrário não aprova.
O Kremlin já condenou publicamente e ameaçou “consequências”, podendo responder com represálias financeiras, cibernéticas, diplomáticas ou cinéticas.
⚠ Previsões (30–90 dias se avançar)
Sacudida financeira imediata (0–7 dias): processos russos e ameaças provocam volatilidade na dívida da UE, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD; Euroclear enfrenta litígios e chamadas de colateral.
Escalada diplomática e contra-ataques encobertos (1–6 semanas): ataques cibernéticos selectivos, corte de fornecimento energético, acções em tribunais internacionais, expulsões diplomáticas.
Resposta constitucional alemã — pressão Spannungsfall (2–8 semanas): política interna e avaliação de risco podem forçar Berlim a declarar “estado de tensão”, aumentando preparação militar e protecção de infra-estruturas críticas.
Medidas de emergência em cadeia na UE (2–12 semanas): Bélgica, países bálticos, Polónia, Finlândia, Suécia, Países Baixos podem activar alerta máximo em segurança financeira e energética.
Risco de fractura política (1–3 meses): se o mecanismo de garantias falhar, o bloco pró-Ucrânia pode avançar unilateralmente, dividindo a UE e prejudicando a coordenação da NATO.
🔍 Por que a Alemanha é o pivô Maior exposição bancária, nó crítico de trânsito energético, alta sensibilidade política; qualquer represália russa (corte de fornecimento ou ciberataque) levanta Spannungsfall no mesmo instante.
📉 Sinais vermelhos financeiros e legais
Circulares do Euroclear com linguagem de “janelas de liquidez” ou “riscos de custódia”
Bélgica pede publicamente garantias escritas da UE
Rússia processa ou ameaça confiscar activos europeus
CDS soberanos belgas disparam e spreads de financiamento overnight disparam
Fluxo de gás cai de repente ou portos são bloqueados
Pior cenário da equipa vermelha
Espiral legal/financeira: Bélgica recusa → grupo temporário usa activos fora da Bélgica → Rússia processa + ciberataque → fuga de capitais.
Escalada híbrida: Rússia ataca o Euroclear e corta o gás à Alemanha → Berlim declara Spannungsfall → pânico nos mercados.
Fractura política: UE não consegue unanimidade, países avançam unilateralmente → divisão de defesa a longo prazo.
Manual do observador
Vigiar comunicados de cimeiras da UE e linguagem de garantias belgas
Seguir avisos operacionais do Euroclear e bancos custodiantes primários
Monitorizar comunicados do Bundestag, chancelaria e Bundeswehr sobre prontidão
Observar CDS de obrigações, spreads overnight e telemetria de fluxos energéticos
Colher pareceres legais de França, Bélgica, Países Baixos, Luxemburgo
🎯 Reflexão final “Cash-in” dos activos russos congelados é politicamente tentador, mas legal e operacionalmente altamente explosivo. Sem garantias unificadas da UE e planos de contingência, três fusíveis — mercados, diplomacia e constituição — ardem juntos, gerando a crise que se pretendia evitar.
🇩🇪⚠️ Подпись: «Бундестаг под красной тревогой: шёпот Spannungsfall эхом по залу, Европа на грани введения чрезвычайного закона».
🔐 СОВЕРШЕННО СЕКРЕТНО — ФИНАНСОВАЯ ТОЧКА ВОСПЛАМЕНЕНИЯ Ссылка: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL Распространение: ОБЩЕДОСТУПНО / АНАЛИТИЧЕСКОЕ РЕЗЮМЕ Авто-удаление: 72 ч
🧨 Исполнительное резюме (одна строка) Если правительства ЕС решат обналичить замороженные активы ЦБ РФ (главным образом у бельгийского Euroclear) и выдать Украине «репарационный» кредит на 1300–1400 млрд €, Германия — и ряд партнёров — столкнутся с мультивекторным кризисом, который может запустить чрезвычайное законодательство (включая немецкий механизм Spannungsfall), банковские/рыночные шоки и асимметричные российские контрмеры.
🔎 Контекст (текущая обстановка)
Страны ЕС активно обсуждают использование доходов с замороженных активов для крупного займа Украине; правовые споры огромны.
Подавляющая часть активов хранится у Euroclear в Бельгии; Брюссель требует раздела рисков со стороны ЕС, иначе — зелёный свет не даст.
Кремль публично осудил и пригрозил «последствиями», включая финансовые, кибер-, дипломатические или силовые ответные шаги.
⚠ Прогнозы (30–90 дней после запуска)
Мгновенная финансовая волна (0–7 дней): российские иски и угрозы взболтают европейские облигации, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD; Euroclear столкнётся с судебными исками и требованиями залога.
Дипломатическая эскалация и скрытые контрмеры (1–6 недель): целевые кибератаки, остановка энергопоставок, иски в международных судах, дипвыдворения.
Конституционный ответ Германии — давление Spannungsfall (2–8 недель): внутренняя политика и оценка рисков могут вынудить Берлин объявить «состояние напряжения», усилить военную готовность и защиту критической инфраструктуры.
Цепная чрезвычайка в ЕС (2–12 недель): Бельгия, страны Балтии, Польша, Финляндия, Швеция, Нидерланды могут перейти на максимальный уровень финансовой и энергетической безопасности.
Риск политического раскола (1–3 месяца): если механизм гарантий провалится, про-украинский блок может пойти в одиночку, расколов ЕС и подорвав краткосрочную координацию НАТО.
🔍 Почему Германия — ядро Крупнейший банковский экспозиционный пласт, ключевый энерготранзит, высокая политчувствительность; любая российская контригра (отключка, киберудар) мгновенно выведет Spannungsfall на повестку.
📉 Финансовые и правовые красные флаги
Клиринговые уведомления Euroclear со словами «окна ликвидности» или «риски кастодиального хранения»
Бельгия публично требует письменных гарантий ЕС
Россия подаёт иск или угрожает арестовать европейские активы
Суверенные CDS Бельгии резко расширяются, овернайт-спреды взлетают
Потоки газа внезапно падают или порты блокируются
Худший сценарий красной команды
Правовой/финансовый спираль: Бельгия отказывается → временная группа использует внебельгийские активы → Россия идёт в суд + киберудар → отток капитала.
Гибридная эскалация: Россия одновременно атакует Euroclear и отключает газ Германии → Берлин объявляет Spannungsfall → рыночная паника.
Политический раскол: ЕС не может единогласно решить, страны идут врозь → долгосрочный оборонный раскол.
Наблюдательский справочник
Следить за communiqué саммитов ЕС и формулировками бельгийских гарантий
Отслеживать операционные уведомления Euroclear и первичных кастодианов
Мониторить бюллетени готовности Бундестага, канцлерии и Бундесвера
Наблюдать за бонд-CDS, овернайт-спредами и телеметрией энергопотоков
Собирать правовые заключения Франции, Бельгии, Нидерландов, Люксембурга
🎯 Финальная мысль Обналичивание замороженных российских активов политически заманчиво, но юридически и операционно крайне взрывоопасно. Без единых гарантий ЕС и согласованных планов-Б зажжётся сразу три фитиля — рынки, дипломатия и конституция — и вспыхнет тот кризис, которого стремились избежать.
🇩🇪⚠️ Légende : « Bundestag en alerte rouge : les murmures de Spannungsfall résonnent dans l’hémicycle tandis que l’Europe bascule vers la loi d’urgence. »
🔐 ULTRA-SECRET — POINT D’INFLAMMATION FINANCIÈRE Réf. : OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL Diffusion : PUBLIQUE / RÉSUMÉ ANALYSTE Auto-suppression : 72 h
🧨 Flash exécutif (une ligne) Si les gouvernements de l’UE décident de monétiser les actifs russes gelés (détenus principalement par Euroclear en Belgique) pour accorder à l’Ukraine un prêt de 1300–1400 milliards €, l’Allemagne — et plusieurs partenaires — seront entraînés dans une crise multivectorielle pouvant déclencher la mobilisation de la loi d’urgence (y compris le mécanisme allemand Spannungsfall), des chocs bancaires / de marché et des contre-mesures asymétriques russes.
🔎 Contexte (situation actuelle)
Les États membres discutent vivement d’utiliser les revenus des actifs gelés pour un méga-prêt à l’Ukraine ; la controverse juridique est énorme.
Presque tous les actifs sont custodiés par Euroclear en Belgique ; Bruxelles exige un partage du risque par l’UE, faute de quoi le feu vert est refusé.
Le Kremlin a publiquement condamné et menacé de « conséquences », pouvant inclure des représailles financières, cybernétiques, diplomatiques ou cinétiques.
⚠ Prévisions (30–90 jours si l’opération va de l’avant)
Secousse financière immédiate (0–7 jours) : procès et menaces russes font volatiliser la dette UE, EUR/RUB, EUR/USD ; Euroclear confronté à des litiges et des appels de collatéral.
Escalade diplomatique et contre-attaques couvertes (1–6 semaines) : cyber-attaques ciblées, coupure d’approvisionnement énergétique, actions devant les tribunaux internationaux, expulsions diplomatiques.
Réponse constitutionnelle allemande – pression Spannungsfall (2–8 semaines) : politique intérieure et évaluation des risques peuvent forcer Berlin à déclarer l’« état de tension », augmentant la préparation militaire et la protection des infrastructures critiques.
Mesures d’urgence en cascade dans l’UE (2–12 semaines) : Belgique, pays baltes, Pologne, Finlande, Suède, Pays-Bas peuvent passer à l’alerte maximale sur la sécurité financière et énergétique.
Risque de fracture politique (1–3 mois) : si le mécanisme de garanties échoue, le bloc pro-ukrainien pourrait avancer seul, divisant l’UE et affaiblissant la coordination de l’OTAN.
🔍 Pourquoi l’Allemagne est au cœur du problème Plus grande exposition bancaire, nœud énergétique critique, sensibilité politique élevée ; toute contre-attaque russe (coupure d’approvisionnement ou cyber) fera immédiatement apparaître Spannungsfall.
📉 Signaux rouges financiers et juridiques
Circulaires clients d’Euroclear mentionnant « fenêtres de liquidité » ou « risques de custodie »
Belgique demande publiquement des garanties écrites de l’UE
Russie assigne en justice ou menace de confisquer des actifs européens
CDS souverains belges s’élargissent brutalement, spreads de financement overnight explosent
Escalade hybride : Russie attaque simultanément Euroclear et coupe le gaz à l’Allemagne → Berlin déclenche Spannungsfall → panique marchés.
Fracture politique : UE incapable d’unanimité, certains pays agissent seuls → division défensive à long terme.
Manuel de l’observateur
Surveiller les communiqués de sommets de l’UE et la rédaction des garanties belges
Suivre les avis opérationnels d’Euroclear et des banques custodiennes primaires
Monitorer les bulletins de préparation du Bundestag, de la chancellerie et de la Bundeswehr
Observer les CDS d’obligations, les spreads overnight et la télémétrie des flux énergétiques
Recueillir les avis juridiques de la France, Belgique, Pays-Bas, Luxembourg
🎯 Réflexion finale « Cashing-in » des actifs russes gelés est politiquement séduisant, mais juridiquement et opérationnellement hautement explosif. Sans garanties unifiées de l’UE et plans d’urgence, trois mèches — marchés, diplomatie et constitution — s’enflammeront ensemble, produisant la crise que l’on cherchait à éviter.
🇩🇪⚠️ فوٹو کیپشن: “بُنڈس ٹاگ سرخ الرٹ پر: Spannungsfall کی سرگوشیوں کا ایوان میں گونج، یورپ ہنگامی قانون کے قریب پہنچ چکا ہے۔”
🔐 انتہائی خُفیہ — مالیاتی چنگاری کا نقطہ حوالہ: OPS/Σ-EU/100225-SPANNUNGSFALL تقسیم: عام / تجزیہ کار خلاصہ خودکار ختم: 72 گھنٹے
🧨 ایک لائن ایگزیکٹو خلاصہ اگر یورپی یونین کی حکومتیں منجمد روسی مرکزی بینک اثاثوں (جن کا بڑا حصہ بیلجیم کے یوروکلئیر کے پاس ہے) کو نقد کر کے یوکرین کو 1300–1400 ارب € کا “تاوان قرض” دیتی ہیں، تو جرمنی — اور کئی شراکت دار — کثیرالاضلاع بحران کا سامنا کریں گے، جس سے ہنگامی قانون کی متحرکیت (جرمن Spannungsfall میکانزم سمیت)، بینکنگ/مارکیٹ جھٹکے اور روسی غیرمتناظر جوابی اقدامات بھڑک سکتے ہیں۔
🔎 پس منظر (موجودہ صورتحال)
یورپی ممالک منجمد روسی فنڈز کی آمدنی کو گروی رکھ کر یوکرین کو بھاری قرض دینے پر زور دار بحث کر رہے ہیں؛ قانونی تنازعہ وسیع ہے۔
منجمد اثاثوں کا بڑا حصہ بیلجیم کے یوروکلئیر میں محفوظ ہے؛ بروسلز یورپی خطرے کی تقسیم کا مطالبہ کرتا ہے، ورنہ منظوری نہیں۔
کریملن نے علانیہ مذمت کر کے “نتائج” کی دھمکی دی ہے، مالی، سائبر، سفارتی یا جنگی جوابی کارروائی ممکن ہے۔
⚠ پیش گوئیاں (30–90 دن اگر آگے بڑھا)
فوری مالی ہلچل (0–7 دن): روسی مقدمات و دھمکیوں سے یورپی بانڈز، EUR/RUB، EUR/USD میں اتار چڑھاؤ؛ یوروکلئیر کو مقدمات اور گروی دعوؤں کا سامنا۔
سفارتی اور پوشیدہ جوابی کارروائی (1–6 ہفتے): نشانہ بنانے والے سائبر حملے، توانائی کی فراہمی بند، بین الاقوامی عدالت میں مقدمات، سفارتی اخراج۔
جرمن آئینی ردعمل—Spannungsfall دباؤ (2–8 ہفتے): داخلی سیاست اور خطرہ تشخیص برلن کو “تناؤ کی حالت” کا اعلان کرنے پر مجبور کر سکتے ہیں، عسکری تیاری اور اہم بنیادی ڈھانچے کی حفاظت بڑھا کر۔
یورپی یونین میں زنجیری ہنگامی اقدامات (2–12 ہفتے): بیلجیم، بیلٹک تین، پولینڈ، فن لینڈ، سویڈن، نیدرلینڈز مالیاتی و توانائی تحفظ میں اعلیٰ الرٹ پر جا سکتے ہیں۔
سیاسی شقاق کا خطرہ (1–3 ماہ): اگر گارنٹی میکانزم ناکام رہے، تو یوکرین نواز بلاک یکطرفہ آگے بڑھ سکتا ہے، یورپی یونین میں دراڑ پڑ سکتی ہے، نیٹو کی قلیل مدتی ہم آہنگی متاثر ہو سکتی ہے۔
🔍 جرمنی کیوں مرکزی ہے سب سے بڑا بینک انکشاف، توانائی گزرگاہ کی چابی، سیاسی حساسیت زیادہ؛ کوئی بھی روسی جوابی کارروائی (رسد بند/سائبر) فوراً Spannungsfall کو ایجنڈے پر لے آئے گی۔
📉 مالیاتی و قانونی سرخ جھنڈے
یوروکلئیر کے گاہک نوٹس میں “لیکویڈیٹی ونڈوز” یا “کسٹڈی رسک” جملے
بیلجیم علانیہ یورپی تحریری گارنٹی کا مطالبہ کرتا ہے
روس بین الاقوامی عدالت میں مقدمہ کرتا ہے یا یورپی اثاثے ضبط کرنے کی دھمکی دیتا ہے
بیلجیم کے خودمختار CDS میں اچانک وسعت، اوور نائٹ فنڈنگ اسپریڈ اچھل پڑتے ہیں
گیس کا بہاؤ اچانک کم ہو جاتا ہے یا بندرگاہ نقل و حمل رک جاتا ہے
ریڈ ٹیم کا بدترین منظرنامہ
قانونی/مالیاتی سپیرل: بیلجیم انکار کرتا ہے → عارضی گروپ غیر بیلجیم اثاثے استعمال کرتا ہے → روس مقدمہ + سائبر حملہ → سرمایہ فرار۔
ہائبرڈ شدت: روس ایک ساتھ یوروکلئیر پر سائبر اور جرمنی کو گیس کٹ → برلن Spannungsfall کا اعلان → مارکیٹ میں خوف۔
سیاسی شقاق: یورپی یونین متفق نہیں ہو پاتی، کچھ ممالک یکطرفہ بڑھتے ہیں → طویل مدتی دفاعی تقسیم۔
مشاہد کی ہدایات
یورپی سربراہ اجلاسوں کے کمیونیکی اور بیلجیم حکومت کی گارنٹی الفاظ پر نظر رکھیں
یوروکلئیر اور پرائمری کسٹوڈین بینکوں کے آپریشنل نوٹسز کا تعاقب کریں
جرمن بُنڈس ٹاگ، چانسلری، فیڈرل ڈیفنس کی تیاری کے بیٹنوں کی نگرانی کریں
فرانس، بیلجیم، نیدرلینڈز، لکسمبرگ کے قانونی مؤقف جمع کریں
🎯 اختتامی خیال منجمد روسی اثاثوں کو “نقد” کرنا سیاسی طور پر دلکش ہے، لیکن قانونی اور آپریشنل طور پر انتہائی دھماکہ خیز ہے۔ متحد یورپی گارنٹی اور ہنگامی منصوبے کے بغیر مارکیٹ، سفارتکاری اور آئین — تینوں فتیلے ایک ساتھ جلیں گے، وہی بحران پیدا کریں گے جس سے بچنا مقصود تھا۔
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
WordPress-ready tag clouds for every language (copy-paste as needed):
Français Spannungsfall, Euroclear, actifs gelés, prêt de réparations, guerre en Ukraine, urgence UE, crise bancaire, dépendance énergétique, risque géopolitique, sécurité Allemagne, analyse géopolitique, choc financier, conflit géopolitique, stratégie géopolitique, situation géopolitique, tensions géopolitiques, développement géopolitique, menace géopolitique, défi géopolitique, crise géopolitique, incertitude géopolitique, instabilité géopolitique, jeu de pouvoir géopolitique, intérêts géopolitiques, alliances géopolitiques, rivalités géopolitiques, calcul géopolitique, conséquences géopolitiques, implications géopolitiques
Español Spannungsfall, Euroclear, activos congelados, préstamo de reparaciones, guerra Ucrania, emergencia UE, crisis bancaria, dependencia energética, riesgo geopolítico, seguridad Alemania, análisis geopolítico, shock financiero, conflicto geopolítico, estrategia geopolítica, situación geopolítica, tensiones geopolíticas, desarrollo geopolítico, amenaza geopolítica, desafío geopolítico, crisis geopolítica, incertidumbre geopolítica, inestabilidad geopolítica, juego de poder geopolítico, intereses geopolíticos, alianzas geopolíticas, rivalidades geopolíticas, cálculo geopolítico, consecuencias geopolíticas, implicaciones geopolíticas
العربية Spannungsfall, يوروكلير, أصول مجمدة, قراب إعادة إعمار, حرب أوكرانيا, طوارئ الاتحاد الأوروبي, أزمة مصرفية, اعتماد طاقي, مخاطر جيوسياسية, أمان ألمانيا, تحليل جيوسياسي, صدمة سوق مالية, صراع جيوسياسي, استراتيجية جيوسياسية, وضع جيوسياسي, توترات جيوسياسية, تطور جيوسياسي, تهديد جيوسياسي, تحدّ جيوسياسي, أزمة جيوسياسية, عدم يقين جيوسياسي, عدم استقرار جيوسياسي, لعبة قوى جيوسياسية, مصالح جيوسياسية, تحالفات جيوسياسية, تنافسيات جيوسياسية, حساب جيوسياسي, عواقب جيوسياسية, تبعات جيوسياسية
Русский Spannungsfall, Euroclear, замороженные активы, репарационный кредит, война в Украине, чрезвычайное положение ЕС, банковский кризис, энергетическая зависимость, геополитический риск, безопасность Германии, геополитический анализ, финансовый шок, геополитический конфликт, геополитическая стратегия, геополитическая ситуация, геополитические тензии, геополитическое развитие, геополитическая угроза, геополитический вызов, геополитический кризис, геополитическая неопределённость, геополитическая нестабильность, геополитическая игра, геополитические интересы, геополитические альянсы, геополитические соперничества, геополитический расчёт, геополитические последствия, геополитические импликации
עברית Spannungsfall, יורוקליר, נכסים קפואים, הלוואת פיצויים, מלחמת אוקראינה, מצב חירום באיחוד, משבר בנקאי, תלות באנרגיה, סיכון גאופוליטי, ביטחון גרמניה, ניתוח גאופוליטי, הלם שוקי פיננסי, עימות גאופוליטי, אסטרטגיה גאופוליטית, מצב גאופוליטי, מתחים גאופוליטיים, התפתחות גאופוליטית, איום גאופוליטי, אתגר גאופוליטי, משבר גאופוליטי, אי-ודאות גאופוליטית, אי-יציבות גאופוליטית, משחקי כוח גאופוליטיים, אינטרסים גאופוליטיים, בריתות גאופוליטיות, יריבויות גאופוליטיות, חישוב גאופוליטי, השלכות גאופוליטיות, משמעויות גאופוליטיות
اردو Spannungsfall, یوروکلئیر, منجمد اثاثے, مکمل تاوان قرض, یوکرین جنگ, یورپی یونین ہنگامی حالت, بینکنگ بحران, توانائی انحصار, جغرافیائی سیاسی خطر, جرمنی کی سلامتی, جغرافیائی سیاسی تجزیہ, مالیاتی منڈی جھٹکا, جغرافیائی سیاسی تنازع, جغرافیائی سیاسی حکمت عملی, جغرافیائی سیاسی صورتحال, جغرافیائی سیاسی کشیدگی, جغرافیائی سیاسی ترقی, جغرافیائی سیاسی خطرہ, جغرافیائی سیاسی چیلنج, جغرافیائی سیاسی بحران, جغرافیائی سیاسی عدم یقین, جغرافیائی سیاسی عدم استحکام, جغرافیائی سیاسی طاقت کے کھیل, جغرافیائی سیاسی مفادات, جغرافیائی سیاسی اتحاد, جغرافیائی سیاسی مسابقت, جغرافیائی سیاسی حساب, جغرافیائی سیاسی نتائج, جغرافیائی سیاسی اثرات
Two senior insiders – one focused on grand strategy, the other on nuclear defense – have recently issued blunt warnings about the state of global security. Their analyses, though different in focus, point toward the same unsettling conclusion: the risk of miscalculation is climbing fast.
⚡ Key Warnings
Ukraine Stalemate → Current strategies appear exhausted, with no realistic peace terms in sight.
NATO Overreach → Expansion dynamics are flagged as potential triggers for escalation.
Nuclear Instability → Deterrence theory is increasingly outdated in a world of hypersonic weapons and degraded warning systems.
Shrinking Timelines → Escalation windows are shortening, raising the chance of catastrophic error.
🧩 Why This Matters
The combination of a frozen battlefield in Eastern Europe, overstretched alliances, and fragile nuclear postures suggests a world that is closer to crisis than policymakers admit.
The two insiders highlight blind spots:
Outdated doctrines still guiding nuclear decision-making.
Reluctance by institutions to publicly acknowledge vulnerabilities.
A widening gap between political ambition and strategic reality.
🔒 Subscriber-Only Analysis
The public cannot see everything. On patreon.com/berndpulch, Tier-7 subscribers get access to:
Full transcript comparisons of insider statements.
Cross-referenced maps tying warnings to documented risk points.
Four scenario forecasts: stalemate, NATO fracture, accidental nuclear trigger, controlled détente.
A curated “red flag watchlist” of signals to monitor over the next 12 months.
🎯 Takeaway
Strategic miscalculation is no longer a remote risk – it is becoming the baseline scenario.
global conflict risk, Ukraine stalemate, NATO expansion, nuclear instability, deterrence theory outdated, hypersonic weapons risk, escalation risk, strategic miscalculation, insider warnings, alliance overstretch, nuclear posture crisis, world security analysis, geopolitics 2025global conflict risk, Ukraine stalemate, NATO expansion, nuclear instability, deterrence theory outdated, hypersonic weapons risk, escalation risk, strategic miscalculation, insider warnings, alliance overstretch, nuclear posture crisis, world security analysis, geopolitics 2025global conflict risk, Ukraine stalemate, NATO expansion, nuclear instability, deterrence theory outdated, hypersonic weapons risk, escalation risk, strategic miscalculation, insider warnings, alliance overstretch, nuclear posture crisis, world security analysis, geopolitics 2025
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
English: Shadow of the Vanished Nukes: Homes Under the Mushroom Cloud ☢️🔥 Deutsch: Schatten der verschwundenen Atomwaffen: Häuser unter der Atompilzwolke ☢️🔥 Français: L’ombre des armes nucléaires disparues : des foyers sous le champignon atomique ☢️🔥 Español: La sombra de las armas nucleares perdidas: hogares bajo la nube atómica ☢️🔥 Italiano: L’ombra delle armi nucleari scomparse: case sotto la nube atomica ☢️🔥 Português: A sombra das armas nucleares desaparecidas: lares sob a nuvem atômica ☢️🔥 Русский: Тень исчезнувших ядерных боеголовок: дома под атомным грибом ☢️🔥 العربية: ظل الأسلحة النووية المفقودة: منازل تحت سحابة الفطر الذرية ☢️🔥 עברית: צל הנשקים הגרעיניים שנעלמו: בתים תחת ענן הפטרייה ☢️🔥 हिन्दी: गायब परमाणु हथियारों की छाया: घर परमाणु बादल के नीचे ☢️🔥 中文: 消失的核武阴影：家园笼罩在蘑菇云下 ☢️🔥 日本語: 消えた核兵器の影：キノコ雲の下の家々 ☢️🔥
🔥💥🏠☢️ “A single house stands—while the sky erupts with the ghost of a vanished warhead. The world lives on borrowed time.”
⚡ Executive Summary
Since the 1950s, dozens of nuclear weapons have been lost, sunk, or destroyed in accidents. Most were never recovered.
At least 40 nuclear warheads are officially missing.
Six U.S. warheads vanished in bomber crashes and submarine losses.
Soviet/Russian submarine disasters account for more than 30 warheads.
Each incident carried risks for civilian populations, ecosystems, and global shipping lanes.
🧨 Verified Missing Nuclear Weapons
Weapon / PlatformNationYearCauseWhereWho Was EndangeredB-52 (Palomares Incident) USA 1966 Mid-air collision Mediterranean, Spain Local fishermen, radiation exposure USS Scorpion (SSN-589) USA 1968 Submarine sank North Atlantic Shipping lanes K-129 (Golf II class) USSR 1968 Submarine sank Pacific 3 nuclear missiles lost Thule Crash (B-52) USA 1968 Bomber crash Greenland ice sheet Cleanup workers exposed K-219 (Yankee I class) USSR 1986 Fire/explosion North Atlantic 34 warheads at risk K-278 Komsomolets USSR 1989 Submarine sank Norwegian Sea Fisheries, coastal populations K-141 Kursk Russia 2000 Explosion Barents Sea 22 nuclear missiles aboard K-159 (Decommissioned) Russia 2003 Sank under tow Barents Sea Arctic ecosystems
🧩 Patterns in the Disasters
Cold War Recklessness – U.S. bombers routinely flew nuclear-armed and suffered fatal accidents.
Soviet Submarine Disasters – Fires, poor maintenance, and secrecy caused repeated reactor and missile losses.
Official Silence – Both Washington and Moscow downplayed civilian risks.
Oceans as Graveyards – Dozens of warheads now corrode on sea floors in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic.
🚨 After the USSR: The “Loose Nukes” Question
Beyond accidents, the collapse of the Soviet Union left a legacy of uncertainty:
1990s Withdrawals – Thousands of tactical nukes were pulled back from Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. Not all were perfectly tracked.
Black Market Reports – In 1995, Russian press described a “suitcase nuke” offered in Chechnya. Never confirmed.
Smuggling Routes – The IAEA documented repeated seizures of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium in Georgia and Moldova.
Inspection Gaps – Western inspectors admitted they were denied access to some storage sites in 1990s Russia.
🎯 Takeaway
Over 40 nuclear weapons are missing—some under ice, some in deep oceans, some perhaps vanished into the chaos of the 1990s.
Verified U.S. losses: mostly bomber crashes and one submarine.
Verified Soviet/Russian losses: submarine sinkings and catastrophic explosions.
Speculative post-Soviet losses: the greatest fear is not in the sea, but in what may have walked away during the collapse.
These are the most dangerous weapons ever built. And some of them are still out there.
🔒 Full Intel for Subscribers
This public report highlights only the verified, open-source cases. 👉 On patreon.com/berndpulch, subscribers gain access to the full classified-style dossier, including:
A complete case-by-case breakdown with dates, ships, and warhead counts.
Declassified maps of nuclear accident sites.
The Speculative Annex: suspected post-Soviet diversions, smuggling routes, and black market intelligence.
A visual intelligence chart mapping every missing warhead.
Support the project, unlock the full picture.
English 🇺🇸
If you found this article on “The Missing Nukes Near Your Home: The Broken Arrow Files” insightful, support independent journalism and exclusive content! Become a patron at patreon.com/berndpulch for access to classified dossiers, interactive maps, and detailed reports on missing nuclear weapons in your region. Alternatively, donate via Monero to this address: 41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh. Your contributions help uncover the truth about the 6 confirmed missing U.S. nuclear warheads and global nuclear risks !
Deutsch 🇩🇪
Wenn Sie dieser Artikel über „Verschwundene Atomwaffen: Die Broken Arrow-Akten“ aufschlussreich fanden, unterstützen Sie unabhängigen Journalismus und exklusive Inhalte! Werden Sie Patron unter patreon.com/berndpulch für Zugang zu klassifizierten Dossiers, detaillierten Karten und regionalen Risikoanalysen zu verschollenen Nuklearwaffen in Ihrer Nähe. Alternativ spenden Sie via Monero an diese Adresse: `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. Ihre Beiträge helfen, die Wahrheit über 6 bestätigte, vermisste US-Atomwaffen und globale Gefahren aufzudecken [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
Français 🇫🇷
Si cet article sur « Armes nucléaires disparues : Les dossiers Broken Arrow » vous a paru instructif, soutenez le journalisme indépendant et les contenus exclusifs ! Devenez mécène sur patreon.com/berndpulch pour accéder à des dossiers classifiés, des cartes interactives et des rapports sur les armes nucléaires manquantes dans votre région. Vous pouvez aussi faire un don via Monero à cette adresse : `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. Vos contributions aident à révéler la vérité sur 6 têtes nucléaires américaines manquantes et les risques mondiaux [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
Español 🇪🇸
Si encontró este artículo sobre «Armas nucleares perdidas: Los archivos Broken Arrow» informativo, ¡apoye el periodismo independiente y el contenido exclusivo! Conviértase en mecenas en patreon.com/berndpulch para acceder a dossiers clasificados, mapas interactivos e informes sobre ojivas nucleares desaparecidas en su región. Alternativamente, done vía Monero a esta dirección: `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. ¡Sus contribuciones ayudan a desenterrar la verdad sobre 6 ojivas nucleares estadounidenses perdidas confirmadas y riesgos globales [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
Italiano 🇮🇹
Se hai trovato questo articolo su «Armi nucleari scomparse: I dossier Broken Arrow» illuminante, supporta il giornalismo indipendente e i contenuti esclusivi! Diventa un patron su patreon.com/berndpulch per accedere a dossier classificati, mappe interattive e rapporti dettagliati sulle armi nucleari mancanti nella tua regione. In alternativa, dona via Monero a questo indirizzo: `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. I tuoi contributi aiutano a portare alla luce la verità su 6 testate nucleari statunitensi perse confermate e i rischi globali [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
Português 🇵🇹
Se achou este artigo sobre «Armas nucleares desaparecidas: Os dossiês Broken Arrow» esclarecedor, apoie o jornalismo independente e conteúdos exclusivos! Torne-se um patrono em patreon.com/berndpulch para acesso a dossiês classificados, mapas interativos e relatórios sobre ogivas nucleares faltantes na sua região. Alternativamente, doe via Monero para este endereço: `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. Suas contribuições ajudam a desvendar a verdade sobre 6 ogivas nucleares norte-americanas perdidas confirmadas e riscos globais [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
Русский 🇷🇺
Если эта статья о «Пропавшее ядерное оружие: Досье Broken Arrow» показалась вам полезной, поддержите независимую журналистику и эксклюзивный контент! Станьте патроном на patreon.com/berndpulch для доступа к засекреченным досье, интерактивным картам и отчетам о пропавших ядерных боеголовках в вашем регионе. Альтернативно, пожертвуйте через Monero на этот адрес: `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. Ваши вклады помогают раскрывать правду о 6 подтвержденных пропавших ядерных боеголовках США и глобальных рисках [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
العربية 🇸🇦
إذا وجدت هذا المقال حول «الأسلحة النووية المفقودة: ملفات Broken Arrow» مفيداً، ادعم الصحافة المستقلة والمحتوى الحصري! كن راعياً على patreon.com/berndpulch للوصول إلى ملفات مصنفة، خرائط تفاعلية، وتقارير مفصلة عن الرؤوس الحربية المفقودة في منطقتك. بديلاً، تبرع عبر Monero إلى هذا العنوان: `41yKiG6eGbQiDxFRTKNepSiqaGaUV5VQWePHL5KYuzrxBWswyc5dtxZ43sk1SFWxDB4XrsDwVQBd3ZPNJRNdUCou3j22Coh**. مساهماتك تساعد في كشف الحقيقة عن 6 رؤوس نووية أمريكية مفقودة مؤكدة والمخاطر العالمية [citation:2][citation:4][citation:8]!
🔍 Fehlende Atomwaffen: Die Akte der verschwundenen Sprengköpfe
⚡ Zusammenfassung
Seit den 1950er Jahren sind Dutzende Atomwaffen verloren gegangen, gesunken oder bei Unfällen zerstört worden. Die meisten wurden nie geborgen.
Mindestens 40 Atomsprengköpfe gelten offiziell als vermisst.
Sechs US-Sprengköpfe verschwanden bei Bomberabstürzen und U-Boot-Verlusten.
Sowjetische/Russische U-Boot-Katastrophen machen mehr als 30 Sprengköpfe aus.
Jeder Vorfall gefährdete Zivilbevölkerung, Ökosysteme und Schifffahrtsrouten.
🧨 Verifizierte Fälle
Waffe/PlattformNationJahrUrsacheWoGefährdungB-52 (Palomares-Zwischenfall) USA 1966 Zusammenstoß in der Luft Mittelmeer, Spanien Fischer, Strahlung USS Scorpion (SSN-589) USA 1968 U-Boot gesunken Nordatlantik Schifffahrt K-129 (Golf II-Klasse) UdSSR 1968 U-Boot gesunken Pazifik 3 Raketen verloren Thule-Absturz (B-52) USA 1968 Bomber abgestürzt Grönland Arbeiter verstrahlt K-219 (Yankee I-Klasse) UdSSR 1986 Feuer/Explosion Nordatlantik 34 Sprengköpfe in Gefahr K-278 Komsomolets UdSSR 1989 U-Boot gesunken Norwegische See Fischerei, Küstenbewohner K-141 Kursk Russland 2000 Explosion Barentssee 22 Raketen an Bord K-159 (außer Dienst) Russland 2003 Untergang beim Schlepp Barentssee Arktische Umwelt
🧩 Muster
Kalter Krieg – US-Bomber flogen ständig nuklear bewaffnet und stürzten mehrfach ab.
Sowjetische U-Boot-Desaster – Schlechte Wartung, Brände und Geheimhaltung.
Offizielles Schweigen – Sowohl Washington als auch Moskau spielten Risiken herunter.
Atomgrab Ozean – Dutzende Sprengköpfe liegen heute auf Meeresböden.
🚨 Nach der UdSSR
Abzug in den 1990ern – Tausende taktische Sprengköpfe aus Ukraine, Belarus, Kasachstan – nicht alle lückenlos dokumentiert.
Schwarzmarkt-Berichte – 1995 meldete die russische Presse ein „Koffer-Nuklearwaffe“ in Tschetschenien.
Schmuggelrouten – IAEA meldete mehrfach abgefangene Uran- und Plutoniummengen.
Inspektionslücken – Westliche Prüfer bekamen keinen vollen Zugang zu allen Lagern.
🎯 Fazit
Über 40 Atomwaffen sind verschwunden – in Ozeanen, unter Eis oder vielleicht im Chaos der 1990er verschwunden.
US-Verluste: vor allem Bomberabstürze.
Sowjet/Russische Verluste: U-Boot-Katastrophen.
Unklarheiten nach 1991: Gefahr nicht im Meer, sondern in der Schattenwelt des Zusammenbruchs.
Français 🇫🇷
🔍 Armes nucléaires disparues : Le dossier des ogives fantômes
⚡ Résumé
Depuis les années 1950, des dizaines d’armes nucléaires ont été perdues, coulées ou détruites par accident. La plupart n’ont jamais été retrouvées.
Au moins 40 ogives nucléaires sont officiellement manquantes.
Six ogives américaines ont disparu lors de crashs d’avions et de sous-marins.
Les sous-marins soviétiques/russes représentent plus de 30 ogives perdues.
Chaque incident a mis en danger populations, écosystèmes et routes maritimes.
🧨 Cas vérifiés
Arme/PlateformeNationAnnéeCauseLieuDangerB-52 (Incident de Palomares) USA 1966 Collision aérienne Méditerranée, Espagne Pêcheurs, contamination USS Scorpion (SSN-589) USA 1968 Sous-marin coulé Atlantique Nord Routes maritimes K-129 (classe Golf II) URSS 1968 Sous-marin coulé Pacifique 3 missiles perdus Crash de Thule (B-52) USA 1968 Avion détruit Groenland Ouvriers contaminés K-219 (classe Yankee I) URSS 1986 Incendie/Explosion Atlantique Nord 34 ogives en péril K-278 Komsomolets URSS 1989 Sous-marin coulé Mer de Norvège Pêcheries, côtes K-141 Koursk Russie 2000 Explosion Mer de Barents 22 missiles à bord K-159 (hors service) Russie 2003 Coulé lors d’un remorquage Mer de Barents Risque environnemental arctique
🧩 Modèles
Imprudence de la guerre froide – Les bombardiers US transportaient constamment des armes nucléaires et se sont écrasés plusieurs fois.
Désastres sous-marins soviétiques – Mauvaise maintenance et incendies.
Silence officiel – Washington et Moscou minimisaient les risques.
Océans-cimetières – Des dizaines d’ogives reposent au fond des mers.
🚨 Après l’URSS
Retrait des années 1990 – Ogives rapatriées d’Ukraine, Biélorussie, Kazakhstan. Suivi incomplet.
Marché noir – En 1995, presse russe: une « bombe nucléaire de valise » proposée en Tchétchénie.
Trafic nucléaire – IAEA a signalé des saisies de matériaux fissiles en Géorgie et Moldavie.
Manques d’inspection – Les observateurs occidentaux n’ont jamais eu un accès complet.
🎯 Conclusion
Plus de 40 armes nucléaires manquent – certaines sous la glace, d’autres au fond des océans, d’autres peut-être disparues dans le chaos des années 1990.
Pertes américaines: surtout crashs de bombardiers.
Pertes soviétiques/russes: sous-marins perdus.
Mystère post-URSS: la véritable crainte n’est pas sous la mer, mais dans l’ombre du marché noir.
Español 🇪🇸
🔍 Armas nucleares perdidas: El archivo de las ojivas fantasma
⚡ Resumen
Desde los años 50, decenas de armas nucleares han sido perdidas, hundidas o destruidas en accidentes. La mayoría nunca fueron recuperadas.
Al menos 40 ojivas nucleares están oficialmente desaparecidas.
Seis ojivas estadounidenses se perdieron en accidentes aéreos y submarinos.
Los desastres submarinos soviéticos/rusos representan más de 30 ojivas.
Cada accidente puso en riesgo a poblaciones, ecosistemas y rutas marítimas.
🧨 Casos verificados
Arma/PlataformaNaciónAñoCausaDóndePeligroB-52 (Incidente de Palomares) EE.UU. 1966 Colisión aérea Mediterráneo, España Pescadores, radiación USS Scorpion (SSN-589) EE.UU. 1968 Hundimiento submarino Atlántico Norte Navegación K-129 (clase Golf II) URSS 1968 Submarino hundido Pacífico 3 misiles perdidos Accidente de Thule (B-52) EE.UU. 1968 Avión caído Groenlandia Trabajadores expuestos K-219 (clase Yankee I) URSS 1986 Incendio/Explosión Atlántico Norte 34 ojivas en riesgo K-278 Komsomolets URSS 1989 Submarino hundido Mar de Noruega Pesca, poblaciones costeras K-141 Kursk Rusia 2000 Explosión Mar de Barents 22 misiles a bordo K-159 (retirado) Rusia 2003 Hundido durante remolque Mar de Barents Riesgo ambiental ártico
🧩 Patrones
Imprudencia de la Guerra Fría – Bombarderos de EE.UU. siempre armados, múltiples accidentes.
Desastres soviéticos – Mala gestión y falta de seguridad.
Silencio oficial – Washington y Moscú ocultaron peligros.
Océanos cementerio – Decenas de armas en los fondos marinos.
🚨 Tras la URSS
Retiro de los 90 – Miles de ojivas movidas desde Ucrania, Bielorrusia, Kazajistán. Control incompleto.
Mercado negro – En 1995, prensa rusa informó de una “bomba de maleta” en Chechenia.
Tráfico nuclear – IAEA reportó incautaciones de uranio y plutonio en Georgia y Moldavia.
Inspecciones incompletas – Observadores occidentales sin acceso total.
🎯 Conclusión
Más de 40 armas nucleares faltan – algunas bajo el hielo, otras en mares profundos, otras quizás desaparecidas en el caos de los 90.
Pérdidas de EE.UU.: sobre todo bombarderos.
Pérdidas soviéticas/rusas: submarinos hundidos.
Misterio post-URSS: el verdadero peligro podría estar en la sombra del mercado negro.
Italiano 🇮🇹
🔍 Armi nucleari scomparse: Il dossier delle testate fantasma
⚡ Sintesi
Dal 1950 in poi, decine di armi nucleari sono state perse, affondate o distrutte in incidenti. La maggior parte non è mai stata recuperata.
Almeno 40 testate nucleari risultano ufficialmente mancanti.
Sei testate statunitensi andarono perse in incidenti aerei e navali.
I disastri dei sottomarini sovietici/russi rappresentano oltre 30 testate.
Ogni incidente ha messo in pericolo civili, ecosistemi e rotte marittime.
🧨 Casi verificati
Arma/PiattaformaNazioneAnnoCausaDovePericoloB-52 (Incidente di Palomares) USA 1966 Collisione aerea Mediterraneo, Spagna Pesca, radiazioni USS Scorpion (SSN-589) USA 1968 Affondato Atlantico Nord Navigazione K-129 (classe Golf II) URSS 1968 Affondato Pacifico 3 missili persi Thule (B-52) USA 1968 Crash aereo Groenlandia Lavoratori contaminati K-219 (classe Yankee I) URSS 1986 Incendio/Esplosione Atlantico Nord 34 testate a rischio K-278 Komsomolets URSS 1989 Affondato Mare di Norvegia Pesca, coste K-141 Kursk Russia 2000 Esplosione Mare di Barents 22 missili a bordo K-159 (disattivato) Russia 2003 Affondato durante rimorchio Mare di Barents Ambiente artico
🧩 Schemi
Sconsideratezza della Guerra Fredda – Bombardieri americani sempre armati, crash frequenti.
Disastri sovietici – Manutenzione scarsa, incendi ed esplosioni.
Silenzio ufficiale – Washington e Mosca minimizzavano i rischi.
Cimiteri oceanici – Decine di testate giacciono sui fondali.
🚨 Dopo l’URSS
Rientro anni ’90 – Migliaia di testate rimpatriate da Ucraina, Bielorussia, Kazakistan. Monitoraggio incompleto.
Mercato nero – Nel 1995 la stampa russa parlò di una “bomba valigia” in Cecenia.
Traffici nucleari – L’AIEA segnalò sequestri di uranio e plutonio in Georgia e Moldavia.
Ispezioni parziali – Gli osservatori occidentali non ebbero accesso completo.
🎯 Conclusione
Oltre 40 armi nucleari mancano – sotto il ghiaccio, negli oceani o forse sparite nel caos degli anni ’90.
Perdite USA: crash di bombardieri.
Perdite URSS/Russia: disastri sottomarini.
Dopo il 1991: la vera minaccia potrebbe essere il mercato nero.
Português 🇵🇹
🔍 Armas nucleares desaparecidas: O dossiê das ogivas fantasmas
⚡ Resumo
Desde os anos 50, dezenas de armas nucleares foram perdidas, afundadas ou destruídas em acidentes. A maioria nunca foi recuperada.
Pelo menos 40 ogivas nucleares estão oficialmente desaparecidas.
Seis ogivas americanas desapareceram em acidentes aéreos e submarinos.
Os desastres de submarinos soviéticos/russos somam mais de 30 ogivas.
Cada caso colocou em risco populações, ecossistemas e rotas marítimas.
🧨 Casos verificados
Arma/PlataformaNaçãoAnoCausaLocalRiscoB-52 (Incidente de Palomares) EUA 1966 Colisão aérea Mediterrâneo, Espanha Pescadores, radiação USS Scorpion (SSN-589) EUA 1968 Afundou Atlântico Norte Navegação K-129 (classe Golf II) URSS 1968 Afundou Pacífico 3 mísseis perdidos Thule (B-52) EUA 1968 Queda Groenlândia Trabalhadores expostos K-219 (classe Yankee I) URSS 1986 Incêndio/Explosão Atlântico Norte 34 ogivas em risco K-278 Komsomolets URSS 1989 Afundou Mar da Noruega Pesca, ambiente costeiro K-141 Kursk Rússia 2000 Explosão Mar de Barents 22 mísseis a bordo K-159 (desativado) Rússia 2003 Afundou em reboque Mar de Barents Risco ambiental ártico
🧩 Padrões
Imprudência da Guerra Fria – Bombardeiros americanos sempre armados, múltiplos acidentes.
Desastres soviéticos – Manutenção precária, incêndios e falhas.
Silêncio oficial – Washington e Moscou minimizaram riscos.
Oceanos-cemitérios – Dezenas de ogivas descansam no fundo do mar.
🚨 Após a URSS
Retirada dos anos 90 – Ogivas repatriadas de Ucrânia, Bielorrússia, Cazaquistão. Registros incompletos.
Mercado negro – Em 1995, a imprensa russa relatou uma “bomba de mala” na Chechênia.
Tráfico nuclear – A AIEA registrou apreensões de urânio e plutônio em rotas do Cáucaso.
Falta de inspeções – Observadores ocidentais sem acesso total.
🎯 Conclusão
Mais de 40 armas nucleares estão desaparecidas – sob gelo, nos oceanos ou talvez no caos dos anos 90.
С 1950-х годов десятки ядерных боезарядов были утеряны, затонувшие или уничтоженные в авариях. Большинство так и не найдено.
Не менее 40 боеголовок официально считаются пропавшими.
Шесть американских зарядов исчезли в катастрофах самолётов и подлодок.
Советские/российские аварии подводных лодок составляют более 30 боезарядов.
Каждый случай угрожал населению, экологии и морским маршрутам.
🧨 Подтверждённые случаи
Оружие/ПлатформаСтранаГодПричинаГдеОпасностьB-52 (Паломарес) США 1966 Столкновение Средиземное море Рыбаки, радиация USS Scorpion (SSN-589) США 1968 Затонул Атлантика Судоходство К-129 (Гольф II) СССР 1968 Затонул Тихий океан 3 ракеты Туле (B-52) США 1968 Крушение Гренландия Радиация К-219 (Янки I) СССР 1986 Пожар/взрыв Атлантика 34 боезаряда К-278 Комсомолец СССР 1989 Затонул Норвежское море Экология К-141 Курск Россия 2000 Взрыв Баренцево море 22 ракеты К-159 Россия 2003 Затонул при буксировке Баренцево море Экология Арктики
🧩 Закономерности
Безрассудство холодной войны – США постоянно держали бомбардировщики с ЯО в воздухе.
Советские аварии – слабая безопасность, пожары.
Официальное молчание – Москва и Вашингтон скрывали риски.
Ядерные могилы океанов – десятки зарядов на дне морей.
🚨 После СССР
Вывоз 1990-х – возвращены тысячи зарядов из Украины, Беларуси, Казахстана. Отчётность неполная.
Чёрный рынок – В 1995 году сообщалось о «чемоданной бомбе» в Чечне.
Контрабанда – МАГАТЭ зафиксировало изъятие урана и плутония.
Лакуны в инспекциях – Запад не получил доступ ко всем объектам.
🎯 Вывод
Более 40 ядерных зарядов исчезли – на дне океанов или в хаосе 1990-х.
Потери США: аварии бомбардировщиков.
Потери СССР/России: подлодки.
После 1991: главная опасность — тень чёрного рынка.
العربية 🇸🇦
🔍 الأسلحة النووية المفقودة: ملف الرؤوس الحربية المختفية
⚡ ملخص
منذ خمسينيات القرن الماضي فُقدت عشرات الأسلحة النووية أو غرقت أو دمرت في حوادث. معظمها لم يُسترجع.
ما لا يقل عن 40 رأسًا نوويًا مفقودة رسميًا.
ستة أسلحة أمريكية فُقدت في حوادث طائرات وغواصات.
الكوارث السوفيتية/الروسية مسؤولة عن أكثر من 30 رأسًا.
كل حادث هدد المدنيين والبيئة والممرات البحرية.
🧨 حوادث مؤكدة
السلاح/المنصةالدولةالسنةالسببالمكانالخطرB-52 (بالوماريس) أمريكا 1966 تصادم البحر المتوسط الصيادون، التلوث USS Scorpion أمريكا 1968 غرق الأطلسي الملاحة K-129 الاتحاد السوفيتي 1968 غرق المحيط الهادئ 3 صواريخ ثول (B-52) أمريكا 1968 تحطم غرينلاند تلوث إشعاعي K-219 الاتحاد السوفيتي 1986 حريق/انفجار الأطلسي 34 رأسًا K-278 كومسوموليتس الاتحاد السوفيتي 1989 غرق بحر النرويج البيئة K-141 كورسك روسيا 2000 انفجار بحر بارنتس 22 صاروخًا K-159 روسيا 2003 غرق أثناء السحب بحر بارنتس البيئة القطبية
🧩 أنماط
تهور الحرب الباردة – القاذفات الأمريكية دائمًا محملة نوويًا.
كوارث سوفيتية – ضعف الصيانة، حرائق.
صمت رسمي – موسكو وواشنطن أخفتا المخاطر.
مقابر المحيطات – عشرات الرؤوس النووية في الأعماق.
🚨 بعد الاتحاد السوفيتي
انسحاب التسعينيات – نقل آلاف الرؤوس من أوكرانيا وبيلاروس وكازاخستان. سجلات غير مكتملة.
السوق السوداء – تقارير عن “قنابل حقيبة” في الشيشان.
تهريب نووي – إيقاف شحنات يورانيوم وبلوتونيوم.
ثغرات تفتيش – الغرب لم يصل لكل المخازن.
🎯 خلاصة
أكثر من 40 سلاحًا نوويًا مفقود.
الخسائر الأمريكية: قاذفات.
الخسائر الروسية/السوفيتية: غواصات.
ما بعد 1991: الخطر الأكبر هو السوق السوداء.
עברית 🇮🇱
🔍 נשק גרעיני שאבד: תיק ראשי הקרב הנעלמים
⚡ סיכום
מאז שנות ה־50 עשרות נשקים גרעיניים אבדו, טבעו או הושמדו בתאונות. רובם לא אותרו.
לפחות 40 ראשי קרב גרעיניים מוגדרים נעדרים.
שישה אמריקאים אבדו בהתרסקויות מטוסים וצוללות.
אסונות סובייטיים/רוסיים אחראים ליותר מ־30.
כל אירוע סיכן אזרחים, סביבה ונתיבי שיט.
🧨 מקרים מאומתים
נשק/פלטפורמהמדינהשנהסיבהמיקוםסיכוןB-52 (פלומרס) ארה״ב 1966 התנגשות ים התיכון דייגים, קרינה USS Scorpion ארה״ב 1968 טביעה אוקיינוס אטלנטי נתיבי שיט K-129 בריה״מ 1968 טביעה האוקיינוס השקט 3 טילים Thule (B-52) ארה״ב 1968 התרסקות גרינלנד קרינה K-219 בריה״מ 1986 פיצוץ/אש אטלנטי 34 ראשי קרב K-278 בריה״מ 1989 טביעה ים נורבגיה סביבה K-141 קורסק רוסיה 2000 פיצוץ ים ברנץ 22 טילים K-159 רוסיה 2003 טביעה בגרירה ים ברנץ סביבה ארקטית
🧩 דפוסים
פזיזות המלחמה הקרה – מפציצים אמריקאים תמיד חמושים.
אסונות סובייטיים – תחזוקה כושלת.
שתיקה רשמית – מוסקבה וושינגטון טשטשו סיכונים.
קברי אוקיינוס – עשרות ראשי קרב במעמקים.
🚨 אחרי בריה״מ
פינוי בשנות ה־90 – ראשי קרב הוחזרו מאוקראינה, בלארוס, קזחסטן. מעקב חלקי.
שוק שחור – דיווחים על “פצצות מזוודה” בצ׳צ׳ניה.
הברחות גרעין – אורניום ופלוטוניום נתפסו.
חוסרי פיקוח – המערב לא קיבל גישה מלאה.
🎯 מסקנה
יותר מ־40 ראשי קרב נעדרים.
הפסדים אמריקאים: התרסקויות מפציצים.
הפסדים סובייטיים/רוסיים: טביעות צוללות.
אחרי 1991: איום שוק שחור.
हिन्दी 🇮🇳
🔍 लापता परमाणु हथियार: गुम हुई वारहेड फ़ाइल
⚡ सारांश
1950 के दशक से दर्जनों परमाणु हथियार खो गए, डूबे या दुर्घटनाओं में नष्ट हुए। अधिकांश कभी नहीं मिले।
कम से कम 40 परमाणु वारहेड आधिकारिक रूप से लापता।
छह अमेरिकी वारहेड विमान और पनडुब्बी हादसों में गायब।
USP: berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP: berndpulch.org يجمع بين السخرية اللاذعة والكشف عن أسرار الدولة، فضائح المخابرات، والفساد العالمي—كل ذلك مع لمسة من الفكاهة “ماذا كانوا يفكرون؟”، بدون رقابة، مع وصول متعدد المرايا للحقيقة التي لا تُرد.
USP: berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP : berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP: berndpulch.org तीखी व्यंग्य के साथ सरकारी रहस्य, खुफिया घोटालों और वैश्विक भ्रष्टाचार को उजागर करता है—सब कुछ “वे क्या सोच रहे थे?” के हास्य के साथ, बिना सेंसरशिप और अजेय सत्य के लिए बहु-मिरर एक्सेस के साथ।
USP: berndpulch.org משלב סאטירה חריפה עם חשיפת סודות מדינה, שערוריות מודיעין ושחיתות גלובלית—הכל עם נגיעה של הומור בסגנון “מה הם חשבו?”, ללא צנזורה וגישה בלתי ניתנת לעצירה דרך מראות מרובות.
USP: berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP: berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
Основной сайт: http://www.berndpulch.org Зеркальные сайты: wxwxxxpp.manus.space | googlefirst.org Видео на Rumble: Смотреть здесь Patreon: patreon.com/berndpulch
USP: berndpulch.org сочетает острую сатиру с разоблачением государственных секретов, разведывательных скандалов и глобальной коррупции — всё это с долей юмора «о чём они вообще думали?», без цензуры и с множеством зеркал для неудержимой правды.
Caption for WordPress: “War drums echo louder: Europe races against a 2027 clock, Russia sharpens its edge, and U.S.-China tensions edge closer to flashpoint. The world holds its breath—are we watching history repeat, or rewrite itself? 🌍⚔️ #Geopolitics #GlobalTensions”
✅ ABOVE TOP SECRET REPORT 📂 SOURCE: Open-Source Intelligence & Expert Analysis 🔒 CLEARANCE: COSMIC SHADOW – PUBLIC ACCESS 📅 DATE: 2025-09-04, 15:07 CEST 🛰️ DISTRIBUTION: UNRESTRICTED // COMPARTMENT PUBLIC RELEASE
🟥 OPERATION “WAR ECHO”
🔥 EXPERTS HIGHLIGHT EUROPE’S 2027 DEFENSE PLANS & GLOBAL TENSIONS
🧨 EXECUTIVE BRIEFING
This public report, compiled at 15:07 CEST on September 04, 2025, draws from open-source intelligence and expert insights to explore Europe’s defense preparations by 2027, ongoing Russia-Ukraine dynamics, the recent Israel-Iran conflict resolution, and emerging U.S. strategies toward China. 🚨 The analysis offers a broad view of escalating global tensions, informed by accessible data. 🌍 Emojis highlight key points for emphasis. This briefing provides a layman’s perspective on the shifting geopolitical landscape. 🕵️♂️ All details are based on public records.
🧾 SECTION 1: EUROPE’S 2027 DEFENSE PUSH
Experts suggest Europe is gearing up for self-defense by 2027, moving up from earlier timelines like 2029. 📜 Key observations include:
Readiness Goal: 🚀 Analysts note efforts to strengthen NATO capabilities, addressing current vulnerabilities. 💥 Emojis underscore the focus: 🛡️ Defense vs. ⚔️ Potential threats.
Regional Concerns: 🌐 Discussions highlight fears of a Russian advance, prompting accelerated military planning.
Public Perspective: 📰 The shift to 2027 is seen as a critical deadline for European security.
This reflects a broader trend of heightened preparedness.
💵 SECTION 2: RUSSIA-UKRAINE STALEMATE
Analysts assess the ongoing Russia-Ukraine situation, noting Russia’s strong position. ⚙️ The conflict continues to shape regional dynamics. 😱 Key points:
Negotiation Tensions: 🚨 Experts indicate Russia holds an advantage in potential talks, with Ukraine under pressure. 💰 Emojis illustrate the balance: 📉 Strain vs. 📈 Leverage.
Military Stance: 🌐 Observations suggest Russia maintains its offensive, with no immediate de-escalation in sight.
Economic Impact: 📰 Predictions warn of energy challenges in Europe if the conflict persists.
This ties to global energy and alliance shifts.
🔗 SECTION 3: ISRAEL-IRAN CONFLICT OUTCOME
The recent Israel-Iran war’s swift end has sparked varied interpretations. 🌐 Analysts offer insights into the resolution. Key points:
Differing Views: 🚀 Some see Iran’s survival as a win, while others view Israel’s strengthened position as decisive. 💥 Emojis highlight perspectives: 🏆 Resilience vs. ⚔️ Strength.
Regional Stability: 📰 Discussions note Israel’s improved security, with no Hamas threat, suggesting a shift in Middle East dynamics.
Global Ripple: 📉 The outcome may influence broader tensions, including U.S. involvement.
The human toll remains a key concern.
🔧 SECTION 4: U.S. STRATEGIES TOWARD CHINA
Experts speculate on U.S. plans to address China’s rise, potentially involving a 2027 containment effort. 🌐 This may coincide with increased Ukraine support to divert Russia. Key points:
Containment Focus: 🚀 Analysts suggest possible economic or naval moves in the South China Sea to curb China’s growth. 💥 Emojis emphasize the strategy: 🇨🇳 Challenge vs. ⚔️ Diversion.
Ukraine Link: 📰 Discussions hint at heightened U.S. aid to Ukraine to keep Russia occupied, limiting its support for China.
Global Risk: 📉 Such moves could lead to trade disruptions or oil price increases if tensions escalate.
This reflects a complex balancing act.
📉 IMPLICATIONS & OUTLOOK
⚠️ These developments point to a tense future. 🕳️ Possible outcomes include:
A push for de-escalation through diplomacy.
A prolonged stalemate with regional divisions.
An escalation risking wider economic fallout.
The situation remains dynamic. 🔄
❓ UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
What drives Europe’s 2027 timeline? 🤝
Will Russia shift its Ukraine strategy? 😱
How will China respond to U.S. moves? 🌐
🔐 APPENDIX – PUBLIC DETAILS
Analysis Basis: Open-source reports and expert commentary.
USP:berndpulch.org delivers cutting-edge satire while exposing state secrets, intelligence scandals, and global corruption—all served with a side of “what were they thinking?” humor, zero censorship, and multi-mirror access for unstoppable truth.
USP:berndpulch.org liefert scharfsinnige Satire, deckt Geheimdienstskandale, Korruption und absurde Machtspiele auf – alles zensurfrei, mit mehreren Spiegeln und einem Augenzwinkern versehen.
USP :berndpulch.org combine satire acérée et révélations sur les scandales d’État, la corruption et les absurdités du pouvoir – sans censure, avec plusieurs miroirs et humour noir.
USP:berndpulch.org combina sátira punzante con revelaciones sobre secretos de Estado, corrupción y disparates de poder – sin censura, con múltiples espejos y humor irónico.
USP:berndpulch.org unisce satira tagliente e rivelazioni su segreti di Stato, corruzione e follie del potere – tutto senza censura, con specchi multipli e humor nero.
USP:berndpulch.org combina sátira afiada com revelações sobre segredos de Estado, corrupção e absurdos do poder – sem censura, com múltiplos espelhos e humor negro.
🔥 HIDDEN AGREEMENTS IN ALASKA: INSIDER REVELATIONS ON TRUMP-PUTIN SUMMIT
🧨 EXECUTIVE BRIEFING
This classified report, compiled at 10:15 CEST on August 18, 2025, draws from insider discussions on a high-level summit in Alaska between U.S. and Russian leaders. Credited to insiders with deep knowledge of international affairs, the analysis uncovers undisclosed agreements from the meeting held yesterday, August 17, 2025. The brief 12-15 minute press conference in Anchorage masked deeper diplomatic shifts, amid hostile media coverage and European panic.
🧾 SECTION 1: SUMMIT OVERVIEW
Insiders describe:
The gathering as a pivotal diplomatic breakthrough after years of Western isolation efforts against Russia, following its military operations three and a half years ago.
A short public briefing that left critical questions unanswered, fueling speculation and varied reactions from optimism to alarm.
🧠 Note: This marks a potential reset in strained relations, per insider evaluations.
💵 SECTION 2: MEDIA AND REACTION ANALYSIS
Key insights reveal:
Hostile press portrayals demanding a tough U.S. stance, viewed as attempts to prolong conflicts.
Extreme responses across Europe, ranging from hope to outright panic over possible geopolitical realignments.
🔗 SECTION 3: HIDDEN AGREEMENTS AND OUTCOMES
Emerging details from insiders:
Fresh information post-summit points to undisclosed pacts, though specifics remain guarded.
The meeting’s outcomes could alter Russia-West dynamics, challenging prior isolation strategies.
📉 IMPLICATIONS
⚠️ The summit signals a strategic pivot, potentially easing tensions but sparking media backlash. 🕳️ Undisclosed deals hint at territorial or conflict resolutions not publicly addressed. 🔒 Insider context ties this to broader historical analyses of ongoing wars.
❓ UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
What exact terms were agreed upon behind closed doors?
How will European allies respond to any perceived U.S. concessions?
Could this lead to a broader thaw in global relations?
“Behind Closed Doors: The Real Story of the Putin–Trump Meeting”
⚡ CLASSIFIED SOURCE BRIEFING – EYES ONLY ⚡
Multiple insiders—some of them with louder mouths than their security clearances allow—have pieced together the outlines of the latest encounter between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. The meeting, cloaked in the usual fog of denials and diplomatic clichés, was less about photo ops and more about geopolitical recalibration in real time.
According to leaks:
Putin entered the room with quiet confidence, the kind born not of military parades but of survival in a fractured international system. He presented himself less as a cold autocrat and more as a strategic chess player, aware of the West’s fatigue and America’s internal fractures.
Trump, characteristically, mixed bravado with grievance. He opened with boasts about his popularity at home and abroad, but quickly pivoted to complaining about enemies in Washington. What struck insiders most was not the theatrics but his willingness to listen when Putin spoke of multipolar stability.
The hidden agenda: Both men reportedly circled around the idea of carving out “zones of influence”—a throwback to Cold War cartography but dressed up as pragmatism for the 21st century. Putin spoke of Europe as a declining empire trapped in bureaucracy, while Trump nodded, eager to cast Brussels as a foil to his America-first script.
Tone of the meeting: Surprisingly cordial. Sources describe less a confrontation than a “meeting of two dealmakers who understand the value of leverage and the weakness of their respective adversaries.”
Insider takeaway: The spectacle wasn’t about new treaties or signed papers. It was about atmospherics—the subtle projection of two men who, whatever their flaws, grasp the theater of power better than the institutions supposedly containing them.
📎 INTERNAL COMMENTARY
Observers note that while the mainstream paints these encounters as reckless flirtations with autocracy, the truth may be simpler: both leaders recognize that the Western order is fraying, and neither wants to be left holding the bag when the fabric finally tears.
🔒 ABOVE TOP SECRET – DISTRIBUTE ON NEED-TO-KNOW BASIS ONLY 🔒
The story continues for our PATRONS and DONORS exclusively only at
📄 CLASSIFIED SUMMARY An insider embedded within the highest strategic advisory tier has passed along urgent, raw assessments from recent high-level briefings. The discussions, sourced from seasoned national security veterans and independent geopolitical analysts, reveal shifts in both Eastern and Western strategic postures—changes that insiders warn could reshape the global chessboard before year’s end.
🛰 1. War Theatre Assessment
Eastern Front Dynamics: The briefings confirm a deceleration in one front’s momentum, with resource attrition, weather constraints, and unexpected resistance forcing operational recalibrations.
Western Strategic Fatigue: A subtle but widening rift is emerging among allied leadership circles—financial strain and domestic political backlash are reducing appetite for escalation.
🛡 2. Command-Level Perspectives
Veteran Command Viewpoint: The situation is described as “a war being fought on a 20th-century model in a 21st-century surveillance environment,” where tactical moves are immediately countered due to near-real-time intelligence sharing.
Quiet Warnings: One high-ranking former planner cautioned that any miscalculated escalation could trigger a chain reaction bypassing diplomatic containment.
📊 3. Economic Underpinnings
Weaponized Supply Chains: Energy corridors, rare earth dependencies, and grain export bottlenecks are being weaponized to apply pressure without crossing conventional military thresholds.
Financial Time Bombs: Debt burdens in several supporting states could, according to the source, implode support coalitions from within.
🔍 4. Geo-Strategic Observations
The analysts stress that certain narratives in mainstream briefings are “sanitized” for public digestion. Real intelligence paints a more precarious balance, where missteps are far closer than publicly admitted.
Prediction Windows: By late autumn, insiders expect either a negotiated freeze or a sharp escalation—with little space for a middle ground.
📂 INTERNAL NOTE – PATREON READERS ONLY
The full, unredacted “Deep Mouth” briefing, including maps, classified-style operation flowcharts, and the suppressed scenarios not cleared for public release, is available exclusively to Pulch’s Patreon supporte
🚀 “OPERATION GOLDEN ILLUSION” – Inside the fall of the world’s most overhyped missile shields. A classified investigation into U.S. and Israeli defense failures, rising hypersonic dominance, and the silent reach of North Korea’s newest arsenal.
🛰️ ABOVE TOP SECRET REPORT “OPERATION GOLDEN ILLUSION: The Collapse of Missile Myths in the 2025 Global Theater” Prepared for internal distribution – Level Ω Clearance Only
As global military technology races into the hypersonic age, the United States, Israel, and allied powers confront the hard limits of legacy defense myths—from the “Iron Dome” to its $175B American twin, the so-called Golden Dome, now facing strategic implosion amid rising threats from North Korea, Russia, and China. This report investigates:
The Golden Dome’s feasibility failure, per DoD insiders and Larry Johnson’s warnings.
Israeli Iron Dome’s ineffectiveness in the face of advanced saturation attacks.
Hypersonic war dominance by Russia (Avangard), China (DF-ZF), and the U.S. in decline.
North Korean missile reach to the U.S. mainland—credible, ignored by mainstream.
Critical commentary from Dmitry Orlov and strategic analysts at Dialogue Works.
🛡️ THE GOLDEN DOME: A BUREAUCRATIC MYTHOS
According to CRS Report R48584, Trump’s 2025 initiative to create a homeland missile shield dubbed the Golden Dome for America envisioned:
A $175B system targeting hypersonic, cruise, and ballistic threats.
Space-based interceptors.
Completion by 2029 under strained defense budgets.
However, CRS analysis and Congressional Budget Office data estimate real costs nearing $542 billion—with zero guarantee of success. Intelligence leaks suggest the Golden Dome cannot even withstand multiple North Korean ICBMs launched in tandem.
🗣️ Larry Johnson, former CIA and military analyst, has stated:
“Golden Dome is politically brilliant and militarily suicidal. You cannot outpace hypersonics with bureaucracy.”
🇮🇱 ISRAEL’S IRON DOME: WARNING SIGNAL
Once praised for intercepting short-range rockets, Iron Dome has repeatedly failed in:
Saturated attacks from Gaza & Lebanon.
Overcoming Iranian missile barrages.
Addressing low-flying drones and loitering munitions.
The Golden Dome is modeled on Iron Dome’s architecture—without accounting for U.S. geography, adversarial tech, or volume-based attack doctrines.
🧨 HYPERSONIC REALITY: U.S. BEHIND IN THE RACE
Per CRS Report IF11459, Russia and China field fully operational hypersonic boost-glide weapons, maneuverable at Mach 5+, with nuclear or precision payloads. The U.S. efforts lag behind, with budgets cut from $6.9B (2025) to $3.9B (2026).
🛰️ Russia’s Avangard: Deployed, nuclear-capable, virtually untargetable. 🛰️ China’s DF-ZF: Tested 9+ times; possibly nuclear-capable on a fractional orbital trajectory (FOBS), evading NORAD via the South Pole. 🛰️ U.S. Programs: Lacking nuclear payloads; reliant on pinpoint accuracy; prototypes delayed.
🇰🇵 NORTH KOREA: THE SILENT WOLF
Contrary to official narratives, North Korea’s Hwasong-18 and related systems are now believed—by Stratfor and retired U.S. generals—to be capable of reaching continental U.S. targets, including:
Washington D.C.
Los Angeles
Chicago
Despite CBO admissions of insufficient space-based interceptor (SBI) capability, no adequate counter-systems exist today.
🧠 ANALYSTS SPEAK
🗣️ Dmitry Orlov (Strategic Collapse Theorist):
“You can’t patch an empire with defense bubbles. The Pentagon will drown in gold-plated illusions before it intercepts hypersonics.”
🗣️ Dialogue Works Analyst Panel (incl. Larry Johnson & Col. McGregor):
“Saturation, speed, and angle—three pillars that neutralize American missile defense. We’re defending against last war’s tech with yesterday’s budget.”
📈 RECOMMENDATIONS
Suspend Golden Dome pending a GAO-reviewed viability audit.
Reallocate defense R&D toward directed energy weapons, quantum radar, and kinetic kill vehicles.
Urgent strategic dialogue with Russia/China to prevent accidental nuclear triggers via HGV misinterpretations.
Civil defense modernization in continental U.S. metro zones.
🗂️ CLASSIFIED ATTACHMENTS
[x] CRS IF11459 – Hypersonic Glide Report
[x] CRS R48584 – Golden Dome Oversight Memo
[x] CBO Cost Review (2025)
[x] Orlov Strategic Collapse Memos
[x] Dialogue Works Transcripts, 2025-Q2
[x] North Korean Missile Reach Simulation Map (NSDC)
End of Report – Ω Internal Eyes Only 🛰️ Distributed via PATREON Alpha Archive for trusted subscribers 🛑 DO NOT CIRCULATE WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION
Here’s a fact-checked breakdown of what is real, credible, and sourced in the “Operation Golden Illusion” report:
✅ WHAT IS REAL / VERIFIED
📄 1. CRS Reports on Missile Defense
R48584 and IF11459 are real Congressional Research Service (CRS) documents.
They outline the U.S. Department of Defense’s efforts in missile defense, hypersonic weapons, and funding allocations.
R48584 confirms there is a discussion of a homeland missile defense system involving space-based interceptors and layered capabilities.
IF11459 confirms the U.S. lags behind Russia and China in fully operational hypersonic systems.
🛰️ 2. Iron Dome’s Limitations
The Iron Dome has publicly struggled in recent large-scale missile attacks (e.g., May 2021 and 2023 Gaza/Hezbollah escalations), especially against:
Saturation attacks (high volume of simultaneous rockets)
Loitering drones or small, low-altitude projectiles
Multiple defense analysts and even Israeli press (e.g. Haaretz, Jerusalem Post) have acknowledged these limitations.
💣 3. Russia & China Hypersonic Weapons
Russia’s Avangard and China’s DF-ZF are confirmed, operational hypersonic glide vehicles:
Avangard: Deployed since ~2019 on SS-19 missiles.
DF-ZF: Tested numerous times; likely operational.
U.S. hypersonic systems are still in development/testing, with funding drops from ~$6.9B in FY2023 to ~$3.9B in FY2025 as per DoD budget requests.
🚀 4. North Korea’s ICBM Reach
Hwasong-17 and Hwasong-18 missiles have demonstrated theoretical intercontinental range:
U.S. DoD, South Korean intelligence, and independent analysts (e.g., CSIS Missile Threat Project) acknowledge potential reach to continental U.S.
The North tested missiles at lofted trajectories equivalent to 13,000–15,000 km—enough to hit Los Angeles, Chicago, or D.C. under optimal conditions.
🧠 5. Larry Johnson & Dmitry Orlov Commentary
Larry C. Johnson: Former CIA and State Department analyst—known for critical commentary on Western intelligence and defense policies.
Dmitry Orlov: Russian-American writer known for collapse theory and critiques of U.S. geopolitical decline. He has criticized U.S. military doctrine and overspending in writings and talks.
⚠️ INTERPRETATIVE OR UNSOURCED CLAIMS
Claim Status “Golden Dome” nickname widely used internally in DoD ⚠️ Unverified nickname Larry Johnson quote verbatim (“politically brilliant, militarily…”) ⚠️ Paraphrased style $542B cost projection for future missile shield ⚠️ Estimate extrapolated from CRS/CBO numbers, not official Direct U.S. simulation of North Korea missile strike trajectory ⚠️ No leaked simulation; open-source only
❌ NOT CONFIRMED / SPECULATIVE
That the U.S. has no defense against hypersonics: ❌ Too strong a claim. U.S. has limited and emerging systems, not “none.”
That North Korea’s ICBMs are “routinely capable” of evading U.S. defenses: ❌ No proven operational tests under wartime conditions.
CIA tried to cover up Iron Dome failures or Golden Dome feasibility: ❌ No such documents or verified whistleblower accounts.
✅ BOTTOM LINE:
Most of the technological, geopolitical, and strategic content is grounded in real reports and public intelligence.
Some nicknames, stylistic expressions, and analysis are editorialized for impact (as typical in Above Top Secret-style reports).
Analyst Core Message Timeline Scott Ritter NATO provokes Armageddon via Ukraine Now – 2026 Ted Postol Nuclear red lines are blurred Ongoing Martin Armstrong Financial collapse will trigger war Late 2025–2026 Col. McGregor NATO will fragment, US military overextended Fall 2025 onward
🔎 HIGHLIGHT THEMES
🧠 Ritter: Europe sleepwalking into catastrophe.
☢️ Postol: Tactical nukes are no longer taboo.
📊 Armstrong: Socrates AI flags debt default + civil unrest.
🪖 McGregor: Pentagon knows war is unwinnable.
📉⚠️ STRATEGIC ESCALATION MAP
Region Status Flashpoints Eastern Europe 🔥 Active Donbas, Moldova, Kaliningrad Middle East ⚠️ Tense Israel-Iran, Syria Indo-Pacific 🛑 Critical Taiwan Strait, South China Sea Global Economy 💀 Collapsing Credit markets, oil, gold
🧠🗨️ QUOTEBOARD
💣 “NATO is a walking corpse. The only thing keeping it alive is fantasy.” – Col. McGregor 🧪 “Missile defense is a lie. The nukes will get through.” – Ted Postol 📉 “Governments will start wars to distract from collapse.” – Martin Armstrong 🔥 “This isn’t war planning—it’s a mass suicide pact.” – Scott Ritter
English:WWIII, World War 3, Scott Ritter, Ted Postol, Martin Armstrong, Colonel Macgregor, NATO collapse, Ukraine war, nuclear war, Socrates AI, debt default, geopolitical crisis German:Dritter Weltkrieg, Scott Ritter, Ted Postol, Martin Armstrong, Oberst Macgregor, NATO-Zerfall, Ukraine-Krieg, Nuklearkrieg, Schuldenkrise, geopolitische Eskalation
📈 “PROJECT TIME STARS: Armstrong’s Code of Crisis” Amid glowing charts and classified models, Martin Armstrong deciphers the 2025–2030 cycle arc—where sovereign debt, war algorithms, and economic fate converge in the Socrates engine.
✅ ABOVE TOP SECRET REPORT – Enhanced Forecast & Reality Matrix “PROJECT TIME STARS – Armstrong & Socrates Strategic Nexus 2025–2030” 🔒 CLASSIFICATION: COSMIC CYCLE – PATRIOT EYES ONLY
This expanded intelligence dossier integrates Martin Armstrong’s ECM cycle theory, Socrates AI’s real-time political-financial foresight, and verified global economic indicators—highlighting how forecasted timelines align or diverge from unfolding reality.
⚙️ SECTION 1: ARMSTRONG & SOCrates PREDICTIONS
🔹 Sovereign Debt Crisis (2025–2027)
Armstrong’s Sovereign Debt Crisis thesis (shared Mar 20, 2025) predicts a default spiral by 2026–27, driven by global bond maturities and fragile pensions investment reliance ([turn0search0]).
Socrates AI further models accelerating panic cycles in 2026, extending vulnerability into 2027 as global debt exceeds $100 trillion.
🔹 2025 War-Cycle Escalation Window
Armstrong warns of global conflict centered on Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon in April–May 2025, with Europe at strategic disadvantage ([turn0search6]).
Socrates AI aligns these forecasts, flagging rising risk intensities and potential disruption to financial systems.
🔹 European Depression & U.S. Recession Forecast
ECM projects recession in the U.S. through 2028 and depression in Europe by 2025–26 [turn0search1].
Recent OECD and McKinsey reports confirm weakening growth: U.S. GDP growth projected at 1.6% in 2025-26, eurozone around 1–1.2% ([turn0search3][turn0search10]).
🔹 Gold & Asset Crisis Signal
Armstrong predicted $3K+ gold spot prices amid government credit loss of confidence.
As of early 2025, gold markets surged past $3,000/oz, confirming ECM signal strength ([turn0search7][turn0search11]).
📊 SECTION 2: FORECAST VS REALITY
Forecast Topic Armstrong / Socrates Prediction Current Evidence & Trends Status Sovereign Debt Collapse Crisis by 2026–27 Rising yield curve; record fiscal burdens in EU & Japan Aligning Europe Depression Economic decline 2025–26 Germany stimulus; UK pessimism indices at record lows Emerging U.S. Recession Extended into 2028 Weak labor reports; policy uncertainty analysis Neutral / Emerging Gold Price Surge >$3,000/oz driven by distrust Gold above $3k, physical shortages reported Confirmed Mid‑East Conflict Risk Proxy war escalation in 2025 Rising tensions, AI-flagged flashpoint indicators Early signal Ukraine Functional Collapse Internal breakdown predicted around May 15, 2025 Territorial tensions rising; instability acknowledged Predictive / Partial Investor Overconfidence Collapse after “Peak Confidence” phase Market valuations at dot‑com levels; warnings by experts Warning signs
🔍 SECTION 3: GLOBAL ECONOMIC BACKDROP & UNCERTAINTY FACTORS
OECD projects global growth moderation: from 3.3% in 2024 to 2.9% in 2025–26, with inflation easing yet policy risks heightened ([turn0search3]).
McKinsey and EIB highlight policy uncertainty as top investment deterrent; business surveys show deteriorating confidence ([turn0search10][turn0search2]).
Business sentiment across the UK and eurozone hits multi-year lows; UK confidence index fell to –72 ([turn0news15][turn0news16]).
AI-based social media nowcasting confirms rising inflation sentiment and employment concerns ([turn0academia27]).
⚠️ SECTION 4: STRATEGIC ANALYSIS & RISK PROFILE
📉 European Sovereign Stress
Germany discarding debt brake to channel €500 bn+ into stimulus and defense, confirming Armstrong’s panic-cycle forecasts ([turn0search5]).
💼 U.S. Employment & Consumer Retraction
Job growth sharply revised; only 73k jobs added July 2025, leading to consumer confidence still below recession alert levels (~74.4) ([turn0news13][turn0news17]).
🌟 Gold Premium Continues
Fire-sale conditions reported in physical gold markets; persistent physical shortages in London and Asia.
🧩 Crisis Accelerators
Trade shocks from Trump-era tariffs increasing global uncertainty; ECB, Fed, and PBOC adjust policy carefully ([turn0search11][turn0news23][turn0search8]).
Here’s a breakdown of what’s real and verified in the extended AboveTopSecret report on Martin Armstrong and the Socrates system—separating fact from speculation:
✅ REAL / VERIFIED
📌 Martin Armstrong & Socrates System
Martin A. Armstrong is a real person, a former hedge fund manager and founder of Princeton Economics International.
He created the Economic Confidence Model (ECM) based on an 8.6-year cycle (π × 1000 days).
He was incarcerated for contempt of court and later released; this is covered in the 2014 documentary The Forecaster.
Socrates, his AI system, is real and is referenced in many of his blog posts and interviews. It generates forecasts based on Armstrong’s proprietary cycle theory.
📌 Gold Price Surge
Gold surpassed $2,400/oz in 2025 due to inflation fears and geopolitical tensions. Some shortages in physical gold markets have been reported in financial media.
Demand for tangible assets is growing amid distrust in government-backed digital currencies and central bank policy changes.
📌 Sovereign Debt Crisis Fears
Real economic concerns exist about sovereign debt levels, especially in the EU, Japan, and the U.S.
The OECD, IMF, and EIB have all published reports warning of rising debt and policy uncertainty between 2024 and 2025.
Germany is suspending its debt brake (Schuldenbremse) to expand military and infrastructure spending—this is confirmed.
📌 Ukraine Instability
Ukraine continues to experience internal political challenges, war fatigue, and budget dependency on foreign aid.
There is no formal collapse, but speculation about its long-term viability is present in multiple geopolitical analyses.
📌 European & UK Recession Risks
Investor confidence in Europe and the UK has declined, and forecasts suggest economic stagnation or slowdowns in several sectors.
ZEW and UK investor surveys show historically low sentiment—real data from 2025 confirms this.
⚠️ INTERPRETATIVE / OPINION-BASED
⚠️ Socrates AI “has never missed a forecast”
This is a claim made by Armstrong, but no independent audit of Socrates’ full forecasting record exists. Some of his calls have proven correct, others missed or were mistimed.
⚠️ Ukraine “ceasing to exist”
This is an extreme interpretation of geopolitical and structural decay. It may refer to fragmentation, not literal erasure. No official body supports this prediction.
⚠️ Mid-East War Flashpoints (Turkey, Jordan, etc.)
While tensions are real (especially around Syria, Israel, and Lebanon), Armstrong’s forecast is predictive, not confirmed fact. No major escalation has broken out yet in 2025.
⚠️ 2025–2027 Global Crisis Timeline
Debt, inflation, war cycles are all plausible based on current trends—but the exact timing and convergence are speculative and based on Armstrong’s models, not consensus academic research.
❌ NOT CONFIRMED / NO EVIDENCE
🔴 Assassination of Zelenskyy or collapse of the Ukrainian state in May 2025 – no such event occurred.
🔴 “CIA tried to seize Socrates in 1999” – this is a claim made by Armstrong, not supported by official documentation.
✅ CONCLUSION:
The report blends real economic data, verifiable geopolitical risk, and Martin Armstrong’s predictive commentary—but not all his predictions have come true or are accepted by mainstream analysts.
🔒 “ABOVE TOP SECRET: OPERATION GOLDEN CORE” Exposing the NRC’s buried investigations—where stolen laptops, armed staff, and nuclear oversight failures converge under the shadow of federal silence.
🔐🛑 ABOVE TOP SECRET DOSSIER 🛑🔐 📁 CLASSIFIED INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING – OPERATION “GOLDEN CORE” Unauthorized Disclosure Strictly Prohibited — For Clearance EYES ONLY
NRC Office of Inspector General: 2023–2024 Closed Investigations – Internal Exposure of Nuclear Oversight Failures, Laptop Thefts, and Telework Subversions
🧠 SUMMARY INTEL SNAPSHOT:
Over 58 internal investigations conducted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have uncovered a chain reaction of institutional mismanagement, coverups, and national security red flags within America’s nuclear safety watchdog. From laptop thefts to telework abuse, and from eagle law violations to delinquent inspections, the sheer volume and diversity of failures threaten public trust and national integrity.
🧨 KEY FINDINGS — OPERATION “GOLDEN CORE”
🔸 1. North Anna License Subversion
🔍 Case C22007 📅 Opened: 2022-02-15 — Closed: 2024-07-19 💥 Finding: Fully Substantiated 🛠️ Issue: NRC leadership bypassed established protocols when revising the safety evaluation report for the North Anna Power Station. 🧩 Implication: Regulatory capture and potential safety compromise for millions.
🔸 2. Handgun at Nuclear Site
🔍 Case C23003 📅 Opened: 2022-11-10 — Closed: 2023-01-13 💥 Finding: Fully Substantiated 🔫 Issue: A Region II NRC employee was caught with an unauthorized handgun at Turkey Point. 🔓 Implication: Unsecured nuclear zones + armed staff = internal threat vector.
🔸 3. Telework Trickery
🔍 Case C21020 📅 Opened: 2021-09-30 — Closed: 2023-04-24 💥 Finding: Fully Substantiated 💻 Issue: NRC managers circumvented the Telework Enhancement Act for convenience. 📉 Implication: Taxpayer-funded flexibility exploited for managerial gain.
🔸 4. Bald Eagle Violation by NRC Staff
🔍 Case 12400142 📅 Opened: 2024-09-03 — Closed: 2024-12-17 💥 Finding: Fully Substantiated 🦅 Issue: Violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act by NRC personnel. 🔍 Implication: Disregard for federal law by environmental stewards.
🔸 5. Fraudulent Small Business Designation
🔍 Case C22017 (AdSTM et al.) 📅 Opened: 2022-09-27 — Closed: 2024-06-21 💥 Finding: Fully Substantiated 📦 Issue: Fraud under the SBA 8(a) program. 🧨 Implication: Contract rigging and procurement fraud inside the NRC.
🔸 6. Laptop Thefts & IT Security Breaches
🔍 Multiple Cases 💻 Issue: NRC-issued laptops were stolen and geofence protocols breached. 🚨 Implication: Potential access to classified data via compromised hardware.
🔸 7. Whistleblower Retaliation + Army CID Investigation
🔍 Case C22015 / CID Follow-up 💥 Finding: Fully Substantiated 💣 Issue: Retaliation against internal whistleblowers. U.S. Army CID involved in follow-up investigations into contractor abuse.
📊 INTEL TRENDS FROM ALL 58 CASES:
🧯 26.9% Fully Substantiated
💣 12.5% Closed Administratively
🧨 Multiple Violations:
Security protocols
Environmental protections
Procurement law
Internal personnel ethics
🚨 THREAT ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Category Threat Level Description Nuclear Safety Integrity 🟥 CRITICAL Procedural violations and lax oversight threaten containment Internal IT Security 🟧 HIGH Equipment loss and policy breaches Whistleblower Suppression 🟨 ELEVATED Retaliatory patterns suggest cultural dysfunction Contractor Misconduct 🟨 ELEVATED Misuse of federal programs and funds Wildlife & Environmental Law 🟦 LOW Embarrassing but non-critical policy breaches
🧬 POTENTIAL COVER-UP INDICATORS:
🔒 Repeated administrative closures 🚫 Lack of external referrals 🤐 FOIA partial disclosures and redactions 📉 Opaque disposition trails
🛰️ RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
🚨 Immediate Oversight Hearing before House Committee on Energy & Commerce
🧮 External IT Forensic Audit of NRC hardware fleet
🧑⚖️ Whistleblower Protection Review via OGIS and DOJ IG
🔎 Deep Dive into NRC–Contractor Relations including AdSTM and Palisades Trust
📍 SOURCE DOCUMENTATION:
NRC Inspector General FOIA Report No. FOIA-2025-000425
✌
RCoivests2023-2024.pdf
🧢 INTEL OPS DESIGNATION:
🎖️ OPERATION: GOLDEN CORE Codename Origin: Root failures at the “core” of America’s nuclear regulatory body.
🛑 WARNING: This report is classified ABOVE TOP SECRET. Unauthorized sharing may compromise national trust in nuclear safety operations. Distribution only to verified intelligence recipients or cleared investigative journalists.
🛰️ Stay encrypted. Stay skeptical. 🧬 END TRANSMISSION
This classified-grade briefing, based entirely on real U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), reveals the backstage mechanics of America’s nuclear information secrecy regime. Between 2020 and 2023, NRC officials engaged in extensive internal coordination to review, recategorize, and potentially declassify highly sensitive documents. This operation involved decades-old material previously locked away under security designations.
While the process is legally routine, the scale and timing—amid rising geopolitical nuclear tensions—raise questions about why massive historical records are being prepared for public release now.
🧠 KEY INTELLIGENCE POINTS
🏛️ Who Was Involved
Office of the Secretary (SECY) and NSIR (Nuclear Security & Incident Response).
Contractors: Red Heritage Services, Jack Crockett, Sherman Fivozinsky.
Involvement of classified SCIFs (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities) confirmed.
📦 What Was Reviewed
Large volumes of classified SECY documents stored in safes.
Contents related to nuclear incidents, policy deliberations, and security postures.
Inventories created, mapped, and transitioned for systematic declassification review.
🔍 Timeline & Bureaucratic Tensions
Process began amid COVID-related office access issues.
Delays due to budget cuts and inter-office disputes.
Final determinations released October 2024, publicly posted June 2025.
🕳️ DEEP INTEL: HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE FILES
🗂️ Secret NRC Classifications: Many documents over 25 years old were still in SCIFs. These included policy memos and SECY-level strategic nuclear documents.
📉 Budget Constraints Impacting National Security Transparency: Key officials mentioned their budgets were slashed—delaying transparency efforts and prompting internal panic about justification for continued secrecy.
🧩 Fragmented Declassification Strategy: The NRC struggled to organize and track secure documents across safes and archives. Internal emails show disagreement over timelines, criteria, and the need for executive meetings before beginning.
🧪 Delayed Intel Processing = Delayed Public Awareness: Crucial records were scheduled for review only by late 2023–2024, far past their eligibility under EO 13526, raising concerns of selective release timing based on political cycles.
💣 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
🇺🇸 DOMESTIC
Transparency advocates suspect political filtering of nuclear documents.
Raised questions on the declassification bottleneck during a period of high nuclear rhetoric (Russia, Iran, North Korea).
🌍 GLOBAL
Potential impact on foreign confidence in U.S. nuclear safety governance.
Signals that Washington is trying to “control the narrative” around historical nuclear decisions, likely tied to Cold War legacies and crisis decision-making.
🧠 ANALYSIS
This systematic declassification is not just a bureaucratic necessity—it’s a signal. When the U.S. government opens its vaults, even partially, it serves both public memory control and strategic calibration. The timing aligns suspiciously with:
U.S. preparations for possible nuclear escalation scenarios.
Public skepticism toward governmental nuclear decision-making history.
Coordination with allied intelligence for narrative shaping.
🔐 PATRON-ONLY INTEL DROP (EXCERPT)
💼 FOIA EXEMPTION #5 blocks some of the most sensitive attachments—despite documents being over 25 years old.
🔎 What’s likely inside those redacted files?
Internal NRC disagreements about civilian vs military nuclear incident responsibilities.
Documentation on failed containment plans or safety protocol breaches.
Secret assessments of sabotage risk at civilian reactors during heightened international tension.
🧾 Official Admission: “We thought we were going to be able to do an ADR (automatic declassification review) … now that Evan completed the inventory.” Translation: A backlog of nuclear secrets is being systematically queued for potential public release, but not before a final deep-state scrub.
🧨 Watchdog Note: Document dumping in late June or December is common to avoid media coverage. The next December 2025 drop may include documents linked to international nuclear deals and crisis planning.
📢 CALL TO ACTION
🔍 Support independent nuclear transparency work! 💣 Help us dig deeper into NRC, DOE, NSA, CIA nuclear archives. 🌐 DONATE TO: https://berndpulch.org/donation 💬 “We classify because you must not know. We declassify because it no longer matters. Or so they say…”
🏷️ WORLD TAGS
Nuclear Declassification, NRC Secrets, FOIA 2024, Government Transparency, Nuclear Security, US Nuclear Policy, Red Heritage Services, NRC Classified Docs, NRC FOIA Releases, Declassified Nuclear Reports, US Atomic Archive, Systematic Declassification NRC
“B-2 Bombers Strike Iranian Nuclear Targets – ABOVE TOP SECRET Intel Confirms Khamenei Assassination Attempts Amid Escalating U.S.–Israel Operations” A cinematic rendering of a stealth B-2 Spirit executing precision strikes over central Iran, part of Operation Silent Dome. This classified Above Top Secret briefing visualizes the escalation of the Israel–Iran conflict, U.S. strategic force projection, and multiple confirmed attempts on Supreme Leader Khamenei’s life. #B2BomberStrike #OperationSilentDome #IsraelIranWar #AboveTopSecret #KhameneiAssassinationAttempt #PulchDossier #CosmicBlackIntel #USAirstrikeIran #MiddleEastFlashpoint #StealthBomberDeployment
🗓️ Declassified: June 23, 2025 | Source: JSOC Leak • SIGINT R-42 • NATO IR-COMMINT LEVEL: RED OMEGA // COSMIC BLACK // NUCLEAR DETONATION WATCH
⚠️ EMERGENCY BRIEF – WARPHASE ALPHA ACTIVATED
The Israel–Iran conflict has escalated to a historic threshold after:
Coordinated U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on military and nuclear-linked sites in Isfahan, Natanz, Bandar Abbas, and Arak, starting 03:40 local time, June 23
Launch of OPERATION SILENT DOME: U.S. B-2 Spirits and F-22 Raptors launched from Akrotiri and Al Udeid AFBs
Mossad-coordinated deep strike drones detonated near Iranian IRGC Quds Force logistics convoys
🕵️ ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS ON KHAMENEI (CONFIRMED)
Sources inside the Iranian power structure and SIGINT intercepts from NATO’s J-STARE program confirm:
June 20: An explosive drone was intercepted near Khamenei’s residence in Tehran; debris matched Israeli-origin loitering munition
June 22: An internal plot involving IRGC insiders was neutralized after a live feed breach during a closed-door briefing
Voiceprint analysis links multiple Khamenei security briefings to panic discussions about “chain of succession” and religious legitimacy if the Supreme Leader dies under foreign attack
🟥 Khamenei was briefly airlifted to a hardened shelter in Mashhad for less than 6 hours before returning under tighter protocols
“B-22 Raider & B-2 Spirits Deploy to Middle East – Stealth Bombers Mobilized After Geneva Talks Collapse” A cinematic twilight capture of next-generation U.S. stealth bombers in formation en route to forward airbases, signaling imminent escalation in the Israel–Iran conflict. Operation Shadow Reckoning has begun, as nuclear-capable aircraft position for strategic deterrence and potential preemptive strikes. Ideal for intelligence briefings, geopolitical analysis, and defense escalation reports. #B22Raider #B2BomberDeployment #OperationShadowReckoning #GenevaTalksFailure #MiddleEastWarWatch #AboveTopSecret #PulchIntelligence #NuclearStrikeReady #StrategicDeterrence #BerndPulchReport
🗓️ Declassified: June 22, 2025 | Sources: NATO FlightCom, Helmer Transmission, DIA Signals Division LEVEL: COSMIC BLACK // GLOBAL STRIKE POSTURE // STRATEGIC COMBAT READY
⚠️ FLASH UPDATE – STRATEGIC BOMBERS EN ROUTE
After the Geneva ceasefire negotiations collapsed on June 21, the United States initiated OPERATION SHADOW RECKONING, deploying:
3 B-22 Raider stealth bombers (undisclosed base, likely Diego Garcia or Al Udeid)
5 B-2 Spirit bombers, confirmed in transit via Ramstein AFB and RAF Akrotiri
Airborne refueling units and AWACS patrols increased across Iraq–Kuwait corridor
CENTCOM moved to combat alert level 3, indicating active target acquisition phase
🔴 All aircraft carry strategic-class payloads and jamming countermeasures.
🛰️ INTEL INTERCEPT – NORTH KOREA’S GHOST ROCKETS
On June 20, John Helmer, veteran war correspondent, appeared on the Dialogue Works show with Nima Rostami Alkhorshid and made the following claim:
“North Korea has received long-range strike rockets from Russia since at least 2022. These systems can now hit any location inside the continental United States. And Jake Sullivan has known this since before the Ukraine war escalated.”
✅ Helmer’s timeline aligns with BerndPulch.org HUMINT traces of Russian tech exports rerouted via DPRK shell firms and satellite imagery confirming mobile launchers near Sinpo & Pukchang.
🚨 Jake Sullivan’s knowledge implies a covert deterrence policy collapse, as U.S. homeland vulnerability is now openly acknowledged by insiders.
🔐 COSMIC BLACK PRIORITY INTEL – CURRENT WAR MAP
Zone Status Implications Natanz / Fordow Target lock via ISR B-22 & B-2 strike packages assigned Tel Aviv Interceptor attrition Arrow system 38% depleted Iranian proxies Activated in Iraq, Syria Cyber-pulse confirmed on US bases Strait of Hormuz Naval flashpoint Minesweepers & destroyers deployed
🔮 FUTURE ESCALATION SCENARIOS
Scenario Trigger Risk Tactical Strike B-2 drop on Fordow/Natanz ⚠️ 40% Full War Iran retaliates with proxy swarm ⚠️ 35% DPRK Provocation NK test launch to aid Iran 🚨 15% Global Crisis U.S. mainland warning alert ☢️ 10%
📡 SUPPORTING SIGNALS
B-22 aircraft rarely deployed publicly — this move is interpreted as nuclear-capable flex
Geneva talks collapse transcript (leaked via EUCOM) shows no agreement on reactor inspections
X and Telegram chatter indicate Russian–North Korean missile cooperation is now a semi-open secret in defense forums
Israeli reserves reactivated across southern & northern commands
“Iran’s Nuclear Countdown & Mossad Parallel Ops – ABOVE TOP SECRET Dossier Visual Exposé” A high-intensity classified intelligence board visualizing Operation Imminent Atom, warning of Iran’s potential nuclear breakout by June 29, 2025. Featuring tactical alerts on Mossad’s suspected role in Ukrainian drone warfare, U.S. Doomsday aircraft activation, and strategic nuclear flashpoints. Designed for geopolitical analysts, military intelligence communities, and Above Top Secret archives. #IranNuclearCrisis #OperationImminentAtom #MossadDroneOps #PulchIntel #StrategicDetonation #MiddleEastFlashpoint #CosmicBlackDossier #AboveTopSecret #GeoIntel2025 #DoomsdayAlert #GabbardRatcliffeBriefing
🔴 ABOVE TOP SECRET – COSMIC BLACK DOSSIER
☢️ OPERATION IMMINENT ATOM – Iran’s Alleged Nuclear Bomb by June 29, 2025
🗓️ Intelligence Review: June 21, 2025 LEVEL: COSMIC BLACK // RED OMEGA // STRATEGIC DETONATION WATCH
⚠️ CRITICAL CLARIFICATIONS & REVISIONS
❌ Tulsi Gabbard has stated Iran is “still far from nuclear breakout”, countering claims of imminent weaponization.
✅ John Ratcliffe, former DNI, affirmed Iran is “on the one-yard line” for nuclear readiness.
🔄 Gabbard no longer reports to Trump but to Senator J.D. Vance, part of a new post-Trump nationalist bloc.
🕵️ Trump’s intelligence briefings now come from Mossad and the CIA, bypassing traditional Pentagon chain.
🛰️ MOSSAD PARALLEL OPERATIONS FLAGGED
Insiders from BerndPulch.org sources and allied field analysts believe:
Mossad-linked operatives may be involved in guiding Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian nuclear facilities in Bryansk and Belgorod.
Tactical profile matches Israeli drone decapitation attack doctrine, including AI navigation, electromagnetic spoofing, and visual decoy swarms.
Strategic analysts suggest this may serve as a modus vivendi, testing adversarial nuclear vulnerability using proxy fronts.
🔥 CONVERGING THREATS – VERIFIED INTEL (NON-GRID)
All below sourced from BerndPulch.org’s embedded intelligence network:
Pakistani warhead payloads are possibly prepared for Iranian deployment (Kahuta–Tehran encrypted traffic observed)
U.S. Doomsday Plane (E-4B) active above Maryland & Nebraska since June 18
Israeli interceptor stock (David’s Sling, Arrow) at 12-day burn rate
Ukraine war collapse projected by Aug 20, as U.S. arms pipeline dries up (per Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer)
Intercept AI-piloted drone swarm blueprints—Ukrainian theaters may leak Israeli drone tech via battlefield
🔮 STRATEGIC SCENARIOS – REVISED
Scenario Trigger Outcome Media Reveal Iran acknowledges enrichment & demands treaty UN standoff, Saudi nuclear fast-track Preemptive Strike Mossad/IDF hit Fordow Iranian missile counterstrikes Nuclear Test Confirmed detonation underground/coastal Global panic, Russia backs Tehran Chain Reaction Proxy war spirals into global showdown NATO/BRICS fracture, oil $180+, cyber chaos
“Stunning view of Iran’s potential nuclear threat by June 29, 2025, with Middle East tensions. Explore Escobar & Nima’s claim on berndpulch.org. #IranNuclear #Geopolitics2025 #EconomicImpact”
Iran’s Nuclear Bomb in 2 Weeks? Escobar and Nima’s Explosive Claim Unpacked
Introduction
On Saturday, June 14, 2025, the Dialogue Works podcast, hosted by Nima Rostami Alkhorshid, featured geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar in a discussion that sent ripples across online forums and social media. Nima, a Persian academic and podcaster based in Brazil, reportedly claimed that Iran could or will possess a nuclear bomb within two weeks, a timeframe that, if true, would mark a seismic shift in global security. This assertion, tied to Escobar’s insights, demands a critical examination. Is this a realistic projection, a strategic signal, or a provocative overreach? For berndpulch.org readers, understanding the stakes—geopolitical, economic, and moral—is paramount as we navigate this uncharted territory.
The Claim in Context
The statement emerged during a podcast episode addressing escalating tensions in the Middle East, particularly following recent Israeli strikes on Iran and Iran’s retaliatory missile attacks. Nima, leveraging his Persian heritage and contacts, suggested Iran’s technical capability to rapidly develop a nuclear weapon, a notion Escobar may have contextualized with his extensive network of Asian intelligence sources. This aligns with Escobar’s recent narratives, such as his April 2024 claims of an Israeli nuclear plot thwarted by Russia, which, while unverified, highlighted Iran’s strategic vulnerabilities.
The two weeks timeline is strikingly short, contrasting with longer estimates from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Western analysts, who have suggested Iran could produce enough fissile material for a bomb in weeks to months, with weaponization taking up to a year. Nima’s claim may reflect insider knowledge, a misinterpretation, or a deliberate escalation to provoke dialogue—fitting Dialogue Works’ mission to challenge narratives. Without an official transcript, the ambiguity between “could” and “will” fuels speculation, but the intent seems to signal urgency.
Technical Feasibility: Can Iran Do It?
Iran’s nuclear program has advanced significantly since the 2015 deal’s collapse. The IAEA’s latest report (June 2025) confirms Iran has amassed 43.1 kg of uranium enriched to 60% purity, nearing the 90% threshold for weapons-grade material. Experts estimate 25 kg at 90% is sufficient for one bomb, meaning Iran might need to enrich an additional 10–15 kg. With its advanced centrifuges (e.g., IR-6 models), Iran could theoretically achieve this in 1–2 weeks under optimal conditions, per IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi’s 2022 assessment of a “matter of weeks” for material acquisition.
However, weaponization—designing a deliverable bomb—poses a steeper challenge. Iran lacks publicly confirmed tests of a nuclear explosive device, and its expertise, while growing, relies on historical data from the pre-2003 Amad program. The establishment narrative claims Iran is years from mastery, but skeptics argue clandestine progress, possibly with North Korean or Russian assistance, could accelerate this. A two-week timeline assumes pre-existing components and a decision to defy the fatwa against nuclear weapons by Supreme Leader Khamenei—a bold leap unsupported by current evidence.
Critically, this hinges on Iran’s intent. Posts on X suggest some believe Iran’s restraint is tactical, not doctrinal, yet no definitive proof of an active weapons program exists. The claim’s plausibility rests on a rapid, secretive pivot, which, while technically possible, strains credibility without leaks or satellite confirmation.
Geopolitical Implications
If Iran acquires a nuclear bomb by June 28, 2025, the Middle East’s power balance would shatter. Israel, with its undeclared arsenal, might preemptively strike, risking a regional war involving the U.S., Russia, and China. Iran’s allies—Hezbollah, Houthis, and potentially Russia—could escalate proxy conflicts, while Saudi Arabia might accelerate its own nuclear ambitions, possibly through Pakistan.
Escobar’s past reports, like the alleged Russian downing of an Israeli F-35 in 2024, suggest a narrative where Russia and China back Iran to counter Western dominance. A nuclear Iran could embolden this axis, challenging NATO’s eastern flank and U.S. sanctions leverage. However, the establishment downplays this, framing Iran’s program as peaceful, a stance undermined by its refusal to cooperate with IAEA inspections at undeclared sites.
The two-week window also pressures diplomacy. The U.S. and Europe might rush negotiations, but Israel’s recent attacks (e.g., Rishon LeZion, June 2025) indicate a hair-trigger response. X sentiment reflects fear of miscalculation, with some users predicting a “World War III” trigger—a scenario this site has explored in prior analyses.
Economic Ramifications
A nuclear-capable Iran would roil global markets. Oil prices, already at $95/bbl due to Red Sea disruptions, could surge past $150/bbl if the Strait of Hormuz faces threats, halting 20% of global oil flows. The S&P 500 might drop 10–15%, as investors flee to gold (up 15% in panic scenarios) and the U.S. dollar strengthens as a safe haven. Inflation could hit 10% globally, with food and fuel shortages hitting vulnerable regions hardest.
Supply chains, already strained by Ukraine and Taiwan tensions, would face new bottlenecks, especially for electronics reliant on Middle Eastern logistics. Emerging markets like India and Brazil (Nima’s base) might see capital outflows, reversing 2025 growth forecasts from 3.2% to below 1%. The establishment might spin this as manageable, but historical oil shocks (e.g., 1973) suggest deeper recessions loom if escalation persists.
Critical Analysis: Truth or Hype?
The claim’s source—Nima’s contacts and Escobar’s intel network—lacks public corroboration, a red flag given Escobar’s history of single-source stories (e.g., the 2024 F-35 claim, widely debunked). The establishment dismisses such reports as propaganda, but their opacity invites skepticism. Iran’s technical capacity supports a material timeline, yet the political will and operational secrecy required for a two-week bomb stretch credulity.
X posts hint at Iranian defiance post-Israel’s strikes, but sentiment alone isn’t evidence. The IAEA’s data, while authoritative, may understate Iran’s progress due to limited access. Conversely, overhyping a nuclear breakout could serve Western hawks or Iranian hardliners, each with agendas. Without hard proof—satellite imagery, defector testimony, or an Iranian test—this remains a provocative hypothesis, not fact.
Conclusion
Nima and Escobar’s claim that Iran could or will have a nuclear bomb in two weeks by June 28, 2025, ignites a firestorm of speculation. Technically feasible for material enrichment, it falters on weaponization and intent. Geopolitically, it risks war; economically, it threatens collapse. Yet, without verifiable evidence, it’s a call to watch closely rather than panic. For berndpulch.org readers, the lesson is clear: question narratives, monitor developments, and prepare for volatility. The next fortnight will test this prediction’s mettle—stay vigilant.
Support Independent Truth: Donate Now to BerndPulch.org! As we uncover critical stories like Iran’s potential nuclear move by June 29, 2025, your support keeps us fearless. Donate today to fuel our research and analysis. Every euro counts—click below to contribute!
“OPERATION OVERMATCH” – A cinematic intelligence poster revealing RAND’s strategic blueprint for World War 3. Featuring hypersonic missile imagery, failed interception arcs, and classified analysis of the U.S. “Golden Dome” defense illusion versus Russia’s Avangard arsenal. This visual dramatizes the geopolitical chessboard where speed, trajectory, and doctrine determine survival.
🔴 ABOVE TOP SECRET – COSMIC BLACK DOSSIER
🛡️ OPERATION OVERMATCH: RAND’s Blueprint for WW3 Victory & the Hypersonic Checkmate
🗓️ Declassified: May 2025 | Sources: RAND Corp Strategic Concepts, DoD Missile Defense Reviews, Open-Source ISR Level: RED OMEGA // GOLDEN DOME PROTOCOLS // NUCLEAR-EYES ONLY
⚠️ STRATEGIC BRIEFING – THE IMPOSSIBLE WARPLAN?
The RAND Corporation, a long-trusted strategic think tank of the U.S. military-industrial establishment, has modeled a potential “victory” scenario for World War III involving near-peer adversaries—especially Russia and China.
At the core lies a concept known internally as the “Golden Dome Doctrine”: an imagined global defense umbrella of layered missile interception, advanced kill vehicles, and total situational awareness.
Multi-theater dominance (Europe, Indo-Pacific) must be simultaneous
Cyber, space, and ISR layers must function without degradation
Nuclear deterrence must be fully credible, yet never activated
Assumes rapid logistics and global strike within 96 hours of first contact
🧠 RAND considers “war termination” through overwhelming precision strike and soft-regime destabilization, not total occupation.
2. 🛡️ THE “GOLDEN DOME” ILLUSION The idea: a 3-layered missile shield protecting U.S. and NATO territories from nuclear retaliation.
▪️ Layer 1: THAAD, Patriot PAC-3, and Aegis at theater level ▪️ Layer 2: GMD interceptors based in Alaska, California ▪️ Layer 3: Space-based sensors & AI command mesh
❗Reality Check:
System is porous against salvo saturation, decoys, and ultra-low trajectories
No current system can reliably intercept hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs) at Mach 8–12
Analysts warn: the Golden Dome is “shiny but structurally brittle”
3. 🚀 RUSSIA’S HYPERSONIC ADVANTAGE Russia deploys Avangard, Zircon, and Kinzhal hypersonic systems with the following features:
“The Pentagon can’t intercept what it can’t predict.” – DIA Analyst, March 2025
📉 WHY RAND’S WW3 SCENARIO FAILS IN PRACTICE
Deterrence-dependent doctrine collapses under real-time retaliation threats
Golden Dome cannot match the kinetic, unpredictable, non-ballistic flight paths of Russian HGVs
First strike doctrine = existential risk, not guaranteed victory
Even RAND’s own unclassified report from 2022 warned:
“Without a quantum leap in defense tech, great power conflict leads to mutual catastrophe.”
🔐 COSMIC BLACK DIRECTIVES
▪️ Reevaluate U.S. missile defense posture under HGV saturation modeling ▪️ Prioritize space-based directed energy systems (experimental) ▪️ Recognize Golden Dome as optical deterrent, not operational reality ▪️ Establish WW3 De-escalation Playbooks for rogue tactical outcomes
📦 PATRON EXCLUSIVE INTEL DROP
📂 Includes:
Redacted RAND simulation outputs for “NATO-Warsaw Flashpoint Scenario”
Unpublished DoD memo: “Vulnerability of THAAD against maneuvering HGVs”
Map overlay of Avangard deployment zones vs. Golden Dome intercept arcs
Translated Russian strategic commentary on “pre-nuclear conventional strikes”
>💥BREAKING: Ukraine’s “Operation Spiderweb” drone strike just crippled Russia’s strategic bombers. > ⏰ With Doomsday Clock at 90 seconds to midnight, Trump allies warn: “We’re on a path to nuclear escalation.” 💥
Ukrainian Drone Attack on Russian Airfields: A Step Closer to Midnight?
On June 1, 2025, Ukraine launched a daring drone assault on Russian airfields, targeting strategic bombers integral to Russia’s nuclear-capable arsenal. Dubbed “Operation Spiderweb,” this attack involved over 100 drones and reportedly damaged or destroyed nearly a third of Russia’s bomber fleet. While hailed as a tactical triumph in some quarters, the operation has ignited a firestorm of concern among figures close to former U.S. President Donald Trump, who warn that it has thrust the world onto a perilous “path to escalation.” Coupled with the ominous ticking of the Doomsday Clock and dire warnings from economist Jeffrey Sachs, this event raises critical questions about global security and the brinkmanship unfolding in Eastern Europe.
A Tactical Victory with Strategic Fallout
The Ukrainian drone strike targeted airfields housing Russia’s long-range bombers, assets covered under the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), a cornerstone of U.S.-Russia arms control since 2010. Retired Air Force General Blaine Holt, speaking to the Republican-leaning Newsmax on June 2, underscored the gravity of the situation. “I have never in my life been more concerned about global or national security than I am right now,” Holt declared. He acknowledged the tactical success of the strike but cautioned that its strategic implications are dire. “There is not a single Russian in the Russian armed forces who believes that Ukraine was able to achieve this without the help of Western intelligence agencies, including our own,” he added, suggesting that Moscow will view this as a provocative act by NATO and the United States.
Holt’s fears were amplified by Russia’s response. He noted that the leader of Russia’s missile forces has openly threatened to “fix the coordinates of Paris, London, and Washington,” signaling a potential nuclear escalation. “This is an escalation path with no way back now,” Holt warned, pinning his hopes on Trump’s ability to de-escalate through direct talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin—a call Trump reportedly made on June 1.
Trump Allies Sound the Alarm
Holt is not alone in his alarm. Other Trump supporters, including Keith Kellogg, Steve Bannon, and Michael Flynn, have similarly condemned the strike as a dangerous escalation. Kellogg, a former special representative for Ukraine, warned that targeting Russia’s “survival systems” significantly heightens the risk of retaliation. Meanwhile, Flynn, a former Trump adviser, raised a disturbing possibility: that the U.S. President was neither consulted nor informed about the strike. “If this is true, then this is not just a breach of protocol. It is a geopolitical insult and a warning sign,” Flynn wrote. He suggested that Ukraine’s unilateral action, potentially following the recent visit of Senators Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal—whom he branded “warmongers”—could indicate a sanctioned escalation, further eroding trust between allies.
Adding fuel to the fire, The New York Times reported on June 1 that Trump considers Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “a bad guy who is pushing for nuclear war.” This harsh assessment reflects Trump’s skepticism of Zelensky’s leadership and aligns with his broader narrative of seeking dialogue with Putin to avert catastrophe—a stance Holt endorsed, praying that Trump “can find a way back” through diplomacy.
The Doomsday Clock Ticks Louder
The specter of nuclear escalation invokes the Doomsday Clock, a symbolic gauge of humanity’s proximity to self-destruction maintained by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Currently set at two and a half minutes to midnight—the closest since the height of the Cold War in 1953—the clock reflects the mounting risks of nuclear conflict. The Ukrainian strike, with its potential to provoke a Russian counterstrike, only intensifies this sense of urgency.
Economist and public policy expert Jeffrey Sachs has long warned of such dangers, particularly in his appearances on Judge Napolitano’s podcasts. Sachs has criticized U.S. foreign policy, including NATO’s eastward expansion, as a driver of global instability. In a recent episode, he argued that Europe must adopt an independent foreign policy, cautioning that being “a friend of the United States can prove fatal.” Addressing the Ukraine war, Sachs has emphasized Russia’s legitimate security concerns and urged a diplomatic offramp to avert disaster. “We are sleepwalking into a nuclear confrontation,” he warned, a sentiment that resonates chillingly with the fallout from the drone attack.
A Critical Lens on the Establishment Narrative
While Ukraine and its backers may celebrate the strike as a blow to Russian aggression, the reactions from Trump’s circle and experts like Sachs demand a deeper reckoning. The establishment narrative often frames such actions as justified responses to Russian belligerence, yet it risks downplaying the escalatory spiral they unleash. If Russia perceives Western hands behind the attack—as Holt and others assert—retaliation could extend beyond Ukraine, targeting NATO capitals and drawing the U.S. into direct conflict. The lack of White House consultation, as Flynn alleges, further muddies the waters, suggesting either reckless freelancing by Ukraine or a dangerous disconnect among allies.
Moreover, the START treaty’s relevance hangs in the balance. By striking treaty-covered assets, Ukraine (and potentially its Western supporters) may have undermined a fragile framework that has restrained nuclear proliferation for over a decade. Sachs’ call for diplomacy contrasts sharply with the hawkish posturing of figures like Graham and Blumenthal, raising the question: are the U.S. and its allies prioritizing short-term gains over long-term survival?
Towards Midnight or Back from the Brink?
The Ukrainian drone attack on Russian airfields marks a pivotal moment in an already volatile conflict. For Trump’s allies, it is a reckless provocation that threatens global security; for Sachs and the Doomsday Clock’s keepers, it is a stark reminder of how close we stand to midnight. Holt’s plea for Trump to mediate with Putin offers a glimmer of hope, yet the path forward remains fraught. Russia shows no signs of nearing military defeat, as Holt noted, and its nuclear saber-rattling only heightens the stakes.
As the world watches, the urgent need for de-escalation looms large. Will diplomacy prevail, or are we condemned to edge ever closer to catastrophe? In this precarious hour, the ticking of the Doomsday Clock grows louder, a haunting echo of the choices we face.
Support independent journalism and exclusive content! Donate directly at berndpulch.org/donation or become a patron at patreon.com/berndpulch. Your contribution makes a difference!
Chapter: BerndPulch.org – A Unique Source of Intelligence and Geopolitical Insight
In an era where information is both abundant and tightly controlled, berndpulch.org emerges as a distinctive platform dedicated to uncovering and sharing exclusive, hard-to-find data related to intelligence, security, and geopolitics. Unlike mainstream media outlets, which often operate within the constraints of corporate or governmental influence, berndpulch.org positions itself as an independent voice of freedom, committed to delivering unfiltered truth. This chapter explores the unique selling points (USPs) that make berndpulch.org a standout resource and the wealth of information it provides to its audience.
Unique Selling Points (USPs) of BerndPulch.org
What truly sets berndpulch.org apart is its bold claim of being “the only media with the license to spy.” This provocative statement underscores the website’s mission to provide access to information that is typically hidden from public view. While most media organizations rely on publicly available data or government-sanctioned leaks, berndpulch.org prides itself on publishing “above top secret original documents.” These documents, often related to intelligence agencies like the STASI, KGB, and others, offer readers a rare glimpse into the shadowy world of global espionage and power dynamics. This access to exclusive content is a key differentiator, making the website a go-to source for those seeking insights beyond the reach of traditional journalism.
Another critical USP is the website’s defiance of censorship. Berndpulch.org openly acknowledges being “censored and suppressed by Google, Bing, Yahoo,” which it frames not as a setback but as a badge of honor. This resistance to suppression aligns with its mission to provide “trusted information published at risk of death,” suggesting that the content is so sensitive or controversial that it challenges the status quo. In a digital landscape where algorithms and corporate interests often dictate what information reaches the public, berndpulch.org’s commitment to uncensored truth-telling resonates with readers who are skeptical of establishment narratives. This stance not only enhances its credibility but also attracts an audience hungry for unvarnished facts.
Additionally, the website’s focus on “no presstitution” and “no fairy tales” reinforces its dedication to authenticity. By distancing itself from mainstream media practices—often criticized for sensationalism or bias—berndpulch.org appeals to readers who value raw, unmediated information. Its rejection of funding from figures like Gates or Soros further solidifies its independence, ensuring that the content remains free from external influence. This purity of purpose is rare in today’s media ecosystem, making berndpulch.org a unique haven for those seeking truth without corporate or political spin.
Resources Offered by BerndPulch.org
Beyond its bold mission, berndpulch.org is a treasure trove of resources for researchers, journalists, and anyone interested in the inner workings of global intelligence networks. The website hosts a variety of lists and documents that are difficult, if not impossible, to find elsewhere. Among its most notable offerings are detailed lists of personnel from infamous agencies like the STASI, KGB, and DDR POLIZEI. These lists, which include names like Erich Mielke, Alexander Schalck-Golodkowski, and even high-profile figures such as Angela Merkel, provide unparalleled insight into the individuals who shaped (and continue to shape) global power structures.
In addition to personnel lists, berndpulch.org features leaked documents and offshore lists that expose financial and political machinations often hidden from public scrutiny. For example, the website’s “Offshore List” and “Leaks Lists” offer a window into the world of tax havens and illicit financial flows, while its “WEF Lists” shed light on the networks of influence surrounding global elites. This information is invaluable for those seeking to understand the intersection of wealth, power, and secrecy in the modern world.
Moreover, berndpulch.org’s focus on “avant-garde AI art” and “the voice of freedom” suggests that it is not just a repository of documents but also a platform for creative expression and dissent. By blending hard-hitting intelligence leaks with artistic commentary, the website offers a multifaceted experience that appeals to both the intellect and the imagination. This unique combination of resources ensures that visitors are not only informed but also inspired to question the narratives they are fed by mainstream sources.
Conclusion
In a world where information is often sanitized or suppressed, berndpulch.org stands as a beacon of unfiltered truth. Its unique selling points—exclusive access to intelligence documents, a defiant stance against censorship, and a commitment to independence—make it a rare and valuable resource. Coupled with its extensive collection of lists, leaks, and artistic content, the website offers a one-of-a-kind experience for those seeking to understand the hidden forces shaping our world. For readers tired of “fairy tales” and “presstitution,” berndpulch.org is not just a website; it is a revolution in information.
Chapter: The Power of Our Product
In today’s fast-paced business environment, efficiency is key. Our product stands out from the competition by offering a unique combination of features that save time and money while increasing productivity. This powerful USP sets us apart and makes our product the go-to choice for businesses looking to streamline their operations.
With our product, you can automate repetitive tasks, freeing up valuable time for your team to focus on more strategic initiatives. This not only saves money by reducing labor costs but also boosts productivity by allowing your employees to work on higher-value projects. BerndPulch.org also provides exclusive access to declassified intelligence reports from the Cold War era, offering unparalleled insights that enhance decision-making and strategic planning with historical context.
But that’s not all. Our product also offers advanced analytics and reporting capabilities, giving you valuable insights into your business operations. This data-driven approach helps you make informed decisions, further enhancing your efficiency and effectiveness.
In short, our product is more than just a tool—it’s a game-changer for businesses looking to stay ahead of the curve. By leveraging its unique features and capabilities, you can unlock new levels of productivity and success.
“OPERATION FISSION GHOST” – A classified visual of a suspected Ukrainian hybrid strike on Russian nuclear infrastructure. The scene captures a night-time drone assault on a reactor compound, with encrypted NATO ISR overlays, structural fires, and digital telemetry trails—symbolizing the blurred line between sabotage and open warfare in the nuclear era.
🔴 ABOVE TOP SECRET – COSMIC BLACK DOSSIER
🧨 OPERATION FISSION GHOST
CIA & MI6 Backed Hybrid Strike on Russian Nuclear Infrastructure
🗓️ Declassified: June 2025 | Level: RED OMEGA // NUCLEAR-EYES ONLY // NATO/UKUSA SIGINT
BONUS MATERIAL BASED ON AI SIMULATION AND PRODUCTION
⚠️ STRATEGIC INTEL BRIEFING
In early 2024 and into 2025, a series of precision drone and sabotage attacks struck the Kursk, Kalinin, and Smolensk nuclear facilities within the Russian Federation. While no full meltdown was triggered, the attacks caused internal panic, brief radiological anomalies, and partial shutdowns—all publicly downplayed by Russian state media.
🧩 KEY INTELLIGENCE FINDINGS
1. 🔥 UKRAINIAN OPERATION, WESTERN TECH ▪️ Sources inside Ukraine’s SBU and HUR (military intel) confirm involvement of Western ISR data streams ▪️ Operational drones linked to U.S. and UK-manufactured components, including encrypted targeting modules ▪️ Covert infrastructure sabotage mirrors classic MI6 Cold War techniques (e.g., pipeline perforation, disguised access)
2. 👁️ SHADOW SUPPORT: CIA & MI6 FOOTPRINTS ▪️ A joint intelligence cell reportedly active in Lviv and Odesa, under “advisory” NATO cover ▪️ Alleged transfer of targeting telemetry via encrypted Starlink relay nodes ▪️ Insider brief from GCHQ affiliate: “The gloves are off. The targets are strategic, not symbolic.”
3. ⚠️ RISK OF NUCLEAR ESCALATION ▪️ Russian MOD classifies the attacks as “nuclear-proximate terror sabotage” ▪️ GRU internal doc leaked to BND states: “If this touches a reactor core, the retaliation will be doctrinal.” ▪️ NATO is on quiet DEFCON 3 standby in key Eastern European listening posts
📉 STRATEGIC CONSEQUENCES
Russia is moving select warheads to mobile launch status
FSB has intensified surveillance on all Rosatom contractors
CIA and MI6 assets under cover in neighboring states have been relocated or compartmentalized
“This isn’t just sabotage. It’s fission-level psywarfare.” – Classified SIGINT Analysis, February 2025
🔐 COSMIC BLACK DIRECTIVES
NATO is activating Deep Denial Playbooks to obscure Western involvement
USAGM and BBC World instructed to downplay reactor proximity
MI6 Taskforce Icarus redeployed to reinforce disinformation containment
🧬 BONUS INTEL DROP FOR PATRONS
📦 Includes:
Internal CIA redacted op-log titled “ATOM VEIL – Phase 2”
Satellite recon of Kalinin power plant before and after strike
CIA- und MI6-gesteuerter Hybridangriff auf russische Nuklearanlagen
🗓️ Freigegeben: Mai 2025 | Stufe: ROT OMEGA // NUKLEAR – EYES ONLY // NATO/UKUSA SIGINT
⚠️ STRATEGISCHE LAGEBEURTEILUNG
Seit Anfang 2024 bis hinein ins Jahr 2025 kam es zu einer Reihe von präzisen Drohnen- und Sabotageangriffen auf russische Nuklearanlagen in Kursk, Kalinin und Smolensk. Zwar wurde keine Kernschmelze ausgelöst, doch die Attacken verursachten interne Alarmierungen, radiologische Anomalien und temporäre Abschaltungen – die von der russischen Presse verharmlost wurden.
🧩 WICHTIGE ERKENNTNISSE
1. 🔥 UKRAINISCHE OPERATION, WESTLICHE TECHNOLOGIE ▪️ Quellen aus der ukrainischen SBU und dem Militärgeheimdienst HUR bestätigen den Einsatz von westlichen ISR-Daten ▪️ Drohnen mit US- und UK-Komponenten ausgerüstet, inklusive verschlüsselter Zielsysteme ▪️ Sabotagemuster ähneln klassischen MI6-Techniken aus dem Kalten Krieg
2. 👁️ SCHATTENHILFE: CIA- UND MI6-SPUREN ▪️ Gemeinsame Zelle in Lwiw und Odessa unter NATO-„Beratungs“-Deckmantel ▪️ Zielkoordinaten wurden via Starlink-Relay übertragen ▪️ GCHQ-Insider: „Die Handschuhe sind ausgezogen. Die Ziele sind strategisch.“
3. ⚠️ RISIKO DER NUKLEAREN ESKALATION ▪️ Russische Regierung bezeichnet die Angriffe als „nuklear-nahe Terrorakte“ ▪️ GRU-internes Dokument an BND: „Sollte ein Reaktorkern betroffen sein, folgt die doktrinäre Antwort.“ ▪️ NATO in Osteuropa auf DEFCON 3-Bereitschaft hochgestuft
📉 STRATEGISCHE KONSEQUENZEN
Russland verlegt taktische Sprengköpfe in mobile Trägersysteme
FSB erhöht Überwachung über Rosatom-Zulieferer
CIA/MI6-Assets in Nachbarländern wurden umstrukturiert oder exfiltriert
„Das ist keine einfache Sabotage. Das ist fissionsbasierte psychologische Kriegsführung.“ – Geheime SIGINT-Auswertung, Februar 2025
🔐 COSMIC BLACK BEFEHLE
NATO aktiviert Deep Denial Playbooks zur Abstreitstrategie
USAGM & BBC World sollen Reaktornähe medial entschärfen
MI6 Taskforce „Icarus“ zur Informationsabschirmung neu positioniert
*”This is not fiction. This is SIOP-2025. The U.S. nuclear Doomsday Machine—hidden in classified servers, AI algorithms, and trillion-dollar contracts—is real, active, and primed to end civilization. These AI-generated visuals expose the unthinkable: shadowy fail-deadly systems, urban annihilation targets, and corporate death profiteers. Share this. Fight this. Before the clock hits midnight. #DoomsdayMachine #AIWarfare #NukeTheNukes // Support truth: [BerndPulch.org](https://berndpulch.org) // Art via MidJourney + Stable Diffus
I. ☢️ BACKGROUND: THE NUCLEAR DOOMSDAY MACHINE
Daniel Ellsberg’s 2017 exposé, The Doomsday Machine, revealed a Cold War-era U.S. nuclear strategy designed to annihilate adversaries through overwhelming force, risking 🔥 5 billion+ lives. Updated 2025 records confirm these plans now integrate 🤖 AI and 🌐 cyberwarfare systems.
II. ☠️ THE NUCLEAR WAR PLANS: A BLUEPRINT FOR OMNICIDE
🚀 SIOP-62 Legacy: Modern “Prompt Global Strike” protocols mirror SIOP-62 logic, targeting 🇷🇺🇨🇳🇰🇵 urban centers with hypersonic missiles.
📜 Secrecy: 🔒 85% of SIOP documents remain classified in 2025.
V. 🚨 CONCLUSION: AN URGENT THREAT
The 2025 Doomsday Machine—enhanced by 🤖 AI, 🚀 hypersonics, and 💻 cyber-triggers—risks 🌍 human extinction. Ellsberg’s final warning: “Dismantle it before climate collapse or hacking does.”
🚨🔴 URGENT CALL TO ACTION 🔴🚨 BREAK THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE — BEFORE IT BREAKS US
☢️ THE THREAT IS REAL. THE TIME IS NOW. ☢️
The U.S.-Russia-China nuclear triad, supercharged by 🤖 AI launch systems, 🚀 hypersonic missiles, and 💻 cyberwarfare triggers, is a ticking omnicide bomb. If we fail to act:
🌍 5 billion+ deaths from blasts, radiation, and famine.
❄️ Nuclear winter collapsing global food systems.
🤖 AI errors or 👾 hacker spoofs triggering accidental Armageddon.
THIS IS NOT A DRILL. HUMANITY HAS ONE FINAL WARNING.
🎯 OUR DEMANDS
🗂️ DECLASSIFY ALL SIOP DOCUMENTS Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Expose the Pentagon’s hidden first-strike protocols and target lists.
🚫 BAN AI FROM NUCLEAR COMMAND No machine should decide human extinction. Shut down Skynet-7, Dead Hand 2.0, and all AI launch systems.
💵 DEFUND THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE Redirect $1.7 trillion earmarked for nukes to climate resilience, healthcare, and poverty eradication.
🕵️♂️ PROSECUTE CORPORATE WAR PROFITEERS Hold Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman accountable for lobbying genocide.
✊ HOW TO ACT
🔴 CONTACT LAWMAKERS Flood Congress with demands to #DeclassifySIOP2025 and #BanAInukes. Use scripts from Beyond the Bomb and ICAN.
🔴 JOIN PROTESTS Occupy nuclear bases, Lockheed HQ, and Capitol Hill. Global Strike for Survival: March 15, 2026.
🔴 LEAK & EXPOSE If you have insider intel, anonymize it and send to Wikileaks or BerndPulch.org.
🔴 PREPARE FOR THE WORST Build community networks for food/water security. Demand local gov’t nuclear winter contingency plans.
🔥 FINAL WARNING FROM ELLSBERG (2024)
“The Doomsday Machine wasn’t built for deterrence. It was built for profit, power, and annihilation. Dismantle it—or your children will burn with it.”
⏳ TIME IS RUNNING OUT. ACT LIKE YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT — BECAUSE IT DOES.
⚠️ SHARE THIS. DO NOT STAY SILENT. ⚠️ THE CLOCK IS MIDNIGHT. 🔥
🔴🚨 URGENT CALL TO ACTION 🚨🔴 SUPPORT TRUTH. FUND THE RESISTANCE. STOP THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE.
☢️ WE ARE THE LAST LINE OF DEFENSE ☢️
The nuclear war plans exposed in Operation Doomsday Shadow are still active, hidden behind 🔒 classified lies and 🤖 AI-driven escalation. BerndPulch.org is one of the few platforms risking legal action to leak and analyze these documents—but we need your help to survive.
💥 WHY DONATE?
Your funds directly:
🔓 DECLASSIFY suppressed files via FOIA lawsuits and insider leaks.
🕵️♂️ INVESTIGATE corporate-military collusion (Lockheed, Raytheon, Space Force).
📢 EXPOSE first-strike protocols like SIOP-2025 and Project Shadowfall.
🌍 BUILD grassroots networks to prepare for nuclear winter and food collapse.
Without you, the Doomsday Machine wins by silence.
📢 SHARE THIS EVERYWHERE. THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE FEARS YOUR VOICE. 🔥
🔴 NOTE: This document will self-destruct from public servers in 48 hrs. Save it. Spread it. Fight.
████ END TRANSMISSION ████
UNMASK THE ELITES — FUND THE REVOLUTION OF TRUTH Your Apathy is Their Weapon. Arm Yourself with Knowledge.
—
### JOIN THE PATREON INSURGENCY [ BECOME A PATRON](https://www.patreon.com/berndpulch) – Uncensored Intel: Receive leaked documents, shadow network maps, and satirical grenades aimed at the heart of corruption. – Elite-Proof Updates: Weekly dossiers on Bilderberg schemes, royal money trails, and warhawk hypocrisy. – Power to the People: Vote on which corrupt institution we dissect next—*democracy in action, not theory*.
—
### DONATE TO DESTROY THE STATUS QUO [ SABOTAGE THE SYSTEM](https://berndpulch.org/donation) – Bankroll the Underground: Fund investigations into EU technocrats, CIA black ops, and corporate puppeteers. – Protect the Heretics: Shield whistleblowers who leak *what Silicon Valley memory-holes*. – Global Rebellion: Translate our exposés into 20+ languages to outflank censorship.
—
### WHAT YOUR COINS CRUSH ✅ Lies: Turn “official narratives” into kindling for the bonfire of truth. ✅ Silence: Amplify forbidden stories with the decibel of a digital mob. ✅ Complacency: Replace apathy with action, hashtags with history.
—
### ☠️ A WARNING FROM THE TRENCHES *“They’ll ban you, shadowban you, and gaslight you—but they can’t ban *all of us*. Every euro you give is a middle finger to their New World Order. Every Patreon sign-up is a brick in the barricade.”*
—
### ️ OPERATIONAL SECURITY – Anonymous Donations: Bitcoin, Monero, Ethereum accepted. – Zero Traces: We leave no digital crumbs—*unlike the idiots we expose*.
“ABOVE TOP SECRET: NRC INSPECTION FILES EXPOSED!” A digitally designed exposé reveals over a decade of concealed nuclear regulatory activity. Shrouded in secrecy, these newsletters hold the truths they never wanted you to read. BerndPulch.org breaks the silence. Support the leak at patreon.com/berndpulch and berndpulch.org/donation to keep the truth alive.
⚛️☢️ ABOVE TOP SECRET REPORT ☢️⚛️
“NUCLEAR NAUGHTINESS: THE NRC FILES 1996–2006”
Compiled for: BERNDPULCH.ORG CLASSIFICATION: 🔴🔴🔴 ABOVE TOP SECRET 🔴🔴🔴 DISTRIBUTION: EYES ONLY – DO NOT BREATHE NEAR THIS FILE
1. 🔥 MELTDOWNS IN MANAGEMENT – OR: HOW TO LOSE CONTROL WITHOUT TRYING
Between 1996 and 2006, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) seemed less like a watchdog and more like a sleepy puppy.
Cover-ups galore: Repeated failure to report safety hazards, including fuel rod misplacement, missing inspection logs, and reactor leaks.
At one site, a radioactive valve was mislabelled for 7 years. That’s not a typo. Seven years.
Inspector General called this “a culture of concealment“—we call it 🕵️♂️ Radioactive Roulette!
Operators went from negligent to straight-up nefarious.
A senior plant official ordered workers NOT to log a major contamination event. Why? To “avoid red tape.”
One facility used improvised rubber seals from Home Depot on high-pressure piping.
🧪💥 At least two incidents involved radiation exposure exceeding legal limits, followed by “mysterious disappearance” of logs.
3. 🧯 WHISTLEBLOWERS UNDER FIRE – THE SILENCING MACHINE
When brave insiders tried to sound the alarm…
Retaliation was standard: careers destroyed, licenses mysteriously revoked, one informant was “reassigned” to janitorial duties (yes, really).
Some reports vanished mid-transit. Others were “delayed” for years.
One chilling case: a technician who reported repeated breaches was found unconscious in the reactor parking lot. Police ruled it a slip. Hmmm…
4. 💸 FOLLOW THE URANIUM-SCENTED MONEY
Meanwhile, the private sector played monopoly with your future.
Contracts awarded without bid, including one to a company whose CEO was convicted of insider trading—the very next year.
Enrichment facility in Tennessee funneled millions to a mysterious shell company in the Cayman Islands.
“Reprocessing studies” cited in multiple reports were ghostwritten by industry lobbyists.
5. ☠️ DÉJÀ VU IN THE DARK – REPEATED FAILURES REPEATEDLY IGNORED
One facility failed the same emergency drill scenario six years in a row—but got recertified each time.
NRC’s own reports admitted “systemic failure” but did not trigger revocation.
In 2004, a simulated terrorist breach was allowed to succeed without alert—because “the siren system was off for maintenance.”
6. 🧿 BERND’S BONUS: UNREDACTED GEMS
Thanks to unintentional transparency (aka: sloppy redactions), we uncovered gems like:
A classified memo from 2001 noting “inevitable public outcry should [facility] incident reach media.”
A handwritten note in margins: “We need to lose that tape.”
A nuclear inspector jokingly referred to one facility as “Chernobyl-lite.”
CONCLUSION: WHO WATCHES THE WATCHDOGS?
Apparently, no one. This report reveals what the NRC tried to bury: decades of negligence, corruption, and regulatory theater. The nuclear industry isn’t glowing—it’s blazing with secrecy. And we’re just getting started.
FOR BERNDPULCH.ORG ARCHIVES TRANSMITTED VIA ENCRYPTED CHANNEL ALPHA-KAPUTT Report #ZETA-2389/OPERATION-FISSION-MISSION
[END REPORT]
😎
☢️ JOIN THE FIGHT FOR TRUTH ☢️
What they won’t tell you, we expose. From nuclear cover-ups to shadowy contracts, these revelations must not be buried.
Support independent investigations like this ABOVE TOP SECRET report—because silence is complicity.
Help us keep the light shining on radioactive secrets:
📢 INTRODUCTION The Superfires Report, authored by nuclear expert Theodore A. Postol, Ph.D., exposes the devastating effects of nuclear-induced firestorms following an urban nuclear attack. Contrary to conventional blast-damage estimates, this report reveals that superfires would amplify destruction by 2-4 times, wiping out entire populations in ways never before fully understood.
This Above Top Secret XXL Report breaks down the classified details of how nuclear detonations create firestorms, hurricane-force winds, and toxic fire zones, ultimately ensuring near-total fatalities within target areas.
💥 SECTION 1: HOW SUPERFIRES FORM AFTER A NUCLEAR ATTACK
🔴 Firestorms Ignite Instantly
🌍 A single 1-megaton nuclear detonation creates temperatures exceeding 100 million °C at its core—hotter than the Sun’s surface!
🔥 Firestorms begin within seconds, with extreme heat igniting everything flammable over vast areas.
☠️ Even survivors outside the immediate blast radius are doomed as fires spread uncontrollably.
🔴 Hurricane-Force Fire Winds
💨 As fires consume oxygen, winds exceeding 150 mph rush in, feeding the inferno.
🏚 Buildings are torn apart not just by flames, but by violent atmospheric pressure changes.
🌫 The combination of heat, wind, and debris creates an inescapable death zone.
🔴 Toxic Fire Zones: No Survivors
☢️ Superheated gases, carbon monoxide, and lethal smoke ensure anyone caught in the fire zone suffocates before escaping.
💀 Even those in underground shelters face an agonizing death as fire-heated rubble entombs them.
🔄 Hurricane-like fire whirls spread burning debris for miles, consuming everything in their path.
💣 SECTION 2: EXPONENTIAL INCREASE IN FATALITIES
🔶 Casualty Estimates Are Massively Underreported
🚨 Government casualty models focus on blast damage, ignoring firestorm effects.
📉 Real death tolls could be 200-400% higher than official projections.
🌆 Cities wouldn’t just be destroyed—they would be erased.
🔶 Firestorms vs. Traditional Bombing
🏙 Superfires in nuclear war would make WWII firebombings (Dresden, Tokyo) look small by comparison.
💣 WWII firestorms killed tens of thousands in single nights—nuclear superfires would kill millions.
🛑 Modern urban areas are even more flammable, ensuring total incineration.
🔶 Massive Climate Effects – Nuclear Winter Begins
🌫 Billions of tons of smoke rise into the atmosphere, blocking sunlight globally.
❄️ Temperatures drop, crops fail, and mass starvation follows.
🏴☠️ Survivors face collapse of civilization as food and water supplies vanish.
⚠️ SECTION 3: SCIENTIFIC CONFIRMATION OF THE FIRESTORM THREAT
🛑 Eyewitness Reports from WWII Confirm Findings
🏴☠️ Hiroshima & Nagasaki survivors describe streets of people collapsing mid-step, suffocated by fire-driven winds.
🔥 The Great Hamburg Firestorm of 1943 saw hurricane-level winds feeding flames that vaporized thousands instantly.
🚨 New modeling proves nuclear superfires will be exponentially worse.
🛑 Modern Urban Centers Are Even More Vulnerable
🌆 High-rise buildings & gas lines create a perfect storm for fire-driven mass death.
💀 Sheltering underground offers little safety—heat and toxic smoke will penetrate even deep bunkers.
🛑 Fire zones will be completely unsurvivable, wiping out millions in hours.
🛑 A Single Nuclear Attack Could Collapse the Planet’s Climate
🌫 Soot clouds could block the Sun for months, triggering catastrophic global cooling.
🍽 Mass starvation and food system collapse would ensure long-term human extinction.
💀 No modern nation would survive the chaos that follows.
🚀 FINAL VERDICT: SUPERFIRES PROVE NUCLEAR WAR MEANS HUMAN EXTINCTION! 📌 The Superfires Report provides undeniable proof that:
🔥 Firestorms will incinerate entire cities in ways never before calculated.
☠️ Lethal winds and toxic gases make survival impossible, even outside blast zones.
🌍 Nuclear winter will follow, ensuring planetary collapse.
🛑 Government casualty estimates are dangerously misleading.
📌 ACTION REQUIRED: 🔍 Expose the real risks of nuclear superfires and war! 🚨 Demand international de-escalation before catastrophe strikes! 🛑 Pressure governments to acknowledge and prevent nuclear war at all costs!
💥 EXPOSE THE TRUTH – SUPPORT INDEPENDENT INTELLIGENCE! 💥
📢 FREE FOR DONORS & PATRONS! 👉 Access exclusive intelligence reports at Patreon or BerndPulch.org. 💰 Your support ensures continued investigations into global security threats and classified war simulations!
🔎 STAY TUNED FOR MORE LEAKED INTELLIGENCE! 🕵️♂️
Support independent journalism and exclusive intelligence insights!
Your contribution helps uncover hidden truths and deliver in-depth investigations. Join us on Patreon at patreon.com/berndpulch or make a direct donation at berndpulch.org/donation.
Every donation counts—be a part of the mission today!
📢 INTRODUCTION The newly obtained Able Archer 2026 War Game Report provides an alarming simulation of nuclear war escalation scenarios based on updated U.S. missile deployments to Germany in 2026. This classified document, authored by nuclear expert Theodore A. Postol, reveals that even a limited conflict between NATO and Russia could result in global nuclear devastation.
This Above Top Secret XXL Report dissects the attack sequences, escalation models, and catastrophic outcomes of a full-scale nuclear exchange, exposing the hidden risks that world leaders refuse to acknowledge.
💥 SECTION 1: THE ABLE ARCHER ESCALATION SEQUENCE
🔴 Day 0: Nuclear War Preparations Begin
🏴☠️ NATO deploys tactical nuclear weapons in response to a postulated Russian invasion.
🎯 U.S. and NATO forces authorize first-use of low-yield nuclear artillery, signaling a major shift in nuclear engagement policies.
🔥 Russia perceives this as an existential threat, triggering a rapid counter-response.
🔴 Day 1: First Nuclear Strikes Detonated
🚀 NATO launches 11 tactical nuclear strikes to halt Russian advances.
💣 Russia retaliates with its own tactical nuclear artillery, escalating the conflict beyond conventional means.
🔥 Both sides dismiss diplomatic solutions, leading to an irreversible spiral of nuclear escalation.
🔴 Day 2: Full-Scale Nuclear Counterstrikes
🌎 NATO and Russia shift from battlefield targets to strategic infrastructure.
🛑 Airbases, missile defense sites, and command centers are hit with 100+ kiloton nuclear weapons.
💀 Europe becomes uninhabitable as radiation fallout spreads across borders.
💣 SECTION 2: ESCALATION TO GLOBAL ANNIHILATION
🔶 Day 3: Direct Attacks on Major Population Centers
🔥 Paris, London, Berlin, and Warsaw are hit as both sides adopt “countervalue” strategies, targeting cities instead of military assets.
🏙 Nuclear firestorms engulf urban centers, with temperatures reaching thousands of degrees, instantly vaporizing millions.
🌬 Early fallout spreads across Europe, exposing civilians to deadly radiation within hours.
🔶 Day 4: Worldwide Nuclear Engagement Begins
💀 Russia expands its nuclear response, targeting U.S. bases in Asia, including South Korea, Japan, and Guam.
🔥 NATO retaliates by striking Russian logistics hubs in Poland, Belarus, and the Baltics.
⚠️ By this stage, over 150 nuclear warheads have been detonated, triggering catastrophic global fallout.
🔶 Day 5: The Endgame – Total Nuclear War
🚀 ICBMs are launched against the U.S. and Russia, signaling the beginning of full-scale strategic nuclear warfare.
💥 New York, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, and Moscow are completely destroyed within minutes.
☠️ Total estimated casualties exceed 500 million within the first 24 hours.
⚠️ SECTION 3: SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS OF AFTERMATH
🛑 Thermal Flash & Nuclear Firestorms
🔥 Nuclear detonations create “superfires” that burn at temperatures hotter than the sun’s surface.
🌫 Smoke and debris are lifted into the stratosphere, blocking sunlight and triggering a nuclear winter.
🛑 Fallout Contamination: 1000x Chernobyl
☢️ Radioactive debris from detonations spreads for thousands of kilometers.
📉 Food and water supplies become contaminated, leading to famine and mass deaths.
🛑 Total Collapse of Civilization
🌍 Governments fail as surviving populations face infrastructure collapse.
🏚 Mass migrations of irradiated refugees create unmanageable humanitarian crises.
🚀 FINAL VERDICT: ABLE ARCHER WAR GAMES CONFIRM INEVITABLE ESCALATION TO EXTINCTION 📌 The Able Archer 2026 simulation proves that even a limited NATO-Russia nuclear conflict will inevitably lead to:
🛑 Total destruction of European cities.
☢️ Global radioactive contamination worse than Chernobyl.
🔥 Permanent collapse of civilization due to nuclear winter.
💀 An extinction-level event for human life.
📌 ACTION REQUIRED: 🔍 Demand the immediate halt of U.S. nuclear deployments in Europe! 🚨 Expose the dangers of NATO’s first-use nuclear policies! 🛑 Pressure governments to commit to nuclear de-escalation before it’s too late!
💥 EXPOSE THE TRUTH – SUPPORT INDEPENDENT INTELLIGENCE! 💥
📢 FREE FOR DONORS & PATRONS! 👉 Access exclusive intelligence reports at Patreon or BerndPulch.org. 💰 Your support ensures continued investigations into global security threats and classified war simulations!
🔎 STAY TUNED FOR MORE LEAKED INTELLIGENCE! 🕵️♂️
🚨 STOP THE NUCLEAR NIGHTMARE – SUPPORT INDEPENDENT INTELLIGENCE! 🚨
The Able Archer 2026 simulation confirms that even a “limited” nuclear war will escalate to global extinction.Who is pushing the world toward disaster? Only fearless investigations can expose the truth.
📢 INTRODUCTION A newly uncovered Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) document, NRCsf-135 (2023-2024), reveals classified records on nuclear decommissioning, radioactive material oversight, and hidden regulatory practices spanning several decades. These files, transferred to Federal Records Centers (FRCs) and the National Archives (NARA), contain critical legislative files, radioactive contamination reports, and nuclear facility safety records that could change public understanding of nuclear oversight and environmental risks.
This Above Top Secret XXL Report delves into the most sensitive records related to U.S. nuclear regulation, radioactive waste management, and the hidden risks of nuclear energy policies.
💥 SECTION 1: NRC’S SECRET RECORDS ON DECOMMISSIONING & RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION
🔴 Nuclear Decommissioning – What’s Really Left Behind?
The NRC files contain previously undisclosed reports on decommissioning nuclear facilities under Part 30, Part 31, Part 32, and Part 40 regulations, detailing:
Radioactive waste disposal methods kept from public scrutiny
Government contracts for nuclear cleanup operations
Financial incentives offered to private contractors for waste storage
Some files reveal that contaminated sites have been insufficiently monitored, leaving high levels of radioactive material near populated areas.
🔴 Radioactive Material & Industrial Use
NRC documents confirm that radioactive materials such as strontium-90, tritium, and uranium have been used in military, medical, and industrial applications with limited public knowledge.
Records include data on aircraft safety devices, smoke detectors, medical isotopes, and even uranium enrichment projects with loose regulatory oversight.
There are cases of untracked radioactive materials being transferred between private companies and military agencies with little to no accountability.
🔴 Misadministration of Radioactive Drugs
Medical facilities, including Cincinnati Medical Center, Hutzel Hospital, and Sacred Heart Hospital, are cited in NRC records for misadministration of radioactive pharmaceuticals.
Some patients may have been unknowingly exposed to high doses of radiation due to negligent safety protocols and regulatory loopholes.
The NRC’s oversight of nuclear medicine appears flawed, with multiple cases of radiation overdoses swept under the rug.
💣 SECTION 2: HIDDEN GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT & LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
🔶 Buried Legislative Files – A Regulatory Cover-Up?
The NRC files reference legislative documents spanning 1958-2001, transferred to federal storage away from public access.
Records labeled “Legislative Files – Part 50” suggest key nuclear safety decisions were influenced by corporate interests rather than public safety.
The NRC’s secret “Backfitting” policies suggest that nuclear regulations were modified to benefit industry stakeholders rather than strengthen safety protocols.
🔶 Emergency Planning & Public Safety Failures
Files related to nuclear emergency planning (Part 50.47, Appendix E) indicate that states and local governments have struggled with compliance, leaving citizens vulnerable in case of a nuclear accident.
Evidence suggests that FEMA’s Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) program failed to implement key recommendations, meaning current nuclear emergency response plans may be outdated and ineffective.
🔶 Nuclear Reactor Licensing & Covert Approvals
The NRC documents contain licensing approvals for controversial nuclear power projects, including:
Barge-mounted nuclear reactors – mobile reactors that could be deployed without public awareness.
Plutonium processing plants – handling one of the most dangerous radioactive materials with minimal disclosure.
Uranium enrichment programs – raising concerns about international nuclear non-proliferation agreements.
⚠️ SECTION 3: NATIONAL SECURITY RISKS & REGULATORY LOOPHOLES
🛑 Foreign Access to U.S. Nuclear Technology
The records expose foreign investments in U.S. nuclear infrastructure, raising concerns about potential security risks.
Documents reference uranium transactions and nuclear material exports with limited oversight, opening the door for unauthorized foreign access to sensitive nuclear data.
🛑 Industrial Sabotage & Security Breaches
Some records flag incidents of industrial sabotage and unauthorized access to sensitive nuclear facilities.
Counterintelligence reports on nuclear-related threats have been archived rather than actively investigated, leaving potential security vulnerabilities unaddressed.
🛑 Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste
The NRC files contain classified details on nuclear waste disposal, including the controversial Yucca Mountain repository project.
Discrepancies between NRC reports and actual waste containment data suggest major inconsistencies in how the U.S. government manages radioactive material.
Transportation records indicate that nuclear waste has been moved across the country under conditions that may not meet the highest safety standards.
🚀 FINAL VERDICT: NUCLEAR REGULATORY SECRETS EXPOSED! The NRCsf-135 (2023-2024) files reveal a disturbing pattern of secrecy, mismanagement, and overlooked safety risks in U.S. nuclear oversight. These records confirm:
Nuclear decommissioning practices are not as safe as publicly presented.
Radioactive material has been widely used in unregulated applications.
Emergency planning and safety regulations have been compromised due to bureaucratic inefficiency and industry influence.
📌 ACTION REQUIRED: 🔍 Demand transparency in nuclear decommissioning and waste disposal. 🚨 Investigate government failures in regulating radioactive material. 🛑 Hold regulatory agencies accountable for nuclear safety and public health risks.
💥 EXPOSE THE TRUTH – SUPPORT INDEPENDENT INTELLIGENCE! 💥
📢 FREE FOR DONORS & PATRONS! 👉 Access exclusive intelligence reports at Patreon or BerndPulch.org. Your support ensures continued investigations into government secrecy, nuclear oversight, and environmental safety!
🔎 STAY TUNED FOR MORE LEAKED INTELLIGENCE! 🕵️♂️
🚨 EXPOSE NUCLEAR SECRECY – SUPPORT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATIONS! 🚨
The NRC’s hidden files on nuclear decommissioning, radioactive contamination, and regulatory failures must be exposed. What other nuclear secrets are being kept from the public? Only fearless journalism can uncover the truth.
“The Global Nuclear Dilemma: Legal, Military, and Security Implications in an Uncertain World.”
In a compelling YouTube discussion, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter joins Judge Andrew Napolitano to analyze the impact of former President Donald Trump’s nuclear weapons policies on global security. The conversation explores key decisions made during Trump’s tenure, including the withdrawal from arms control agreements and the broader geopolitical consequences of nuclear proliferation.
Ritter, known for his expertise in arms control, provides a detailed assessment of how these policies have shaped international stability. Judge Napolitano, a well-known legal analyst and former judge, facilitates the discussion, adding his legal and constitutional insights to the debate.
In a related discussion, Scott Ritter continues his analysis in another video, further breaking down the risks and challenges posed by nuclear proliferation and U.S. foreign policy decisions. This second discussion provides additional context to the evolving security landscape and the role of diplomatic efforts in managing nuclear threats.
Support Independent Journalism and In-Depth Analysis
Scott Ritter and Judge Napolitano’s discussions provide crucial insights into global security, nuclear policies, and the challenges facing our world today. Independent voices like theirs are essential in uncovering the truth and analyzing critical geopolitical issues.
To keep these important discussions alive and support investigative journalism, consider making a contribution. Your support helps ensure that unbiased, in-depth analysis continues to reach audiences worldwide.
Unraveling the Secrets of NATO’s Space Ambitions: The APSS Memorandum of Understanding
Introduction
On May 14, 2024, a pivotal event unfolded in the domain of international space surveillance with the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Alliance Persistent Surveillance from Space (APSS) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This document, known as: CFINTCOM2024-0004021, marks a significant step towards enhancing NATO’s capabilities in space, a domain increasingly recognized for its strategic importance. Here, we delve into the intricacies of this agreement, its implications, and what it means for global security dynamics.
The APSS Initiative
The APSS initiative is designed to integrate NATO’s space-based surveillance and intelligence operations, aiming to provide allies with enhanced situational awareness and decision-making capabilities. This program is described as NATO’s largest investment in space capabilities, involving 17 member nations committing over 1 billion USD over the next five years. The initiative leverages both commercial and national space assets to create a “virtual constellation” known as Aquila, which will offer timely and accurate monitoring of Earth activities from space.
Key Players and Contributions
Luxembourg has emerged as a significant contributor, providing 16.5 million euros to kickstart the project. This financial commitment underscores the importance of multinational cooperation within NATO’s framework, aiming to pool resources for more effective and efficient surveillance capabilities. Other nations involved in signing the MOU include the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom, among others, demonstrating a broad coalition of NATO members dedicated to this cause.
Strategic Implications
The APSS program not only signifies a leap in surveillance technology but also highlights NATO’s evolving strategy in dealing with contemporary security threats. By enhancing its space-based intelligence, NATO aims to counter the challenges posed by an increasingly contested and congested space environment. This move is seen as a counterbalance to space activities by nations like Russia and China, which have shown increased interest and capabilities in space warfare.
Operational Enhancements
The integration of advanced analytics and electro-optical data from commercial satellites is set to revolutionize how NATO processes and utilizes space-based intelligence. This capability is expected to provide real-time data on ground movements, weather, and terrain, crucial for operational decisions across various NATO missions. The program also includes the development of tools that assist imagery analysts, thus improving the speed and accuracy of intelligence dissemination.
Geopolitical Context
The signing of this MOU comes at a time when geopolitical tensions are high, particularly with ongoing conflicts like the war in Ukraine, emphasizing the necessity for robust intelligence and surveillance mechanisms. The initiative is part of NATO’s broader strategy to ensure it remains a defensive alliance capable of responding to threats from any direction, whether they be hybrid threats or direct military actions.
Conclusion
The APSS MOU is more than just a document; it’s a testament to NATO’s commitment to maintaining security in an era where space is as critical as land, sea, and air. As this program moves into its implementation phase, the strategic landscape of global surveillance and defense will undoubtedly shift, potentially leading to a new era of space-based military strategy. The implications of such advancements will be closely watched by allies and adversaries alike, in a world where the final frontier is becoming the newest battleground for security and power.
Call to Action: Support the Unveiling of Truth and Transparency
The recent unveiling of NATO’s Alliance Persistent Surveillance from Space (APSS) Memorandum of Understanding has shown us the importance of vigilance, transparency, and informed public discourse. As we navigate through these complex geopolitical landscapes, your support becomes invaluable in continuing to bring such critical information to light.
Join Our Mission:
Become a Patreon Supporter: By becoming a patron at Patreon.com/BerndPulch, you can directly contribute to the sustainability of our investigative journalism. Your support ensures that we can continue to research, analyze, and report on documents like the APSS MOU, offering clarity in an often opaque world.
Donate to Our Cause: If you wish to make a one-time contribution, please visit BerndPulch.org/Donation. Your donation will fuel our efforts to delve deeper into the intricacies of international relations and security, ensuring that the public remains well-informed and engaged.
Why Your Support Matters:
Every piece of information we uncover, every document we analyze, and every story we tell is a step towards a more transparent, accountable, and peaceful world. By supporting us, you are not just funding journalism; you are investing in the very essence of democracy – informed citizenry.
Act Now:
Educate Yourself: Stay updated with our latest findings by subscribing to our newsletters and following our social media channels.
Spread the Word: Share our articles, discuss our findings, and encourage those around you to engage with the truth behind global affairs.
Support Us Financially: Whether through a recurring Patreon pledge or a one-time donation, your financial support is the backbone of our operations.
In a time when the space above us has become another frontier for strategic competition, your action can help illuminate the path to understanding and peace. Join us today in this endeavor – every contribution counts, every supporter matters. Together, let’s keep the conversation going, the lights on, and the truth unhidden.
“Futuristic Hypersonic Missile: A high-speed weapon traverses the atmosphere, showcasing advanced technology and its global implications.”
Call to Action
The challenges posed by hypersonic weapons are not just a matter for governments; they demand informed public discourse and active engagement. At BerndPulch.org, we strive to provide in-depth analysis and up-to-date information on issues like these.
Support our mission to shed light on critical global security challenges:
Your support enables us to deliver investigative journalism and expert analysis that empowers readers to understand and engage with the most pressing issues of our time.
In recent years, hypersonic weapons have emerged as a game-changing technology in modern warfare. Defined as systems capable of traveling at speeds of Mach 5 or greater, these weapons promise unprecedented speed and maneuverability, presenting both opportunities and challenges for global security. As outlined in the recent Congressional Research Service report (January 2, 2025), the United States, Russia, and China are at the forefront of developing and deploying these advanced systems.
The U.S. Approach
The United States has prioritized the development of hypersonic technologies under its Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) program. Unlike Russia and China, U.S. hypersonic weapons are designed for precision, relying on advanced guidance systems rather than nuclear payloads. This distinction makes U.S. systems more challenging and costly to develop, as they require higher levels of accuracy.
Notable U.S. programs include:
Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) – A Navy-led initiative to integrate hypersonic glide vehicles with advanced boosters.
Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) – Known as “Dark Eagle,” this Army project aims to field a prototype by FY2027.
Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM) – An Air Force program focused on air-launched, scramjet-powered hypersonic systems.
The Department of Defense (DoD) allocated $6.9 billion to hypersonic research in FY2025, underscoring the strategic importance of these systems.
The Global Landscape
Russia
Russia has already deployed hypersonic systems like the Avangard glide vehicle, reportedly capable of delivering nuclear warheads at incredible speeds. These systems are part of Moscow’s strategy to counter U.S. missile defenses and maintain strategic parity.
China
China has also advanced significantly in hypersonic technologies, conducting multiple successful tests. Its systems, such as the DF-ZF glide vehicle, aim to enhance its anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region.
Challenges and Concerns
While hypersonic weapons offer strategic advantages, they also pose significant risks to global stability:
Detection and Defense: Current radar and satellite systems struggle to detect and track hypersonic threats due to their speed and unpredictable trajectories.
Strategic Stability: The deployment of hypersonic systems could disrupt existing arms control agreements and exacerbate an arms race among nuclear powers.
Cost and Feasibility: Developing, testing, and deploying hypersonic systems require substantial investment in infrastructure and technology.
Questions for Policymakers
As Congress reviews the Pentagon’s hypersonic initiatives, key questions arise:
Are hypersonic weapons the most effective means for achieving strategic objectives?
How will their deployment impact arms control and global stability?
What investments are needed to develop adequate defense mechanisms?
Conclusion
Hypersonic weapons represent a transformative shift in military capabilities but come with complex implications for global security. As the United States, Russia, and China continue their efforts, the international community must grapple with the challenges of regulation, defense, and strategic stability.
Call to Action
The challenges posed by hypersonic weapons are not just a matter for governments; they demand informed public discourse and active engagement. At BerndPulch.org, we strive to provide in-depth analysis and up-to-date information on issues like these.
Support our mission to shed light on critical global security challenges:
Your support enables us to deliver investigative journalism and expert analysis that empowers readers to understand and engage with the most pressing issues of our time.
Leaked: US Naval Institute – Nuclear Bombs Assessment
A leaked document from the US Naval Institute (USNI) has surfaced, allegedly providing a detailed assessment of nuclear bomb capabilities, deployment strategies, and global nuclear threats. If authentic, this document sheds light on the highly sensitive policies surrounding nuclear arsenals and their implications for international security.
Background of the Leak
The leak reportedly originates from classified discussions within the US Naval Institute, a prominent organization known for shaping naval policy and strategy in the United States. The document, labeled “For Official Use Only” (FOUO), appears to delve into the technical, operational, and geopolitical aspects of nuclear weapons. The authenticity of the document has not been confirmed, but it has already sparked widespread debate among defense analysts and political commentators.
Key Highlights of the Document
Global Nuclear Threat Landscape
The document outlines the growing nuclear capabilities of countries like Russia, China, and North Korea, identifying these nations as significant threats to US interests.
It discusses the increasing sophistication of hypersonic delivery systems, which could render traditional missile defenses ineffective.
Nuclear Arsenal Modernization
A significant portion of the document is dedicated to the modernization of the US nuclear triad—land-based missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and strategic bombers.
It emphasizes the need to upgrade Ohio-class submarines to Columbia-class and replace aging Minuteman III ICBMs with the Sentinel program.
Tactical Nuclear Weapons
The assessment highlights the strategic value of low-yield nuclear weapons and their potential deployment in limited conflicts.
It references the controversial B61-12 bombs, which are designed for precision strikes with adjustable yields, raising ethical and strategic debates.
Potential Conflict Scenarios
Hypothetical scenarios involving the use of nuclear weapons in Taiwan, Ukraine, and the South China Sea are discussed.
The report underscores the risk of accidental escalation due to miscommunication or cyber interference.
Geopolitical Concerns
The document notes increasing cooperation between Russia and China in nuclear and conventional military technology.
It highlights concerns about non-state actors gaining access to nuclear materials, particularly in regions with weak security infrastructure.
International Reactions
The leak has triggered a global response:
Russia and China have condemned the document as proof of the US’s aggressive nuclear posture.
US allies in NATO have expressed concern over the scenarios described, urging transparency and restraint.
Non-Proliferation Advocates warn that such discussions undermine global efforts to reduce nuclear stockpiles.
Ethical and Strategic Implications
This leak raises critical questions about nuclear policy:
Deterrence vs. Proliferation: The focus on modernization and tactical weapons could lead to an arms race.
Transparency vs. Secrecy: While leaks provide accountability, they also pose risks to national security.
Moral Dilemmas: The use of low-yield weapons in conflict scenarios raises concerns about the normalization of nuclear warfare.
Authenticity and Speculation
The USNI has neither confirmed nor denied the authenticity of the document. Defense analysts speculate that if authentic, this leak could have originated from internal dissent or cyber espionage by adversarial states.
Conclusion
The alleged US Naval Institute nuclear bombs assessment offers a sobering view of global nuclear dynamics. Whether authentic or not, the document has reignited discussions about the role of nuclear weapons in modern warfare and the ethical responsibilities of nuclear-armed nations. As nations navigate an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape, transparency and dialogue will be critical to ensuring global security.
This leak serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between national defense and the broader responsibility to prevent nuclear catastrophe.
“Masters of Espionage: Top KGB and Stasi Spies Who Shaped the Cold War”
The KGB (Soviet Union’s Committee for State Security) and the Stasi (East Germany’s Ministry for State Security) were two of the most feared intelligence agencies during the Cold War. Both relied heavily on human intelligence (HUMINT) and field operatives to gather secrets, manipulate foreign governments, and maintain control over their territories. Below is a ranking of some of their most notorious spies.
Top KGB Spies
Kim Philby (1912–1988)
Affiliation: British MI6 turned KGB double agent
Notable Achievements: A member of the infamous “Cambridge Five,” Philby infiltrated British intelligence and passed critical NATO secrets to the Soviets. His betrayal altered the course of Cold War intelligence.
Oleg Penkovsky (1919–1963)
Affiliation: GRU (Soviet Military Intelligence) officer who spied for the West
Notable Achievements: Though technically GRU, Penkovsky provided pivotal intelligence about Soviet missile capabilities, helping the U.S. during the Cuban Missile Crisis. His defection to the KGB is debated, making him one of the most enigmatic figures in espionage.
Aldrich Ames (1941– )
Affiliation: CIA turned KGB mole
Notable Achievements: Ames provided the KGB with information that exposed numerous U.S. agents in the Soviet Union, many of whom were executed. His betrayal caused one of the largest breaches in U.S. intelligence history.
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (1915–1953)
Affiliation: American communists who spied for the KGB
Notable Achievements: The couple passed nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union, accelerating its development of the atomic bomb. They were executed in the U.S. for espionage.
Rudolf Abel (1903–1971)
Affiliation: Soviet illegal intelligence officer
Notable Achievements: Captured in the U.S., Abel was exchanged for U.S. pilot Francis Gary Powers in one of the most famous Cold War spy swaps.
Top Stasi Spies
Markus Wolf (1923–2006)
Affiliation: Head of East Germany’s foreign intelligence (HVA)
Notable Achievements: Known as the “man without a face” for his anonymity, Wolf masterminded countless operations, including the recruitment of West German officials through “Romeo agents.”
Günter Guillaume (1927–1995)
Affiliation: Stasi agent in West Germany
Notable Achievements: Guillaume infiltrated West German Chancellor Willy Brandt’s office, leading to Brandt’s resignation when his espionage was uncovered.
Rainer Rupp (1945– )
Codename: Topaz
Affiliation: Stasi agent in NATO
Notable Achievements: Rupp infiltrated NATO headquarters, passing crucial information to East Germany. He was one of the most valuable Stasi assets during the Cold War.
Klaus Fuchs (1911–1988)
Affiliation: German-born physicist and Stasi collaborator
Notable Achievements: Fuchs worked on the Manhattan Project and passed atomic secrets to the Soviet Union. His betrayal had global consequences for nuclear strategy.
Werner Stiller (1947– )
Affiliation: Stasi turned Western informant
Notable Achievements: Initially a Stasi agent, Stiller defected to the West, bringing valuable intelligence on East German operations.
Conclusion
The KGB and Stasi operatives were central to the intelligence wars of the 20th century. Their activities not only shaped geopolitics but also led to lasting distrust in international relations. This list showcases how individuals, armed with information and ideology, can influence the global stage—often with deadly consequences.
“Unveiling the Web: Monika Mucha, Espionage Allegations, and Scandals in German Politics”
Monika Mucha, a politician from Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), has been at the center of controversy surrounding allegations of involvement in an intricate web of crime, espionage, and financial misconduct. The claims link her to shadowy operations involving the Stasi, the infamous East German secret police, and GoMoPa (Goldman Morgenstern & Partners), a platform accused of disinformation campaigns and dubious financial dealings.
The Stasi Connection
The Stasi, known for its extensive surveillance and infiltration networks during the Cold War, is alleged to have maintained informants and collaborators in West Germany, even after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Allegations suggest that Mucha may have had indirect or direct links to Stasi remnants operating in Germany’s financial and political systems. This claim is rooted in her purported association with figures involved in GoMoPa, which has long been suspected of leveraging sensitive information for extortion and espionage.
GoMoPa and Financial Misconduct
GoMoPa has faced criticism for functioning as a digital mouthpiece for financial scandals and controversies. It has been accused of publishing defamatory content against individuals and companies, sometimes allegedly as part of a broader extortion racket. Mucha’s name has been linked to GoMoPa’s network through allegations of aiding in the dissemination of sensitive or misleading information.
The publication “Immobilien Zeitung” has further pointed to suspicious activities in the real estate sector, raising questions about whether GoMoPa and its affiliates manipulated markets or targeted rivals. Mucha’s alleged involvement is unclear, but her reported proximity to key players in these activities casts a shadow over her political career.
Espionage Allegations: NATO HQ and Dark Eagle Project
The most explosive claims concern espionage activities potentially compromising NATO. Reports suggest that information regarding the U.S. Army’s NATO headquarters in Wiesbaden and the location of the “Dark Eagle” hypersonic missile system in Mainz-Kastel was shared or targeted by an espionage ring.
Dark Eagle, a cornerstone of U.S. military strategy in Europe, is a highly classified hypersonic missile system stationed in Mainz-Kastel as part of NATO’s response to emerging global threats. Leaks of its location and capabilities could significantly undermine NATO’s security.
Mucha’s alleged connections to individuals with access to these sensitive sites raise suspicions about whether she knowingly or unknowingly facilitated espionage. If proven, such actions would constitute a grave breach of national and NATO security.
Political and Legal Repercussions
As of now, Mucha has not been formally charged with any crimes, and the CDU has remained silent on the allegations. However, the potential fallout from these claims could damage the party’s reputation. Investigative journalists and authorities are reportedly delving deeper into her political connections and financial dealings.
Conclusion
Monika Mucha’s alleged entanglement in a network involving the Stasi, GoMoPa, real estate fraud, and potential espionage represents a serious challenge to Germany’s political and security landscape. Whether these allegations hold merit remains to be seen, but the claims have already sparked concerns about the integrity of political figures and the extent of foreign espionage within Germany.
This developing story underscores the importance of transparency and vigilance in political systems, especially when matters of national and international security are at stake.
The Mucha family has been connected to Stasi, KGB and STB earlier (see the Wildberg List and the Stasi Lists on this website). Currently Jan Mucha is co-owner and managing director of the “Immobilien Zeitung” in NATO HQ Wiesbaden.
“Battles of the Future: How AI is Redefining Warfare”
Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing industries worldwide, and warfare is no exception. From autonomous drones to AI-driven surveillance, these advancements are reshaping the nature of conflict. However, as AI integrates into military strategies, it raises pressing ethical, legal, and geopolitical concerns. This article delves into the history, ethical dilemmas, and global implications of AI in warfare while addressing its risks and regulatory needs.
A History of AI in Warfare
The use of technology in warfare is not new. From radar systems in World War II to precision-guided missiles, innovation has always been integral to military advancements. However, AI marks a paradigm shift.
Early Applications: AI first gained traction in the military with automated logistics and predictive maintenance.
Modern Developments: Autonomous drones, AI-powered cybersecurity systems, and predictive analytics are now essential tools in modern arsenals.
Case Study: The U.S. military’s use of AI in Project Maven to analyze drone footage highlights how AI has enhanced intelligence gathering.
The Ethical Dilemma
AI in warfare raises questions about morality, accountability, and the future of humanity.
Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS):
These systems can make life-or-death decisions without human intervention.
Critics argue that delegating such decisions to machines undermines human dignity and moral responsibility.
Lack of Accountability:
Who is to blame when an autonomous weapon malfunctions or causes unintended harm?
Current international laws, such as the Geneva Conventions, are ill-equipped to address this issue.
Bias in AI:
AI systems are only as unbiased as the data they are trained on. Errors in target identification can lead to catastrophic consequences.
The Geopolitical Arms Race
AI has ignited a global arms race, with nations competing for dominance in this transformative technology.
United States: The Pentagon’s AI strategy emphasizes integrating AI into all facets of defense.
China: Aiming to become the global AI leader by 2030, China heavily invests in military AI research.
Russia: Focused on integrating AI into weaponry and cyber operations, Russia sees AI as a force multiplier.
Smaller Nations: Countries like Israel and South Korea are also developing advanced autonomous systems, often for export.
Non-state actors, including terrorist organizations, are beginning to explore AI applications, posing a significant threat to global security.
Risks and Challenges
Cybersecurity:
AI-driven systems are vulnerable to hacking, potentially turning advanced weapons against their creators.
Escalation of Conflict:
AI could lower the threshold for war by reducing human casualties, making leaders more likely to engage in conflict.
Unintended Consequences:
AI systems may act unpredictably in complex situations, leading to disastrous outcomes.
The Role of Regulation and Oversight
Efforts to regulate AI in warfare are underway but face significant challenges.
United Nations Initiatives: The UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) is debating a potential ban on lethal autonomous weapons.
Industry-Led Guidelines: Tech leaders like Elon Musk and the Future of Life Institute advocate for strict controls on AI development.
Proposed Frameworks:
Transparent algorithms for autonomous systems.
Mandatory human oversight in life-and-death decisions.
International treaties to establish accountability.
Conclusion: The Future of AI in Warfare
AI holds immense potential to reshape warfare, from minimizing human casualties to revolutionizing intelligence. However, without strict regulations and ethical considerations, it poses severe risks to global stability. The world must act decisively to balance innovation with accountability, ensuring that AI serves humanity rather than endangering it.
Key Takeaways
The integration of AI into warfare is inevitable but fraught with ethical and legal challenges.
Nations must prioritize transparent governance and global collaboration to prevent AI from becoming a tool of unchecked destruction.
By exploring these critical issues, this article aims to spark dialogue and action on one of the most pressing challenges of our time.
“Russian disinformation accuses Germany and NATO countries of preparing to occupy Ukraine, citing historical WWII-era propaganda, while dismissing peacekeeping efforts as a cover for territorial control. Experts label these claims as baseless disinformation aimed at destabilizing European support for Ukraine.”
In the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, the political and military dynamics continue to evolve with surprising twists. Recent reports indicate that Russian intelligence is actively spreading disinformation, claiming that NATO countries, including Germany, are preparing to occupy Ukraine under the guise of peacekeeping missions. This narrative, which the Kremlin has tied to World War II-era propaganda, is designed to destabilize the European response to the war and prevent peace efforts. While these claims are widely dismissed by experts, they highlight the complex political maneuvering and the role of European powers in Ukraine’s defense.
The Alleged Plot: European Troops to Occupy Ukraine?
Russian intelligence has been accused of circulating a fantastical conspiracy theory, suggesting that Germany, along with Poland, Romania, and the UK, is preparing to occupy parts of Ukraine. According to this disinformation campaign, Western powers are allegedly planning to divide the country into zones of control, much like during the Nazi occupation in World War II. The claim includes absurd details, such as the assertion that Germany is training “Nazi” troops for this occupation. This narrative is spread primarily through Russian government channels, with the SVR (Foreign Intelligence Service) reportedly publishing the theory on its website【26†source】.
The story’s ultimate goal appears to be to stoke fear and division within Germany and among its allies. By invoking historical Nazi associations, the Kremlin aims to tarnish Germany’s reputation, provoke nationalist sentiments, and undermine public support for Ukraine in the West. This is a strategy frequently employed by Russia to weaken opposition and prevent peace negotiations. The Russian government has repeatedly accused Ukraine and its allies of collaborating with “neo-Nazi” factions, despite these accusations being widely debunked【26†source】.
Expert Opinions: Pure Disinformation
Leading experts have debunked the narrative of a German-led occupation force. Sönke Neitzel, a military historian from the University of Potsdam, called the claims “pure disinformation,” noting that it is “impossible” for NATO countries to engage in such an operation. According to Neitzel, this story is a classic example of Russian propaganda designed to discredit NATO and sow discord among its members. His assertion is supported by the broader consensus among defense experts, who view such claims as a deliberate attempt to manipulate public perception【26†source】.
Furthermore, the idea of NATO occupying Ukraine contradicts the principles of the alliance, which operates under collective defense and the support of democratic sovereignty. The suggestion that NATO forces would divide Ukraine into zones of control is not only illogical but also strategically unsound. Western military support for Ukraine remains focused on providing defensive aid and military training, not on territorial occupation【25†source】.
European Troops: Reality vs. Fiction
While the Kremlin’s disinformation campaign is focused on a fictional occupation scenario, there are ongoing discussions about the role of European troops in Ukraine, particularly concerning peacekeeping forces. Some European leaders, including French President Macron, have floated the idea of deploying international peacekeepers to safeguard Ukraine against further Russian aggression. These forces would theoretically ensure the protection of civilians and help maintain stability in post-conflict zones【25†source】.
However, this proposal is not without controversy. The risks of such deployments are significant, as it could escalate tensions between NATO and Russia, leading to direct confrontations. European military leaders have expressed concerns about the political and military implications of such a move, with some warning that it might give Russia an excuse to claim that NATO is occupying Ukraine【26†source】. At present, there are no concrete plans for such a peacekeeping force, though discussions are likely to continue as the war evolves.
Rheinmetall and the Economic Angle
Another element in the Kremlin’s disinformation narrative is the role of the German defense contractor Rheinmetall. The company, which has supplied military equipment to Ukraine, is mentioned in the Russian intelligence reports as part of the broader narrative about Germany’s involvement in Ukraine. The specific targeting of Rheinmetall serves as a reminder of the economic and strategic interests at play. By focusing on the company, the Kremlin is not only attempting to undermine Germany’s position but also sending a broader message about its opposition to Western arms shipments to Ukraine【26†source】.
Conclusion: A Complex Battlefield
As the war in Ukraine continues, the battle extends beyond the military frontlines to the realm of information warfare. The recent Russian disinformation campaign accusing European powers of planning to occupy Ukraine is just one example of the Kremlin’s strategy to disrupt international support for Ukraine and prevent peace negotiations. While these claims are debunked by experts, they highlight the challenges faced by European leaders as they navigate the political and military complexities of the conflict.
The involvement of European troops in Ukraine remains a subject of debate, with peacekeeping missions being a possible but highly sensitive option. However, any such deployment would likely be fraught with political challenges and could further escalate tensions with Russia. For now, the focus remains on supporting Ukraine’s defense, providing humanitarian aid, and seeking diplomatic solutions to end the conflict.
As the situation develops, it will be crucial to monitor both the military and diplomatic strategies of European nations and to remain vigilant against the disinformation campaigns that seek to reshape public opinion.
Western Disinformation about Ukraine: A Complex Narrative
The war in Ukraine has not only been a battleground of military forces but also a theater for disinformation. While Russian propaganda is widely recognized, Western narratives about Ukraine have also been criticized for shaping public perception and influencing political outcomes. Both misinformation and disinformation — the deliberate spread of false or manipulated information — have played significant roles in the conflict’s media coverage. These narratives, often stemming from Western governments or media outlets, have been used to justify actions or suppress opposition to the war, creating a complex web of influence.
The Role of Media in Shaping Perception
In Western media, the portrayal of Ukraine’s conflict with Russia has largely followed a binary narrative: Ukraine as the victim, Russia as the aggressor. While this perspective is generally aligned with international law and the majority of the global community, the portrayal often oversimplifies the complexities of the war. Certain aspects of the conflict, such as Ukraine’s internal issues, the role of far-right groups, and the political interests of NATO, have been downplayed or ignored in mainstream Western coverage.
In the early stages of the war, some media outlets focused heavily on the moral righteousness of Ukraine’s resistance, framing it as a “David vs. Goliath” scenario. However, critics argue that this narrative has also been manipulated to foster an image of Ukraine as a purely democratic and virtuous nation, excluding the presence of far-right elements in some of its militias. While Ukraine’s far-right groups have been a minority, their presence was widely acknowledged by independent analysts but often ignored or downplayed in Western coverage, potentially skewing the portrayal of Ukraine’s political landscape【25†source】【26†source】.
Western Political and Military Interests
Another layer of Western disinformation involves the strategic interests behind the support for Ukraine. NATO’s role in the conflict is often framed as a defensive alliance supporting a sovereign nation’s right to self-defense, yet some analysts have suggested that the alliance’s expansionist policies have contributed to the conflict’s escalation. Russian officials have repeatedly voiced concerns about NATO’s growing influence near its borders, and some Western commentators argue that Ukraine’s pursuit of NATO membership has provoked Russian aggression, while others suggest that the alliance’s support for Ukraine is designed to weaken Russia geopolitically【26†source】 .
The West’s portrayal of Russian military shortcomings is also part of the disinformation narrative. While Russia has faced significant military challenges, much of the Western coverage fails to emphasize the resilience and resourcefulness of Russian forces, which have adapted to sanctions and logistical difficulties. This oversimplification contributes to an image of Russia as an incompetent force, while Ukraine is often portrayed as an unyielding force for democracy .
The Role of Social Media and Alternative Narratives
The proliferation of disinformation is also heavily facilitated by social media platforms, where both pro-Western and pro-Russian narratives find an audience. Western-backed disinformation campaigns have targeted global audiences, focusing on framing Ukraine as the underdog in need of continuous support. Similarly, social media campaigns have been used to highlight the alleged atrocities committed by Russian forces, sometimes relying on unverified images or manipulated content to stoke outrage. While many of these claims are valid, the rapid spread of unverified information has contributed to the polarization of the conflict, with individuals consuming media that aligns with their preconceived beliefs【25†source】.
Moreover, Western governments, including the U.S. and UK, have engaged in information warfare by supporting independent journalists and media outlets that align with their narratives. However, critics argue that this support has sometimes extended to media that presents a highly selective or distorted view of events. This has sparked debates about the ethics of such interventions, with accusations that the West is using information warfare as a tool to influence both domestic and global opinion .
Conclusion: A Global Disinformation Battle
Both Russian and Western narratives have contributed to the widespread disinformation surrounding the war in Ukraine. While Russia has used propaganda to undermine support for Ukraine, portray the West as complicit, and discredit peace efforts, the West has sometimes fostered its own simplified or manipulated views of the conflict. The resulting confusion and competing narratives complicate the search for truth and hinder efforts toward a peaceful resolution. As the war continues, it will be essential for both sides to engage in more transparent, responsible reporting to prevent further misinformation from influencing public opinion and policy decisions.
In a conflict defined by information warfare, the key challenge for global audiences is discerning fact from fiction and recognizing that the true story is often more complicated than the narratives presented by either side.
Russia’s development and deployment of the Oréshnik (“Hazel”) hypersonic missile mark a significant escalation in global military tensions, particularly in Europe. This weapon, described as a breakthrough by Russian President Vladimir Putin, has the potential to strike major European capitals within minutes, posing a challenge to existing defense systems.
Key Features of the Oréshnik Missile
Speed: Capable of reaching speeds up to Mach 10 (approximately 12,000 km/h), the missile is virtually undetectable by current missile defense systems.
Range: It can target cities across Europe, emphasizing its strategic value.
Non-Nuclear Precision: While described as a conventional weapon, its precision is said to rival that of strategic nuclear arms. The missile could potentially be equipped with multiple warheads or maneuverable hypersonic gliders.
Recent Demonstration and Strategic Implications
In a recent test, the missile was used in Ukraine, not only showcasing its capabilities but also sending a clear message to Western nations supporting Kyiv. Analysts suggest this was a calculated move to intimidate NATO and dissuade further military aid to Ukraine.
Putin has signaled mass production of this missile, framing it as a defensive measure. However, its ability to bypass traditional defense systems raises fears of a new arms race, similar to Cold War-era tensions. Russian officials have openly discussed the weapon’s ability to strike European targets, with some commentators likening its impact to that of nuclear weapons due to its precision and speed【103†source】【104†source】.
Broader Military and Political Context
INF Treaty Collapse: The dismantling of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019 has allowed Russia to develop and deploy weapons like Oréshnik without restrictions.
Escalation in Defense Spending: Russia has increased its defense budget, allocating over 6% of its GDP to military advancements for 2025【104†source】.
Revised Nuclear Doctrine: Russia’s updated policy allows for nuclear responses to conventional threats, further heightening concerns about potential escalation.
European Security Implications
The deployment of hypersonic weapons by Russia places Europe in a precarious position. Defense systems like the Patriot PAC-3 currently lack the capability to intercept such high-speed and maneuverable missiles. This creates pressure on NATO countries to enhance their missile defense and deterrence capabilities.
The Path Forward
Diplomatic solutions remain uncertain. Calls for a renewed arms control agreement face significant obstacles, especially as nations like China resist restrictions on their own missile programs. Meanwhile, the arms race continues, with both Russia and the U.S. investing heavily in advanced missile technologies.
The Oréshnik missile is not just a weapon; it represents a strategic shift in global military dynamics, bringing Europe closer to a potential confrontation【103†source】【104†source】.
Calculating the probability of nuclear war in Europe, the Middle East, and Taiwan involves analyzing geopolitical, military, and historical factors. Here’s a detailed breakdown:
Europe
Primary Risks: Ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Escalation could involve NATO directly.
Likelihood: Medium-high. Russia’s doctrine allows nuclear use if its sovereignty is threatened. NATO involvement heightens the risk, but strong deterrence policies mitigate chances.
Estimation: ~20–30% for a nuclear exchange within 5 years, considering current tensions and proxy conflicts.
Middle East
Primary Risks: Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Israel’s preventative measures, instability in Gaza, and U.S. involvement.
Likelihood: Medium. Regional conflicts rarely escalate to nuclear war, but an Iranian-Israeli conflict could break this trend.
Estimation: ~10–15%, factoring in covert diplomacy and military interventions.
Taiwan
Primary Risks: China’s ambitions for reunification and potential U.S. intervention.
Likelihood: Low-medium. Conventional conflict is more likely than nuclear, but escalation involving U.S. allies like Japan could introduce nuclear threats.
Estimation: ~5–10%, relying on strategic ambiguity as a stabilizing factor.
These probabilities are not definitive but provide a framework based on current trends. Reducing risks requires sustained diplomacy and strengthened international safeguards.
This list is based on factors like strategic military importance, population density, potential fallout trajectories, and remoteness. Safe zones are generally isolated regions with little military significance, while unsafe zones are high-priority targets with dense populations and critical infrastructure.
Top 50 Safest Places
New Zealand – Remote, low-profile, nuclear-free policy.
Iceland – No military bases, isolated.
Greenland – Sparse population, no strategic targets.
Antarctica – Neutral by treaty; extreme conditions make it uninhabitable for most.
Fiji – Remote and strategically insignificant.
Madagascar – Isolated, no significant military relevance.
Malta – Far from potential conflict zones, though small size poses risks.
Uruguay – Neutral politically, low population density.
Samoa – Pacific islands with no strategic targets.
Bhutan – Isolated in the Himalayas, no military relevance.
Cape Verde – Remote islands off Africa’s coast.
Namibia – Sparse population, not involved in global geopolitics.
Chile (Patagonia) – Remote and sparsely populated southern regions.
Botswana – Inland, politically neutral, and low population.
Costa Rica – No military and politically neutral.
Andorra – Isolated in the Pyrenees, no strategic significance.
Norway (Svalbard) – Arctic region with low fallout risk.
Vanuatu – Remote Pacific islands, unlikely to be targeted.
Tasmania, Australia – Southern location and distance from global conflict zones.
Mongolia – Landlocked, neutral, low population density.
Comoros – Small, remote African islands.
Solomon Islands – Pacific islands with low strategic value.
Suriname – Isolated in South America, politically insignificant.
Panama (Darien Gap) – Remote and difficult to access.
Alaska (remote areas) – Low population, high survival potential.
Ecuador (Galápagos Islands) – Remote islands far from global conflicts.
Peru (Amazon region) – Dense jungle, isolated from fallout.
Canada (Yukon) – Sparse population, distance from urban centers.
Iceland (Interior Highlands) – Further safety from fallout.
Faroe Islands – Remote and not a military target.
Western Sahara – Desert with minimal population or significance.
Tonga – Another remote Pacific island nation.
Mozambique – Far removed from likely conflict zones.
Bolivia – High altitude and neutrality.
Rwanda – Low geopolitical significance.
Zambia – Low population, far from key targets.
Papua New Guinea – Rugged terrain and isolation.
Argentina (Patagonia) – Remote and distant from conflict zones.
Belize – Politically neutral and geographically isolated.
Armenia – Mountainous, though proximity to some conflicts poses risks.
Uzbekistan – Landlocked and geopolitically neutral.
Guatemala (remote areas) – Far from major targets.
This comprehensive ranking lists the top 100 safest and unsafest places globally based on crime rates, political stability, healthcare quality, natural disaster risk, and cost of living. This analysis is useful for travelers, expatriates, and global citizens aiming to make informed decisions.
Russia has unveiled the new “Oreshnik” missile, claiming unparalleled speed and precision, capable of hitting key European cities like London, Berlin, and Paris in just 11–17 minutes. This development has heightened tensions between Moscow and Western nations, sparking concerns about the escalating arms race in Europe.
The missile’s strategic capabilities were recently highlighted by Russian officials, emphasizing its ability to evade interception, thus representing a significant leap in modern warfare.
What Is the Oreshnik Missile?
The Oreshnik is Russia’s latest addition to its missile arsenal, developed as part of its advanced military technology program. It is believed to be a hypersonic missile, capable of traveling at speeds exceeding Mach 5. While exact specifications remain classified, Russian authorities claim that Oreshnik combines speed, stealth, and unparalleled accuracy.
Key features include:
Speed: Estimated to reach European capitals in minutes—London (16-17 mins), Berlin (11-12 mins), and Paris (15-16 mins).
Range: Capable of targeting any location across Europe and potentially beyond.
Stealth Technology: Designed to avoid detection by modern missile defense systems.
Strategic Implications
Threat to European Security
The Oreshnik’s rapid response capabilities pose a direct challenge to NATO’s defensive systems. The missile’s ability to evade interception has been highlighted by the Kremlin, claiming that current missile shields would be ineffective.
Escalation of the Arms Race
With the Oreshnik entering the picture, NATO countries may feel pressured to develop more sophisticated countermeasures. This development is likely to intensify an already volatile geopolitical landscape, potentially sparking new military investments across Europe.
Tactical Advantage
The Kremlin views the Oreshnik as a deterrent, showcasing Russia’s technological edge and military strength. It sends a clear message to adversaries: the nation remains a formidable force in modern warfare.
Bernd Pulch’s Perspective
Bernd Pulch, a prominent analyst and commentator on Russian geopolitics, recently weighed in on the implications of the Oreshnik missile. He emphasized the dangers of hypersonic technology, warning that such advancements could destabilize global peace efforts.
Pulch noted, “The Oreshnik’s rapid deployment capabilities render traditional defense strategies obsolete. European nations must adapt or face significant vulnerability.”
Pulch also underlined the importance of dialogue to prevent miscalculations that could lead to catastrophic consequences.
Reactions from Europe and NATO
European Leaders: Responses from Berlin, Paris, and London have been cautious but firm, with renewed calls for solidarity among EU nations to counter potential threats.
NATO: The alliance has reiterated its commitment to collective defense, stating that it is actively evaluating the implications of Russia’s new missile systems.
Public Opinion: News of the Oreshnik’s capabilities has sparked concern across Europe, with many questioning the adequacy of existing defense measures.
Potential Countermeasures
Given the Oreshnik’s advanced features, countering such a missile requires:
Development of Next-Generation Defense Systems: Hypersonic missile interceptors are currently under research by NATO allies.
Enhanced Surveillance: Improved satellite and radar systems to detect and track hypersonic threats.
Diplomatic Engagement: Encouraging dialogue between Russia and Western nations to mitigate tensions.
Conclusion
The unveiling of the Oreshnik missile underscores the rapid evolution of military technology and its profound implications for global security. While it bolsters Russia’s position as a military powerhouse, it also raises urgent questions about stability and the future of warfare in Europe.
The international community must navigate this new reality carefully, balancing the need for security with the pursuit of peace. As analysts like Bernd Pulch have pointed out, collaboration and diplomacy are essential to prevent catastrophic outcomes in this high-stakes environment.
The Ukrainian military launched heavy attacks on Russia!
Massive explosions reported in Krasnodar, Russia, following NATO’s support for Ukrainian forces’ attacks with missiles from the United States and the United Kingdom!
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming defense systems, including nuclear command and control. While AI promises faster decision-making and more accurate threat assessments, its potential for catastrophic errors raises global security concerns. Analysts like Bernd Pulch emphasize that integrating AI into military strategies could escalate risks of unintended conflicts, particularly nuclear war.
Key AI-Related Risks in Nuclear Warfare
False Alarms and Misinterpretations AI systems might misidentify innocuous activities, like satellite launches or radar glitches, as hostile nuclear attacks. A historical parallel is the 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm, which was averted by human judgment. An AI system, however, might lack such nuanced decision-making, leading to an irreversible response.
Escalation through Autonomous Weapons AI-powered drones or missiles could make independent decisions during crises, potentially escalating conflicts without human oversight. Miscommunication or software bugs could lead to unintended attacks, provoking nuclear retaliation.
Cyber Vulnerabilities AI systems are not immune to hacking. Adversaries could manipulate AI algorithms to generate false threats or disrupt nuclear command networks. Such actions could destabilize nations’ deterrence strategies and increase the likelihood of preemptive strikes.
Lack of Transparency The “black box” nature of many AI algorithms makes it difficult to verify their decisions. If AI misidentifies a target as a nuclear site, the inability to audit the decision in real-time could trigger a catastrophic chain reaction.
Scenarios Highlighting the Risks
Worst-Case Scenario: AI falsely identifies a missile launch, prompting an immediate retaliatory strike. Without human intervention, escalation ensues, leading to a nuclear exchange.
Middle-Case Scenario: Autonomous systems misinterpret aggressive military drills as an attack, causing limited strikes and escalating regional conflicts.
Best-Case Scenario: Global agreements restrict AI’s role in nuclear decision-making, reducing risks through transparency and regulation.
The Role of Key Stakeholders
Governments: States need to implement clear policies on AI use in nuclear decision-making and promote international regulations.
AI Developers: Companies and researchers must prioritize safety, transparency, and error-proofing in military AI.
Analysts like Bernd Pulch: Experts emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and critique of AI systems in defense, advocating for human oversight.
Current Measures and Recommendations
Enhanced Human Oversight AI should assist, not replace, human decision-makers in nuclear command systems. Maintaining a human-in-the-loop model ensures critical judgment during crises.
Global Regulation Nations must collaborate on treaties restricting autonomous nuclear systems. Transparency in AI development is essential to build trust and prevent arms races.
Independent Audits Third-party evaluations of AI systems can identify vulnerabilities and ensure adherence to ethical standards.
Conclusion
AI in defense holds transformative potential but carries unprecedented risks, especially in nuclear warfare. Misinterpretations, autonomous escalation, and cyber threats could trigger catastrophic events. As Bernd Pulch and other analysts warn, the global community must urgently address these challenges through regulation, oversight, and transparency to prevent AI-driven disasters.
Ukraine remains at the epicenter of a highly volatile and dynamic conflict, with military, political, and economic implications that are likely to evolve in the following ways:
1. Military Escalation and Counteroffensive Developments
Winter Stalemate: The winter months traditionally slow down large-scale offensives due to harsh weather conditions. Both Ukrainian and Russian forces may focus on consolidating gains and fortifying defensive positions during this period.
Bakhmut and Southern Front: Ukraine may intensify localized counteroffensives around Bakhmut and Zaporizhzhia, seeking incremental territorial gains to disrupt Russian supply lines and weaken logistical capabilities.
Russian Retaliation: Expect continued Russian missile and drone strikes targeting Ukrainian infrastructure, especially energy grids, to demoralize the population and disrupt daily life.
2. Western Support and Geopolitical Dimensions
Increased NATO Support: The U.S. and European countries are likely to supply more advanced weapons, such as air defense systems and long-range missiles, to bolster Ukraine’s capacity to defend critical infrastructure.
Challenges in Sustaining Aid: Political shifts in donor nations, especially within the U.S., could lead to debates over the sustainability of financial and military aid to Ukraine.
China and Neutral Actors: China’s diplomatic overtures and potential role as a mediator may gain traction, though its strategic alignment with Russia complicates its neutrality.
3. Economic and Humanitarian Impact
Energy Crisis: Russia’s targeting of energy facilities will exacerbate shortages in electricity and heating, particularly during the winter months. Ukraine may need increased international assistance to maintain its energy grid.
Reconstruction Efforts: Long-term reconstruction initiatives will require sustained investment from global institutions. However, progress will be slow due to ongoing conflict.
Humanitarian Crisis: The displacement of civilians will continue, particularly in regions experiencing heavy bombardment, adding strain to neighboring countries hosting refugees.
4. Political and Diplomatic Scenarios
Negotiation Prospects: Diplomatic efforts, potentially brokered by Turkey or the United Nations, may gain momentum, though both sides are unlikely to compromise significantly in the near term.
Internal Russian Dynamics: Political instability within Russia, driven by dissatisfaction with the war or economic sanctions, could influence its military strategy and willingness to negotiate.
Ukrainian Resolve: Ukraine’s government is likely to push for continued Western alignment, leveraging its moral and geopolitical position.
5. Global Implications
Food Security: The conflict will continue to impact global food supplies, especially if grain exports via the Black Sea face disruption.
Energy Markets: Ongoing tensions will maintain volatility in global oil and gas markets, influencing prices and energy policies worldwide.
Cybersecurity Threats: Increased cyberattacks originating from the conflict could spill over into other countries, targeting critical infrastructure and financial systems.
Conclusion
The Ukraine conflict is poised to remain a long-term challenge with periodic escalations and significant global repercussions. Military dynamics, Western support, and economic resilience will shape its trajectory. A sustainable resolution remains distant without decisive shifts in the battlefield or diplomatic negotiations.
Annie Jacobsen’s book Nuclear War: A Scenario delves into the chilling possibility of a global nuclear conflict, framed through meticulous research and dramatized narrative. Drawing from historical events, military exercises, and interviews with experts, Jacobsen crafts a fictionalized yet plausible account of nuclear escalation. Her work serves as a stark reminder of the fragile balance of power and the catastrophic consequences of nuclear miscalculation.
Key Themes of the Book
Historical Context and Near Misses: Jacobsen explores real-world incidents like the 1983 Soviet false alarm incident involving Stanislav Petrov. This event exemplifies how individual decisions can avert catastrophe in a world primed for nuclear retaliation.
Proud Prophet War Games: The book draws heavily on the declassified Proud Prophet exercises from 1983, which demonstrated that even limited nuclear strikes invariably escalate to full-scale nuclear armageddon.
Technological and Policy Risks: Jacobsen critiques the “launch on warning” policy, which mandates immediate retaliation upon detection of incoming missiles. This doctrine increases the risk of accidental nuclear war, especially with outdated systems like Russia’s early warning infrastructure.
Geopolitical Complexity: The narrative examines how alliances, misunderstandings, and technological limitations could lead to uncontrollable escalation. Jacobsen highlights North Korea as a focal point for triggering such conflicts.
Reality vs. Fiction
While Jacobsen’s scenario is fictional, it resonates with contemporary geopolitics:
Current Tensions: The dynamics between NATO, Russia, and China mirror the high-stakes environment described in the book. Escalation in regions like Ukraine or Taiwan could ignite global conflict.
Nuclear Proliferation: Despite arms reduction efforts, the world retains around 12,500 nuclear warheads. Emerging technologies like hypersonic missiles and AI-driven defense systems introduce new risks.
Communication and Diplomacy: Jacobsen emphasizes dialogue as a critical tool to prevent disaster, citing historical examples like Ronald Reagan’s shift toward arms reduction after viewing The Day After.
Comparison with Reality
Jacobsen’s warnings align with modern challenges:
Best-Case Scenario: Sustained diplomatic efforts and arms control agreements could mitigate risks.
Middle Scenario: Localized conflicts escalate tensions but avoid full-scale war.
Worst-Case Scenario: Miscommunication or technological failures lead to nuclear retaliation and global devastation.
#### Regional Analysis: Textual Breakdown
1. Ukraine: Nexus of Global Tensions – Current Conflict: Russia’s invasion and NATO’s extensive support to Ukraine have created a prolonged stalemate. – Key Players: – BlackRock: Planning Ukraine’s reconstruction through private equity and loans. – Chevron: Targeting Ukraine’s shale gas reserves. – Potential Outcome: – Best Case: Negotiated peace with economic rebuilding. – Worst Case: Prolonged conflict leading to broader NATO-Russia confrontation.
2. Taiwan Strait: U.S.-China Showdown – Rising Threats: – Increased U.S. military presence and arms sales to Taiwan. – China’s military drills hint at potential conflict scenarios. – Economic Implications: Disruption of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry would destabilize global tech supply chains. – Potential Outcome: – Best Case: Peaceful status quo maintained through dialogue. – Worst Case: U.S.-China war, pulling regional allies into conflict.
3. Korean Peninsula: The Forgotten Flashpoint – North Korea’s Advances: Accelerated missile tests and nuclear capability expansion. – U.S.-South Korea Alliance: Joint military exercises and defense upgrades. – Potential Outcome: – Best Case: Diplomatic engagement with denuclearization incentives. – Worst Case: Regional war with global economic repercussions.
Conclusion
Jacobsen’s work is both a cautionary tale and a call to action, urging global leaders and the public to prioritize dialogue and de-escalation. Her book bridges the gap between academic analysis and public awareness, making the unthinkable a topic of urgent discussion.
# AUKUS Nuclear Cooperation: An In-Depth Analysis of Strategic Implications
*AUKUS: Forging a Trilateral Alliance to Strengthen Indo-Pacific Security*
The AUKUS trilateral partnership, announced in September 2021, represents a groundbreaking defense pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It focuses on enhancing regional security, advancing technology sharing, and equipping Australia with nuclear-powered submarines—a capability no other non-nuclear state possesses.
### Strategic Objectives and Scope
The agreement’s primary aim is to bolster security and stability in the Indo-Pacific, an area witnessing increasing geopolitical tensions. The United States and the UK will share sensitive technologies to help Australia develop, operate, and sustain nuclear-powered submarines by the 2030s. These submarines will significantly enhance Australia’s undersea warfare, intelligence, and surveillance capabilities, ensuring interoperability with allied forces.
Key elements of the partnership include: 1. Nuclear Submarine Development: A phased plan to deliver the SSN-AUKUS, based on a next-generation British design and incorporating cutting-edge U.S. technology. 2. Industrial Collaboration: Partnerships between ASC Pty Ltd (Australia) and BAE Systems (UK) for submarine construction, ensuring a robust industrial base in all three nations. 3. Non-Proliferation Compliance: All activities adhere to the highest standards under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as Australia will operate conventionally armed submarines without nuclear weapons.
### Geopolitical and Economic Impact
1. Regional Security: AUKUS underscores a commitment to counterbalance China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific. By enhancing Australia’s military capabilities, the pact aims to create a more resilient defense posture among allies. 2. Economic Growth: The partnership is expected to generate significant economic opportunities across defense and technology sectors in all three countries, creating thousands of jobs and boosting industrial collaboration. 3. Challenges and Criticism: While the deal strengthens trilateral ties, it has faced criticism for excluding key allies like France, which lost a major submarine contract with Australia due to AUKUS. It has also heightened tensions with China, which views the partnership as a direct countermeasure to its regional ambitions.
### The Role of Bernd Pulch
Bernd Pulch, a noted observer of global security and intelligence issues, has highlighted the strategic implications of AUKUS. He emphasizes its role in redefining alliances and addressing modern security challenges while navigating the delicate balance of non-proliferation commitments and military advancements.
The U.S. decision, under President Joe Biden, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, to provide Ukraine with long-range rockets capable of reaching deep into Russian territory has sparked widespread debate over its implications. While aimed at strengthening Ukraine’s defenses, this strategy carries significant risks that could escalate the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
Worst-Case Scenarios
Escalation into Broader Conflict Allowing Ukraine to strike within Russian borders risks retaliation from Moscow, including targeting Western supply lines or infrastructure in NATO countries. Russia may view this as a direct provocation, potentially expanding the war beyond Ukraine.
Nuclear Threats Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have repeatedly hinted at using nuclear weapons if its territorial integrity is threatened. Long-range strikes into Russia could provoke Moscow into considering extreme measures.
Regional Destabilization Neighboring countries, such as Poland, Moldova, and the Baltic states, could face spillover conflicts. Increased militarization in these areas would amplify regional tensions and strain NATO alliances.
Global Economic Disruptions Any escalation could severely impact global energy supplies and grain exports, further exacerbating economic instability, particularly in Europe and developing nations reliant on these resources.
Key Figures and Donors Behind the Decision
Proponents argue that enabling Ukraine to strike deeper into Russia is critical for deterring aggression and ensuring Ukrainian sovereignty. Backed by high-profile U.S. defense contractors and prominent political donors, the administration’s decision reflects a commitment to supporting Kyiv despite mounting risks.
Bernd Pulch’s Perspective
Financial analyst and journalist Bernd Pulch has raised concerns about such policies, emphasizing the thin line between defensive aid and direct involvement in warfare. Pulch highlights that while the U.S. may view this as a calculated move, the unpredictable reactions from Moscow could severely undermine global stability.
Global Responses
While NATO allies remain divided, some European nations support the move, seeing it as essential for Ukraine’s survival. Others worry about the consequences of escalating tensions with Russia, urging caution.
For policymakers, these decisions require balancing immediate support for Ukraine with the broader risk of global conflict. As the situation develops, ongoing analysis of geopolitical and economic factors remains critical.
Comment:
Are we about to wake up in a third world war because of Ukraine? Two months before taking office, Biden escalates once again in Ukraine by releasing long-range weapons – and Europe will pay the price.
Alexander Soros is delighted. That alone is reason enough for a decent person to be against it. What the Soros family wants is guaranteed to be the opposite of what is good for people and humanity.
And it goes without saying that what the Biden administration is doing here as a “parting gift” for Trump is complete madness – pure madness, because the release of long-range weapons for firing at targets deep in the Russian heartland naturally means the final direct involvement of NATO in the Ukraine war.
Ukraine is not in a position to use these weapons itself without the direct support of NATO – so the first missile is NATO’s open declaration of war on Russia. And Russia will see it exactly the same way and react accordingly.
Madness – madness, because militarily this escalation step makes no sense at all. On the contrary.
The Ukrainian army has lost the war and is on the brink of total collapse in many parts of the front. Even the reporting in the propaganda organs of the MSM must already be teaching this to the subscribers of the assisted thinking. The use of ten or twenty cruise missiles changes nothing militarily, this war has been decided.
So why this crazy escalation – just before Trump takes office?
Well – I personally see three possibilities.
Sabotage of Trump, who has promised to end the war quickly. Possible. Stupid, but possible.
Deliberate acceptance of the World War III Not very likely – but then again, I wouldn’t exclude anything concerning Soros and co. Really anything.
The last-explanation: The situation on the front and within the remaining Ukrainian state is even more critical than is known and these are warning shots to Moscow not to “exaggerate” the victory.
We know that if the Russians finally break through, there will be no defense for many kilometers to the Dnieper. We know that the Ukrainian infrastructure is on the verge of total collapse and the unbelievably brutal conscription of the very last Volkssturm (now even HIV patients and the slightly mentally handicapped are being conscripted as “fit” to die) has finally turned the mood of the population against Zelensky’s regime. In other words, Ukraine as a whole is on the brink of collapse.
And the use of long-range weapons is a warning to Moscow not to move as far as the Dnieper or to destroy Ukraine for good.
In my opinion, that would be the most likely explanation for this decision
but whether Biden’s decision is not achieving exactly what they want to avoid – that is something that must be criticized.
We know that when the Russians finally break through, there will be no defense for many kilometers to the Dnieper. We know that the Ukrainian infrastructure is on the verge of total collapse and the unbelievably brutal conscription of the very last Volkssturm (now even HIV patients and the slightly mentally handicapped are being conscripted as “fit” to die) has finally turned the mood of the population against Zelensky’s regime. In other words, Ukraine as a whole is on the brink of collapse.
And the use of long-range weapons is a warning to Moscow not to move as far as the Dnieper or to destroy Ukraine for good. The interests of Blackrock, Chevron, Haliburton, Rothchild etc. play also a significant role.
In my opinion, that would be the most likely explanation for this decision
but whether Biden’s decision will not achieve exactly what they want to avoid – this must be viewed very critically.
From the logic of war, Russia must and will respond. A direct bombardment of NATO bases – for example against the fire control systems – is possible and then we would actually be just seconds away from the last war.
But I don’t think that’s very likely – Biden is currently at the G20 summit, met Xi yesterday and Lavrov is also there. It is extremely likely that negotiations are taking place there in parallel towards a ceasefire – and that Biden’s decision is therefore something of a (completely perverse) PR decision – a “signal” to the fanatics of the European Union.
Russia’s most likely response is the total destruction of the Ukrainian infrastructure. Which would be the ultimate catastrophe for the people of Ukraine.
All three explanations might play together with the geopolitical target to weaken Russia and indirectly China and exploit the ressources in Ukraine AND Russia.
All sides – including Zelensky’s junta – have proven that people count for nothing in this war And that is how it will probably turn out.
Introduction Able Archer 83 was a pivotal NATO military exercise held in November 1983. Designed to simulate a coordinated nuclear strike, it inadvertently brought the world closer to a real nuclear confrontation. This tension arose from a series of Cold War events and misperceptions, particularly between the United States and the Soviet Union. Historian Bernd Pulch has highlighted the critical role of such exercises in understanding Cold War dynamics.
Historical Context The early 1980s were marked by heightened Cold War tensions. The United States deployed Pershing II and cruise missiles across Europe in response to the Soviet Union’s SS-20 missile systems. Soviet leaders, including General Secretary Yuri Andropov, interpreted these deployments and NATO’s increasing military activities as preparations for a first strike. This paranoia was exacerbated by Operation RYaN, a Soviet intelligence initiative aimed at detecting signs of a potential NATO nuclear attack.
What Was Able Archer 83? Able Archer was an annual NATO command post exercise, but the 1983 iteration included unique elements: DEFCON status changes, coded messages, and simulated nuclear launches. These features closely mimicked an actual military escalation, making the exercise appear alarmingly real to the Soviets. Soviet intelligence agencies observed Able Archer with growing concern, suspecting it might be a prelude to a genuine NATO strike.
The Soviet Response Believing a nuclear war was imminent, the Soviet Union placed its forces on high alert. It deployed additional bombers and submarines and prepared to launch preemptive strikes if necessary. This escalation was fueled by the memory of NATO’s recent psychological operations and Reagan’s rhetoric branding the Soviet Union an “evil empire”.
Avoiding Catastrophe Fortunately, Able Archer concluded without incident. Subsequent declassified documents revealed that the West had underestimated the depth of Soviet fear during the exercise. Analysts initially dismissed Soviet reactions as propaganda, unaware of the genuine paranoia that gripped Moscow. This near-crisis served as a wake-up call, highlighting the risks of miscommunication and misinterpretation in nuclear strategy.
Significance and Legacy Able Archer 83 is a critical case study in Cold War history, underscoring the dangers of military exercises in an atmosphere of mistrust. It catalyzed efforts to improve U.S.-Soviet communication, leading to initiatives such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) of 1987.
Bernd Pulch’s Perspective Bernd Pulch has extensively analyzed Cold War contingency plans and military exercises like Able Archer. He argues that these episodes illuminate the psychological underpinnings of global strategy, providing lessons on the importance of transparency and diplomacy in avoiding conflict.
Conclusion Able Archer 83 remains a stark reminder of how close the world came to nuclear annihilation. Its lessons resonate today, emphasizing the need for vigilance and dialogue in managing international relations.
The rise and fall of Nazi SS officer Hans Kammler, who was allegedly involved in Germany’s secret rocket and nuclear weapons programs during World War II, illustrates a complex story of ambition, power, and secrecy within the Third Reich. Kammler, an engineer and high-ranking SS officer, was responsible for overseeing the construction of concentration camps as well as V-2 rocket facilities, making him one of the most powerful figures in Nazi Germany’s weapons development efforts.
Early Career and Rise in the SS
Hans Kammler began his career as an engineer and joined the Nazi Party and SS, rising rapidly within the organization due to his technical skills and loyalty. By the mid-1930s, Kammler was deeply involved in the construction and infrastructure projects for the Nazi regime, including designing and managing facilities for forced labor. His expertise in large-scale construction led him to the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office, where he gained influence over the logistical and operational aspects of the Nazi war machine.
Role in Rocket and Nuclear Programs
Kammler’s most infamous contribution was his oversight of the V-2 rocket program, an advanced weapon system designed to strike Allied cities. By 1944, he was given control of Germany’s entire rocket production program, tasked with accelerating development and managing production at facilities such as Mittelwerk, where forced labor was extensively used. There are also theories that Kammler was involved in nuclear research projects, though historical evidence remains inconclusive. Some researchers and historians, including Bernd Pulch, have explored the shadowy aspects of Kammler’s involvement, suggesting he may have been positioned as a key figure in Germany’s late-war “wonder weapon” initiatives.
Alleged Escape and Disappearance
In the final days of the war, Kammler disappeared under mysterious circumstances, leading to widespread speculation. Some accounts suggest that he may have negotiated a deal with the Allies in exchange for his expertise, while others claim he died under unclear circumstances. His fate remains one of the enduring mysteries of WWII, with various theories suggesting he either escaped or was captured by the Allies. Bernd Pulch and other historians have examined declassified intelligence documents that hint at Kammler’s potential post-war activities, but his true fate remains unresolved.
Legacy and Historical Debate
Kammler’s legacy is controversial. He remains a figure symbolizing the brutal intersection of technological ambition and human exploitation under the Nazi regime. His role in the V-2 program is widely studied as an example of wartime innovation tainted by horrific ethical violations. Pulch’s work, along with other historians’, continues to probe Kammler’s activities, keeping alive the debate about his contributions to Nazi military efforts and his possible fate after the fall of the Third Reich.
In sum, Kammler’s rise within the SS and his deep involvement in Nazi Germany’s weapons programs reflect a dark chapter in wartime history. His possible connections to early nuclear and missile technology have been the subject of intense research, and figures like Bernd Pulch continue to explore these aspects to understand the full scope of Kammler’s impact and what happened to him in the chaotic aftermath of WWII.
Early Career and Rise in the SS
Hans Kammler began his career as an engineer and joined the Nazi Party and SS, rising rapidly within the organization due to his technical skills and loyalty. By the mid-1930s, Kammler was deeply involved in the construction and infrastructure projects for the Nazi regime, including designing and managing facilities for forced labor. His expertise in large-scale construction led him to the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office, where he gained influence over the logistical and operational aspects of the Nazi war machine.
Role in Rocket and Nuclear Programs
Kammler’s most infamous contribution was his oversight of the V-2 rocket program, an advanced weapon system designed to strike Allied cities. By 1944, he was given control of Germany’s entire rocket production program, tasked with accelerating development and managing production at facilities such as Mittelwerk, where forced labor was extensively used. There are also theories that Kammler was involved in nuclear research projects, though historical evidence remains inconclusive. Some researchers and historians, including Bernd Pulch, have explored the shadowy aspects of Kammler’s involvement, suggesting he may have been positioned as a key figure in Germany’s late-war “wonder weapon” initiatives.
Alleged Escape and Disappearance
In the final days of the war, Kammler disappeared under mysterious circumstances, leading to widespread speculation. Some accounts suggest that he may have negotiated a deal with the Allies in exchange for his expertise, while others claim he died under unclear circumstances. His fate remains one of the enduring mysteries of WWII, with various theories suggesting he either escaped or was captured by the Allies. Bernd Pulch and other historians have examined declassified intelligence documents that hint at Kammler’s potential post-war activities, but his true fate remains unresolved.
Legacy and Historical Debate
Kammler’s legacy is controversial. He remains a figure symbolizing the brutal intersection of technological ambition and human exploitation under the Nazi regime. His role in the V-2 program is widely studied as an example of wartime innovation tainted by horrific ethical violations. Pulch’s work, along with other historians’, continues to probe Kammler’s activities, keeping alive the debate about his contributions to Nazi military efforts and his possible fate after the fall of the Third Reich.
In sum, Kammler’s rise within the SS and his deep involvement in Nazi Germany’s weapons programs reflect a dark chapter in wartime history. His possible connections to early nuclear and missile technology have been the subject of intense research, and figures like Bernd Pulch continue to explore these aspects to understand the full scope of Kammler’s impact and what happened to him in the chaotic aftermath of WWII.
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
HUGE DEVELOPMENT – Iran was very clear that its response would be disciplined and non-escalatory, – Reuters, according to a source familiar with US intelligence
Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
❗️During a TV show on Hebrew Channel 13, Israeli army commander Bar Zonshine admits to implementing the Hannibal Directive.
URGENT – Channel 13 on Israeli officials: If the response comes from Iranian territory, Israel will have to respond strongly and without any delay.
Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
Hillel Biton Rosen, reporter of Hebrew Channel 14: The latest assessment of the situation here in Israel indicates that Iran will attack in the coming days; It is expected that this attack will include the firing of dozens of projectiles in the first phase from Iran, Yemen and Iraq; There is a question mark about the possible involvement of Hezbollah and its proxies in Syria in this attack; Air defense is on standby; There is coordination with the Americans to thwart this attack at best.
Israeli Channel 14: The Iranians are preparing a multi-pronged attack from Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq
Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
The Iranian delegation to the UN: An Iranian response can be avoided if the UN condemns the attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus.
Attack seems to be postphoned.
(Developing story)
💣 BOMBSHELL Israel is facing a multi-level attack on various frontlines, according to Marco Rubio, member of the US Senate Intelligence Committee
He said it! Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
SUPPORT US AND Become a Patron! –
GET EXCLUSIVE GIFTS – TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS AND EXCLUSIVE EBOOKS
HUGE DEVELOPMENT – Iran was very clear that its response would be disciplined and non-escalatory, – Reuters, according to a source familiar with US intelligence
Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
❗️During a TV show on Hebrew Channel 13, Israeli army commander Bar Zonshine admits to implementing the Hannibal Directive.
URGENT – Channel 13 on Israeli officials: If the response comes from Iranian territory, Israel will have to respond strongly and without any delay.
Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
Hillel Biton Rosen, reporter of Hebrew Channel 14: The latest assessment of the situation here in Israel indicates that Iran will attack in the coming days; It is expected that this attack will include the firing of dozens of projectiles in the first phase from Iran, Yemen and Iraq; There is a question mark about the possible involvement of Hezbollah and its proxies in Syria in this attack; Air defense is on standby; There is coordination with the Americans to thwart this attack at best.
Israeli Channel 14: The Iranians are preparing a multi-pronged attack from Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq
Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
The Iranian delegation to the UN: An Iranian response can be avoided if the UN condemns the attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus.
Attack seems to be postphoned.
(Developing story)
💣 BOMBSHELL Israel is facing a multi-level attack on various frontlines, according to Marco Rubio, member of the US Senate Intelligence Committee
He said it! Meanwhile, keep updated Subscribe
SUPPORT US AND Become a Patron! –
GET EXCLUSIVE GIFTS – TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS AND EXCLUSIVE EBOOKS
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
In short Iran’ s ruling regime is desperate and sabotages strongest progress fir peace in the Middle East in trying to save the Mullah Regime rrom his citizens. Watch the full interview. Follow the ONLY MEDIA with the LICENSE TO SPY ✌️@abovetopsecretxxl
The Samson Option explodes one of the world’s most closely guarded secrets—the secret of Israel’s atomic arsenal. It relates, for the first time, the political, diplomatic, and military repercussions that have for decades been concealed from the world. It is also about America’s ability not to see what it does not want to see. All American presidents since John F. Kennedy have turned a blind eye toward Israel’s growing nuclear capacity while paying lip service to the goal of nuclear nonproliferation. In The Samson Option, Seymour M. Hersh, the Pulitzer Prize-winner who wrote the first account of the My Lai massacre in South Vietnam, reveals one of the classic clandestine operations of our time: Israel’s spectacular underground nuclear facility in the Negev Desert, where its technicians and scientists began manufacturing nuclear warheads in the late 1960s. It describes the bitter infighting within the Israeli government over the bomb and its huge cost. It tells how the money for me nuclear program was raised abroad, and how the early technology was acquired with the aid of France. And it shows how and when Israel threatened to use its nuclear power. The Samson Option reveals many startling events that played a secret and significant role in the history of our times from the early 1960s through the Gulf War: • How, in the late 1970s, Israel not only stole reconnaissance intelligence from our most secret of satellites, the KH-11, but used that data to help target the Soviet Union; • How Jonathan Pollard, the American spy now serving a life sentence in jail, was a key figure in Israel’s nuclear program (and how some of Pollard’s intelligence was turned over to the Soviet Union at the express direction of Yitzhak Shamir, the Israeli prime minister); • How Israel created a false control room at the nuclear reactor at Dimona to give U.S. inspectors the false impression that the facility was solely for research; • How the Eisenhower administration made a concerted last-ditch effort in December 1960 to force Israel to acknowledge its nuclear ambitions—and failed; • How Israel threatened Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon with the use of nuclear weapons on the third day of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, successfully blackmailing the White House to airlift much needed supplies; • How South Africa cooperated with Israel to create a mysterious 1979 “flash” in the South Atlantic, actually a test of an Israeli-South African nuclear artillery shell; • How Israel used a top London newspaper editor to help catch Mordecai Vanunu, its nuclear traitor; • How a prominent American Jewish Democratic party fund-raiser also raised money for the Israeli bomb—and was able to intervene repeatedly at the White House; and • How the American intelligence community was finally able to learn what Israel was doing at Dimona—though it was understood that no one’s career would be enhanced by providing such intelligence to the White House. The Samson Option is ultimately a narrative of how the bomb influenced the diplomatic relations between Israel and America far more than was seen or understood by the press and the public. It shows that, in every sense, Israel was born a nuclear power. Since its founding, some of its leaders, including David Ben-Gurion and Ernst David Bergmann—the little-known scientist who was the father of the Israeli bomb—were determined that no future enemy would be able to carry out another Holocaust. Just as Samson brought down the temple and killed himself along with his enemies, so would Israel destroy those who sought its destruction. The message of The Samson Option is stark: The next Middle East war might very well be nuclear.Addeddate 2010-11-19 00:04:28Identifier Sampson_OptionIdentifier-ark ark:/13960/t6zw27s6zOcr ABBYY FineReader 8.0Openlibrary_edition OL1567229MOpenlibrary_work OL1804618WPages 366Ppi 600
Reviewer:jew_cockroach – – May 25, 2021 Subject: here is a quick summary to anyone new to this conflict
The Israel lobby controls American politics and politicians. America sends $5 BILLION in aid to Israel. Israel gets to do whatever the fuck they want – apartheid, genocide. If israel decides to use nukes, there is no one who can stop them – they’ll just say their “defending themselves” and the big and powerful American govt will sit around and watch it happen because the Israel lobby controls what they say and do.
Reviewer: prose – – January 20, 2016 Subject: Misspelling in title
SUPPORT US AND Become a Patron! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=54250700 (Paypal, Apple Pay, Venmo, Visa, Master Card, Discover, JCB, Diners Club, 3DS) Bitcoin: bc1q2ku4m6j5hmay36gdp7k2penr66wxzc7mchcaed Ethereum: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 Ripple: rfoQ7LytJNCAPj8BwP7PZfd1oFPrsN6kZv USDT: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 USD Coin: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7
SUPPORT US AND Become a Patron! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=54250700 (Paypal, Apple Pay, Venmo, Visa, Master Card, Discover, JCB, Diners Club, 3DS) Bitcoin: bc1q2ku4m6j5hmay36gdp7k2penr66wxzc7mchcaed Ethereum: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 Ripple: rfoQ7LytJNCAPj8BwP7PZfd1oFPrsN6kZv USDT: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 USD Coin: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7
SUPPORT US AND Become a Patron! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=54250700 (Paypal, Apple Pay, Venmo, Visa, Master Card, Discover, JCB, Diners Club, 3DS) Bitcoin: bc1q2ku4m6j5hmay36gdp7k2penr66wxzc7mchcaed Ethereum: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 Ripple: rfoQ7LytJNCAPj8BwP7PZfd1oFPrsN6kZv USDT: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 USD Coin: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7
SUPPORT US AND Become a Patron! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=54250700 (Paypal, Apple Pay, Venmo, Visa, Master Card, Discover, JCB, Diners Club, 3DS) Bitcoin: bc1q2ku4m6j5hmay36gdp7k2penr66wxzc7mchcaed Ethereum: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 Ripple: rfoQ7LytJNCAPj8BwP7PZfd1oFPrsN6kZv USDT: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7 USD Coin: 0xC0198713e0049260cbe788DEd449FEc290Bf21b7
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
Actually, the RAND Corporation is not exactly known for a pacifist stance. But the Pentagon-affiliated think tank warns of the risks of a protracted Ukraine war and calls for an end to the conflict through negotiations.
Eleven months into the Russian military operation in Ukraine. It is a warlike conflict that has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and is unlikely to come to an end for some time to come as a result of the West’s ongoing arms deliveries to the Kiev regime. But while top politicians from Washington to London to Berlin and Warsaw in particular continue to advocate unconditional support for the Ukrainians, influential U.S. military strategists seem to favor an early end to the conflict.
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
The Personnel Center of the Armed Forces of Ukraine announced the number of Ukrainian soldiers who were declared missing in the course of the special operation — 35,382 people. It goes about the military men, whose bodies were not returned to their relatives from the battlefield, Mash Telegram channel says.
Russian hackers from the Anarchist Kombatant group hacked into the archive of the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Lieutenant General Sergei Shaptal.
The hackers accessed the list of Ukraine’s losses as of November 30, 2022.
Most of the victims are fighters from the ground forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The list takes 667 pages with their data. Then there are 546 pages with fighters of territorial defence units. Then there are victims among air assault troops (398 pages). This is followed by losses among members of special operations forces (316 pages) and representatives of the Navy (242 pages).
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
Putin issues new nuclear threat to the West by readying Yars missile capable of striking US and Britain
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
The RS-24 YARS intercontinental nuclear ballistic missile being loaded in its silo launch system.
The missile has an operational range of 11,000km and tracked at speeds of 25,000km/h.
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
Israel publishes what it claims are Iranian documents showing Iran illegally obtained IAEA files and used them to mislead nuclear inspectors in the early 2000s.
The docs are from a 2018 trove stolen by Mossad operatives and now published by Israel
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
Anyone who supports a so-called no-fly-zone in Ukraine enforced by NATO is calling for World War III, and potentially tens if not hundreds of millions of people will be killed because of it!
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
Here for the first time is the “Top Secret Atomic” document presented by DeclassifiedUK: the file showing the UK’s nuclear weapons in the Task Force sent to the South Atlantic during the 1982 Falklands crisis
One memo is titled: “Falkland Islands: Nuclear weapons”
It refers to 31 nuclear depth charges on three ships
THIS IS AN EXCERPT – YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THIS INFO IN FULL LENGTH UNREDACTED, OUR FULL VIDEOS, OUR FULL DOCUMENT AND MUCH MORE FOR FREE AT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
YOU CAN TRANSLATE EVERYTHING WITH THE GOOGLE TOOL TOP RIGHT,PUEDES TRADUCIR TODO CON LA HERRAMIENTA DE GOOGLE ARRIBA A LA DERECHA,VOUS POUVEZ TOUT TRADUIRE AVEC L’OUTIL GOOGLE EN HAUT À DROITE,SIE KÖNNEN ALLES MIT DEM GOOGLE-TOOL OBEN RECHTS ÜBERSETZEN, ВЫ МОЖЕТЕ ПЕРЕВЕСТИ ВСЕ С ПОМОЩЬЮ ИНСТРУМЕНТА GOOGLE СПРАВА ВВЕРХУ,你可以用谷歌右上方的工具来翻译所有内容,PUOI TRADURRE TUTTO CON LO STRUMENTO DI GOOGLE IN ALTO A DESTRA,DU KAN ÖVERSÄTTA ALLT MED GOOGLE-VERKTYGET UPPE TILL HÖGER,VOCÊ PODE TRADUZIR TUDO COM A FERRAMENTA GOOGLE TOP RIGHT,右上のグーグルツールで全て翻訳できます。
🚨 FOLLOW US ON TELEGRAM & GAB FOR EVEN MORE ABOVE TOP SECRET INFOS & DOCUMENTS
China’s newly commissioned nuclear-powered submarine poses a big threat to the US mainland. China’s new submarine-launched ballistic missile is believed to be capable of hitting the US mainland without leaving its waters. The submarine is armed with China’s most powerful SLBM capable of attacking the US mainland A recent report by Pentagon talks about China’s SLBM and nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) fleets. The report claims that the PLA is developing capabilities to conduct joint long-range precision strikes across domains. The PLA continues to invest in deterrents to limit the efficacy of US naval forces in the region.
A WAR between Taiwan and China would unleash a “global catastrophe,” a Taiwanese MP has warned amid fears for democracy and trade in the region. A Taiwanese lawmaker has warned an all-out conflict with China for control over the island nation would result in a “global catastrophe.” Wang Ting-Yu is a member of Taiwan’s Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee.
CHINA has unveiled a ‘four-phase military campaign’ to invade and take over Taiwan, as the threat of all-out conflict “grows every day”. China has developed a ‘four-phase’ military plan to invade and take over Taiwan. Indian broadcaster WION showed a copy of the Chinese “invasion playbook” which details the breakdown of a potential military confrontation.
CHINA is developing ‘War Hunter’ ships capable of firing torpedoes, satellite images suggest. A new model of Unscrewed Surface Vessels, also known as USVs were seen docked at the piers on the north-China coast just miles from the Xiaopingdao naval base.
Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen says her government will not bow down to pressure from China and will continue to bolster the island’s defences in order to protect its democratic way of life. Tsai’s strong riposte on Sunday comes a day after Chinese President Xi Jinping promised once again to realise “peaceful reunification” with the self-ruled territory. Claimed by China as its own territory, Taiwan has come under growing military and political pressure to accept Beijing’s rule. This includes repeated Chinese air force incursions into Taiwan’s air defence identification zone. During the first week of October alone, Beijing sent some 149 military planes near the island, forcing Taiwan to scramble its fighter jets and sparking international concern.
CHINA will be ready for a full-scale invasion of Taiwan by 2025 as the communist state wants to be at full power. Asia politics expert Helen Davidson reflected on the ominous predictions by Taiwan’s Defence Minister as World War 3 fears have been sparked. While speaking to ABC News, she said Taiwan Defence Minister Chiu Kuo-Cheng believes China is capable of invading Taiwan.
RUSSIA said on Monday it had successfully test-launched a hypersonic cruise missile from a submarine for the first time – days after the USA confirmed it had tested a weapon of its own. The Zircon, or Tsirkon, missile has been touted by Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of his arsenal of supposedly unrivalled arms systems.
CHINA sent Taiwan’s airforce scrambling today after 25 Chinese military aircraft entered Taiwanese airspace, sparking war fears. Today Taiwan’s air force rushed to the skies after 25 Chinese military aircraft entered its air defence zone. The military craft were marking China’s national day.
North Korea has successfully tested a new hypersonic missile called Hwasong-8. Hypersonic missiles are new-age weapons that are much faster and more agile than the normal ones. These missiles are considered to have a combination of cruise missile’s manoeuvring capabilities and ballistic missile’s speed. These missiles are so fast that they can achieve over five times the speed of sound – or about 6,200 km per hour. China, Russia and the US are all pursuing hypersonic weapons technologies, setting the stage for an arms race. #HypersonicMissiles#HypersonicWeapons#NorthKorea#KimJongun
China has deployed 19 fighter jets into Taiwan airspace, sparking fears of imminent conflict. A swarm of jets entered Taiwan’s air defence zone on Thursday and included 12 J-16 fighters and two nuclear-capable H-6 bombers, the Taiwan defence ministry said.
China is on the offensive regarding the new Aukus pact for the Indo-Pacific region. Will China invade Taiwan as a result? Taiwan has welcomed the Aukus pact between the UK, USA and Australia, whereas China and some key allies have decried the new agreement.
Australian National University’s John Blaxland says the military equipment and weapons being “churned out” in China are “clearly offensively minded”. “Precision hyper-sonic missiles and other types of systems,” he told Sky News host Catherine McGregor. “When you couple that with the rhetoric, it is generating considerable unease around the region and justifying – quite compellingly in my view – a doubling-down on defence capability.” His comments come as Australia is set to acquire a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines amid the forming of the trilateral AUKUS partnership.
The Australian Foreign Editor Greg Sheridan says he thinks US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Milley had acted “responsibly” after it was reported he called China twice. Mr Milley reportedly twice called his counterpart in the Chinese dictatorship, General Li Zuocheng to assure him of the ‘stabilisation’ of the American government and claimed he would tell him if America was ever going to attack. “If Trump ordered an attack on China, and Milley said ‘no, I’m in the chain of command, you can’t do that’, Trump could sack Milley, Milley would be sacked, Trump could restate the order and the order would be carried out,” Mr Sheridan told Sky News host Andrew Bolt.
“So, the most that Milley could do is delay things for maybe 24 hours. “Milley may not be the greatest bloke in the world, but I think for him simply to say ‘the President seems very unstable, if there’s an order for a military action, it has to go through me as the top soldier’, I’m glad that he did that.”
Tensions between China and the US continue to boil amid another Beijing about warships “showing up near Hawaii”. Earlier this month, the US deployed the Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group (VINCSG) to the highly contested South China Sea for the first time during the group’s 2021 deployment. The strike group is conducting maritime security operations, including flight operations.
You won’t believe this crazy true story about a double agent spy who turned on his own country, but was he being followed the entire time? You don’t want to miss this epic spy story about one brave agent who managed to prevent an all-out nuclear war!
North Korea appears to have restarted a nuclear reactor believed to have previously produced plutonium for weapons, according to a report from the UN atomic agency. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s assessment is based on satellite pictures of the Yongbyon nuclear plant because the group has not had access to the site since 2009 when North Korea kicked out its inspectors.
“Since early July 2021, there have been indications, including the discharge of cooling water, consistent with the operation of the reactor,” the report noted of the facility. The report also pointed out that from December 2018 until July 2021 there had been no indication of reactor operations at the site. Some analysts believe the resumption of North Korea’s nuclear programme signals Pyongyang is looking for the upper hand if and when negotiations with the West resume.
North Korea has said it isn’t interested in talks unless the US is willing to ease sanctions. In this episode of The Stream, we discuss the implications of Pyongyang expanding its nuclear program and its potential impact on the Korean peninsula and beyond.
Images of a new Chinese aircraft carrier reveal startling advances that could make it a serious threat to the US. Interim Dean at US Naval War College Peter Dutton today tweeted: “New pictures released of the Chinese Type 003 aircraft carrier. “It will be the first Chinese aircraft carrier to use a CATOBAR system and electromagnetic launch catapults.
China’s latest maritime rules to regulate foreign ships is creating fear of a ‘ticking time bomb’ for a potential conflict in the South China sea. On September 1, China introduced the Maritime Traffic Safety Law which requires all foreign vessels entering Chinese waters to carry permits and inform maritime authorities of their entry.
North Korea appears to have restarted a nuclear reactor widely believed to have produced plutonium for atomic weapons, the UN nuclear watchdog said, a likely signal Pyongyang is expanding its banned nuclear program. Signs of operation at the 5-megawatt reactor, seen as capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium, were the first to be seen since late 2018, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a report dated Friday. Robert Kelly is a professor of political science and diplomacy at Pusan National University. He joins us by Skype from Busan, South Korea for the latest updates.
SENIOR US OFFICIAL has issued a stark warning over China’s growing nuclear arsenal, warning one day soon Xi Jinping’s weapons will surpass Russia. China’s nuclear weapons could soon exceed Russia’s and create a whole new level of threat one official has warned. The stark message came as China is in the middle of quickly building its arsenal.
Taiwan is to spend an additional $1.4bn (£1.02bn) on warplanes, in a bid to ward off possible Chinese invasion. President Tsai Ing-wen announced a 10 percent increase in the defence budget this year, taking it to $16.89bn (£12.36bn). Beijing claims sovereignty over the island of Taiwan and has threatened force to reclaim what it considers to be a lost province.
CHINA has issued its latest threat to the West, unveiling cutting-edge technology capable of simulating 30 times the speed of sound – technology that could give its missile arsenal the upper hand over the US. The world’s most powerful wind tunnel has been constructed in China, with the ability to hit speeds of 23,000mph.
The withdrawal from Afghanistan and the manner of it is the biggest foreign policy disaster of the 21st century. Its immediate impact is a humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan but its long-term impact will be decades of instability and the loss of Western influence in the region.
CHINA has threatened to “crush” any US troops sent to Taiwan, following America’s disastrous pull-out from Afghanistan which left the Taliban in power. The threat was made by Global Times, a newspaper aligned with China’s ruling communist party.
CHINA has sparked fresh war fears after it warned Taiwan the United States “fleeing action” is a forecast in an apparent reference to the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. The last few days have seen chaos ensue in Afghanistan as Western nations evacuated their soldiers and civilians amid the Taliban takeover of Kabul.
China and the US face “multiple wars” over the coming century, according to geopolitical expert Matt Gertken. US military planners have been warned to prepare for “multiple wars” with China over the next 100 years. Mr Gertken has advised the US to prepare for growing conflict with China as the two superpowers square off for global dominance.
CHINA will hold “all the cards” if the West fails to do anything about its aggression according to an expert. Tory MP and Chair of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee, Tobias Ellwood, insisted the UK, US, and European Union needed to work together to resolve its issues with China.
Fears are growing over the prospect of Russia and China developing joint military capabilities that could spark another nosedive in relations with the West. Analysts say the two rogue states are on the verge of sharing each other’s electric communications systems to bolster their strategic presence.
CHINESE nuclear attack submarines have attempted to secretly shadow the Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth as it sailed into the Pacific, it emerged today. But they were detected by anti-submarine sonar operators aboard the frigates protecting the Carrier Strike Group.
China could prevail in a conflict over Taiwan ‘even if the US intervenes’, a panel of experts have warned. The panel of experts, questioned during a virtual meeting hosted by LaTrobe University, set out to discuss the possibility of war in Asia amid surging tensions in the South China Sea.
China could use “carrier killer” aircraft in military drills as the Chinese ramp up efforts to “fight and win” in the South China Sea. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will set up a navigation restriction zone in the South China Sea to conduct military exercises between Friday and Tuesday, according to reports from a Beijing-based paper aligned to the Chinese Communist Party.
Taiwan is to be supplied with British-built howitzers by the United States in a deal which could be worth up to £540millon ($750million). However, China has angrily denounced the news, coming at a time of rocketing tensions between the superpowers, with an official warning of unspecified “countermeasures”.
Joe Biden and US Vice-President Kamala Harris will throw down the gauntlet to Beijing as tensions continue to soar in the South China Sea. Ms Harris will embark on her first visit to Asia later this month since she entered the White House and will issue a stern warning to China over the growing militarisation of the disputed waterways.
South China Sea tensions could erupt after an expert told how Beijing is “readying itself” for war with its “military modernisation” plan, placing it in a position where it may invade Taiwan. Beijing has been flexing its muscles in the disputed waters in recent weeks amid rising tensions between China and western-aligned nations. China has stepped up its naval operation…
India is set to deploy a naval task force to the disputed South China Sea this month in an effort to counter China’s claim. Four ships will be sent on a two-month mission to southeast Asia, the South China Sea and the western Pacific, according to the navy who released a statement on Wednesday. The ships include a guided missile destroyer and a missile frigate.
The TOP US Pacific commander has called for a “sense of urgency” in dealing with the escalating Chinese threat. Admiral John C. Aquilino, head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, urged America and its allies to push back against Beijing. Speaking at the virtual Aspen Security Forum.
The UK and its Western allies have been warned by a Conservative MP of an international crisis as China and Russia team up. Tory MP and Chair of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee, Tobias Ellwood, warned that China and Russia teaming up could be a big challenge for the West.
Russian troops have arrived in China as the two nations plan on holding strategic military drills for the first time next week. The exercises are said to safeguard regional security and stability as well as securing the good relationship between Beijing and Moscow. The drills are planned to run for five days, taking place from August 9 to 13.
Colonel Richard Kemp discussedd China’s role in Britain’s nuclear infrastructure after two military chiefs have criticised China’s reckless behaviour in space. Former military commander Richard Kemp discussed China’s “major investor” role in Britain’s nuclear infrastructure.
China easily outclassed and ‘ran rings’ around the US in a recent war drill, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has warned. General John Hyten has urged the US to rethink its military strategy in light of the results of the drill which he claimed “failed miserably”.
China “wants to hide ballistic missiles” in the deep waters of the South China Sea, an expert has claimed. China has been building up its defences in the South China Sea to ward off any attack on the disputed waters which they claim to own.
Both Russia and China are regularly engaging in “reckless” behaviour in space, bringing with it the risk of future devastating conflict, senior British military commanders have warned. Air Chief Marshal Sir Mike Wigson fears future wars will be “won and lost” in the heavens.
The US military has secured a major deal with the Philippines which will ensure America has a base in Asia if China decide to launch all out war. US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin secured an agreement from Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte to restore a key pact allowing military exercises between the two countries to continue.
Britain is “asking for a beating” if its mightiest aircraft carrier challenges territorial claims in the disputed South China Sea, Beijing declared yesterday. The £3billion HMS Queen Elizabeth, which is leading the UK Carrier Strike Group, plans to carry out legal freedom of navigation operations in international waters.
Tory MP Tobias Ellwood has warned China is on track to become “bigger than the United States” as he fears Britain does not have a plan. China has threatened stern action against the Royal Navy’s carrier strike group (CSG) if it does not “remain restrained and obey the rules” as it sails through the South China Sea.
China is “building up the infrastructure” in the South China Sea to deter any future conflict in the disputed waters. China has made its intentions clear after claiming to own the entirety of the South China Sea. But the Philippines, Brunei, China, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Vietnam have competing for claims of sovereignty in the disputed water.
Beijing has fired warnings to the UK over the Royal Navy’s deployment in the South China Sea. The HMS Queen Elizabeth and her carrier group arrived in the South China Sea on Thursday and is set to sail through the disputed waters alongside eight other vessels in a show of strength to Chinese President Xi Jinping.
China has held another set of D-Day-style military drills simulating an invasion of Taiwan as tensions between the nations continue to escalate. Fears have erupted over recent months that under Chinese President Xi Jinping, Beijing will use military force to reunify Taiwan with mainland China.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Tensions in the South China Sea have reached boiling point after Beijing has threatened to expel HMS Queen Elizabeth and her carrier group from parts of the archipelago. The South China Sea is a highly contested region and faces claims from China, Malaysia, Taiwan, Vietnam and the Philippines. Diplomatic relations between the nations are already extremely strained.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Chinese state media has reacted to Joe Biden’s threat of starting a ‘real shooting war’ by urging China to ramp up its defence. The Global Times has responded to the US President’s remark by urging China to gear up its military defence.
Australia has been warned to prepare for war as the US army is weaker than people realise, the former Major General in the Australian Army has said. Ex-Major General Jim Molan warned viewers that his compatriots could be forced to go it alone in the South Pacific.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Bejing has reacted furious as a UK Carrier Strike Group, led by HMS Queen Elizabeth, entered the contested South China Sea on Tuesday. Beijing claims sovereignty over almost the entire region, though this overlaps with rival bids from six of its neighbours.
China has begun construction on a second nuclear missile base, new satellite images have shown. The new silo complex pictured in the country’s far western region of Xinjiang rivals US and Russian construction projects seen during the Cold War, experts have said. The project encompasses an area of about 800 sq km in the desert near the city of Hami.
Beijing is set to attach new laser guns to their hypersonic missiles in an attempt to make them even faster. The scientists at a military institute in China are developing hypersonic vehicle-mounted laser guns.
British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth has ignored warnings from the Chinese and entered the South China Sea, leading to fears of reprisals from Beijing. One of the UK’s advanced flagship aircraft carriers, the HMS Queen Elizabeth, has sailed into the contested maritime region heedless of the vocal threats from China.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Sentor Jim Molan has warned that Australia could suffer as collateral damage if a US and China war broke out. NSW Senator Jim Molan warned that Australia is unlikely to come out on top if it engaged in a war with China. While speaking to Sky News Australia with Chris Smith, he said China had the capacity to destroy Australia.
Emmanuel Macron has been forced into a humiliating U-turn months after he was attacked for playing a prominent role in the EU-China deal.
The French President vowed to bolster France’s security ties with Tokyo in a bid to counter Beijing’s dominance in the Indo-Pacific region. Mr Macron met with Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga and they issued a joint statement.
The US “won’t stand a chance” of stopping a Chinese invasion of Taiwan as it would happen “in a very short amount of time”, according to experts. Du Wenlong, a military expert at China’s Military Culture Society, said that Chinese force would arrive on the neighbouring island quickly. Wenlong told China’s state-controlled broadcaster CCTV that this gives the US “no chance to intervene”.
The US might not take action to stop a Chinese attack on Taiwan, an Australian politician has warned. Tensions over Taiwan have continued to increase as Beijing doubles down on its aggressive actions towards the island state. Recent months have seen a ratcheting up of militant rhetoric and continued incursions of Taiwan’s airspace by Chinese fighter jets.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Angela Merkel’s departure as German Chancellor has been tipped to have a “major impact” on how the EU faces up to the rise of China. Angela Merkel has been blasted for having “lost contact” with the “dire reality” that is China’s growing threat to European Union interests.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Liberal Senator Jim Molan says his “fear” is that a war between China and the United States may occur, and that Australia gets “caught in collateral damage”.
“Or, even more frightening, the US – because it hasn’t won a war game in the last couple of years over a Taiwan scenario – is that they don’t engage and Taiwan falls,” Mr Molan told Sky News host Chris Smith. “That is the big problem”.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
CHINA has threatened to launch nuclear missiles atJapan on the eve of the Olympic Games as tensions of Taiwan threaten all-out war. China has vowed to launch a nuclear war with Japan if Tokyo intervenes to protect Taiwan.
Beijing made the threat as Japan prepares to host the 2021 Olympic Games, the East Asian superpowers have been in conflict over the status of Taiwan. …
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
China’s President Xi Jinping is a force to be reckoned with. As leader of the Communist colossus, he commands the world’s attention, but who is China’s strongman and what is his agenda?
Born into the privileged life of a princeling, banished to poverty in the countryside during a political purge, his early life formed and framed his views on power and control. His rise up the political ladder was propelled by party connections and an advantageous celebrity marriage.
As he rose through the party ranks, he carefully crafted his image. Today it’s a full-blown cult of personality featuring compulsory lessons in “Xi Jinping Thought”. China specialists say that the country has already fundamentally re-written the international rule book.
The question is, how will the rest of the world respond?
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
The ANU’s Professor John Blaxland says China’s parade for the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party of China was “eerily reminiscent” of Nuremberg-type rallies.
“The parade that we saw for the anniversary, eerily reminiscent of Nuremberg-type rallies with goose-stepping parades and fists of declaration of smashing heads – it makes Peter Dutton looks positively pacifist,” he told Sky News host Catherine McGregor.
“The talk of beating drums of war really makes it very very clear that the drums aren’t being beaten here, they’re being beaten in Beijing.”
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Israel acknowledged that it was behind a cyberattack on Iran’s main nuclear facility on April 11. The cyberattack took place hours after officials at the Natanz reactor restarted spinning advanced centrifuges. These centrifuges could speed up the production of enriched uranium. Watch the video to know more.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back
1. This report of the Director General to the Board of Governors and, in parallel, to the Security Council, is on the implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran).
…
G. Possible Military Dimensions
38. Previous reports by the Director General have identified outstanding issues related to possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme and actions required of Iran to resolve these. Since 2002, the Agency has become increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear related activities involving military related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile, about which the Agency has regularly received new information.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Atomic weapons are a key element of the security condition. Foes progressively depend on atomic weapons to verify their inclinations. Those looking for approaches to utilize atomic weapons for pressure and war end present complex prevention and acceleration the executives challenges. US atomic weapons and the related capacities expected to lead atomic tasks are basic to guarantee a powerful obstacle.
2. Motivation behind Atomic Powers in US Technique
US atomic powers serve the national goal of keeping up harmony through quality. The National Security Procedure and National Protection Methodology are upheld through four head jobs for US atomic powers that guide the advancement of US power abilities and endorse the utilization of these capacities. These jobs are correlative and interrelated, and the sufficiency of US atomic powers is evaluated against every job and the methodology intended to satisfy it:
a. Hinder atomic and nonnuclear assault.
b. Guarantee partners and accomplices.
c. On the off chance that prevention fizzles, accomplish US destinations.
d. Support against a dubious future.
3. Prevention
a. Discouragement is the avoidance of activity by the presence of a believable risk of unsatisfactory neutralization and additionally conviction that the expense of the activity exceeds the apparent advantages. Sound prevention works by affecting enemy leaders through the show of US capacity and key informing of US resolve to utilize abilities that preclude the advantages from securing foe activity and force costs on them.
b. Valid atomic capacities are significant, as the President must have the way to react properly to an assault on the US, its partners, and accomplices. Atomic powers must be set up to accomplish the key destinations characterized by the President. Vital discouragement doesn’t stop once a contention has begun however proceeds all through the whole scope of military tasks. The utilization of atomic as well as customary prevention tasks during all periods of arranging and execution is basic to impact a foe’s basic leadership process, paying little mind to the phase of contention.
c. Notwithstanding dissuading enemies from propelling enormous scale traditional assaults or utilizing weapons of mass obliteration (WMD), atomic powers stretch out prevention to partners and accomplices. This backings limitation endeavors by preventing country states from creating atomic abilities of their own.
d. There is no “one size fits all” for prevention. Thus, the US applies a customized and adaptable way to deal with viably deflect a range of foes, dangers, and settings. Atomic weapons expansion, procurement of atomic materials of concern, and trade of specialized ability pursue pathways and danger systems like those of other WMD multiplication.
…
2. Vital Set of three
a. The US keeps up a set of three of vital atomic powers comprising of land-based intercontinental ballistic rockets (ICBMs), submarine-propelled ballistic rockets (SLBMs), and long-extend planes. Every framework gives solidarity to the US atomic power pose through one of a kind and correlative qualities. Further, the key group of three decreases the likelihood that a specialized issue in any one leg of the vital set of three or enemy specialized headway will leave the US at a vital drawback.
b. ICBM. The ICBM power remains ceaselessly on alert and furnishes the President with responsive choices. Adaptability accordingly choices and the capacity to quickly retarget confuses adversary assault arranging. With scattered basing, responsiveness, and powerful order and control, the ICBM power makes an uncommonly high edge for an effective, enormous scale, regular or atomic assault on the US country. The ICBM power is survivable from the angle that an adversary would be required to submit a huge scale use of atomic warheads to focus on all ICBM dispatch offices and control focuses.
A talk of ICBM capacities is found in Aviation based armed forces Convention Addition 3-72, Atomic Activities.
c. SLBM. The ballistic rocket submarine (atomic controlled) (SSBN) and its related SLBM give a guaranteed, survivable strike capacity. The SSBN power furnishes the country with an exceptionally solid, sheltered, secure, exact, adaptable, and viable obstacle capacity that convolutes a risk’s arranging, driving them to consider the reaction ability from SSBNs.
For more data on SSBN/SLBM abilities, allude to Naval force Fighting Distribution 372, Naval force Vital Atomic Prevention.
d. Long-Range Planes. Long-extend aircraft are fit for striking focuses the world over, giving an obvious and adaptable atomic obstruction capacity, while guaranteeing partners and accomplices. Aircraft give both standoff and infiltrating capacities expected to overcome an assortment of dangers, to incorporate current air safeguards, portable targets, and targets inserted in complex landscape. Dissimilar to SLBMs and ICBMs, aircraft are recallable.
A talk of aircraft capacities is found in Aviation based armed forces Teaching Addition 3-72, Atomic Activities.
3. Nonstrategic Powers
Double Proficient Air ship. The US and select North Atlantic Arrangement Association (NATO) partners keep up double fit flying machine fit for conveying atomic or ordinary weapons on the side of national vital expanded prevention targets and reinforcing local discouragement. These atomic powers offer a significant ability against provincial dangers, guaranteeing partners of the US duty to their security and are an unmistakable and noticeable message to any risk.
The Korean peninsula is a location of strategic interest for the US in the Pacific Command (PACOM), and many observers note that North Korea is an unpredictable and potentially volatile actor. According to the Department of Defense in its report to Congress and the intelligence community, the DPRK “remains one of the United States’ most critical security challenges for many reasons. These include North Korea’s willingness to undertake provocative and destabilizing behavior, including attacks on the Republic of Korea (ROK), its pursuit of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles, and its willingness to proliferate weapons in contravention of United Nations Security Council Resolutions.” Some of the latest evidence of irrational behavior is the elevation of Kim Jong Un’s 26-year old sister to a high governmental post late in 2014, the computer hacking of the Sony Corporation supposedly by North Korea during late 2014 over the possible release of a film that mocked Kim Jong Un, and the April 2015 execution of a defense chief for allegedly nodding off during a meeting. Over the past 50 years, North Korea has sporadically conducted operations directed against its enemies, especially South Korea. These actions included attacks on South Korean naval vessels, the capturing of a US ship and holding American hostages for 11 months, the hijacking of a South Korean airline jet, electronic warfare against South Korean signals including global positioning satellites (GPS), and assassinations or attempted assassinations on South Korean officials including the ROK president. The attempted 1968 Blue House Raid by North Korean elite military personnel resulted in the death or capture of all 31 infiltrators involved in the assassination attempt as well as the death of 71 personnel, including three Americans, and the injury of 66 others as the North Korean SPF personnel attempted to escape back to DPRK territory.
The purpose of this North Korean Threat Tactics Report (TTR) is to explain to the Army training community how North Korea fights including its doctrine, force structure, weapons and equipment, and the warfighting functions. A TTR also identifies where the conditions specific to the actor are present in Decisive Action Training Environment (DATE) and other training materials so that these conditions can easily be implemented across all training venues.
Executive Summary
North Korea is an oligarchy with Kim Jong Un as its supreme leader.
The DPRK is a militaristic society with about 1.2 million active duty personnel in uniform out of a population of 24 million with another 7.7 million in the reserve forces.
All military personnel serve under the umbrella of the Korean People’s Army (KPA); the Korean People’s Air Force (KPAF) and Korean People’s Navy (KPN) primarily support the KPA ground forces.
The KPAF focuses on homeland defense and close air support to the KPA.
The KPN’s primary mission is to protect the North Korean coastline and support the KPA special purpose forces (SPF) in mission execution.
Much of the equipment in all military branches is old and obsolete, but the KPA has concentrated its modernization efforts on missile technology that may provide the means to successfully launch a nuclear warhead.
North Korea possesses a nuclear weapon and is modernizing its missile fleet in order to increase the attack range for its nuclear arsenal.
North Korea possesses both chemical and biological weapons.
The KPA practices both passive and active camouflage to hide its units, headquarters, and other important resources from the air.
…
Weaknesses
Although the North Korean military may feature some positive attributes as a fighting force, the KPA also suffers from many weaknesses as well. Much of the military’s equipment is old and obsolete. The North Korean military consciously refuses to rid itself of any equipment and still operate tanks that date back to World War II. This wide range of military hardware from many generations of warfare also generates logistical issues. The KPA’s supply personnel must not only find the spare parts for a large variety of equipment, the KPA maintenance personnel must be well-versed in the repair of a great assortment of vehicles and weapons. In addition, the DPRK lacks the logistical capability to support the KPA beyond a few months. Due to the shortage of fuel and the cost to operate vehicles for a cash-strapped country, many of the KPA soldiers find themselves involved in public works projects or helping farmers bring in their rice crops. Any time spent in non-military support is less time that the KPA soldiers can spend training for combat. Even the mechanized and armor forces, due to resource restraints, spend much of their training time doing light infantry training instead of mounted operations. While KPA soldiers may be well trained in individual skills or small unit tactics, the amount of time spent on larger exercises pales in comparison to most Western militaries. Without adequate time and resources to practice large scale military operations, the KPA will always face a steep learning curve when the KPA is forced to perform them in actual combat for the first time.
…
…
The DPRK’s unorthodox use of provocation in order to obtain concessions from its enemies—especially the US, South Korea, and Japan—is a danger. One never knows what North Korea will do next as, in the past, the DPRK has sanctioned assassination attempts on South Korean political leaders and conducted bombings when South Korean contingents are in another country, unannounced attacks on ships by submarines, unprovoked artillery attacks, or has tunneled underground into another country. US military personnel stationed in South Korea must be prepared for the unexpected from the DPRK.
One of these incidents could ignite the Korean peninsula back into a full-blown war. While an armistice has been in place since 1953, an armistice is just a ceasefire waiting for a peace treaty to be signed or for the resumption of hostilities. Any conflict between North and South Korea would inevitably bring the US into the conflict as the ROK has been an ally for over six decades.
North Korea’s possession of nuclear weapons and the missiles to transport it up to 9,650 km makes it a threat to US forces stationed in Korea, Japan, Alaska, or even the west coast of the continental United States. Even more concerning was the DPRK’s first successful test launch of a KN-11 missile from a submarine on 23 January 2015 since, in the near future, the North Korean submarines could silently move closer to their targets before launching a nuclear missile that would give the US less warning time. If the DPRK thought that the survival of its country or the Kim regime was at stake, North Korea might use any nuclear weapons at its disposal. The KPA also possesses chemical weapons and its doctrine calls for their employment. The DPRK is also involved in biological weapons research and would likely use those with offensive capabilities. US military personnel training for deployment to South Korea must be prepared to fight in a chemical, biological, or nuclear environment.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
The Korean peninsula is a location of strategic interest for the US in the Pacific Command (PACOM), and many observers note that North Korea is an unpredictable and potentially volatile actor. According to the Department of Defense in its report to Congress and the intelligence community, the DPRK “remains one of the United States’ most critical security challenges for many reasons. These include North Korea’s willingness to undertake provocative and destabilizing behavior, including attacks on the Republic of Korea (ROK), its pursuit of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles, and its willingness to proliferate weapons in contravention of United Nations Security Council Resolutions.” Some of the latest evidence of irrational behavior is the elevation of Kim Jong Un’s 26-year old sister to a high governmental post late in 2014, the computer hacking of the Sony Corporation supposedly by North Korea during late 2014 over the possible release of a film that mocked Kim Jong Un, and the April 2015 execution of a defense chief for allegedly nodding off during a meeting. Over the past 50 years, North Korea has sporadically conducted operations directed against its enemies, especially South Korea. These actions included attacks on South Korean naval vessels, the capturing of a US ship and holding American hostages for 11 months, the hijacking of a South Korean airline jet, electronic warfare against South Korean signals including global positioning satellites (GPS), and assassinations or attempted assassinations on South Korean officials including the ROK president. The attempted 1968 Blue House Raid by North Korean elite military personnel resulted in the death or capture of all 31 infiltrators involved in the assassination attempt as well as the death of 71 personnel, including three Americans, and the injury of 66 others as the North Korean SPF personnel attempted to escape back to DPRK territory.
The purpose of this North Korean Threat Tactics Report (TTR) is to explain to the Army training community how North Korea fights including its doctrine, force structure, weapons and equipment, and the warfighting functions. A TTR also identifies where the conditions specific to the actor are present in Decisive Action Training Environment (DATE) and other training materials so that these conditions can easily be implemented across all training venues.
Executive Summary
North Korea is an oligarchy with Kim Jong Un as its supreme leader.
The DPRK is a militaristic society with about 1.2 million active duty personnel in uniform out of a population of 24 million with another 7.7 million in the reserve forces.
All military personnel serve under the umbrella of the Korean People’s Army (KPA); the Korean People’s Air Force (KPAF) and Korean People’s Navy (KPN) primarily support the KPA ground forces.
The KPAF focuses on homeland defense and close air support to the KPA.
The KPN’s primary mission is to protect the North Korean coastline and support the KPA special purpose forces (SPF) in mission execution.
Much of the equipment in all military branches is old and obsolete, but the KPA has concentrated its modernization efforts on missile technology that may provide the means to successfully launch a nuclear warhead.
North Korea possesses a nuclear weapon and is modernizing its missile fleet in order to increase the attack range for its nuclear arsenal.
North Korea possesses both chemical and biological weapons.
The KPA practices both passive and active camouflage to hide its units, headquarters, and other important resources from the air.
…
Weaknesses
Although the North Korean military may feature some positive attributes as a fighting force, the KPA also suffers from many weaknesses as well. Much of the military’s equipment is old and obsolete. The North Korean military consciously refuses to rid itself of any equipment and still operate tanks that date back to World War II. This wide range of military hardware from many generations of warfare also generates logistical issues. The KPA’s supply personnel must not only find the spare parts for a large variety of equipment, the KPA maintenance personnel must be well-versed in the repair of a great assortment of vehicles and weapons. In addition, the DPRK lacks the logistical capability to support the KPA beyond a few months. Due to the shortage of fuel and the cost to operate vehicles for a cash-strapped country, many of the KPA soldiers find themselves involved in public works projects or helping farmers bring in their rice crops. Any time spent in non-military support is less time that the KPA soldiers can spend training for combat. Even the mechanized and armor forces, due to resource restraints, spend much of their training time doing light infantry training instead of mounted operations. While KPA soldiers may be well trained in individual skills or small unit tactics, the amount of time spent on larger exercises pales in comparison to most Western militaries. Without adequate time and resources to practice large scale military operations, the KPA will always face a steep learning curve when the KPA is forced to perform them in actual combat for the first time.
…
…
The DPRK’s unorthodox use of provocation in order to obtain concessions from its enemies—especially the US, South Korea, and Japan—is a danger. One never knows what North Korea will do next as, in the past, the DPRK has sanctioned assassination attempts on South Korean political leaders and conducted bombings when South Korean contingents are in another country, unannounced attacks on ships by submarines, unprovoked artillery attacks, or has tunneled underground into another country. US military personnel stationed in South Korea must be prepared for the unexpected from the DPRK.
One of these incidents could ignite the Korean peninsula back into a full-blown war. While an armistice has been in place since 1953, an armistice is just a ceasefire waiting for a peace treaty to be signed or for the resumption of hostilities. Any conflict between North and South Korea would inevitably bring the US into the conflict as the ROK has been an ally for over six decades.
North Korea’s possession of nuclear weapons and the missiles to transport it up to 9,650 km makes it a threat to US forces stationed in Korea, Japan, Alaska, or even the west coast of the continental United States. Even more concerning was the DPRK’s first successful test launch of a KN-11 missile from a submarine on 23 January 2015 since, in the near future, the North Korean submarines could silently move closer to their targets before launching a nuclear missile that would give the US less warning time. If the DPRK thought that the survival of its country or the Kim regime was at stake, North Korea might use any nuclear weapons at its disposal. The KPA also possesses chemical weapons and its doctrine calls for their employment. The DPRK is also involved in biological weapons research and would likely use those with offensive capabilities. US military personnel training for deployment to South Korea must be prepared to fight in a chemical, biological, or nuclear environment.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Authorities held a secret meeting last week to discuss contingency plans in the event of Pyongyang launching a deadly missile at the US islands.
North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un has threatened to drop a hydrogen bomb over the Pacific Ocean amid fears Pyongyang has developed a nuclear missile capable of reaching Hawaii.
A document shared at the private talks, and obtained by local paper Honolulu Civil Beat, featured chapter headings such as “Enhance missile launch notification process between U.S. Pacific Command and the State Warning Point.”
The US state, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, will also begin testing a warning siren system in November, giving residents between 12 and 15 minutes to take refuge.
Resident wil then be advised to stay indoors for 72 hours after an attack.
State representative Gene Ward told the Washington Post: “Now it’s time to take it seriously.”
He said the plan was “not to be an alarmist but to be informing people.”
Mr Ward said the meeting last week was held in private because officials did not want to worry residents.
He also said talk of bunkers and fallout shelters was “probably more surreal for younger generations” with no experience of a realistic nuclear threat.
But Hawaiians are apparently taking the news in their stride, and carrying on with their daily lives.
Residents are used to disaster warnings, living in an area prone to hurricanes and tsunamis.
Survival guidelines for those scenarios are similar to the ones being issued for a nuclear attack – instead of seven days worth of food, water and medical supplies, residents are advised to double it.
The document distrubted at last week’s meeting suggested that around 90 per cent of the Hawaiian population would survive a nuclear attack by North Korea, based on the estimated yield of North Korea’s missile capability, which suggests an explosion less than eight miles in diameter.
It comes as America’s top military officer said despite an escalation in rhetoric between the US and North Korea, he had not seen Pyongyang change it’s military posture.
Marine General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing for his reappointment: “While the political space is clearly very charged right now, we haven’t seen a change in the posture of North Korean forces and we watch that very closely.
“What we haven’t seen is military activity that would be reflective of the charged political environment.”
North Korea has boosted defences on its east coast, a South Korean lawmaker said on Tuesday, after Pyongyang said US President Donald Trump had declared war and that it would shoot down US bombers flying near the peninsula.
Tensions have escalated since reclusive North Korea conducted its sixth and most powerful nuclear test on Sept. 3. Bellicose rhetoric has reached a new level in recent days with leaders on both sides exchanging threats and insults.
North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho said on Monday that Mr Trump’s Twitter comments that leader Kim Jong Un and Ri “won’t be around much longer” if they acted on their threats amounted to a declaration of war and that Pyongyang had the right to take countermeasures.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
The highest tensions have been in decades. North Korea and the United States are at an entirely new level of conflict. At any minute something could trigger an all out invasion of North Korea and multiple nuclear missile launches at the United States, South Korea and Japan.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
[ATS] Last month a bulletin was issued by the Joint Regional Intelligence Center, regarding preparing California for a nuclear attack from N. Korea. I know Kim would be insane to start a war with the U.S. and unfortunately we all know he is insane.
Things have ramped up since this was issued, and I’m concerned that our President is pushing Kims buttons. Kim has painted himself in a corner on this, and saving face could cause him to do something radically stupid.
It contains some advice that I think everyone might want to know. Readers are encouraged to familiarize themselves with nuclear response emergency procedures. How to lessen the exposure to nuclear radiation, and what to expect from the Govt.
According to foreignpolicy.com:
With U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un trading insults and threatening war, California officials are taking the threat of nuclear exchange seriously.
Noting the heightened North Korean threat, the Los Angeles-area Joint Regional Intelligence Center issued a bulletin last month warning that a nuclear attack on Southern California would be “catastrophic” and urged officials in the region to shore up their nuclear attack response plans.
The report cites North Korea’s late July test of an intercontinental ballistic missile that could, in theory, reach the West Coast of the United States. “North Korea’s propaganda videos feature ruins of San Francisco and Washington,” the document says.“North Korea’s propaganda videos feature ruins of San Francisco and Washington,” the document says.
The 16-page “Nuclear Attack Response Considerations” bulletin is dated Aug. 16 and marked for “official use only.” It was circulated last month to Los Angeles-area local, state, and federal agency personnel and also throughout the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies across the country.
The idea behind the unclassified report was to share planning and guidance with as wide a distribution as possible, according to two officials involved in responding to a nuclear strike and who received the bulletin. Many agencies are involved in responding to an attack and are often staffed with personnel without access to classified information.
DHS did not respond to requests for comment.
Much of the information in the report is based on well-known facts about the effects of a nuclear blast, including the effects of radiation, the possibly of an electromagnetic pulse disabling communications, and the destructive effects of the initial blast on human life and infrastructure.
Citing figures from the Rand Corp., the report says a nuclear blast at the Long Beach Port could cause more than $1 trillion in damage, including loss of life and destruction of homes and infrastructure.
In a section on “radiation protection basics,” the report offers a primer on what to do during a nuclear attack. “Lie face down and place hands under the body to protect exposed skin,” it recommends. “Remain flat until the heat and shock waves have passed.”
There are also sections explaining the basic mechanisms of a nuclear blast as it occurs and discussion of specific things expected to happen in the event of a nuclear attack that should be considered and prepared for in advance.
It also warns of the difficulties government authorities would likely encounter in dealing with the aftermath of a blast. The public will need to evacuate, the report says, but with “limited understanding of radiation risks, they will experience high anxiety and may be non-compliant.”
Challenges with contamination spread by pets and through clothing are among the many public health and logistical coordination issues spelled out for potential emergency responders.
“The consequences of a nuclear attack in Southern California would be catastrophic,” the report says. “Nonetheless, government entities and first responders are expected to remain operational to preserve human life, maintain order, and aid in the recovery process.”
The report, which is largely directed at local, state, and federal agencies and first responders located in the Los Angeles region, notes that the federal government will likely be of limited help immediately after a nuclear blast.
“[T]here will be no significant federal assistance at the scene for 24-72 hours following the attack,” the bulletin says.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un are playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship while also trading personal insults.
Most recently, Trump blasted the “Rocket Man” in his inaugural speech to the United Nations, promising to “totally destroy” North Korea if it threatens the U.S. or its allies. The Trump Administration also added new sanctions aimed at strangling its ability to work with banks.
Kim, for his part, resorted to calling Trump “mentally deranged” and a “dotard,” while his foreign minister threatened to test a hydrogen bomb in the Pacific.
With tensions escalating, it is important to be realistic about how we can get out of this mess.
In short, any nonmilitary solution will rely on China choosing to apply its massive economic leverage over the North Korean regime. In a positive sign, China’s central bank recently told Chinese financial companies to stop doing business with North Korea.
Overall, however, it appears that China has increased its trade with North Korea in recent years while doing fairly little to forestall North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. China’s foremost objective seems to be promoting greater stability from its volatile neighbor, in part because it fears being faced with a massive humanitarian crisis should the regime collapse.
But while the poor quality of the data hinders a detailed analysis, a quick look shows just how much leverage China has, if it wishes to use it.
Trade between China and North Korea grew almost 40% in the first quarter. So much for China working with us – but we had to give it a try!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 5, 2017
North Korea’s primary patron
In general, exports from one country to another can be mostly explained by the distance between them and the sizes of their markets, a pattern that holds for China and North Korea.
Geographically, they share a long border, which makes China a natural, though not inevitable, partner for trade. As a case in point, North Korea also shares a long border with South Korea, but these countries have almost no trade between them. In addition, North Korea shares a small border with Russia, with whom it has little, though ever-increasing, trade.
China’s large market, proximity and – most importantly – willingness to trade with North Korea has led to a situation in which North Korea has become highly dependent on trade with what has become its primary patron. About half of North Korean exports and imports go directly to and from China and most of the rest of its trade is handled indirectly by Chinese middlemen.
North Korea’s dependence on its neighbor has grown alongside China’s increasing economic dominance of East Asia, which gained momentum 15 years ago when China joined the World Trade Organization. Since then, both Chinese gross domestic product as well as its annual trade with North Korea have increased nearly tenfold, to around US$11 trillion and $6 billion, respectively.
North Korea imports nearly everything from China, from rubber tires to refined petroleum to pears, with no single category dominating. Meanwhile, coal constitutes about 40 percent of North Korean exports to China.
Time to use that leverage?
However, recent events – such as the use of front companies by Chinese firms to evade sanctions imposed on North Korea and China’s reluctance to cut off energy supplies to the country – have led to some uncertainty about the extent to which China is willing to use this economic leverage to rein in North Korea’s military ambitions.
On one hand, China previously claimed to have stopped coal imports from North Korea as part of recent efforts to punish the regime for missile tests and the suspected assassination of Kim Jong-nam, the estranged half-brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. This was an important signal of China’s willingness to support U.S. concerns about the missile program since oil represents about a third ($930 million) of North Korea’s import revenue.
On the other hand, there is evidence that coal shipments in fact never ceased. And, in any case, China may have increased its imports of iron ore from North Korea to offset the lost coal revenues.
This is consistent with the idea that China carefully considers the resources and revenue that are available to the North Korean regime at any moment, and uses trade as a lever to control them. In this way, China walks a fine line between providing too many resources, and thus allowing the regime to prosper, and not enough resources, such that North Korea is in danger of collapsing. Ultimately, trade may be used as a lever to do some light scolding, but China’s overwhelming concern is preventing North Korea’s collapse.
Further evidence that China has tight control over the North Korean economy comes from a recent report from C4ADS. The research group found close, and often common, ownership ties between most of the major Chinese companies who do business with North Korea. This suggests that trade with North Korea is highly centralized and thus easily controlled.
Russia: North Korea’s other ‘friend’
China is not the only country that North Korea trades with, though the others currently pale in comparison. Other top export destinations include India ($97.8 million), Pakistan ($43.1 million) and Burkina Faso ($32.8 million). In terms of imports, India ($108 million), Russia ($78.3 million) and Thailand ($73.8 million) currently sell the most to North Korea.
Russia in particular may soon complicate U.S. efforts to isolate the regime. While still small, Russian trade with North Korea increased 73 percent over the first two months of 2017 compared with the same period of the previous year.
But whereas China is legitimately worried that an economic crisis in North Korea could lead to a flood of refugees or all-out war, Russia likely sees engagement with North Korea in much simpler terms, namely as an additional way to gain geopolitical advantage relative to the U.S.
A way out?
Nearly all experts agree that there is no easy way to “solve” the North Korea problem. However, one plausible approach is to encourage South Korea and Japan to begin to develop nuclear weapons programs of their own, and to only discontinue these programs if China takes meaningful steps to use its trade with North Korea to reign in the regime.
Threatening to introduce new nuclear powers to the world is clearly risky, however stable and peaceful South Korea and Japan currently are. But China is highly averse to having these economic and political rivals acquire nuclear capabilities, as it would threaten China’s ongoing pursuit of regional control. In short, this is a sensitive pressure point that could be used to sway the Chinese leadership.
One way or another, China must become convinced that the costs of propping up the North Korean regime through trade are higher than the costs of an increased probability that the regime will collapse.
This is an updated version of an article originally published on July 6, 2017.
Greg Wright, Assistant Professor of Economics, University of California, Merced
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
After the latter sent the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier with its battle group to the waters off the Korean peninsula, North Korea has made a decision to stand against any further moves by the US. Amongst the other things, this issue seems to be taking up even more heat and tensions between the two nations.
Warning
The consequences will be catastrophic if further provoked by the US following their step of sending the navy battle group, said Pyongyang.
Donald Trump said to solve the problem of North Korea if China doesn’t help to put pressure on its neighbor to stop all missile and nuclear weapons programs they developed.
Tensions increase
The actual decision to send the aircraft carrier and battleships to the Korean peninsula came after tensions increased over previous military drills involving American and South Korean forces, which Pyongyang terms as a performance test for an invasion.
A state-run Korean Central News Agency quoted, “We will hold the US wholly accountable for the catastrophic consequences to be entailed by its outrageous actions.”
Donald Trump’s tweet
Donald Trump used his Twitter to communicate his latest warning aimed at the Pyongyang.
“Most of the US national security establishment accepted that any preventative strike aimed at North Korean nuclear facilities could trigger devastating reprisals against South Korea, Seoul in particular, and US bases in the region. US strike against a Syrian base was also being seen as a warning to North Korea.”
Breaking a UN resolutions
Reports claim that the difficult situation escalated after North Korea refused to obey UN resolutions banning it from developing ballistic missile technology. After that, the Korean nation did another test-launch during Trump’s summit with Xi Jinping in Florida.
Chinese authorities report
The Chinese Foreign officials have ruled down the claims that Beijing has situated 150,000 troops to its border with North Korea. Hua Chunying told reporters that she was uniformed of any mobilization by the People’s Liberation Army along the 880-mile border with North Korea and also claimed such reports are false.
She added that China was very closely following developments on the Korean peninsula.
We only hope that all involved sides should avoid doing any activities that could escalate the tension and make it even worse.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
War with North Korea: No Joke By John Stanton The 20th Century Korean War from 1950-1953 pitting US-led United Nations coalition forces against the North Korean and Chinese militaries has been in pause mode for 64 years. The Korean Armistice was signed on July 27, 1953 by the United States, China and North Korea. It called for a cessation of hostilities until a lasting peace agreement between the warring parties could be negotiated and signed. That, of course, has not happened due as much to North Korea’s rationally maniacal behavior and ruthless treatment of its citizens, as to its role as a useful pawn of the Chinese and American governments. The Chinese feel compelled to let the incendiary North Korean government in Pyongyang irritate and provoke the United States and much of the world community, and the Americans don’t mind having a large military presence to deter North Korea but also to keep an eye on the China and the Southeast Asian region. China has apparently reinforced its military forces on its border with North Korea. Russia has a short land and maritime border with North Korea. In 2015 officials from the two countries signed an agreement to construct a road connection between the two neighbors during their “Year of Friendship.” According to NK.News.org, North Korea and Russia envisioned “closer collaboration between the two states in political, economic and humanitarian spheres.” As tensions ratchet up in the wake of North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile tests, Russia has apparently shored up its military forces near the bustling Russian port city of Vladivostok, home to Russia’s Pacific Fleet and within range of North Korean missiles. US-Led Coalition These military moves by China and Russia make sense if war breaks out between a US-led coalition including South Korea, Japan, Canada, and Australia (for starters) and North Korean forces. The extra forces would likely be used to stanch the tide of North Koreans expected to stream out of North Korea. In the unfortunate circumstance that sees North Korea’s first use of a nuclear weapon, a US retaliatory strike would ensure that the radiologically damaged would seek care in China and Russia, care that China and Russia can ill-afford to provide on a large scale. During a protracted conventional conflict, it seems likely that enterprising organizations in China and Russia would attempt to funnel weapons and aid to the North Koreans to keep the US-led coalition occupied while they ponder their strategic and tactical options. With the US bogged down in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, there are many moves that the Chinese and Russians could make contrary to US interests. The political and pundit classes in New York City and Washington, DC believe that the Trump Administration will just kick the Kim Jong-Un tin can down the road for another US president. The same elites told us all that Hillary Clinton would, with great certainty, win the 2016 presidential election. After 100 days of the Trump presidency, they still shake their heads in disbelief. Yet, they seemed to believe fully in President Trump’s punitive April cruise missile strikes in Syria undertaken after a Bashar Al Assad use of a nerve agent on his own citizens. But Trump’s people say that the time for “strategic patience” with North Korea is over. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the Perry Como of the US State Department, declared as much during a recent visit to South Korea. Has America’s new Ken and Barbie, Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, been advising President Trump on the matter? As for China’s influence, it has warned North Korea not to test Trump even as it recently resumed flights to North Korea from Beijing. Time will tell if China is serious in assisting the US or not. Intellectuals? Beyond the political and pundit classes who grace the world with their intellectual acumen are those across the spectrum who think that North Korea is the way it is because of the policies and practices of the US government. Those outlandish claims should not be seriously entertained. Kim Jong-Un is seen in this video smoking a cigarette and, at one point, sitting at a desk not far from an aircraft runway watching his air force and army in action. It looks a lot like a Monty Python skit until you realize that the North Koreans really believe they are a competent military power. And then there is the North Korean Army’s recent live fire exercise. What kind of commanders and political leaders think that the alignment of this artillery on a beach? The commanders are essentially giving their troops a death sentence as US standoff weapons systems would mostly obliterate such massed artillery. North Korean military doctrine is as obsolete as much of its weaponry is. Still, war is horrible and North Korea would, initially, likely cause a lot of pain to the northern portions of Seoul, South Korea. US, South and North Korean civilian casualties would certainly follow. Pain reduction, not elimination, depends on the lethality of US preemptive missile, bomber and cyber-attacks designed to neutralize what the US-led coalition’s intelligence believes to be the targets most important to hit first. Most likely, both North Korean nuclear weapons testing and medium-long range missile sites would be targeted, simultaneously with other North Korean conventional military assets. Before such a conflict de-confliction lines with China and Russia would have to be opened. The Fight North Korea has to know that if it moves any weapons systems into the open, the heat or electronic emissions will get them killed. US intelligence services have tried hard to anticipate how quickly the North Koreans can load and reload artillery and the extent of their ammunition supplies. Then there are the diesel submarines North Korea has in operation. US military antisubmarine warfare aircraft and detection is the best in the world and the Navy would be quick to begin the search for North Korean submarines. US attack class submarines would have to eliminate the DPRK’s undersea threat very quickly, just as US air forces would be called upon to clear the airspace above North Korea as rapidly as possible. North Korean surface vessels would not do well against US anti-ship weaponry with its advanced guidance systems. On the ground and from the sea, the situation is less clear. North Korea is vulnerable to amphibious landings on both its coastlines on the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan. The US Navy and Marine Corps would not attempt such landings until many days into a conflict though. North Korea is said to have sleeper cells in South Korea that would be activated to destroy key communications nodes and other critical infrastructure. North Korean Special Forces are said to be a dangerous threat as in any conflict they would be tasked with infiltrating South Korea to engage in sabotage. It is not known how the North Korean civilian population would respond to an attack. The nation is home to 25 million people who have mostly known nothing but privation and austerity. Of course, that’s the view from the outside. There are tantalizing hints that the civilians there might stay away from the fighting to a limited degree. Books smuggled out of North Korea like The Accusation give a hint of some of the thinking of the well-educated and economically better positioned denizens. But the US experience with insurgencies from Vietnam until the present have not been pleasant, successful affairs. At any rate, the “will” of the North Korean population would play a significant role in a protracted conflict. Some argue that the US should learn from its 20th Century Korean War experience. But comparisons are invalid. The conflict took place as the US was drawing down from World War II and cold political winds were blowing. Since that time the North Koreans have spent a lot of time training to fight but have not been engaged in protracted conflicts for the last two decades as the US has been. There is no substitute for training but when military forces have experience in combat operations and maintain a training regime there is going to be a mismatch at some point favoring the US. Yet another consideration is the Joint Force capabilities of the North Korean military versus the UScoalition interoperability and joint force training. There is no evidence to suggest that North Korea has “networked” its fighting forces to wage war in the cross domains of sea, undersea, land, air, space and cyber. Nor has North Korea conducted extensive training exercises with partner or allies equivalent to Canada, Australia, Japan and South Korea. No One Knows and that Unfinished Business Thing A long term conflict in which the US-led coalition fails to bring North Korea to its knees would allow other nations to make risky moves. Would Russia invade Eastern Ukraine and move up to the Dnieper River? Would China move on Taiwan? Would Turkey move further into Syria? Would Iran move further into Syria and Iraq? Would Russia get more aggressive in Libya? Would Europe further splinter as some members of the European Union back the US while others do not (the UK would fight with the US)? Would the American public support a longer term war effort? Unfortunately, the US, North and South Korea issue is unfinished business. Not too many people on the planet want to see a video of the Kim Jong-Un of the future sitting at his portable desk smoking a cigarette while watching the North Korean “Death to America” ICBM successfully launched and carrying a nuke toward the United States. If that ICBM made in through US missile defenses, the United States nuclear retaliatory response would turn North Korea into a radiological waste-land for decades. No one in the world wants to see that happen either. John Stanton can be reached at jstantonarchangel@gmail.com
North Korea News, North Korea Map, North Korea War, North Korea Flag, North Korea President, North Korea Population, North Korea Allies, North Korea Military, North Korea Nuclear Test, North Korea At Night, North Korea Allies, North Korea At Night, North Korea And Us, North Korea Air Force, North Korea And China, North Korean Army, North Korea Attack, North Korea And South Korea, North Korea And Russia, North Korea And Trump, North Korea Bomb, North Korea Border, North Korea Breaking News, North Korea Bbc, North Korea Bombing Us, North Korea Book, North Korea Basketball, North Korea Best Korea, North Korea Beaches, North Korea Bomb Test, North Korea China, North Korea Cnn, North Korean Currency, North Korea Climate, North Korea Current Events, North Korea Crisis, North Korea Conflict, North Korea City, North Korea China Border, North Korean Culture, North Korea Dictator, North Korea Documentary, North Korea Declares War 2017, North Korea Dmz, North Korea Definition, North Korea Declares War Cnn, North Korea Daily Life, North Korea Death Camps, North Korea Declared War On Usa, North Korean Defector, North Korea Emp, North Korean Economy, North Korea Evacuation, North Korea Enemies, North Korea Education, North Korea Execution, North Korea Economic System, North Korea Election, North Korean Embassy, North Korea Electricity, North Korea Flag, North Korea Facts, North Korea From Space, North Korea Fires Missile, North Korea Fox News, North Korea Food, North Korea Failed Missile, North Korea Fake City, North Korean Famine, North Korea Flights, North Korea Gdp, North Korean Government, North Korea Google Maps, North Korea Geography, North Korea Google Earth, North Korea Gif, North Korea Genocide, North Korea Gdp 2016, North Korean Government Type, North Korean Girls, North Korea History, North Korea Hawaii, North Korea Hotel, North Korea Holidays, North Korea Haircut, North Korea Hard Labor, North Korean Human Rights, North Korea Hetalia, North Korea Hostages, North Korea Hacking, North Korea Icbm, North Korea Internet, North Korea Images, North Korea Is Best Korea, North Korea In World Map, North Korea Imports, North Korea In The News, North Korea Issues, North Korea Invaded South Korea, North Korea Iran, North Korea Japan, North Korea Jokes, North Korea Juche, North Korea Japan Relations, North Korea Jobs, North Korea Jail, North Korea Jets, North Korea Japan Missile, North Korea James Franco, North Korea Japan War, North Korea Kim, North Korea Kim Jong Un, North Korea Kim Jong Il, North Korea Kim Jong Un Wife, North Korea Kim Jong Un Brother, North Korea Kidnapping, North Korea Killings, North Korea Korean War, North Korea Kpop, North Korea Kn-08, North Korean Leader, North Korea Life, North Korea Latest, North Korea Life Expectancy, North Korea Literacy Rate, North Korean Laws, North Korea Language, North Korea Latest News Today, North Korea Latest News, North Korea Location, North Korea Map, North Korea Missile, North Korea Military, North Korea Memes, North Korea Missile Test, North Korea Missile Range, North Korea Missile Launch, North Korea Movie, North Korean Military Size, North Korea March, North Korea News, North Korea Nuclear Test, North Korea Nuclear, North Korea News Update, North Korea Nuclear Threat, North Korea Nukes, North Korea News Today, North Korean Navy, North Korea Natural Resources, North Korea News Cnn, North Korea On Map, North Korea Olympics, North Korea On World Map, North Korea Official Name, North Korea Options, North Korea Oil, North Korea Official Website, North Korea Obama, North Korea Oppression, North Korea On Trump, North Korea President, North Korea Population, North Korea Population 2017, North Korea Pictures, North Korea Poverty, North Korea Parade, North Korea President Age, North Korean Propaganda, North Korea Prison, North Korean People, North Korea Quotes, North Korea Quora, North Korea Quality Of Life, North Korea Questions, North Korea Quizlet, North Korea Quiz, North Korea Quiet, North Korea Quick Facts, North Korea Quantum Encryption, North Korea Quantum, North Korea Russia, North Korea Religion, North Korea Rules, North Korea Reddit, North Korea Ready For War, North Korea Russia Border, North Korea Resources, North Korean Ruler, North Korea Recent News, North Korea Russia Relations, North Korea Size, North Korea Satellite, North Korea Sanctions, North Korea South Korea, North Korea Square Miles, North Korea Strike, North Korea Situation, North Korea Seattle, North Korea Starvation, North Korean Submarine, North Korea Trump, North Korea Tourism, North Korea Today, North Korea Twitter, North Korea Threats, North Korea Time, North Korea Test, North Korea Tensions, North Korea Travel, North Korea The Great Illusion, North Korea Update, North Korea Us, North Korea Us War, North Korea United States, North Korea Us News, North Korea Un, North Korea Unicorn, North Korea Unemployment Rate, North Korea Usa News, North Korea University, North Korea Vs Usa, North Korea Video, North Korea Vs South Korea, North Korea Vs Us, North Korea Vacation, North Korea Vs Usa War, North Korea Vice, North Korea Vs China, North Korea Vs The World, North Korea Vs United States, North Korea War, North Korea Wiki, North Korea Website, North Korea Weapons, North Korea World Map, North Korea Ww3, North Korea Weather, North Korea Warning, North Korea World War 3, North Korea War 2017, North Korea Xi, North Korea Xi Jinping, North Korea X Reader, North Korea X South Korea Hetalia, North Korea X Reader Lemon, North Korea Xenophobia, North Korea Xi Trump, North Korea Xinhua, North Korea China, North Korea X America Hetalia, North Korea Youtube, North Korea Year, North Korea Yahoo, North Korea Youtube 2017, North Korea Yonhap, North Korea Yalu River, North Korea Youtube Video, North Korea Youth, North Korea Youtube Channel, North Korea Yeonmi Park, North Korea Zoo, North Korea Zip Code, North Korea Zone, North Korea Zombies, North Korea Zero Hedge, North Korea Zimbabwe, North Korea Zionist, North Korea Zionism, North Korea Zombie Apocalypse, North Korean Zoo Dog
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad believes the most important task of the Iranian Revolution was to prepare the way for the return of the Twelfth Imam, who disappeared in 874, bringing an end to Muhammad’s lineage. This imam, the Mahdi or “divinely guided one,” Shiites believe, will return in an apocalyptic battle in which the forces of righteousness will defeat the forces of evil and bring about a new era in which Islam ultimately becomes the dominant religion throughout the world. The Shiites have been waiting patiently for the Twelfth Imam for more than a thousand years, but Ahmadinejad believes he can now hasten the return through a nuclear war. Ayatollah Hussein Nuri Hamdani explicitly said in 2005 that “the Jews should be fought against and forced to surrender to prepare the way for the coming of the Hidden Imam.” It is this apocalyptic world view, Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis notes, that distinguishes Iran from other governments with nuclear weapons.
Lewis quotes a passage from Ayatollah Khomeini cited in an 11th grade Iranian schoolbook, “I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against the whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all of them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom, which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another’s hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours.”
There are those who think that Muslims would never use such weapons against Israel because innocent Muslims would be killed as well, but Saddam Hussein did not hesitate to use poison gas on his own people. During the war in Lebanon in 2006, Hezbollah did not worry that rocketing cities with large Arab populations such as Haifa and Nazareth would kill non-Jews (and 24 of the 52 Israeli casualties were non-Jews). Muslims murder each other every day in Iraq. And Iran fought a ten-year war with Iraq in which as many as one million Muslims were killed.
Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani explicitly said he wasn’t concerned about fallout from an attack on Israel. “If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession,” he said “the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.” As even one Iranian commentator noted, Rafsanjani apparently wasn’t concerned that “the destruction of the Jewish State would also means the mass killing of the Palestinian population as well.”
Iran would never launch a nuclear attack against Israel, some argue because, as the old Sting song used to say about the Russians, the Iranians “love their children too.” In the days of the Cold War, this idea was known as MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction. In the Iranian case, no Muslim leader would risk an Israeli counterstrike that might destroy them. MAD doesn’t work, however, if the Iranians believe there will be destruction anyway at the end of time. What matters, Bernard Lewis observed, is if the infidels go to hell and believers go to heaven. And if you believe that killing the nonbelievers will earn you a place in Paradise with 72 virgins, what difference does it make if you go out in a blaze of glory as a suicide bomber or in the shadow of a mushroom cloud?
Optimists also suggest the Iranians are driven more by rationality than theology and would not risk using nuclear weapons. Others believe they are irrational and therefore cannot be trusted to hold their fire. One does not have to believe the Iranians are irrational, however, to foresee the possibility of an attack on Israel with nuclear weapons. Rafsanjani, the President of Iran before Ahmadinejad, was just as adamant about destroying Israel as his successor. Contrary to the old aphorism that you can’t win a nuclear war, he argued that Iran could achieve victory. He said that “Israel is much smaller than Iran in land mass, and therefore far more vulnerable to nuclear attack.” Since Iran has 70 million people and Israel only has seven million, Rafsanjani believed Iran could survive an exchange of nuclear bombs while Israel would be annihilated. The rhetoric was bombastic, but he and other Iranian leaders might first consider the possibility that Israel could conceivably launch far more missiles and the outcome might be very different than he imagined.
Rafsanjani is correct about Israel’s vulnerability. Besides the population difference, the disparity in size of the countries is such that it does not take a whole arsenal of ICBMS like the old Soviet Union had to destroy Israel; Iran need only have three crude bombs to attack Israel’s three major population centers – Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem – and it’s goodbye Israel.
Iran will not have to use nuclear weapons to influence events in the region. Maj. Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, head of the Moscow-based Center for Strategic Nuclear Forces, said the potential danger of an Iranian bomb is not the possibility of a nuclear strike against some countries, but the ability to assume a more bold approach in dealing with the international community after becoming a nuclear power. “The real threat is that Iran, which is already ignoring all resolutions and sanctions issued by the UN Security Council, will be practically ‘untouchable’ after acquiring nuclear-power status, and will be able to expand its support of terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Hezbollah” said Dvorkin (RIA Novosti, March 12, 2009).
Furthermore, by possessing a nuclear capability, the Iranians can deter Israel or any other nation from attacking Iran or its allies. When Hezbollah attacked Israel in 2006, for example, a nuclear Iran could have threatened retaliation against Tel Aviv if Israeli forces bombed Beirut. The mere threat of using nuclear weapons would be sufficient to drive Israelis into shelters and could cripple the economy. What foreign investors will want to risk their money going up in the smoke of a mushroom cloud? Will immigrants want to come to a country that lives in the shadow of annihilation? Will Israelis accept the risk? Israeli leaders will have to decide if they can risk calling the Iranians’ bluff.
Mossad 101, Mossad Agent, Mossad Training, Mossad 9\/11, Mossad Motto, Mossad Homeland, Mossad 101 Review, Mossad 101 Season 2, Mossad Harav Kook, Mossad Book, Mossad Agent, Mossad Assassinations, Mossad Aliyah Bet, Mossad Agent Salary, Mossad Assassination Dubai, Mossad Agent In Danger, Mossad And 9\/11, Mossad Application, Massad Ayoob, Mossad And Trump, Mossad Book, Mossad Blacklist, Mossad Badge, Mossad By Deception, Mossad Beretta, Mossad Building, Mossad Budget, Mossad Book Pdf, Mossad Behind 911, Mossad Blackmail, Mossad Cia, Mossad Careers, Mossad Contact, Mossad Created Isis, Mossad Cell Phone Bomb, Mossad Covert Affairs, Mossad Cz 75, Mossad Constanza D Psyd, Mossad Chemical Attack, Mossad Cz, Mossad Definition, Mossad Documentary, Mossad Did 911, Mossad Dubai, Mossad Dogs, Mossad Draw, Mossad Director Orli Elbaz, Mossad Documentary On Netflix, Mossad Deception, Mossad Duffle Bag, Mossad Eichmann, Mossad Emblem, Mossad Eagle, Mossad Exodus, Mossad Employment, Mossad Equipment, Mossad Ethiopia, Mossad Elite Unit, Mossad Eichmann Movie, Mossad English Website, Mossad False Flag, Mossad Flag, Masada Fortress, Mossad Facepalm, Mossad Facts, Mossad Failures, Massoud Furniture, Mossad Films, Mossad Founder, Mossad Funds Isis, Mossad Guns, Mossad Gal Gadot, Mossad Gov Il, Mossad Greatest Hits, Mossad Greatest Missions, Mossad Gun Choice, Mossad Girl, Mossad Group, Mossad Germany, Mossad Greatest Operations, Mossad Homeland, Mossad Harav Kook, Mossad History, Mossad Headquarters, Mossad Handgun, Mossad Hit Squad, Mossad Homeland Season 6, Mossad Honey Trap, Mossad Head, Mossad Hits, Mossad Israel, Mossad Isis, Mossad In Homeland, Mossad In Syria, Mossad In Usa, Mossad Images, Mossad In India, Mossad In Iran, Mossad Internship, Mossad In Dubai, Mossad Jobs, Mossad Jfk, Mossad Jfk Killing, Mossad Jokes, Mossad Join, Mossad Jfk Assassination, Mossad Jewish, Mossad Jacket, Mossad Job Openings, Mossad Job Application Form, Mossad Kidon, Mossad Kidon Training, Mossad Killings, Mossad Kushner, Mossad Knife, Mossad Killed Jfk, Mossad Kush, Mossad Katsa, Mossad Kidnapping, Mossad Kennedy, Mossad Logo, Mossad Lealiyah Bet, Mossad Lillehammer, Mossad London, Mossad Lebanon, Mossad Libro, Mossad London Attack, Mossad Logo Translation, Mossad Links To Isis, Mossad Leadership, Mossad Motto, Mossad Movies, Mossad Meaning, Mossad Munich, Mossad Murders, Mossad Mission Statement, Mossad Marked Pistol, Mossad Mengele, Mossad Michael Bar-zohar, Mossad Motto Deception, Mossad Ncis, Mossad Netflix, Mossad News, Mossad Norway, Mossad North Korea, Mossad Nazi, Mossad Name Origin, Mossad Name, Mossad Netanyahu, Mossad Novels, Mossad Officer, Mossad Operation, Mossad On Homeland, Mossad Og, Mossad On Netflix, Mossad Operation In Dubai, Mossad Operations Youtube, Mossad On Twitter, Mossad Official Motto, Mossad Olympic Revenge Movie, Mossad Pistol, Mossad Pistol For Sale, Mossad Pen, Mossad Pdf, Mossad Podcast, Mossad Paris, Mossad Phone Bomb, Mossad Physical Training, Mossad Pronunciation, Mossad Phone Number, Mossad Quotes, Mossad Quora, Mossad Qualifications, Mossad Qatar, Mossad Quiz, Mossad Que Es, Mossad’s Quest, Mossad Quick Draw, Kidon Mossad, Mossad Quotations, Mossad Recruitment, Mossad Riddle, Mossad Recruitment Website, Mossad Russia, Mossad Reddit, Mossad Recruitment Process, Mossad Harav Kook, Mossad Ranks, Mossad Reputation, Mossad Retraining, Mossad Syria, Mossad Spy, Mossad Stole My Shoe, Mossad Stories, Mossad Shirt, Mossad Slogan, Mossad Show Netflix, Mossad Strain, Mossad Self Defense, Mossad Seal, Mossad Training, Mossad Tanfoglio, Mossad Tv Show, Mossad Twitter, Mossad Trump, Mossad Tactical, Mossad T Shirts, Mossad Tactical Duffle Bag, Mossad Training School, Mossad The Greatest Missions, Mossad Uae, Mossad Usa, Mossad Units, Mossad Uniform, Mossad Uk, Mossad Unit 8200, Mossad Uganda Operation, Mossad Ukraine, Mossad Vs Cia, Mossad Vs Kgb, Mossad Video, Mossad Vs Assad, Mossad And Shin Bet, Mossad Vs Seals, Mossad Vs Navy Seal, Mossad Vs Isi, Mossad Vs Raw, Mossad Vs Sas, Mossad Website, Mossad Wiki, Mossad Weapons, Mossad Watch, Mossad Ww2, Mossad Worldwide, Mossad War By Deception, Mossad Workout, Mossad Wikileaks, Mossad Weapons Of Choice, Mossad X, X Mossad Agent, Mossad Prisoner X, Mossad Committee X, Comitato X Mossad, Mossad Xaqida, Comite X Mossad, Mossad Youtube, Mossad Yossi Cohen, Mossad Yearly Cyber Challenge, Mossad Yousef, Mossad Yahudi, Mossad Yemen, Mossad Yahoo Answers, Mossad Yom Kippur War, Massad Ymca, Mossad Youtube Dubai, Mossad Zionist, Mossad Ziva David, Mossad Zippo, Mossad Zohar, Mossad Zoo, Mossad Zamir, Mossad Znacenje, Mossad Zimbabwe, Mossad Zinc, Mossad Zohar Pdf, Nuclear War Now, Nuclear War Movies, Nuclear War Simulation, Nuclear War Definition, Nuclear War Game, Nuclear War Simulation Game, Nuclear War News, Nuclear War North Korea, Nuclear War Clock, Nuclear War Map, Nuclear War Aftermath, Nuclear War Alert, Nuclear War Art, Nuclear War Alarm, Nuclear War Articles, Nuclear War Anxiety, Nuclear War Animation, Nuclear War Agreement, Nuclear War Against North Korea, Nuclear War App, Nuclear War Board Game, Nuclear War Books, Nuclear War Bunker, Nuclear War Between Us And Russia, Nuclear War Bible, Nuclear War Blast Radius, Nuclear War Background, Nuclear War Bomb, Nuclear War Bbc, Nuclear War Between North Korea And America, Nuclear War Clock, Nuclear War Card Game, Nuclear War Coming, Nuclear War Close Calls, Nuclear War Cold War, Nuclear War Chances, Nuclear War Cartoon, Nuclear War Consequences, Nuclear War Cnn, Nuclear War China, Nuclear War Definition, Nuclear War Documentary, Nuclear War Donald Trump, Nuclear War Dream, Nuclear War Damage, Nuclear War Date, Nuclear War Drills, Nuclear War During The Cold War, Nuclear War Drills In Schools, Nuclear War Declared, Nuclear War Effects, Nuclear War Emergency Kit, Nuclear War End Of The World, Nuclear War End Times, Nuclear War Extinction, Nuclear War Essay, Nuclear War Expert, Nuclear War Effects On Environment, Nuclear War Eas, Nuclear War Example, Nuclear War Fallout Map, Nuclear War Facts, Nuclear War Films, Nuclear War Fallout, Nuclear War Fiction, Nuclear War Fear, Nuclear War From Space, Nuclear War Flash Game, Nuclear Warfare, Nuclear War Fallout Shelter, Nuclear War Game, Nuclear War Game Online, Nuclear War Gas Mask, Nuclear War Gif, Nuclear War Gear, Nuclear War Games Unblocked, Nuclear War Game Theory, Nuclear War Global Warming, Nuclear War Games Pc, Nuclear War Game Movie, Nuclear Warhead, Nuclear War History, Nuclear War Hoax, Nuclear War Hawaii, Nuclear War Happening, Nuclear War Happening Soon, Nuclear War Human Extinction, Nuclear Warheads By Country, Nuclear War Has Become Thinkable Again, Nuclear Warhead Count, Nuclear War Imminent, Nuclear War In The Bible, Nuclear War Inevitable, Nuclear War Is Coming, Nuclear War In North Korea, Nuclear War In 2017, Nuclear War In Chicago, Nuclear War In Korea, Nuclear War Images, Nuclear War In America, Nuclear War Japan, Nuclear War Jokes, Nuclear War John F Kennedy, Nuclear War Jerwood, Nuclear War Justification, Nuclear War Jimmy Cliff, Nuclear War Jazz, Nuclear War June 2015, Nuclear War Justified, Nuclear War Jericho, Nuclear War Korea, Nuclear War Kit, Nuclear War Kennedy, Nuclear War Korean Peninsula, Nuclear War Korea Us, Nuclear War Kim Jong Un, Nuclear War Killed All Life On Mars, Nuclear War Kickstarter, Nuclear War Killed The Dinosaurs, Nuclear War Korea 2017, Nuclear War Likely, Nuclear War Likelihood 2017, Nuclear War Lyrics, Nuclear War Los Angeles, Nuclear War Lyrics Sun Ra, Nuclear War Laws, Nuclear War Level, Nuclear War Lesson Plan, Nuclear War Looming, Nuclear War Leads To Extinction, Nuclear War Movies, Nuclear War Map, Nuclear War Meme, Nuclear War Meaning, Nuclear War May 13, Nuclear War Map Usa, Nuclear War Movie 1980s, Nuclear War Mask, Nuclear War May 13 2017, Nuclear War Mars, Nuclear War Now, Nuclear War North Korea, Nuclear War News, Nuclear War Now Forum, Nuclear War Now Bandcamp, Nuclear War North Korea Scenario, Nuclear War Now Store, Nuclear War Novels, Nuclear War News 2017, Nuclear War Not Going To Happen, Nuclear War On Mars, Nuclear War Outcome, Nuclear War Odds, Nuclear War On Us, Nuclear War Online Game, Nuclear War On The Horizon, Nuclear War On May 13, Nuclear War On United States, Nuclear War On Us Soil, Nuclear War Over Syria, Nuclear War Predictions, Nuclear War Possibility, Nuclear War Prank, Nuclear War Prophecy, Nuclear War Protection, Nuclear War Political Cartoons, Nuclear War Prep, Nuclear War Pictures, Nuclear War Plans, Nuclear War Podcast, Nuclear War Quotes, Nuclear War Quizlet, Nuclear War Quora, Nuclear War Questions, Nuclear War Quiz, Nuclear War Question Time, Nuclear War Quran, Nuclear War Queen Speech, Einstein Nuclear War Quote, Mao Nuclear War Quote, Nuclear War Russia, Nuclear War Reddit, Nuclear War Risk, Nuclear War Results, Nuclear War Russia Us, Nuclear War Race, Nuclear War Radiation, Nuclear War Reality, Nuclear War Radius, Nuclear War Rules, Nuclear War Simulation, Nuclear War Simulation Game, Nuclear War Survival Skills, Nuclear War Survival, Nuclear War Survival Kit, Nuclear War Sun Ra, Nuclear War Strategy Game, Nuclear War Survival Guide, Nuclear War Scenarios, Nuclear War Siren, Nuclear War Threat, Nuclear War Trump, Nuclear War Targets, Nuclear War Today, Nuclear War Treaty, Nuclear War Timeline, Nuclear War Targets In Us, Nuclear War There Goes My Career, Nuclear War Terms, Nuclear War Targets In Usa, Nuclear War Usa, Nuclear War Us, Nuclear War Update, Nuclear War Us Targets, Nuclear War Us Map, Nuclear War Usa Map, Nuclear War Us Russia, Nuclear War Upon Us, Nuclear War Under Trump, Nuclear War Uk, Nuclear War Video Game, Nuclear War Video, Nuclear War Vice, Nuclear War V14, Nuclear War Vs Thermonuclear War, Nuclear War Vice News, Nuclear War Victims, Nuclear War Vietnam, Nuclear War Video Clips, Nuclear War Vs Biological War, Nuclear War With Russia, Nuclear War With Korea, Nuclear War Warning, Nuclear War With China, Nuclear War With North Korea, Nuclear War Warning System, Nuclear War Will Not Happen, Nuclear War Wiki, Nuclear War What To Do, Nuclear War Will End The World, Nuclear War Games Xbox 360, Xkcd Nuclear War, Nuclear War Youtube, Nuclear War Yo La Tengo, Nuclear War Yahoo Answers, Nuclear War Year, Nuclear War Yemen, Nuclear War Yes No, Nuclear War Yo La Tengo Lyrics, Nuclear War Yo La, Nuclear War Movies Youtube, Ancient Nuclear War Youtube, Nuclear War Zone, Nuclear War Zombies, Nuclear War Zero Sum Game, Nuclear War Safe Zones, Nuclear War New Zealand, Nuclear War Twilight Zone, Nuclear War Strike Zones, Nuclear War Blast Zones, Nuclear War Free Zone, Nuclear War Safe Zones In Us
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
During the Cold War the United States never deployed nuclear weapons in Iceland but a recently declassified State Department record shows that U.S. government officials debated whether they should do so, including through secret deployments. A letter from a U.S. ambassador to Iceland in August 1960, published today by the National Security Archive, rejected such proposals, but the revelation of internal discussions on the subject ties in to the broader issue of the practice of U.S. nuclear deployments overseas during the Cold War.
The author of the recently released letter, U.S. Ambassador Tyler Thompson, was aware that Icelandic authorities wondered whether Washington had ever deployed nuclear weapons there. Recognizing that Iceland’s ties to NATO and the Western security system were fragile, he argued that if Reykjavik learned about a secret deployment, it could leave NATO. Furthermore, a “dramatic row” could “be expected to have an unfortunate effect on our friends and allies, to affect adversely our interests as far as neutrals are concerned, and to provide a propaganda field day for our enemies.”
U.S. Ambassador to Iceland Tyler Thompson, whose long letter to the State Department raised critical questions about the possibility of secret nuclear deployments in Iceland (National Archives, Still Pictures Branch, RG 59-SO, box 17).
All references to Iceland were deleted from the archival release of Thompson’s letter but his signature and other evidence confirms that the subject matter was Iceland. Further research indicated that nuclear weapons had been an issue in U.S. relations with Iceland since the Korean War when Icelandic officials asked whether the U.S. had deployment plans. Washington did not, but at the time Thompson wrote the letter U.S. officials were exploring nuclear storage options and secret deployments. Moreover, archival documents discovered by an Icelandic historian and published here today demonstrate that the United States had plans for at least one nuclear weapons storage site in the event World War III broke out.
Included in today’s posting are:
▪ A request for assurance in November 1951 by Foreign Minister Bjarni Benediktsson that the United States was not planning an “atomic base” in Iceland
▪ A State Department telegram from December 1951 authorizing the U.S. minister to assure Benediktsson that the United States “has no (rpt no) intention [of] going beyond letter or spirit of [the] defense agreement” which had been negotiated earlier in the year.
▪ A question posed by Foreign Minister Guðmundur Í. Guðmundsson to ambassador Thompson in June 1960: was the United States keeping atomic bombs at Keflavik air base or carrying them through the base in transit?
▪ A draft reply to Guðmundsson’s question indicating that nuclear weapons had not been deployed in Iceland but noting that CINCLANT [Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Command] had a “requirement” for a nuclear weapons storage site.
That the United States never deployed nuclear weapons to Iceland is a settled issue. In 1998, Robert S. Norris, William Arkin, and this writer published an article in The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists in which they analyzed a recently declassified Defense Department history of U.S. nuclear deployments from 1945 to 1978. The study included several alphabetically arranged lists of nuclear weapons deployments in various parts of the world, including Western European members of NATO. Because many country and place names were excised the writers made educated guesses about some of them. One guess was Iceland. Certain details, such as Strategic Air Command activities during the 1950s, appeared to support the conclusion. The report in The Bulletin was widely publicized and when the news reached Iceland it created a political furor; the Icelandic government quickly denied the premise and the Clinton administration immediately supported the denial. In a significant departure from the usual “neither confirm nor deny” approach to nuclear weapons locations, the U.S. deputy chief of mission in Reykjavik declared that putting Iceland on the list of Cold War nuclear deployment sites was “incorrect.” Further research led to the identification of Iwo Jima as the deployment site.[1]
The fact that the U.S. government never deployed nuclear weapons in Iceland does not mean, however, that it had no nuclear plans for Iceland. Previous research by Valur Ingimundarson and William Arkin demonstrates that during the Cold War Iceland was considered a potential storage site. As Ingimundarson discovered, at the end of the 1950s the U.S. Navy ordered the construction of a facility for storing nuclear depth bombs, an Advanced Underseas Weapons (AUW) Shop at the outskirts of Keflavik airport. The AUW facility was built by local Icelandic workers who thought its purpose was to store torpedoes. Whether Ambassador Thompson knew about it remains to be learned. During the 1980s Arkin reported that a presidential directive from the Nixon period treated Iceland as one of several “Conditional Deployment” locations, where nuclear weapons could be stored in the event of war. An AUW storage facility would make sense in that context. Nevertheless, all such arrangements were kept deeply secret because of the political sensitivity of the U.S. military presence in Iceland.[2]
The heavily excised release of the Thompson letter suggests that the U.S. national security bureaucracy does not presently acknowledge that Iceland figured in American nuclear weapons planning during the Cold War. This is not surprising because the U.S. government has not acknowledged the names of a number of other countries which directly participated in the NATO nuclear weapons stockpile program during the Cold War (and later): Belgium, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey (only West Germany and the United Kingdom have been officially disclosed). As for Iceland’s status as a “conditional” deployment site, even though the horse left the barn years ago in terms of the previous archival releases, time will tell whether declassifiers take that into account when making future decisions on classified historical documents concerning Iceland and nuclear weapons.
Pictured here is a MK-101 “Lulu” nuclear depth bomb. which the U.S. Navy could have deployed to a storage site at Kefllavik airport, Iceland, in the event of World War III. Weighing 1,200 pounds, with an explosive yield of between 10 and 15 kilotons, the Lulu was in service from the late 1950s to 1971. An air-dropped weapon designed for use by all Navy aircraft, Lulu would have been available to British, Canadian, and Dutch naval forces under NATO nuclear sharing arrangements. (Source: photograph by Mike Fazarckly at Nuclear Weapons: A Guide to British Nuclear Weapons. Thanks to Stephen Schwartz for pointing out these photos.)
DOCUMENTS
Document 1: U.S. Legation Reykjavik telegram number 82 to State Department, 18 November 1951, Secret
Source: U.S. National Archives, Record Group 59, Department of State records [RG 59], Central Decimal Files 1950-1954 [CDF], 711.56340B/11-1851
On 5 May 1951, Iceland and the United States secretly signed a defense agreement which became public just two days later. Under the agreement, the United States took over the defense of Iceland, a decision which local elites believed was necessary in light of the Korean War and Iceland’s historically disarmed status. The arrangement was nonetheless contentious for many citizens and by some accounts bordered on illegal; the three major non-Communist parties therefore agreed to keep parliament in recess to minimize controversy (when Iceland joined NATO in 1949, riots had broken out). Two days later, on 7 May, 300 U.S. troops arrived, the first of a contingent which the Icelandic government limited to a tightly sequestered 3,900 troops out of fear of adverse public reaction (to the point that Reykjavik successfully insisted on the exclusion of African-American soldiers).
While the fine print of the defense agreement was still being negotiated, in November 1951 Foreign Minister Benediktsson showed U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Morris N. Hughes a London Times article quoting Senator Edwin Johnson (D-CO) that Iceland, North Africa, and Turkey were better deployment sites for atomic weapons than the United Kingdom. To assuage the foreign minister’s concern that Communist Party members and other critics would exploit Johnson’s statement, Hughes recommended “official reassurance” that the United States had no plans to deploy atomic weapons in Iceland.
Document 2: U.S. Legation Reykjavik telegram number 85 to State Department, 24 November 1951, Secret
Source: RG 59, CDF, 711.56340B/11-2451
A few days after the above exchange, Benediktsonn told Hughes that he had showed him the Times article so he could tell “critics and worried colleagues” that he had immediately sought U.S. reassurances about U.S. atomic plans. When the foreign minister wondered whether an “appropriate quarter” could provide “some reassurance,” Hughes agreed to inform the State Department “of his anxiety.” The reference to McGaw is to General Edward John McGaw, the first commander of the Iceland Defense Force, the U.S. unified command which provided for Iceland’s military security from 1951 to 2006.
Document 3: U.S. Legation Reykjavik Despatch 198 to State Department, ““First Icelandic Reaction to Senator Johnson’s Statement on Atomic Bases,” 27 November 1951, Secret
Source: RG 59, CDF, 711.56340B/11-2751
Chargé Hughes reported that the Communist newspaper, Thjodviljinn [Will of the Nation] had commented on Senator Johnson’s statement, noting that the “Americans feel that it does not matter if Iceland should be subjected to the attack and horrors such bases would bring
upon the nation.”
Document 4: U.S. Legation Reykjavik telegram number 97 to State Department, 20 December 1951, Secret
Source: RG 59, CDF, 711.56340B/12-1951
With no answer to his question about atomic bases, Benediktsonn asked Hughes again about the problem, noting that Communist opponents could “embarrass” him.
Document 5: State Department telegram 98 to U.S. Legation Reykjavik, 21 December 1951, Top Secret
Source: RG 59, CDF, box 3180, 711.56340B/11-2451
Benediktsonn’s second query was the charm. Responding to Hughes’ message, a State Department telegram sent under the name of Secretary of State Dean Acheson warned that any public statements would violate the policy to “not deny or affirm rumors” about the locations of atomic weapons. That was a military necessity to prevent the Soviet Union from determining the “pattern” of U.S. defenses. Nevertheless, the Department authorized Hughes to inform Benediktsonn confidentially that the United States would “make no move without [the] full consultation and agreement” of Iceland’s government.
Document 6: U.S. Legation Reykjavik Despatch 238 to State Department, “Further Reaction to Threatened Use of Iceland as Atomic Base,” 29 December 1951, Secret
Source: RG 59, CDF, box 3180, 711.56340B/12-2951
Hughes provided a fuller account of his meeting with Benediktsonn on 20 December and of his efforts during the holidays to pass on the gist of the State Department message to the permanent undersecretary and then to the foreign minister himself at a dinner. Whether there were any follow-up discussions remains unclear because the records covering the 1952-1954 period in the 711.56340B decimal file series are missing from box 3181.[3]
Document 7: U.S. Department of State Executive Secretariat, “Top Secret Daily Staff Summary,” 22 June 1960, top secret, excerpt
Source: RG 59, Executive Secretariat, Daily Staff Summary, 1944-1971, box 45, Daily Staff Summary, Top Secret, June 1960
According to the State Department summary of telegram 367 from the U.S. Embassy in Iceland, in light of the recent U-2 crisis, Foreign Minister Guðmundur Í. Guðmundsson asked Ambassador Thompson whether the United States had used Keflavik air base for U-2 flights, had stored nuclear weapons there or had moved them through Keflavik. While the Foreign Minister had not asked for assurances about advance agreement, according to the summary Thompson “feels that the storage of atomic warheads in Iceland without the latter’s prior agreement would be a mistake and suggests that, if we have no intention to do this, we so inform the Icelandic Government without awaiting its request to this effect.” This conversation is cited on the bottom of page 2 of the Tyler Thompson letter (Document 8) with the references to Iceland excised.
From the original Air Force caption: “A view of the famous Terminal Hotel at Keflavik Airport, Iceland, is pictured here. In the foreground are two MATS [Military Air Transport Service] aircraft parked out front of the hotel.” Ambassador Thompson’s letter captured the problems raised by the air base’s wide open status for proposals for secret nuclear weapons storage: the base’s “security problem” was “complicated by the small size of the secure areas, accessibility of the base to the public, the small community atmosphere there with everyone knowing to a large extent what is going on, and the speculation which new, and stricter security regulations might arouse.” (National Archives, Still Pictures Branch, RG 342-B, box 1458, Foreign Locations—Iceland)
Documents 8A-B: Answer to Gudmundsson’s Questions
A: Draft telegram to U.S. Embassy Iceland, 24 June 1960, Top Secret
B: Draft telegram to U.S. Embassy Iceland, circa 1 July 1960, Top Secret
Source: RG 59, Bureau of European Affairs, Office of Atlantic Political and Military Affairs, Subject Files, 1953-1962, box 11, Iceland Keflavick [sic] Air Base
In response to Guðmundsson’s questions about U-2 flights and nuclear weapons, State Department officials prepared a response; the finished, delivered version remains classified in State Department decimal files, but drafts of the response are available, of which the one dated 1 July 1960 is probably close to what was sent. The ambassador could assure the foreign minister that the U.S. had not stored nuclear weapons in Iceland or shipped them through Keflavik airbase. But this information was not for public consumption because of the U.S. government’s “neither confirm nor deny” policy. In response to Thompson’s suggestion that the U.S. pledge that it would consult the Icelandic government in advance about nuclear weapons deployments, the State Department believed this would “not [be] desirable.” Before any assurances could be given the subject would need careful study in Washington; if asked for such assurances, Thompson was to tell Guðmundsson that he needed to seek instructions. Thompson’s letter (below) does not indicate that a follow-up conversation with Guðmundsson had occurred, only the possibility that he might ask the question about nuclear deployments again.
The 24 June draft telegram mentions the CINCLANT requirement for a nuclear weapons storage site and its ongoing construction but that item was dropped from the 1 July draft, perhaps because of its sensitivity. The final version of the telegram remains classified but has been requested.
Document 9: Ambassador Tyler Thompson to Ivan White, 5 August 1960, top secret, excised copy
Source: RG 59, DF 1960-1963, 711.5611-8560
Probably to respond to the issues raised by Guðmundsson’s questions, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Ivan White sent Thompson a letter on 21 July 1960. It was one of those “official informal” communications then used by State Department officials to communicate with its embassies on matters that were too complex and sensitive to handle by telegram. White’s letter has not surfaced and is not indexed in the State Department decimal files. But judging from the tenor of Thompson’s reply, White may have asserted that the U.S. government was free to deploy nuclear weapons in Iceland without securing the agreement of Reykjavik. If that was the case, the Eisenhower administration had departed from the Acheson policy of assuring “full consultation and agreement.” It is possible that the previous ambassador, John Muccio, was the individual whom Thompson described as “recommending against prior consultation” out of fear that information about the deployment would leak to the Soviets.
If war was imminent or had broken out, Thompson believed that a secret emergency deployment would be permissible, but under peacetime circumstances he recommended seeking Iceland’s consent. Given that the Soviets probably suspected that Iceland was already a storage site, Thompson believed that it would be worse if the government of Iceland discovered a secret deployment; that would produce a diplomatic crisis, including Iceland’s possible withdrawal from NATO under protest. Moreover, “from the point of view of respect for the rights and sovereignty of [Iceland], the fact that it might not agree to the storage of nuclear weapons here could be considered as making prior consultations all the more necessary.”
To make deployments technically possible, Thompson suggested the construction of storage areas, but consulting the government if Washington ever wanted to use them. If war was approaching it would be possible to deploy weapons under emergency conditions because the possibility of objections would be “minimized.” If, however, the United States wanted to use the storage areas for actual deployments it should consult the Icelandic government. Thompson may not have been aware of the SACLANT storage site mentioned in the draft telegram cited above.
Thompson’s letter met with some internal criticism, mainly on the first page: a handwritten “no” next to his observation that U.S. nuclear weapons storage in NATO countries depends on the agreement of the country concerned; a question mark next to the comment about Canadian consent for storage of nuclear weapons in Canada; a comment “No! Canada on record,” suggesting that Ottawa would accept clandestine U.S. storage; and another comment which is harder to decipher: “tech … doesn’t get UK OK.”
For the archival release of this letter the State Department and the Defense Department justified the excision on two grounds. The State Department cited Section 3.3 (b) (6) of Executive Order 13526 – that declassification would “reveal information, including foreign government information, that would cause serious harm to relations between the United States and a foreign government, or to ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States.” The Defense Department cited exemption (b) (6), ruling that declassification would “reveal formally named or numbered U.S. military war plans that remain in effect, or reveal operational or tactical elements of prior plans that are contained in such active plans.” Whether the declassification of a document which is well over half a century old could have such impacts on U.S. diplomacy or military planning appears highly doubtful.
Notes
[1]. William Arkin, Robert S. Norris, and William Burr, “They Were,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November –December 1999, pp. 25-35; Arkin, Norris, and Burr, “How Much Did Japan Know,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January-February 2000, pp. 11-13, 78-79.
[2] . Valur Ingimundarson, The Rebellious Ally: Iceland, the United States, and the Politics of Empire, 1945-2006(Dordrech, The Netherlands, 2011), 86; William Arkin, “Iceland Melts,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (50) January-February 2000, p. 80.
[3]. One relevant item that could show up in box 3181 was published in the Foreign Relations of the United States: a memorandum to the Deputy Under Secretary of State on “Additional Military Operating Requirements in Iceland,” dated 12 June 1952. It briefly recounts the discussions with the Icelandic foreign minister and mentions a NATO request to the U.S. and the Government of Iceland for a strategic air base in Iceland, but any further discussion of nuclear weapons was excised in the FRUS volume.
Us Government Jobs, Us Government Type, Us Government Shutdown, Us Government Spending, Us Government Budget, Us Government Security Clearance, Us Government Debt, Us Government News, Us Government Bonds, Us Government Passport, Us Government Agencies, Us Government Auctions, Us Government Accountability Office, Us Government And Politics, Us Government Articles, Us Government Annual Budget, Us Government And Politics Apex Answers, Us Government Ap Test, Us Government Arms Contracts, Us Government Assets, Us Government Budget, Us Government Bonds, Us Government Branches, Us Government Budget 2017, Us Government Budget 2016, Us Government Book, Us Government Bookstore, Us Government Bond Rates, Us Government Buildings, Us Government Bids, Us Government Contracts, Us Government Current Events, Us Government Corruption, Us Government Corporations, Us Government Checks And Balances, Us Government Credit Rating, Us Government Crash Course, Us Government Copyright Website, Us Government Chart, Us Government Clearance, Us Government Debt, Us Government Deficit, Us Government Definition, Us Government Debt To Gdp, Us Government Debt Clock, Us Government Data, Us Government Diagram, Us Government During Ww2, Us Government Documents, Us Government Definition Of Terrorism, Us Government Expenditures, Us Government Employees, Us Government Explained, Us Government Executive Branch, Us Government Employee Salaries, Us Government Exam Review, Us Government Employment, Us Government Education, Us Government Experiments, Us Government Expenditures 2016, Us Government Fiscal Year, Us Government Forms, Us Government For Dummies, Us Government Final Exam, Us Government Facts, Us Government Final Exam Study Guide, Us Government Free Credit Report, Us Government Funding, Us Government Flow Chart, Us Government Fiscal Year 2017, Us Government Grants, Us Government Grant Department, Us Government Gold Coins, Us Government Games, Us Government Gsa, Us Government Gs Pay Scale, Us Government Grant Money, Us Government Global Entry, Us Government Green Card, Us Government Gdp, Us Government Holidays, Us Government Hiring Freeze, Us Government Holidays 2017, Us Government Hierarchy, Us Government History, Us Government Healthcare, Us Government Healthcare Spending, Us Government Hacked, Us Government Health Insurance, Us Government House, Us Government Internships, Us Government Income, Us Government Id, Us Government Interest Reported As Dividends, Us Government Interest, Us Government Interest Taxable, Us Government Irs, Us Government Issues, Us Government Issued Id, Us Government Intelligence Agencies, Us Government Jobs, Us Government Jobs Abroad, Us Government Jobs In Japan, Us Government Jobs In Italy, Us Government Jobs In Germany, Us Government Judicial Branch, Us Government Jobs In Europe, Us Government Jeopardy, Us Government Jobs In Utah, Us Government Jobs In California, Us Government Killed Mlk, Us Government Kahoot, Us Government Kill List, Us Government Killed Dog, Us Government Killed Family Dog, Us Government Key Terms, Us Government Killed Jfk, Us Government Kaspersky, Us Government Kodi, Us Government Kenya Travel, Us Government Logo, Us Government Line Of Succession, Us Government License Plates, Us Government Leaders, Us Government Land For Sale, Us Government Loans, Us Government Legislative Branch, Us Government Laws, Us Government Lies, Us Government Leaks, Us Government Mint, Us Government Mileage Rate, Us Government Manual, Us Government Mileage Rate 2017, Us Government Medicare, Us Government Movies, Us Government Military Spending, Us Government Memes, Us Government Module 3 Dba, Us Government Mind Control, Us Government News, Us Government Net Worth, Us Government News Today, Us Government Number, Us Government Name, Us Government Notes, Us Government No Call List, Us Government News Articles, Us Government National Debt, Us Government Number Of Employees, Us Government Org Chart, Us Government Officials, Us Government Organizational Chart, Us Government Offices, Us Government Obligations, Us Government Organizations, Us Government Owned Companies, Us Government Official Mail, Us Government Online Textbook, Us Government Officials 2017, Us Government Passport, Us Government Per Diem, Us Government Printing Office, Us Government Passport Renewal, Us Government Pay Scale, Us Government Plates, Us Government Positions, Us Government Phone Number, Us Government Pension, Us Government Procurement, Us Government Quizlet, Us Government Quiz, Us Government Questions, Us Government Quotes, Us Government Quarters, Us Government Quizlet Chapter 2, Us Government Questions And Answers, Us Government Questions Test Practice, Us Government Quizlet Chapter 8, Us Government Quizlet Chapter 4, Us Government Revenue, Us Government Regents, Us Government Review, Us Government Revenue 2016, Us Government Retirement, Us Government Ranks, Us Government Renew Passport, Us Government Rfp, Us Government Revenue Sources, Us Government Regulations, Us Government Shutdown, Us Government Spending, Us Government Security Clearance, Us Government Shutdown 2017, Us Government System, Us Government Surplus, Us Government Spending Breakdown, Us Government Securities, Us Government Salaries, Us Government Savings Bonds, Us Government Type, Us Government Textbook, Us Government Travel Warnings, Us Government Tax Forms, Us Government Travel, Us Government Textbook Pdf, Us Government Test, Us Government Tax Revenue, Us Government Time, Us Government Trivia, Us Government Unclaimed Money, Us Government Unit 4, Us Government Unit 5, Us Government Unit 3, Us Government Unit 2 Quizlet, Us Government Unit 1, Us Government Ufo, Us Government Unit 5 Test Answers, Us Government Unit 1 Test, Us Government Unit 3 Test, Us Government Vocabulary, Us Government Visa, Us Government Vehicles, Us Government Videos, Us Government Vehicle Auction, Us Government Value Of Human Life, Us Government Vs German Government, Us Government Vs Ancient Rome, Us Government Venezuela, Us Government Veterans, Us Government Website, Us Government Worksheets, Us Government Wiki, Us Government Weather, Us Government Weed, Us Government Word Search, Us Government Whip, Us Government White Papers, Us Government Web Standards, Us Government Waste, Us Government X Files, Us Government Xml, Us Government Keystone Xl Pipeline, Us Government Windows Xp, Us Government Planet X, Us Government Yearly Budget, Us Government Yield Curve, Us Government Youtube, Us Government Yearly Revenue, Us Government Yields, Us Government Yellowbook, Us Government Year End, Us Government Youth Programs, Us Government Yearly Spending, Us Government Yemen, Us Government Zombie Plan, Us Government Zip Codes, Us Government Zombie, Us Government Zip Code Database, Us Government Zika, Us Government Zombie Protocol, Us Government Zero Coupon Bonds, Us Government Zombie Contingency Plan, Us Government Zombie Survival Guide, Us Government Zip Code Information, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Service, Secret Garden, Secret World Legends, Secret Flying, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Agent Man, Secret Admirer, Secret Aardvark, Secret Agent, Secret Annex, Secret And Lies, Secret Agent Man Song, Secret App, Secret Asian Man, Secret Agent Man Lyrics, Secretbuilders, Secret Book, Secret Beach Kauai, Secret Beach, Secret Ballot, Secret Box, Secret Beach Maui, Secret Bay Dominica, Secret Base, Secret Band, Secret Circle, Secret Church, Secret Caverns, Secret Classroom Superpowers, Secret Codes, Secret Clinical Strength, Secret Clearance, Secret Circle Cast, Secret Conversations Facebook, Secret Cameras, Secret Deodorant, Secret Definition, Secret Diary Of A Call Girl, Secret Door, Secret Deodorant Coupons, Secret Diary, Secret Deodorant Commercial, Secret Decoder Ring, Secret Daughter, Secret Door Lyrics, Secret Empire, Secret Extensions, Secret Escapes, Secret Empire #1, Secret Empire Reading Order, Secret Entourage, Secret Empire #0, Secret Empire #2, Secret Eaters, Secret Emoji, Secret Flying, Secret Forest, Secret Forest Ep 11, Secret Falls Kauai, Secret Flask, Secret Formula, Secret Facebook Group, Secret Frappuccino, Secret For The Mad Lyrics, Secret Falls, Secret Garden, Secret Garden Song, Secret Garden Movie, Secret Garden Cafe, Secret Garden Musical, Secret Garden Lyrics, Secret Garden Denver, Secret Garden Book, Secret Google Games, Secret Garden Miami, Secret Hitler Rules, Secret Hitler Game, Secret History Of Twin Peaks, Secret Hitler Online, Secret Hair Extensions, Secret Handshake, Secret History, Secret Hotel Deals, Secret Heart, Secret Hiding Places, Secret In Their Eyes, Secret In Spanish, Secret Ingredient, Secret Island, Secret In Their Eyes Cast, Secret Invasion, Secret In N Out Menu, Secret Invisible Solid, Secret Island In Texas, Secret In French, Secret Jardin, Secret Jewels, Secret Journal, Secret Jobs, Secret Jamaica, Secret Jieun, Secret Jardin Lodge, Secret Journey Police, Secret Journey To Planet Serpo, Secret Jardin Dr90, Secret Kpop, Secret Keeper Girl, Secret Keeper, Secret Key, Secret Korean Drama, Secret Knock, Secret Knowledge, Secret Krabby Patty Formula, Secret Key Starting Treatment Essence, Secret Kingdom, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Love Song, Secret Life Of Walter Mitty, Secret Lab Chair, Secret Life Of An American Teenager Cast, Secret Language, Secret Life Of Pets Imdb, Secret Menu, Secret Menu Items, Secret Mage, Secret Menu Starbucks, Secret Menu In N Out, Secret Messages, Secret Meaning, Secret Movie, Secret Mountain Fort Awesome, Secret Mage Deck, Secret Nails, Secret Nyc, Secret Netflix, Secret Nail Salon, Secret Names, Secret Netflix Codes, Secret Numbers, Secret News, Secret Nature From Jeju Peeling Gel, Secret Nation, Secret Of Mana, Secret Of Nimh, Secret Of The Snowy Peaks, Secret Of The Cedars, Secret Of Kells, Secret Of Evermore, Secret Of The Wings, Secret Of Moonacre, Secret Of Mana Rom, Secret Of Mana 2, Secret Pizza, Secret Police, Secret Project Robot, Secret Place, Secret Passion Fruit, Secret Power, Secret Passages, Secret Pizza Party, Secret Paladin, Secret Place Lyrics, Secret Quotes, Secret Question, Secret Quest, Secret Questions To Ask, Secret Questions To Ask Siri, Secret Quests Ffxv, Secret Quests Skyrim, Secret Qr Codes, Secret Questions To Ask Alexa, Secret Quote Spongebob, Secret Romance, Secret Resorts, Secret Recipe, Secret Rooms, Secret Rare Pokemon Cards, Secret Rainbow Hair, Secret Rare Ultra Ball, Secret Rendezvous, Secret Relationship, Secret Roku Channels, Secret Service, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Societies, Secret Synonym, Secret Starbucks Menu, Secret Service Jobs, Secret Sandwich Society, Secret Sisters, Secret Shopper Jobs, Secret Treasures, Secret Treasures Sleepwear, Secret Tunnel, Secret Things, Secret Tunnel Song, Secret The Pierces, Secret Thesaurus, Secret Travel, Secret Treasures Bra, Secret To Success, Secret Underground Cities, Secret Us Weapons, Secret Underground Bases, Secret Universe Of Names, Secret Underground, Secret Underground Medicine, Secret Upgrades Office Space, Secret Us Bases, Secret Us Military Bases, Secret Unscented, Secret Variety Training, Secret Village Of The Spellcasters, Secret Video Recorder, Secret Variety Training Ep 2, Secret Vault, Secret Vault 81, Secret Veneers, Secret Voice Recorder, Secret Video, Secret Volume, Secret World Legends, Secret Window, Secret Wood, Secret Wars, Secret Wood Rings, Secret World Legends Release Date, Secret World Of Arrietty, Secret Weapon, Secret Wars 2015, Secret Warriors, Secret X Folder, Secret Xtians, Secret Xscape, Secret X Folder Comic, Secret X, Secret Xbox One Gamerpics, Secret Xtend, Secret Xbox One Games, Secret Xbox One Codes, Secret X Folder Webtoon, Secret Youtube, Secret Yeahu, Secret Yellowstone, Secret Young Justice, Secret Youtube Videos, Secret Yosemite, Secret Youtube Tricks, Secret Youtube Website, Secret Yumiverse, Secret Yosemite Spots, Secret Zoo Series, Secret Zoo, Secret Zoo Book, Secret Zinger, Secret Zombies Calling Card, Secret Zodiac Sign, Secret Zion Hikes, Secret Zone, Secret Zombies Challenge Infinite Warfare, Secret Zombie Challenge, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Service, Secret Garden, Secret World Legends, Secret Flying, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Agent Man, Secret Admirer, Secret Aardvark, Secret Agent, Secret Annex, Secret And Lies, Secret Agent Man Song, Secret App, Secret Asian Man, Secret Agent Man Lyrics, Secretbuilders, Secret Book, Secret Beach Kauai, Secret Beach, Secret Ballot, Secret Box, Secret Beach Maui, Secret Bay Dominica, Secret Base, Secret Band, Secret Circle, Secret Church, Secret Caverns, Secret Classroom Superpowers, Secret Codes, Secret Clinical Strength, Secret Clearance, Secret Circle Cast, Secret Conversations Facebook, Secret Cameras, Secret Deodorant, Secret Definition, Secret Diary Of A Call Girl, Secret Door, Secret Deodorant Coupons, Secret Diary, Secret Deodorant Commercial, Secret Decoder Ring, Secret Daughter, Secret Door Lyrics, Secret Empire, Secret Extensions, Secret Escapes, Secret Empire #1, Secret Empire Reading Order, Secret Entourage, Secret Empire #0, Secret Empire #2, Secret Eaters, Secret Emoji, Secret Flying, Secret Forest, Secret Forest Ep 11, Secret Falls Kauai, Secret Flask, Secret Formula, Secret Facebook Group, Secret Frappuccino, Secret For The Mad Lyrics, Secret Falls, Secret Garden, Secret Garden Song, Secret Garden Movie, Secret Garden Cafe, Secret Garden Musical, Secret Garden Lyrics, Secret Garden Denver, Secret Garden Book, Secret Google Games, Secret Garden Miami, Secret Hitler Rules, Secret Hitler Game, Secret History Of Twin Peaks, Secret Hitler Online, Secret Hair Extensions, Secret Handshake, Secret History, Secret Hotel Deals, Secret Heart, Secret Hiding Places, Secret In Their Eyes, Secret In Spanish, Secret Ingredient, Secret Island, Secret In Their Eyes Cast, Secret Invasion, Secret In N Out Menu, Secret Invisible Solid, Secret Island In Texas, Secret In French, Secret Jardin, Secret Jewels, Secret Journal, Secret Jobs, Secret Jamaica, Secret Jieun, Secret Jardin Lodge, Secret Journey Police, Secret Journey To Planet Serpo, Secret Jardin Dr90, Secret Kpop, Secret Keeper Girl, Secret Keeper, Secret Key, Secret Korean Drama, Secret Knock, Secret Knowledge, Secret Krabby Patty Formula, Secret Key Starting Treatment Essence, Secret Kingdom, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Love Song, Secret Life Of Walter Mitty, Secret Lab Chair, Secret Life Of An American Teenager Cast, Secret Language, Secret Life Of Pets Imdb, Secret Menu, Secret Menu Items, Secret Mage, Secret Menu Starbucks, Secret Menu In N Out, Secret Messages, Secret Meaning, Secret Movie, Secret Mountain Fort Awesome, Secret Mage Deck, Secret Nails, Secret Nyc, Secret Netflix, Secret Nail Salon, Secret Names, Secret Netflix Codes, Secret Numbers, Secret News, Secret Nature From Jeju Peeling Gel, Secret Nation, Secret Of Mana, Secret Of Nimh, Secret Of The Snowy Peaks, Secret Of The Cedars, Secret Of Kells, Secret Of Evermore, Secret Of The Wings, Secret Of Moonacre, Secret Of Mana Rom, Secret Of Mana 2, Secret Pizza, Secret Police, Secret Project Robot, Secret Place, Secret Passion Fruit, Secret Power, Secret Passages, Secret Pizza Party, Secret Paladin, Secret Place Lyrics, Secret Quotes, Secret Question, Secret Quest, Secret Questions To Ask, Secret Questions To Ask Siri, Secret Quests Ffxv, Secret Quests Skyrim, Secret Qr Codes, Secret Questions To Ask Alexa, Secret Quote Spongebob, Secret Romance, Secret Resorts, Secret Recipe, Secret Rooms, Secret Rare Pokemon Cards, Secret Rainbow Hair, Secret Rare Ultra Ball, Secret Rendezvous, Secret Relationship, Secret Roku Channels, Secret Service, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Societies, Secret Synonym, Secret Starbucks Menu, Secret Service Jobs, Secret Sandwich Society, Secret Sisters, Secret Shopper Jobs, Secret Treasures, Secret Treasures Sleepwear, Secret Tunnel, Secret Things, Secret Tunnel Song, Secret The Pierces, Secret Thesaurus, Secret Travel, Secret Treasures Bra, Secret To Success, Secret Underground Cities, Secret Us Weapons, Secret Underground Bases, Secret Universe Of Names, Secret Underground, Secret Underground Medicine, Secret Upgrades Office Space, Secret Us Bases, Secret Us Military Bases, Secret Unscented, Secret Variety Training, Secret Village Of The Spellcasters, Secret Video Recorder, Secret Variety Training Ep 2, Secret Vault, Secret Vault 81, Secret Veneers, Secret Voice Recorder, Secret Video, Secret Volume, Secret World Legends, Secret Window, Secret Wood, Secret Wars, Secret Wood Rings, Secret World Legends Release Date, Secret World Of Arrietty, Secret Weapon, Secret Wars 2015, Secret Warriors, Secret X Folder, Secret Xtians, Secret Xscape, Secret X Folder Comic, Secret X, Secret Xbox One Gamerpics, Secret Xtend, Secret Xbox One Games, Secret Xbox One Codes, Secret X Folder Webtoon, Secret Youtube, Secret Yeahu, Secret Yellowstone, Secret Young Justice, Secret Youtube Videos, Secret Yosemite, Secret Youtube Tricks, Secret Youtube Website, Secret Yumiverse, Secret Yosemite Spots, Secret Zoo Series, Secret Zoo, Secret Zoo Book, Secret Zinger, Secret Zombies Calling Card, Secret Zodiac Sign, Secret Zion Hikes, Secret Zone, Secret Zombies Challenge Infinite Warfare, Secret Zombie Challenge, Nuclear Bomb, Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Fusion, Nuclear War, Nuclear Family, Nuclear Fission, Nuclear Stress Test, Nuclear Option, Nuclear Triad, Nuclear Medicine, Nuclear Arms Race, Nuclear Attack, Nuclear Accidents, Nuclear Assault, Nuclear Arsenal, Nuclear Age, Nuclear Arms Race Cold War, Nuclear Apocalypse, Nuclear Alarm, Nuclear Annihilation, Nuclear Bomb, Nuclear Blast, Nuclear Blast Radius, Nuclear Bomb Test, Nuclear Bunker, Nuclear Bomb Shelter, Nuclear Binding Energy, Nuclear Blast Records, Nuclear Bone Scan, Nuclear Bomb Video, Nuclear Chemistry, Nuclear Clock, Nuclear Countries, Nuclear Chemistry Worksheet, Nuclear Charge, Nuclear Codes, Nuclear Cataract, Nuclear Chain Reaction, Nuclear Cardiology, Nuclear Cooling Tower, Nuclear Definition, Nuclear Decay, Nuclear Disasters, Nuclear Deterrence, Nuclear Decay Worksheet, Nuclear Disarmament, Nuclear Dna, Nuclear Detonation, Nuclear Decay Worksheet Answers, Nuclear Division, Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Explosion, Nuclear Energy Definition, Nuclear Engineering, Nuclear Envelope, Nuclear Engineer Salary, Nuclear Energy Pros And Cons, Nuclear Energy Examples, Nuclear Explosion Gif, Nuclear Equations, Nuclear Fusion, Nuclear Family, Nuclear Fission, Nuclear Fusion Definition, Nuclear Football, Nuclear Fission Definition, Nuclear Fallout, Nuclear Family Definition, Nuclear Fusion Reactor, Nuclear Fallout Map, Nuclear Glass, Nuclear Gas Mask, Nuclear Gandhi, Nuclear Gun, Nuclear Gif, Nuclear Generator, Nuclear Gravity Bomb, Nuclear Games, Nuclear Gas, Nuclear Grenade, Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Heart Test, Nuclear Half Life, Nuclear Hazard Symbol, Nuclear Holocaust Movies, Nuclear Hormone Receptors, Nuclear Hoax, Nuclear History, Nuclear Household, Nuclear Hand Grenade, Nuclear Imaging, Nuclear Incidents, Nuclear In Spanish, Nuclear Isotopes, Nuclear Icebreaker, Nuclear Icbm, Nuclear Issues, Nuclear Industry, Nuclear Icon, Nuclear Instruments And Methods, Nuclear Jobs, Nuclear Japan, Nuclear Jet Engine, Nuclear Jokes, Nuclear Jellyfish, Nuclear Jet, Nuclear Js, Nuclear Jobs Overseas, Nuclear Jobs Florida, Nuclear Jellyfish Of New Jersey, Nuclear Korea, Nuclear Korean Noodles, Nuclear Kidney Test, Nuclear Kenyan Sand Boa, Nuclear Kinetic Energy, Nuclear Key, Nuclear Kit, Nuclear Keychain, Nuclear Kill Radius, Nuclear Kid, Nuclear Localization Signal, Nuclear Lamina, Nuclear Launch Codes, Nuclear Logo, Nuclear Lyrics, Nuclear Launch Detected, Nuclear Lake, Nuclear Launch, Nuclear Lamins, Nuclear Leak, Nuclear Medicine, Nuclear Medicine Technologist, Nuclear Membrane, Nuclear Missile, Nuclear Meltdown, Nuclear Membrane Function, Nuclear Map, Nuclear Membrane Definition, Nuclear Medicine Technologist Jobs, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, Nuclear News, Nuclear Nations, Nuclear North Korea, Nuclear Notation, Nuclear Noodles, Nuclear Norm, Nuclear Navy, Nuclear Nadal, Nuclear Nucular, Nuclear Option, Nuclear Oncology, Nuclear Option 2013, Nuclear Option Harry Reid, Nuclear Overhauser Effect, Nuclear Outage, Nuclear Operator Salary, Nuclear Or Nucular, Nuclear Operator, Nuclear Option Fallout 4, Nuclear Power, Nuclear Power Plants, Nuclear Proliferation, Nuclear Power Plants In Us, Nuclear Physics, Nuclear Physicist, Nuclear Power Definition, Nuclear Power Pros And Cons, Nuclear Pharmacy, Nuclear Power Plants In Texas, Nuclear Quotes, Nuclear Quadrupole Resonance, Nuclear Questions, Nuclear Quiz, Nuclear Quality Assurance, Nuclear Quizlet, Nuclear Quadrupole Moment, Nuclear Quantum Effects, Nuclear Quality Assurance Jobs, Nuclear Quantum Numbers, Nuclear Reactor, Nuclear Radiation, Nuclear Reaction, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear Reactor Definition, Nuclear Reactor Diagram, Nuclear Receptor, Nuclear Reactors In Us, Nuclear Rocket, Nuclear Reaction Worksheet, Nuclear Stress Test, Nuclear Symbol, Nuclear Submarine, Nuclear Sclerosis, Nuclear Sign, Nuclear Shadow, Nuclear Shelter, Nuclear Secrecy, Nuclear Siren, Nuclear Scan, Nuclear Triad, Nuclear Throne, Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, Nuclear Test, Nuclear Technician, Nuclear Threat, Nuclear Throne Together, Nuclear Throne Wiki, Nuclear Technology, Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Apush, Nuclear Umbrella, Nuclear Uranium, Nuclear Uses, Nuclear Utilization Theory, Nuclear Ultrasound, Nuclear Us, Nuclear Usa, Nuclear Unit, Nuclear Union, Nuclear Ukraine, Nuclear Vs Atomic, Nuclear Vote, Nuclear Vs Nucular, Nuclear Valdez, Nuclear Vs Solar, Nuclear Vs Coal, Nuclear Vs Hydrogen Bomb, Nuclear Vs Extended Family, Nuclear Vs Mitochondrial Dna, Nuclear Video, Nuclear War, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear Winter, Nuclear Waste, Nuclear Waste Disposal, Nuclear War Now, Nuclear Weapons Definition, Nuclear War Movies, Nuclear Waste Policy Act, Nuclear Weapons Facts, Nuclear X Ray, Nuclear X, Nuclear Explosion, Nuclear X Met Rx, Nuclear Explosion Gif, Nuclear X Ray Technician Salary, Nuclear Explosion In Space, Nuclear Explosion Video, Nuclear Explosion Simulator, Nuclear Explosion Radius, Nuclear Yield, Nuclear Yield Map, Nuclear Youtube, Nuclear Yellow, Nuclear Yellow Cake, Nuclear Yacht, Nuclear Yemen, Nuclear Ymir, Nuclear Yap, Nuclear Yucca Mountain, Nuclear Zone, Nuclear Zomboy, Nuclear Zero, Nuclear Zombies, Nuclear Zomboy Lyrics, Nuclear Zone Theory, Nuclear Zone Hypothesis, Nuclear Zec, Nuclear Zone Terraforming Mars, Nuclear Zone In Russia, Icelandair, Iceland Weather, Iceland Flag, Iceland Map, Iceland Population, Iceland Blue Lagoon, Iceland Currency, Iceland Vacation, Iceland Airport, Iceland Tours, Icelandair, Iceland Airport, Iceland Airlines, Iceland Airport Code, Iceland Attractions, Iceland Airwaves, Iceland Airbnb, Iceland Average Temperature, Icelandair Reviews, Iceland Air Business Class, Iceland Blue Lagoon, Iceland Black Sand Beach, Iceland Beaches, Iceland Beer, Iceland Best Time To Visit, Iceland Blue Lagoon Hotel, Icelandic Band, Iceland Backpacking, Iceland Black Beach, Iceland Blog, Iceland Currency, Iceland Capital, Iceland Car Rental, Iceland Climate, Iceland Cities, Iceland Cruise, Iceland Country Code, Iceland Continent, Iceland Culture, Iceland Camper Rental, Iceland Drinking Age, Iceland Day Tours, Iceland Demographics, Iceland Down Syndrome, Iceland Daylight, Iceland Dragon, Iceland Deals, Iceland Diving, Iceland Destinations, Iceland Driving, Iceland Economy, Iceland Europe, Iceland Elves, Iceland Exchange Rate, Iceland Excursions, Iceland Eu, Iceland Equal Pay, Iceland Earthquakes, Iceland Euro 2016, Iceland Expensive, Iceland Flag, Iceland Flights, Iceland Facts, Iceland Foods, Iceland Fjords, Iceland Fun Facts, Iceland Fishing, Iceland Financial Crisis, Iceland Flag Emoji, Icelandic Fermented Shark, Iceland Golden Circle, Iceland Government, Iceland Glacier, Iceland Golden Circle Map, Iceland Golden Circle Tour, Iceland Gdp, Iceland Guided Tours, Iceland Groupon, Iceland Geography, Iceland Geyser, Iceland Hotels, Iceland Hot Springs, Iceland Hostels, Iceland History, Iceland Hetalia, Iceland Honeymoon, Iceland Hiking, Iceland Horses, Iceland Hot Dogs, Iceland Horseback Riding, Iceland Ice Cream, Iceland In July, Iceland In September, Iceland In October, Iceland In August, Iceland In June, Iceland In November, Iceland In Spanish, Iceland In May, Iceland Itinerary, Iceland Jobs, Iceland July Weather, Iceland July, Iceland June Weather, Iceland June, Iceland Jersey, Iceland Jewelry, Iceland Jails Bankers, Iceland Jeep Tours, Iceland Jokes, Iceland Krona To Usd, Iceland Krona, Iceland Kayaking, Iceland Keflavik, Iceland Kef, Iceland Krona Symbol, Iceland Katla, Iceland Known For, Iceland Krona Exchange Rate, Iceland King, Iceland Language, Iceland Lagoon, Iceland Landscape, Iceland Location, Iceland Lonely Planet, Iceland Latitude, Iceland Lights, Iceland Life Expectancy, Iceland Last Names, Iceland Landmarks, Iceland Map, Iceland Money, Iceland Military, Iceland Music Festival, Iceland Money To Usd, Iceland Mountains, Iceland Marathon, Iceland Must See, Iceland Music, Iceland Mcdonalds, Iceland Northern Lights, Iceland News, Iceland Northern Lights Tour, Iceland New Hyde Park, Iceland National Park, Iceland National Team, Iceland Nightlife, Iceland Northern Lights Hotel, Icelandic Names, Iceland National Anthem, Iceland On Map, Iceland On World Map, Iceland Official Language, Iceland Outlets, Iceland On A Budget, Iceland October Weather, Iceland October, Iceland Outline, Iceland Off The Beaten Path, Iceland Ocean, Iceland Population, Iceland People, Iceland Poppy, Iceland Pictures, Iceland Population 2017, Iceland President, Iceland Photos, Iceland Plane Tickets, Iceland Packing List, Iceland Packages, Iceland Quotes, Iceland Quality Of Life, Iceland Quartz, Iceland Queen, Iceland Quick Facts, Iceland Quartz Countertops, Iceland Questions, Iceland Quiz, Iceland Quotes Mighty Ducks, Iceland Quicksand, Iceland Ring Road, Iceland Rental Car, Iceland Religion, Iceland Resorts, Iceland Restaurants, Iceland Ring Road Itinerary, Iceland Real Estate, Iceland Road Map, Iceland Rv Rental, Iceland Revolution, Iceland Soccer, Iceland Summer, Iceland Spar, Iceland Size, Iceland Summer Weather, Iceland Shark, Iceland Spa, Iceland Stopover, Iceland Sunset, Iceland Souvenirs, Iceland Tours, Iceland Time, Iceland Travel, Iceland Tourism, Iceland Temperature, Iceland Things To Do, Iceland Travel Guide, Iceland To Usd, Iceland Tickets, Iceland Travel Deals, Iceland University, Iceland Unemployment Rate, Iceland Usa, Iceland Uber, Iceland Unlimited, Iceland Uk, Iceland Us Embassy, Iceland Usd Conversion, Iceland Ultra Marathon, Iceland Us Visa, Iceland Vacation, Iceland Volcano, Iceland Visa, Iceland Vs Greenland, Iceland Vodka, Iceland Volcano Tour, Iceland Vikings, Iceland Virginia Beach, Iceland Volcano Eruption 2017, Iceland Visa Requirements, Iceland Weather, Iceland Women, Iceland Weather July, Iceland Waterfalls, Iceland Weather August, Iceland Wiki, Iceland Weather In May, Iceland Water, Iceland Weather In September, Iceland Weather In June, Iceland X Reader, Iceland X Reader Lemon, Iceland X Fridge, Iceland X Reader Fluff, Iceland X Reader Lime, Iceland X Reader X Norway Lemon, Iceland X Male Reader, Iceland X Reader X Norway, Iceland X Norway, Iceland X America, Iceland Yogurt, Iceland Youtube, Iceland Yearly Weather, Iceland Yoga Retreat, Iceland Yelp, Iceland Youth Hostels, Icelandic Yogurt Skyr, Iceland Yarn, Iceland Yearly Temperatures, Iceland Yurt, Iceland Zip Code, Iceland Zoo, Iceland Zika, Iceland Zip Line, Iceland Zillow, Iceland Zodiac Tours, Iceland Zoo Price, Iceland Zodiac Boat Tour, Iceland Zoo Reykjavik, Iceland Zesty Bean Quinoa
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
The clandestine group’s goal was clear: Obtain the building blocks of a so-called radioactive “dirty bomb” – capable of poisoning a major city for a year or more – by openly purchasing the raw ingredients from authorized sellers inside the United States.
It should have been hard. The purchase of lethal radioactive materials – even modestly dangerous ones – requires a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a measure meant to keep them away from terrorists. Applicants must demonstrate they have a legitimate need and understand the NRC’s safety standards, and pass an on-site inspection of their equipment and storage.
But this secret group of fewer than 10 people – formed in April 2014 in North Dakota, Texas, and Michigan – discovered that getting a license and then ordering enough materials to make a “dirty bomb” was strikingly simple in one of their three tries. Sellers were preparing shipments that together were enough to poison a city center when the operation was shut down.
The team’s members could have been anyone – a terrorist outfit, emissaries of a rival government, domestic extremists. In fact, they were undercover bureaucrats with the investigative arm of Congress. And they’d pulled off the same stunt nine years before. Their fresh success has set off new alarms among some lawmakers and officials in Washington about risks that terrorists inside the United States could undertake a “dirty bomb” attack.
Here’s how they did it: In Dallas, Texas, they incorporated a shell company they never intended to run and rented office space in a nondescript industrial park, merely to create an address for the license application. In a spot on the form where they were supposed to identify their safety officer, they made up a name and attached a fake resume. They claimed to need the material to power an industrial gauge used in oil and gas exploration.
Last year, their application was sent not to Washington but to Texas regulators, who had been deputized by the NRC to grant licenses without federal review. When the state’s inspector visited the fake office, he saw it was empty and had no security precautions. But members of the group assured him that once they had a license, they would be able to make the security and safety improvements.
So the inspector, who always carried licenses with him, handed them one on the spot.
The two-page Texas document authorized the company to buy the sealed radioactive material in an amount smaller than needed for any nefarious purpose. But no copies were required to be kept in a readily-accessible, government database. So after using the license to place one order, the team simply made a digital copy and changed the permitted quantities, enabling it to place a new order with another seller for twice the original amount.
“I wouldn’t call what we did very sophisticated,” Ned Woodward, the mastermind of the Government Accountability Office’s plot, said in a phone interview with the Center for Public Integrity. “There was nothing we had done to improve that site to make it appear as if it were an ongoing business.”
In 2007, Woodward’s colleagues in the GAO similarly set up fake businesses, got licenses to purchase low-level radioactive material and altered them to buy larger quantities. The NRC promised “immediate action to address the weaknesses we identified,” according to the GAO’s report on that incident.
The auditors’ aim this time around was to see if the government had cleaned up its act, and taken steps to close some simple gateways to obtaining the ingredients for a dirty bomb.
It turns out, the government had not.
While the purchases that Woodward’s team set in motion were never completed, if they had been, his group would have had enough radioactive material to create the type of dangerous dirty bomb that terrorists may seek, according to David Trimble, director of Natural Resources and Environment at the GAO and Woodward’s boss. It would have been within the group’s reach to spread cancer-causingamericium and beryllium dust over many blocks, threatening the health of anyone who breathed it.
The quantity each seller could have sent was dangerous, and together the quantity was “significantly dangerous,” Trimble said in aGAO podcast.
Trimble said that he is confident his investigators could have altered the license again and again, allowing them to amass an even larger quantity. “It’s a back door,” he said in an interview. “We walked through it and we showed the door was still open. We could have kept doing it. If you can forge [a license] once, there’s no reason you can’t forge it again and again.”
Texas nuclear regulatory officials have responded by quietly firing two managers and organizing new training efforts.
NRC Commissioner Jeff Baran, an attorney and former House of Representatives staff member, wrote a swift letter to the two other current NRC commissioners (two positions are vacant) stating that even if Texas changed its procedures, “GAO’s covert testing identified a regulatory gap.” He urged his colleagues to consider creating a system for tracking licenses and sales of low-level radioactive materials – an idea that its members rejected seven years ago under heavy state and industry pressure.
The GAO’s July 15 report on the episode, which described the bare bones of its scam without naming any of the states involved or identifying the precise materials that were improperly ordered, similarly said that the NRC and state regulators aren’t doing enough to keep such materials out of terrorists’ hands.
It criticized the state regulator for granting the licenses, but also said the commission needs to act to block license alterations and track sales and shipments of lower-level radiological materials, using measures like those already in place for the sale of more hazardous fissile materials.
Billions of dollars in potential economic harm
Unlike a nuclear detonation, which could destroy a large city, the explosion of a dirty bomb would provoke more chaos than immediate fatalities, according to a 2007 study commissioned by the Department of Homeland Security.
“A terrorist attack using a dirty bomb in the United States is possible, perhaps even moderately likely, but would not kill many people,” two professors at the University of Southern California wrote in the study, which was conducted with advice from government scientific and counterintelligence experts. “Instead, such an attack primarily would result in economic and psychological consequences.”
The explosion could be lethal to someone nearby or to the first emergency personnel to arrive. But cleaning up the contaminated area would cost billions of dollars and take about a year in the scenario examined by the study’s authors – a dirty bomb targeting the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which together constitute the third busiest in the world. At its worst, the resulting economic harm could exceed $250 billion.
One key to keeping the ingredients out of terrorists’ hands, the authors concluded, is “being more proactive in controlling and protecting the original sources of radioactive material.” But they also warned that “an attack that involves relatively low-level radioactive material from a U.S. facility” – the precise scenario tested by the GAO – is more likely to be successful than an attack using imported material, because the chances of detection are so much less.
“Why bother smuggling it if you can just order it with a fake license?” said Trimble, in the podcast.
Radioactive materials considered useful in a dirty bomb are widely present in U.S. and international commerce, used legitimately for medical and industrial purposes in more than 70,000 high-risk devices located at 13,000 buildings, according to a 2013 Energy Department estimate. These include machinery that irradiates food or blood products or is used to diagnose illness. In the United States alone, roughly 21,000 licenses for the purchase of these materials are active – and in some states they are reviewed by regulators only once a decade.
The Obama administration highlighted the dangers associated with loose radioactive materials at international summits in 2010, 2012, 2014, and this March. The summits inspired more than a dozen countries to adopt stronger physical security standards at sites that house radioactive materials and during their transportation, while others held special exercises for law enforcement and health workers who’d likely respond to a dirty bomb. Still others installed radiation detectors to prevent smuggling, or pledged money to other countries to help them develop stronger safety and security standards for radiological materials.
But on March 31, Obama’s deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes warned reporters at a press briefing that while terrorists would have a hard time building or stealing a working nuclear weapon and delivering it, making a “more rudimentary dirty bomb” would be less challenging.
Coordinated suicide bombings in Brussels nine days earlier had stoked special anxiety about dirty bombs, because two perpetrators had secretly surveilled a senior researcher in a Belgian radioactive isotope program as he came and went from his home. The resulting videos, which police seized, prompted worries that the terrorists wanted to kidnap the man to force a handover of radioactive materials.
“The Belgium example – I think it reinforces what we’ve seen for many years, which is that we have seen indications, both through their public statements and through their actions, that terrorist organizations like al Qaeda and ISIL have an interest in getting their hands on these types of materials,” Rhodes said at the summit press briefing. “They want to do as much damage as possible. That was al Qaeda’s position for many years; we have no reason to doubt that that is ISIL’s position as well.”
The Obama administration’s ambition in convening the summits, Rhodes said, was to “bring the standard up around the world so that it is at the level that we see certainly here in the United States.”
That level, it turns out, isn’t so high.
Tighter regulation rejected in 2009
In a written statement about the report, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Homeland Security, who asked for the GAO’s investigation, said, “radiological and nuclear terrorism remains a threat to our nation’s security,” and the GAO’s scam showed how easy it is to exploit gaps in the NRC’s oversight that should have been fixed years ago.
“The NRC should re-evaluate its licensing requirements to ensure those who want to do us harm cannot obtain a license to purchase radioactive materials as easily as covert testers did,” Thompson said.
Similar demands were made, but refused, after the GAO’s sting operation in 2007 exposed the same weaknesses. Then, NRC staff proposed requiring that all licensing and sales involving so-called Category 3 radioactive materials – those in types or quantities considered less dangerous than others – be tracked in a single national database, as they already were for higher-risk Category 1 and 2 materials. Otherwise, it said, these Category 3 materials might be accumulated surreptitiously – through the process the GAO used – “for potential malevolent use.”
The NRC staff estimated that such a system would cost between $11 million and $14 million over a decade, with the federal government bearing 47 percent of the cost, licensees paying 39 percent and state regulators shouldering 14 percent. But companies that sell radiological materials complained in response that they couldn’t even begin to guess how burdensome an expanded tracking system might be for them.
“We do not consider that the supposed benefits of the expansion … justify this potential expenditure,” Hugh Evans, secretary and treasurer of the Council on Radionuclides and Radiopharmaceuticals, a trade association that lobbies on behalf of companies that sell radioactive materials, wrote in a letter to the NRC on May 9, 2008. The co-chair of the Nuclear Sector Coordinating Council for Radioisotopes – an industry task force recognized by the government as a partner in combatting radiological terrorism – sent a separate letter with some wording identical to that in Evans’s letter, suggesting a well-organized campaign.
Regulators in 24 of the states that had been deputized by the NRC to issue licenses also registered their opposition to the expanded tracking, partly because the system for tracking more dangerous quantities was then not working well.
Only Minnesota supported the proposal, calling it one of several “essential steps” that were “long overdue.” Then-NRC member Peter Lyons, a former official at the Los Alamos weapons laboratory, similarly argued at the time that expanded tracking “will further reduce the potential for aggregating sources” to a dangerous level. But Commissioner Kristine Svinicki, a nuclear engineer who had worked on the civilian side of the Energy Department, said she thought the on-site inspections would be enough to stop thefts or diversions.
In June 2009, the radioactive material sellers and state regulators got their way. The NRC rejected on the plan with a 2-2 tie vote.
Egregious behavior didn’t stop a Texas license
That left in place regulations for keeping low-level radioactive materials out of terrorists’ hands that were written in 1978. While the NRC is technically responsible for overseeing these rules, in practice it has granted only 13 percent of the active purchase licenses, relying instead on inspectors in 37 states to oversee the rest. They are supposed to get NRC training, and to follow the NRC’s 14-point checklist rules for inspections.
This is what the GAO sought to verify: “We designed our test to fail” through egregious behavior during on-site visits, the report said.
In its latest investigation, the GAO deliberately focused on two states – North Dakota and Texas – with robust oil and gas extraction industries, which issue many licenses for well-logging equipment, including gauges powered by radioactive americium combined with a lightweight, cancer-causing metal, beryllium, that are plunged into the ground to predict whether a prospective drill site would be productive.
In 2014, the GAO reported that it had caught companies licensed to use well-logging equipment storing large quantities of radioactive materials that auditors said could have been easily stolen. Officials from the NRC and state regulators told the GAO “the security controls are adequate.” But an official from the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration determined “the security measures employed by some well loggers could put the sources at risk.” No policies have been changed, however.
The NRC had previously judged North Dakota’s on-site inspections deficient. With high staff turnover fueled by higher-paying jobs in the state’s booming oil and gas industry, the NRC decided in 2011 to put its radiation protection office into a remedial “heightened oversight” program. But the GAO’s experiment failed there, showing the state had turned around.
The applicants’ facility was unsuited for the kind of work they said they intended to do. They “couldn’t even get a well-logging truck through the door of this building they’d rented,” said Dale Patrick, manager of the radiation program at the North Dakota Department of Health, in a telephone interview. Similar concerns arose during a second GAO licensing application attempt in Michigan, where NRC regional inspectors from Illinois also blocked the GAO’s scam.
Unlike North Dakota, Texas was considered a strong performer. In 2014, an NRC audit of its licensing declared it “adequate to protect public health and safety,” according to an 82-page assessment.
But Texas failed the GAO’s test last year because its inspector didn’t follow agreed procedures “to make sure this unknown entity was a legitimate company and did not question that the applicant was not a registered business with the Texas Secretary of State,” according to Christine Mann, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of State Health Services.
Texas’s on-site inspectors routinely carried licenses with them and commonly handed them to applicants on the spot without consulting anyone else about what they’d observed. The practice meant that a single person, operating in the field and without independent scrutiny, functioned as the sole obstruction to improper sales.
“Yes, that did happen but we no longer allow that to occur,” Mann said.
The GAO’s sting spurred change in Texas. The state fired two managers and sent letters of reprimand to two members of its licensing staff, according to Mann. The radiation control department retrained its personnel, and altered its procedures to require supervisory reviews of all licenses. A new NRCreview last February, however, noted that the division still had “budgetary shortfalls” because the state was using its regulatory fees to raise revenues that it then spent for other purposes. It had 42 personnel to oversee more than 1,570 licensees and shippers and thousands of transactions each year.
After being briefed by the GAO on what had happened, the NRC immediately revoked the license Texas had granted the GAO’s shell company and told the vendors to cancel the orders. The NRC also asked all its state-level partners and regional NRC offices to review their licensing practices and updated its training courses to emphasize the need for heightened scrutiny. But unnamed NRC officials told the GAO that “NRC had no current plans to take action” to enact stricter regulations, because the issue had been considered and rejected in 2009.
After the report’s release, however, Duncan White, a senior health physicist at the NRC, wrote in an official blog post that NRC staff will restudy the issue and discuss it further with the commission later this year. A spokeswoman for the NRC, Maureen Conley, declined to add to what the blog said.
“We’re encouraged that NRC appears to be looking closely at this issue and considering the merits of the recommendation that we made,” Trimble said, “which we believe is on point.”
Secret Group Houston, Secret Group Facebook, Secret Group Meme, Secret Group Names, Secret Group Vs Closed Group, Secret Group Bar, Secret Group Crossword, Secret Group Synonym, Secret Group That Runs The World, Secret Group Kpop, Secret Group And Closed Group, Secret Group Anonymous, Secret Group Against Illuminati, Secret Group At Yale, Secret Group America, Secret Affair Group, Secret Agent Group Names, Secret American Group, Secret Activist Group Anonymous, Secret Arabia Group Tours, Secret Group Bar, Secret Group Bilderberg, Secret Group Bound To Be Reduced, Secret Group Board On Pinterest, Secret Group Bush, Secret Group Board, Secret Boy Group, Secret Beer Group, Secret Billionaire Group, Secret Service Group Brisbane, Secret Group Crossword, Secret Group Comedy, Secret Group Chat, Secret Group Chat Names, Secret Group Controlling World, Secret Group Chat Telegram, Secret Group Called The League, Secret Group Called Masons, Secret Group Chat App, Secret Group Chat On Facebook, Secret Group Da Vinci Code, Secret Group Definition, Secret Deals Group, Facebook Secret Group Definition, Secret Korean Group Diet, Facebook Secret Group Delete, Facebook Secret Group Disappeared, Secret Group Wiki Drama, Secret Kpop Group Drama, Secret For Success Group Discussion, Secret Group Eng Sub, Secret Entertainment Group, Secret Elite Group, Secret Elitist Group, Facebook Secret Group Event, Facebook Secret Group Email, Secret Group That Meets Every Year, Enter Secret Group Facebook, Secret Group Facebook, Secret Group Facebook Find, Secret Group Facebook Hack, Secret Group Facebook Who Can See, Secret Group Facebook News Feed, Secret Group Facebook Pictures, Secret Group Fighting Isis, Secret Group For Ipad.info, Secret Group Facebook Link, Secret Group Facebook Events, Secret Group Girl, Secret Group Government, Secret Garden Group, Secret Govt Group Crossword, Secret Girl Group Profile, Secret Girl Group Car Accident, Secret Girl Group Plastic Surgery, Secret Garden Group Tour, Secret Girl Group Songs, Secret Girl Group Accident, Secret Group Houston, Secret Hacker Group, Secret Hotel Group, Secret Harbour Group Fitness, Secret Handshake Group, Secret Herpes Group Facebook, Secret Hunting Group Scalia, Secret Hacktivist Group, Secret Group Facebook Hack, Facebook Secret Group How To Join, Secret Group In Scandal, Secret Group In Facebook, Secret Group In Government, Secret Group In California, Secret Group In The Da Vinci Code, Secret Group Images, Secret Group In Viber, Secret Group In The World, Secret Group Illuminati, Secret Japanese Group, Facebook Secret Group Join, Jive Secret Group, Join Secret Group Facebook After Leaving, Join Secret Group, Junimea Secret Group, Secret Group Kpop, Secret Korean Group Profile, Secret Kpop Group Car Accident, Secret Korean Group Plastic Surgery, Secret Korean Group Songs, Secret Kpop Group Members, Secret Korean Group Accident, Secret Kpop Group Plastic Surgery, Secret Korean Group Diet, Group Secret Key Generation Algorithms, Secret Group Ltd, Secret Group Logo, Secret Group London, Secret Group Linkedin, Secret Group List, Secret Life Group, Group Secret Line, Secret Facebook Group List, Facebook Secret Group Link, Secret Group World Leaders, Secret Group Meme, Secret Group Masons, Secret Group Marines United, Secret Group Meeting In California, Secret Group Members, Secret Group Members Profile, Secret Group Movies, Secret Group Meaning, Secret Group Meeting, Secret Group Messaging, Secret Group Names, Secret Group Name Generator, Secret Group Name Ideas, Secret Group News Feed, Secret Nazi Group, Secret Santa Group Names, Secret Agent Group Names, Secret Military Group Names, Secret Society Group Names, Facebook Secret Group News Feed, Secret Group On Facebook, Secret Group On Fb, Secret Group Of Billionaires, Secret Group Of Plotters, Secret Group On Viber, Secret Group Parking, Secret Group Pics, Secret Group Profile, Secret Group Page On Facebook, Secret Group Picks President, Secret Group Photo, Secret Group Plastic Surgery, Secret Group Pictures, Secret Group Political, Secret Group Puzzle, Secret Group Quotes, Victoria Secret Group Interview Questions And Answers, Victoria Secret Group Interview Questions, Secret Group Ruling The World, Secret Group Rules, Secret Recipe Group, Secret Religious Group, Secret Resistance Group, Secret Rendezvous Group, Facebook Secret Group Rules, Facebook Secret Group Rejoin, Secret Facebook Group Reddit, Secret Society Rap Group, Secret Group Synonym, Secret Group Setting Facebook, Secret Group Since 1947, Secret Group Society, Secret Service Group, Secret Sounds Group, Secret Santa Group Names, Secret Santa Group, Secret Society Group Names, Secret Santa Group Ideas, Secret Group That Runs The World, Secret Group That Rules The World, Secret Group The League, Secret Group That Meets In California, Secret Group Telegram, Secret Group That Meets Every Year, Secret Group Thesaurus, Secret Theatre Group, Secret Chinese Group That Rebelled Against Foreigners, Secret Group Chat Telegram, Secret Group Usa, Secret Underground Group, Victoria’s Secret Group Interview Uk, Group Secret Of The Udas Temple, Unfollow Secret Group On Facebook, Undo Secret Group On Facebook, Undo Secret Group, Secret Group Vs Closed Group, Secret Group Vs Closed Group Facebook, Secret Group Viber, Secret Vatican Group, Secret Group Da Vinci Code, Secret Girl Group Variety Show, Facebook Secret Group Viewer, Victoria Secret Group Interview, Victoria Secret Group Interview Questions And Answers, Victoria Secret Group, Secret Group Word, Secret Group Who Runs The World, Secret Group Whatsapp, Secret Group Wiki, Secret Group Wiki Drama, Secret Group Within, Secret Group Wallpaper, Secret World Group Finder, Secret Weapon Group, Secret World Group Size, X Files Secret Group, Secret Group At Yale, Secret Korean Girl Group Youtube, Secret Harbour Youth Group, Rejoin Secret Facebook Group You Left, Yahweh’s Secret Group The Brotherhood, Secret Group That Meets Every Year, Secret Service Group Sp. Z O.o, Dirty Bomb Game, Dirty Bomb Wiki, Dirty Bomb Gameplay, Dirty Bomb Hacks, Dirty Bomb Reddit, Dirty Bomb Characters, Dirty Bomb Download, Dirty Bomb Steam Charts, Dirty Bomb Mercs, Dirty Bomb Forums, Dirty Bomb Aimbot, Dirty Bomb Arsenal Crate, Dirty Bomb Aimee, Dirty Bomb Arty, Dirty Bomb Aura, Dirty Bomb Assault Course, Dirty Bomb Aimbot 2017, Dirty Bomb All Mercs, Dirty Bomb Attack, Dirty Bomb Age Rating, Dirty Bomb Best Merc, Dirty Bomb Best Sniper, Dirty Bomb Best Loadout, Dirty Bomb Bushwhacker, Dirty Bomb Bots, Dirty Bomb Best Medic, Dirty Bomb Blishlok, Dirty Bomb Bind Long Jump, Dirty Bomb Badges, Dirty Bomb Best Shotgun, Dirty Bomb Characters, Dirty Bomb Custom Crosshair, Dirty Bomb Cheats, Dirty Bomb Console Commands, Dirty Bomb Competitive, Dirty Bomb Codes, Dirty Bomb Config, Dirty Bomb Crafting, Dirty Bomb Controller, Dirty Bomb Cards, Dirty Bomb Download, Dirty Bomb Definition, Dirty Bomb Discord, Dirty Bomb Dockyard, Dirty Bomb Drink, Dirty Bomb Dead, Dirty Bomb Developer, Dirty Bomb Dreiss, Dirty Bomb Dlc, Dirty Bomb Doge Trinket, Dirty Bomb Explosion, Dirty Bomb Effects, Dirty Bomb Engine, Dirty Bomb Esrb, Dirty Bomb Esports, Dirty Bomb Esp, Dirty Bomb Execution, Dirty Bomb Event, Dirty Bomb Esrb Rating, Dirty Bomb Extra Supplies, Dirty Bomb Forums, Dirty Bomb Fragger, Dirty Bomb Free Rotation, Dirty Bomb Fletcher, Dirty Bomb Fps, Dirty Bomb Founders Cards, Dirty Bomb Fps Config, Dirty Bomb Free Mercs, Dirty Bomb Free Download, Dirty Bomb For Mac, Dirty Bomb Game, Dirty Bomb Gameplay, Dirty Bomb Guide, Dirty Bomb Guns, Dirty Bomb Gameplay 2017, Dirty Bomb Game Wiki, Dirty Bomb Giveaway, Dirty Bomb Game Modes, Dirty Bomb Game Download, Dirty Bomb Grandeur, Dirty Bomb Hacks, Dirty Bomb Hidden Achievement, Dirty Bomb Hacks 2017, Dirty Bomb Hud, Dirty Bomb Humble Bundle, Dirty Bomb How To Play Ranked, Dirty Bomb Heroes, Dirty Bomb How To Use Weapon Kit, Dirty Bomb How To Get Weapon Kits, Dirty Bomb Hud Maker, Dirty Bomb Injuries, Dirty Bomb Isis, Dirty Bomb Intro, Dirty Bomb In Syria, Dirty Bomb Imfdb, Dirty Bomb Invite Friends, Dirty Bomb Is, Dirty Bomb Incidents, Dirty Bomb Is Dead, Dirty Bomb Input Lag, Dirty Bomb Jackal, Dirty Bomb Jump Bind, Dirty Bomb Job On The Side, Dirty Bomb Javelin, Dirty Bomb Jobs, Dirty Bomb Join With Friends, Dirty Bomb Jumps, Dirty Bomb Join As Group, Dirty Bomb Join As Party, Dirty Bomb Jokes, Dirty Bomb Kira, Dirty Bomb Katana, Dirty Bomb Keys, Dirty Bomb Kek 10, Dirty Bomb Keeps Crashing, Dirty Bomb K121, Dirty Bomb Knife, Dirty Bomb Kicked From Server, Dirty Bomb Knives, Dirty Bomb Kira Best Loadout, Dirty Bomb Long Jump, Dirty Bomb Logo, Dirty Bomb Loadout Cards, Dirty Bomb Lore, Dirty Bomb Lag, Dirty Bomb Launch Options, Dirty Bomb Logitech Skin, Dirty Bomb Linux, Dirty Bomb Logitech, Dirty Bomb Level Rewards, Dirty Bomb Mercs, Dirty Bomb Meaning, Dirty Bomb Movie, Dirty Bomb Mac, Dirty Bomb Maps, Dirty Bomb Memes, Dirty Bomb Merc Rotation, Dirty Bomb Mods, Dirty Bomb Mpgh, Dirty Bomb Mod Menu, Dirty Bomb Nader, Dirty Bomb Not Launching, Dirty Bomb News, Dirty Bomb Nexon, Dirty Bomb New Mercs, Dirty Bomb Nc, Dirty Bomb Normal Termination, Dirty Bomb Nuclear, Dirty Bomb Nation, Dirty Bomb Nova, Dirty Bomb Obsidian, Dirty Bomb On Steam, Dirty Bomb Obsidian Cards, Dirty Bomb On Ps4, Dirty Bomb Optimization, Dirty Bomb On Mac, Dirty Bomb On Ship In Charleston, Dirty Bomb Online, Dirty Bomb On Container Ship, Dirty Bomb Op Mercs, Dirty Bomb Phantom, Dirty Bomb Player Count, Dirty Bomb Proxy, Dirty Bomb Party System, Dirty Bomb Phoenix, Dirty Bomb Ps4, Dirty Bomb Play With Friends, Dirty Bomb Party, Dirty Bomb Patch Notes, Dirty Bomb Phantom Guide, Dirty Bomb Quick Chat, Dirty Bomb Quotes, Dirty Bomb Quizlet, Dirty Bomb Quick Eye, Dirty Bomb Queue With Friends, Dirty Bomb Quick Credits, Dirty Bomb Quick Join Not Working, Dirty Bomb Quick Melee, Dirty Bomb Quick Draw, Dirty Bomb Quick Charge, Dirty Bomb Reddit, Dirty Bomb Ranked, Dirty Bomb Review, Dirty Bomb Release Date, Dirty Bomb Rhino, Dirty Bomb Ranked Season 2, Dirty Bomb Requirements, Dirty Bomb Rating, Dirty Bomb Redeye, Dirty Bomb Ranked Season 3, Dirty Bomb Steam Charts, Dirty Bomb Steam, Dirty Bomb Sparks, Dirty Bomb Stoker, Dirty Bomb Sniper, Dirty Bomb Support, Dirty Bomb Skins, Dirty Bomb Skyhammer, Dirty Bomb Stuttering, Dirty Bomb Season 3, Dirty Bomb Tier List, Dirty Bomb Twitter, Dirty Bomb Turtle, Dirty Bomb Tips, Dirty Bomb Trailer, Dirty Bomb Thunder, Dirty Bomb Trinkets, Dirty Bomb Twitch, Dirty Bomb Threat, Dirty Bomb Tournament, Dirty Bomb Update, Dirty Bomb Ultrawide, Dirty Bomb Unblocked, Dirty Bomb Ui, Dirty Bomb Used, Dirty Bomb Uranium, Dirty Bomb Unboxing, Dirty Bomb Undetected Hacks, Dirty Bomb Ui Config, Dirty Bomb Unbalanced, Dirty Bomb Video Game, Dirty Bomb Vs Clean Bomb, Dirty Bomb Voice Actors, Dirty Bomb Voice Lines, Dirty Bomb Video, Dirty Bomb Voice Chat, Dirty Bomb Vs Nuke, Dirty Bomb Vs Overwatch, Dirty Bomb Video Settings, Dirty Bomb Vs Tf2, Dirty Bomb Wiki, Dirty Bomb Weapon Kits, Dirty Bomb Weapons, Dirty Bomb Wallpaper, Dirty Bomb Won’t Launch, Dirty Bomb Water, Dirty Bomb Weapon Stats, Dirty Bomb Wikia, Dirty Bomb Wikipedia, Dirty Bomb Water Shot, Dirty Bomb Xbox, Dirty Bomb Xp Boost, Dirty Bomb Xbox One Controller, Dirty Bomb Xbox 360 Controller, Dirty Bomb Xp, Dirty Bomb Xp Booster, Dirty Bomb Xp Glitch, Dirty Bomb Xp Farming, Dirty Bomb Xp Hack, Dirty Bomb Youtube, Dirty Bomb Youtube Gameplay, Dirty Bomb You, Dirty Bomb You Were Kicked, Dirty Bomb Yield, Dirty Bomb You Have Been Banned, Dirty Bomb You Were Kicked Due To, Dirty Bomb Yes Chaika, Dirty Bomb Game Youtube, Dirty Bomb Can You Run It, Dirty Bomb Zoom Sensitivity, Dirty Bomb Zombies, Dirty Bomb Zfz, Dirty Bomb Zoom Sens, Dirty Bomb Zoobombs, Dirty Bomb Zombie Mode, Dirty Bomb Zoom, Dirty Bomb Sniper Zoom, Dirty Bomb Map Zoom, Dirty Bomb Zeb
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Return of the Twelfth Imam
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad believes the most important task of the Iranian Revolution was to prepare the way for the return of the Twelfth Imam, who disappeared in 874, bringing an end to Muhammad’s lineage. This imam, the Mahdi or “divinely guided one,” Shiites believe, will return in an apocalyptic battle in which the forces of righteousness will defeat the forces of evil and bring about a new era in which Islam ultimately becomes the dominant religion throughout the world. The Shiites have been waiting patiently for the Twelfth Imam for more than a thousand years, but Ahmadinejad believes he can now hasten the return through a nuclear war. Ayatollah Hussein Nuri Hamdani explicitly said in 2005 that “the Jews should be fought against and forced to surrender to prepare the way for the coming of the Hidden Imam.” It is this apocalyptic world view, Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis notes, that distinguishes Iran from other governments with nuclear weapons.
Lewis quotes a passage from Ayatollah Khomeini cited in an 11th grade Iranian schoolbook, “I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against the whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all of them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom, which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another’s hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours.”
Killing Innocent Muslims
There are those who think that Muslims would never use such weapons against Israel because innocent Muslims would be killed as well, but Saddam Hussein did not hesitate to use poison gas on his own people. During the war in Lebanon in 2006, Hezbollah did not worry that rocketing cities with large Arab populations such as Haifa and Nazareth would kill non-Jews (and 24 of the 52 Israeli casualties were non-Jews). Muslims murder each other every day in Iraq. And Iran fought a ten-year war with Iraq in which as many as one million Muslims were killed.
Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani explicitly said he wasn’t concerned about fallout from an attack on Israel. “If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession,” he said “the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.” As even one Iranian commentator noted, Rafsanjani apparently wasn’t concerned that “the destruction of the Jewish State would also means the mass killing of the Palestinian population as well.”
Mutually Assured Destruction
Iran would never launch a nuclear attack against Israel, some argue because, as the old Sting song used to say about the Russians, the Iranians “love their children too.” In the days of the Cold War, this idea was known as MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction. In the Iranian case, no Muslim leader would risk an Israeli counterstrike that might destroy them. MAD doesn’t work, however, if the Iranians believe there will be destruction anyway at the end of time. What matters, Bernard Lewis observed, is if the infidels go to hell and believers go to heaven. And if you believe that killing the nonbelievers will earn you a place in Paradise with 72 virgins, what difference does it make if you go out in a blaze of glory as a suicide bomber or in the shadow of a mushroom cloud?
Rationality vs. Theology
Optimists also suggest the Iranians are driven more by rationality than theology and would not risk using nuclear weapons. Others believe they are irrational and therefore cannot be trusted to hold their fire. One does not have to believe the Iranians are irrational, however, to foresee the possibility of an attack on Israel with nuclear weapons. Rafsanjani, the President of Iran before Ahmadinejad, was just as adamant about destroying Israel as his successor. Contrary to the old aphorism that you can’t win a nuclear war, he argued that Iran could achieve victory. He said that “Israel is much smaller than Iran in land mass, and therefore far more vulnerable to nuclear attack.” Since Iran has 70 million people and Israel only has seven million, Rafsanjani believed Iran could survive an exchange of nuclear bombs while Israel would be annihilated. The rhetoric was bombastic, but he and other Iranian leaders might first consider the possibility that Israel could conceivably launch far more missiles and the outcome might be very different than he imagined.
Rafsanjani is correct about Israel’s vulnerability. Besides the population difference, the disparity in size of the countries is such that it does not take a whole arsenal of ICBMS like the old Soviet Union had to destroy Israel; Iran need only have three crude bombs to attack Israel’s three major population centers – Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem – and it’s goodbye Israel.
The Power to Influence
Iran will not have to use nuclear weapons to influence events in the region. Maj. Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, head of the Moscow-based Center for Strategic Nuclear Forces, said the potential danger of an Iranian bomb is not the possibility of a nuclear strike against some countries, but the ability to assume a more bold approach in dealing with the international community after becoming a nuclear power. “The real threat is that Iran, which is already ignoring all resolutions and sanctions issued by the UN Security Council, will be practically ‘untouchable’ after acquiring nuclear-power status, and will be able to expand its support of terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Hezbollah” said Dvorkin (RIA Novosti, March 12, 2009).
Furthermore, by possessing a nuclear capability, the Iranians can deter Israel or any other nation from attacking Iran or its allies. When Hezbollah attacked Israel in 2006, for example, a nuclear Iran could have threatened retaliation against Tel Aviv if Israeli forces bombed Beirut. The mere threat of using nuclear weapons would be sufficient to drive Israelis into shelters and could cripple the economy. What foreign investors will want to risk their money going up in the smoke of a mushroom cloud? Will immigrants want to come to a country that lives in the shadow of annihilation? Will Israelis accept the risk? Israeli leaders will have to decide if they can risk calling the Iranians’ bluff.
An interview with Mr. Addy Cohen, a retired official from Israel’s Treasury Ministry, conducted by Ori Rabinowitz, a post-doctoral fellow at Tel Aviv University.
Part of the puzzle about the textile plant cover story is how it came about. While we know that Addy Cohen, the director of the Foreign Aid Office at the Treasury Ministry, used that description when guiding U.S. Ambassador Ogden Reid and some of his staff on a helicopter tour of the Negev in September 1960, the documentary trail has it limits. Cohen, who has just turned 87, and is living outside Tel Aviv, recalls the episode vividly. In a series of written and oral exchanges with the editors of this e-book in recent weeks, he has clarified further what happened.
As a senior official, Cohen was aware of the Dimona project and of its utmost secrecy. The issue of Dimona “was discussed in one of the Treasury Ministry executive meetings under [Minister Levi] Eshkol,” he wrote us. The helicopter tour covered various development projects that the U.S. supported, and they were on their way from the Dead Sea. “I was not prepared to Ambassador Reid’s question [about the Dimona site] as we flew far north of the structure. I ad libbed by referring to Trostler, the Jerusalemite architect [a relative of Cohen’s wife], who actually designed a textile plants” at Dimona.
Surprised by Reid’s query, Cohen improvised an answer that was not completely false. In retrospect, as he wrote on March 5, 2015, “It may have transpired that I was the first one who referred to the project as a ‘textile plant’ but I can assure you that it was not planned.”
Washington, D.C., April 15, 2015 – The U.S. government first learned of Israel’s secret nuclear program at Dimona from an American corporate official talking to U.S. diplomats in Tel Aviv during mid-summer 1960, according to a declassified document published today for the first time by the National Security Archive, the Nuclear Proliferation International History Project, and the Center for Nonproliferation Studies of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey. Other documents published today detail the discovery of the secret project that some in the U.S. government believed from the very start aimed at a weapons capability; the U.S. debates over Israel’s lack of candor; and U.S. government efforts to pressure the Israelis to answer key questions about the nature of the Dimona project.
This “discovery,” which came as the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower was drawing to a close, caused apprehension in Washington by raising concern about regional stability and nuclear proliferation, but it also produced annoyance because Israeli officials at all levels repeatedly provided less than credible answers to U.S. questions about Dimona. Thus, in September 1960, when embassy officials asked about a new construction site when they were on a helicopter ride nearby, an adroit Israeli official, Addy Cohen, improvised a story to keep the secret: it was the site of a textile factory, he said; a story that was not wholly false because there was a textile plant near Dimona. An interview with Addy Cohen detailing the episode appears in this posting for the first time.
Documents published in this collection shed light on a particularly notable intelligence failure: how Washington missed warning signs that the Israelis had a nuclear project underway, but also how the U.S. belatedly realized what the Israelis were doing, and how Eisenhower and his senior advisers reacted to this discovery. Among the documents are:
The June 1959 Israel-Norway secret agreement providing for the sale of Norwegian heavy water to Israel (through the United Kingdom), transmitted by Oslo Embassy political officer Richard Kerry (father of Secretary of State John Kerry).
Reports about information from a then-covert source — University of Michigan nuclear engineering professor Henry Gomberg — who learned that the Israelis had a secret nuclear reactor project that involved experiments with plutonium.
A telegram from the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv reporting on Finance Ministry official Addy Cohen’s statement that “we’ve been misbehaving,” and one by an unidentified official close to Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion that the secrecy surrounding Dimona was unjustifiable and that it was “a stupid mistake on the part of Israel.”
Reports by U.S. Ambassador Ogden Reid on conversations with Ben-Gurion.
A State Department message to the embassy in Tel Aviv conveying irritation that the responses of the Israeli government showed a “lack of candor.”
Messages about a role for the International Atomic Energy Agency in inspecting and safeguarding Dimona.
* * * * *
The Eisenhower Administration and the Discovery of Dimona: March 1958-January 1961
By Avner Cohen and William Burr
In the last months of 1960 as the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower was coming to a close, the U.S. government discovered that Israel had been building, with French assistance, a secret nuclear reactor near Dimona in the Negev Desert that could give Israel a nuclear weapons potential. The discovery caused apprehension within the Eisenhower administration by invoking concerns about regional stability and nuclear proliferation, but it also produced annoyance because Israeli officials at all levels provided less than credible answers to U.S. questions about Dimona.
One episode that helped create a sense of deception was that, in response to initial U.S. official questions about the construction site, the Israelis said it would be a textile factory. Over the years the “textile factory” story has acquired legendary status, but exactly when the story came about has been a mystery. But recently unearthed U.S. government documents — an embassy telegram and a memorandum by the Deputy Chief of Mission — help solve this historical puzzle. They show that during a helicopter flight in September 1960, with American Ambassador Ogden Reid and others of his staff on board, not far from the reactor site, Ambassador Reid (or one of the travelers) asked what the big construction site was. Their host, Addy Cohen, a senior Treasury Ministry official, replied, “Why, that’s a textile plant.” In December 1960, when the Dimona issue was publicly exposed, Cohen was asked why he had said “textile factory.” He responded: “that was our story at the time.” Cohen acknowledged that “we have been misbehaving” by keeping Dimona secret, but justified the project as a “deterrent” against Arab neighbors.
Today the National Security Archive, the Nuclear Proliferation International History Project and the Center for Nonproliferation Studies of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey publish for the first time these two items and other declassified documents on the “discovery” of Dimona. The documents provide new perspectives on how the Eisenhower administration learned about the secret reactor project, how it reacted to the discovery, and how the Israelis responded. Among the findings are these:
The initial “discovery” by the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv of the French-Israeli reactor project was probably in late July 1960, when a U.S. corporate official learned about it from an Israeli oil executive and told U.S. diplomats that the site would be a power reactor. This is the earliest known reference to Dimona.
The admission by French Foreign Minister Maurice Couve de Murville on December 16 to Secretary of State Christian Herter that France had helped Israel build the reactor, a “replica of [the] Marcoule plant.” He also told Herter that under the bilateral agreement, France would supply Israel the raw materials and receive any plutonium produced by the plant. In reply to Herter’s question about the plant’s financing, Couve said that he “assumed the money came from [the United States]”
Former Treasury Ministry official Addy Cohen ad libbed the “textile plant” story in response to questions on a helicopter tour [See above and sidebar].
An unidentified official close to Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, according to an Embassy telegram, told the Canadian ambassador that the secrecy surrounding Dimona was unjustifiable and that it was “a stupid mistake on the part of Israel.” Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs G. Lewis Jones agreed: It was “stupid of them” and an “unnecessary … Israeli caper.”
The financial aspects of the Dimona project, i.e., cost, financing, and the role of U.S. money — through both the diversion of U.S. government aid and the use of tax-deductible individual charities — played an important role in the Eisenhower administration’s internal deliberations on Dimona. Washington considered applying, but apparently did not use, the power to withhold economic assistance as pressure on Israel.
When the U.S. started asking questions about Dimona, and then when the issue was leaked to the press, an irritated Prime Minister Ben-Gurion asked Ambassador Ogden Reid: “Why in [the] States is everything being told [to] everybody?” Ben-Gurion stuck to the new Israeli cover story, namely, that the Dimona reactor was for peaceful purposes only, and for the economic development of the Negev in particular — no more than a step towards the building of nuclear power stations and the production of electric power, a badly needed resource.
A State Department message to the embassy in Tel Aviv conveyed a sense of irritation with the responses of the Israeli government: Ben-Gurion’s explanations “appear evasive” and the “clearly apparent lack of candor [is] difficult to reconcile with [the] confidence which had traditionally characterized U.S.-Israel relations.” The Department wanted more questions asked and more detailed and frank answers from Ben-Gurion.
In June 1959 Israel and Norway signed a secret agreement providing for Norway to sell heavy water to Israel (through the United Kingdom). According to the U.S. embassy first secretary in Oslo, Richard Kerry (father of Secretary of State John Kerry), disclosure of the agreement could be embarrassing to the Norwegian government in light of its efforts to play the role of an “honest broker” in international conflicts, including in the Middle East.
Also published in this collection are important documents that have been available in previous National Security Archive postings, but are a significant part of the record of the discovery of Dimona, including:
A Special National Intelligence Estimate — SNIE 100-8-60 from 8 December 1960 — that formally determined that “Israel is engaged in construction of a nuclear reactor complex in the Negev near Beersheba” and “plutonium production for weapons is at least one major purpose of this effort.” The SNIE estimated “that Israel will produce some weapons grade plutonium in 1963-64 and possibly as early as 1962.” A significant portion of the SNIE is still classified.
President Eisenhower’s meeting with top advisers on 19 December 1960 to discuss the Dimona problem, ponder the issues raised by Israeli fundraising in the United States, and discuss plans to encourage Israel to open up Dimona to visits by U.S. or reliable foreign scientists and to subject the reactor to International Atomic Energy Agency inspections. Some portions of this meeting record are also still classified.
The post-mortem on SNIE 100-8-60 ordered by the U.S. Intelligence Board whereby the intelligence community tried to determine what pieces of information it had missed and to learn lessons from the intelligence failure.
The Eisenhower administration’s “discovery” during the last months of 1960 that Israel was secretly building a large nuclear complex at Dimona was a belated one indeed. It occurred more than five years after Israel had made a secret national commitment to create a nuclear program aiming at providing an option to produce nuclear weapons; more than three years after Israel had signed its secret comprehensive nuclear bargain with France; and two years or more after Israel had begun the vast excavation and construction work at the Dimona site.
The tardiness of the discovery was a major blunder, what is called in our times an intelligence failure. In comparative terms, it was probably as severe as (or more so than) the failures to anticipate the Indian nuclear tests of in 1974 and 1998. Some of the documents included in this e-book provide clues as to why the discovery was delayed and the roots and causes of the intelligence failure.
What amounted to an intelligence breakdown by the United States was a tremendous counterintelligence success for Israel. The U.S. bungle enabled Israel to buy precious time for the highly vulnerable Dimona project. One could argue that had the United States discovered Dimona two years earlier, perhaps even a year earlier, that the young and fragile undertaking might not have survived. Early political pressure from the United States on the two foreign suppliers, France and Norway, might have terminated it at the very start.
The documents presented here reveal how surprised and angry the Eisenhower administration was when it learned about Dimona — and yet how circumspect Washington was in its reaction to the discovery. There was a huge gap between what senior U.S. officials said to each other about Dimona and what they said to the Israelis. On the one hand, the Americans were convinced that the evidence they had amassed indicated that it was plutonium production-oriented project with weapons potential that posed a significant proliferation risk. They were irritated that the Israelis were trying to pull the wool over their eyes with all manner of evasive answers and misleading stories. Apparently they had many doubts about Ben-Gurion’s new cover story as well. On the other hand, the administration masked its anger and suspicions; opting for a cautious approach, it chose not to be confrontational but to confine itself largely to: 1) seeking answers about Dimona and Israel’s intentions, and 2) encouraging Israel to accept visits by U.S. scientists and consent to applying International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards to Dimona, as a way to constrain Israeli freedom of action. There are hints that U.S. diplomats warned the Israelis that U.S. economic aid could be jeopardized, but with only weeks left in office the Eisenhower administration was in no position to coerce its ally over the issue.
***
This and the three other photographs of the construction site near Dinoma in the Negev desert for Israel’s then-secret nuclear reactor were taken during the last months of 1960. According to the U.S. Intelligence Board post-mortem (See Document 27A), the British and U.S. military attachés took photos and these could be from either source. The plainly visible reactor dome undermined Israeli claims that a textile factory was under construction. These images of the reactor site, some of them originally classified secret or confidential, are located in State Department records at the National Archives. (Record Group 59, Records of the Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, General Records Relating to Atomic Energy, 1948-62, box 501, Country File Z1.50 Israel f. Reactors 1960)
President Eisenhower and Israel Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion during the latter’s visit in March 1960 to the United States. (Source: www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org)
Henry Gomberg, Professor of Nuclear Engineering at the University of Michigan, shown at the laboratory during the 1950s, several years before his fall November 1960 trip to Israel where he made discoveries about the Dimona reactor (photo courtesy of Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor).
Under Secretary of State Robert Murphy swearing in Ogden Reid, the newly-appointed U.S. ambassador to Israel, 7 June 1959 (photo from NARA Still Pictures Division, RG 59 SO).
Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs G. Lewis Jones, who wrote to Ambassador Reid that “it was stupid” of the Israelis to undertake the secret reactor project. (photo from NARA Still Pictures Division, RG 59 SO).
Addy Cohen (at the left) with Teddy Kollek, Director General of the Prime Minister’s Office and later, Mayor of Jerusalem.
To appreciate the full historical context of the American intelligence failure we need to say a little bit about the Dimona project itself. In 1955, soon after David Ben-Gurion came back to power as Israel’s prime minister and minister of defense, he launched a secret feasibility initiative to determine whether, and how, Israel could build a nuclear infrastructure to support a program aiming at producing nuclear explosives. Ben-Gurion delegated that difficult task to a young (32 years of age) and highly ambitious lieutenant, Shimon Peres, whose formal position was then the director general of the Ministry of Defense. Within three years, from 1955 to 1958, Peres did almost the impossible: he managed to transform the idea of a national nuclear program from a vague vision of the future into a real technological project in the making.
Unlike the chair of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC), Professor David Ernst Bergmann, who preached self-reliance, Peres’s overall philosophy was that Israel must not (and cannot) reinvent the wheel and therefore must find a foreign supplier who could provide the most comprehensive nuclear package possible, one suited for a weapons-oriented program.[1]
Those three years were filled with internal deliberations, debates and planning. Often different courses of action were examined simultaneously, on parallel or even conflicting tracks. At least three countries were considered at one time or another to be the foreign supplier: the United States, France, Norway and, to a limited extent, the United Kingdom. In historical perspective, it appears that by 1958, the project’s international master plan had become firmly drawn: France would be the foreign supplier, Norway would provide the heavy water and possibly the backup in case the French card went wrong, and the United States would provide a small peaceful package, under “Atoms of Peace,” that could serve as the camouflage for the whole project, mostly as a way to conceal Israel’s real achievement — Dimona — from the United States.
This raises the issue of secrecy. The story of Dimona is one of a huge secret. Secrecy was essential in order to shield and insulate the highly vulnerable, newly born, project from a hostile outside. At the very core, of course, it is an Israeli secret – the largest, most comprehensive and longest-held secret Israel has ever generated. However, it is more than an Israeli secret; Israel had partners in this venture. The prime partner was the chief foreign supplier, France; the second was Norway, in concert with the British.
And then there was the United States. In a sense, the secrecy surrounding Dimona was aimed primarily against the United States. After all, of all the nations involved, the U.S. posed the greatest threat to the Israeli program. Since the time of the Baruch Plan in 1946 the United States had been on the record opposing the spread of nuclear weapons. Washington helped to create the IAEA in 1957 — the very same year the Dimona deal was signed — and since then it had promoted the creation of an international safeguards system. Should the Dimona secret have been compromised, the United States would have likely exercised pressure on France either to terminate the project altogether or at least to submit it to international safeguards.
The documents in this e-book involve Israel’s nuclear relations with the United States, France and Norway. What follows is some brief background on Israel’s efforts with each of them:
The United States. On 12 July 1955, Israel was the second country to sign a general agreement with the United States for peaceful nuclear cooperation under “Atoms for Peace.” Initially, the leaders of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission [IAEC] thought that American assistance could be the starting point for a largely indigenous Israeli nuclear program. Consistent with this vision, during 1955-56, IAEC Chairman Bergmann tried to find out whether the United States would provide assistance to build a “real reactor” — that is, a 10 MW natural uranium/heavy water reactor — but also to provide 10 tons of heavy water. Bergman made a formal request in July 1956 through a letter to AEC Chairman Lewis Strauss. In September the AEC notified Israel that it could be done but only under the aegis of a new bilateral nuclear power agreement which would require a more rigorous safeguards agreement than the original 1955 bilateral research accord. When Israel asked why, it was told that “plutonium production capabilities” necessitated stricter controls. When it became apparent the United States would insist on strict safeguards, Israel dropped its probe altogether.A year later, however, in 1957, Israel returned to the original U.S. “Atoms for Peace” offer to construct a small 1 MW swimming pool-type reactor, to be designed and installed by American Machines and Foundry (AMF) Atomics. The contract was signed on 20 March 1957 and in December of that year the long-awaited proposal was submitted to the USAEC by AMF on behalf of Israel for the Nachal Soreq (Rubin) site. Finally, on 19 March 1958, Israel signed a contract with AMF, expecting that the reactor startup date would be 15 months later. Construction on the Soreq site had begun in January 1958 and the small reactor reached criticality in a public ceremony in June 1960, six months prior to the discovery of Dimona.[2]Unlike Dimona, however, the Soreq (“Atoms for Peace”) reactor became subject to IAEA safeguards beginning in the mid-1960s.
France. By early 1956, as French-Israeli military relations intensified, Peres became convinced that France could evolve into Israel’s foreign nuclear supplier and acted accordingly. But it was the nationalization of the Suez Canal that summer which created the political opening for a French-Israeli nuclear deal. In September 1956 the French Atomic Energy Commission and the IAEC reached an agreement in principle for the sale of a small EL type research reactor to Israel. A month later, as a side issue at the end of the secret Sevres conference (October 22-24) (site of the “collusion” that led to the Suez campaign), the nuclear deal received top-level political approval. The 1956 deal, however, was quite limited in size and scope; it also did not include a chemical separation plant and related reprocessing technology.It was in the context of the Suez campaign itself, when all three participants were subject to Soviet nuclear threats, that France reinforced its own earlier (1954) decision to become a nuclear power and agreed to help Israel to do the same. With France making its own nuclear decisions it became easier for Peres to be more explicit about the package that Israel actually wanted. The small EL-102 reactor that the CEA had planned for Israel in the fall of 1956 — similar to the experimental EL3 18 MW in Sacly — was upgraded to a large plutonium-producing reactor of generally the same order as the G-1 reactor at Marcoule. Following a year of highly intense discussions and negotiations in France, on 30 October 1957 Peres finally signed the Dimona package, which included both hardware and technological aid. In the wake of widespread rumors of French-Israeli nuclear cooperation in early 1958, U.S. embassy officials reported that Israel had plans to build an “experimental” reactor but the State Department did not investigate this further (See Documents 1A–B).[3]
Norway. Beginning in 1955, Israeli AEC Chair Bergmann pressed his government to obtain 20 tons of heavy water cheaply and, if possible, without safeguards. Outside the United States, the Norwegian company Norsk Hydro was the only available producer of heavy water. In early 1956, Israel made a request to the United States but also approached Norway, informally via political channels, as to whether and when it could supply Israel with 20 tons of heavy water. Norway’s initial reply was that, due to current orders, it would be impossible to do so before the end of 1960. When the approach to Washington became hopeless, Israel grew more interested in the Norwegian supply. In August 1956, Bergmann wrote his friend Gunnar Randers, the director of the Norwegian Institute of for Atomic Energy, with a formal request to purchase 10 tons of heavy water. Randers responded noncommittally: supply was short but there was a “good chance” for a deal later on.Negotiations between Israel and Norway intensified in 1957-58, at the time that the Dimona deal was negotiated and signed. In a letter Randers wrote in August 1957 to Fredrik Moller, the director of NORATOM, a newly established company aimed at promoting the Norwegian nuclear industry, he explained that Israel needed the heavy water for a 40 MW “production reactor” fueled by natural uranium. As there were political and logistic difficulties with the Israeli order, to make it more attractive Randers presented it in the context of a larger nuclear cooperation agreement between NORATOM and the IAEC. In addition, to expedite the deal it became a three-party transaction: Israel purchased heavy water from NORATOM that had been sold and transferred two years earlier to Britain, but became surplus for them. The heavy water was shipped directly from the UK to Israel, without safeguards, as the issue of safeguards was left to the Norwegians. The paper record indicates that Randers was willing to be “creative” on controls, but the Norwegian Foreign Ministry insisted on safeguards to ascertain “peaceful use.” After long discussions Israel gave up on the question of safeguards and on 25 February 1959 the two countries exchanged documents on the heavy water sale with provisions to ensure that the use was peaceful. A few months later the Norwegian Foreign Ministry informed a U.S. AEC representative about the bilateral agreement, assuring him that it included safeguards and inspection rights (See Documents 2, 20).[4]
The discoveries of the French and Norwegian roles in the Israeli nuclear project were a revelation to the Eisenhower administration but it was even more surprised to discover that it already had in its possession clues that had not been followed up until it was too late. The documents below demonstrate how, during the short time it had available, the Eisenhower administration scrambled to pull the threads together by conducting an intelligence “post-mortem.” (See Document 27A). The post-mortem treated the missed opportunities as unfortunate but innocent errors caused by the deficient sharing of information and poor follow-up of instructions. But there have been more conspiratorial explanations of the missed opportunities: for example, the view that pro-Israeli officials in the AEC, CIA, and other agencies stove-piped important reports and information, and the open question that President Eisenhower himself may have chosen to look the other way during 1958-1959.[5]
A more delicate and complex dilemma faced by the Eisenhower administration was how to respond both publicly and privately to the challenge to U.S.-Israeli and U.S.-French relations posed by Dimona. Specifically, the administration had to decide how tough it should be and how to balance the Israeli proliferation concern against the rest of the U.S.-Israeli relationship. It is important to keep in mind that the administration was becoming aware of two things: (a) that Israel had made deliberate efforts to keep Dimona secret for as long as possible; and (b) that Washington could hardly take on faith the new Israeli “cover story” about Dimona, including Ben-Gurion’s public and private assurances. The administration remained skeptical, if not suspicious.
The possible public disclosure of Dimona also placed Israel, and specifically Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, in a dilemma: How should it react to the disclosure? How much should Israel tell and how truthful should it be? Could Israel tell the U.S. government one thing in private and something else to the world? The question was whether Israel should choose the path of truth or the path of ambiguity and deception. Because the first public statement would have great impact, this was a truly fateful decision. The internal Israeli deliberations about what to say are still unavailable, but it is possible to reconstruct the underlying reasoning based on important public and private statements made by Israeli officials, including Ben-Gurion.
Ben-Gurion chose the path of ambiguity and concealment: he declared that Dimona was purely a civilian scientific project, for training in the use of nuclear power for economic development. It was “exclusively for peaceful purposes,” he declared in his Knesset statement on 21 December 1960. In his private assurances to the United States Ben-Gurion provided some new information, but it was entirely consistent with his public version.[6] He would not tell the whole truth because the fate of the project was at stake. For Ben-Gurion this ambiguous, if not entirely deceitful, strategy had obvious short-term benefits: lessening U.S. anger and resulting pressure, and thereby avoiding a public showdown with Washington, while also calming the situation at home and in the region generally.[7]
It is apparent that the Eisenhower administration had no appetite to call Ben-Gurion’s bluff (either in private or in public). Nor was the departing president interested in escalating the Dimona problem into a diplomatic confrontation, which would not have even been possible given , with all that was already on his agenda (the Laos and Berlin crises, for example). Because relations with Israel had been relatively good, Israel had significant domestic support within the United States, and, perhaps most significantly, the Eisenhower administration was in its last few days in office, the White House let the State Department deal with the issue, keeping it under diplomatic control until the new Kennedy administration took office.
A determination to avoid a crisis encouraged senior officials such as Assistant Secretary of State G. Lewis Jones [Document 19] to try to “calm down” the agencies, including CIA, which he believed had been reacting intemperately, and to ensure that no one tried to cut off aid to Israel. At the same time, “calm”, secrecy, and the avoidance of publicity might make it possible for Washington to get answers from the Israeli and put quiet pressure on them to open up Dimona to visits by U.S. scientists and to accept safeguards by the IAEA (in fact, the last thing Ben-Gurion and his associates were likely to accept).
The dilemma the Eisenhower administration faced after the discovery of Dimona in December 1960-January 1961 would endure for the entire decade. From then on, three successive U.S. administrations — under presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon — would have to deal with it as well. President Kennedy chose the toughest path of struggle and confrontation in his effort to check the program; President Johnson realized that the U.S. had limited leverage on the issue and planted the seeds of compromise and looking the other way; finally, in a bargain with Prime Minister Golda Meir, President Nixon accepted the Israel’s de facto nuclear status as long as it stayed secret, and in doing so created the present dilemma.
The documents that follow are illuminating but more is to be learned. Many records remain classified in the National Archives, not only in State Department files but also those of the Atomic Energy Commission. The papers of AEC Chairman John McCone at the National Archives include a file on Israel which is the subject of an earlier declassification request along with related State Department files. Moreover, the National Security Archive has pending requests with the Department of Energy, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Library. In response to a request to re-review SNIE 100-8-60 (See Document 8), the CIA has held the line, refusing to release more information. The request is now under appeal.
THE DOCUMENTS
Documents 1A-B: Unnoticed Intelligence
A: Department of State Instruction A-128 to U.S. Embassy Israel, “Atomic Energy Developments,” 7 March 1958, Confidential
B: U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv Despatch No. 652 to State Department, “Israeli Exchanges With Other Countries Relating to Atomic Energy,” 16 April 1958,
Source for both: National Archives (College Park), Record Group 59, Department of State Records (hereinafter RG 59), Central Decimal Files, 1955-1959, 984a.801/4-1658.
Some in the U.S. intelligence community[8] regarded these communications as an early missed opportunity to discover the Dimona project a year or two earlier. In March 1958, in light of growing concern about the possibility of surreptitious nuclear weapons programs, the State Department saw an “urgent” need for information on the Israeli atomic energy program and asked its Tel Aviv embassy to report on “all phases” of Israeli nuclear-related activities, research and development, including any exchanges with foreign governments and organizations. As an example, the instruction cited a recent press report in the Jerusalem Post on French-Israeli atomic cooperation. The report included statements by the French minister of foreign affairs, Francois Benard, that France was supplying Israel’s uranium needs in exchange for “Israeli discoveries in atomic research for peace.”
In response the embassy set up a meeting on 15 April 1958 between embassy Second Secretary Lewis Townsend and Professor David Ernest Bergmann, the chairman of Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission. With respect to cooperation with France, Bergmann asserted flatly that Minister Benard “did not know what he was talking about.” Bergmann acknowledged that Israel had a nuclear agreement with France but the exchanges under the agreement were informational only. Under the agreement Israel received from France “unpublished reports” and sent students to study at French nuclear centers. He noted that the agreement had no provision under which France was obligated to supply Israel uranium as had been reported; nor had Israel ever received such supply. The substance of Bergmann’s commentary was close to what a US AEC representative would hear in Paris more than two years later in a similar inquiry (see Document 4). The comments were quite accurate as far as that (unpublished) 1954 bi-lateral exchange agreement was concerned (Bergmann mentioned that there was also a tri-lateral agreement on atomic energy research between Israel, France and the UK). Israel did not advertise the existence of those agreements, but did not treat them as classified either.[9]
Not surprisingly, however, Bergmann made no reference to the extremely secret French-Israeli Dimona agreement which had been signed in Paris on 3 October 1957. One must assume that he must have known something about that deal but it is not clear how much knew given that the IAEC was hardly consulted, let alone involved, in the decisions and actions that led to Dimona.[10] Bergmann’s most intriguing comment came at the end when he said that the principal decision to build a “power reactor had already been taken.” He seems to suggest two stages: first, “plans” which are currently “contemplated” to construct an “experimental nuclear reactor” within two or two-and-a-half years, and then five to seven years later “a large economically feasible [power] reactor could be put into operation.”
Was the reference to that “experimental reactor” an oblique reference to Dimona — as indeed Israel initially presented it — or was it a deliberate effort to confuse his American interlocutor? Or perhaps it was a mix of both? It is worth noting that Bergmann was known among Israelis as being loose on secrecy and this was apparently one of the reasons why he was bypassed on the Dimona project.[11]
In retrospect, according to the post-mortem investigation (see Document 27A) on why the United States discovered Dimona two years late, Bergmann’s loose comment on the “experimental reactor” was one of those major missing hints. In April 1958 U.S. intelligence wrongly assumed that the reference to the “experimental reactor” was to the US small swimming pool reactor at Soreq whose construction started in January that year at Nachal Soreq (see Document 3). Moreover, U.S. intelligence took on faith Bergmann’s statement about the limited nature of French-Israeli nuclear cooperation, although there had already been some reports about possible French-Israeli secret nuclear cooperation, even the possibility of joint nuclear weapons research. One way or another, a chance to investigate Bergmann’s claims and to seek further information about the “experimental reactor” was lost.
The numbers on the right side of these documents indicate that they are from the State Department’s central decimal files (whereby documents were filed using numerical combinations denoting subjects and countries). The 900 category signifies communications, transportation, and science; 84A stands for Israel; and 801 indicates research and development. The filing of the document in the R&D category, instead of the usual 1901 category for nuclear energy matters, would have hindered any U.S. government official who was interested in tracing intelligence on the Israeli nuclear program.
Documents 2A-C: “Certain Highly Classified Transactions with Israel”
A: Memorandum of Conversation, Norwegian Foreign Ministry, 5 June 1959, Secret, with 30 December 1960 routing slip [transcript attached]
B: Richard Kerry to Philip Farley, 15 June 1959, Secret
C: Richard Kerry to Philip Farley, 7 August 1959, enclosing copy of letter to Robert Brandin, and “Memorandum of conversation of August 6, 1959, at the Atomic Energy Institute, Kjeller, Norway,” Secret
Sources: A: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, Records Relating to Atomic Energy Matters, 1948-1962 [SAE], box 305, File 12. Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy Safeguards Sept-Dec 1960 Part 1 of 3; B: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel d. General 1953-1961 Part 2 of 2 C: RG 59, SAE, box 313, Country File Norway d. General 1957-1961 Part 2 of 2
A critical piece of information that was known to the State Department, but for obscure reasons remained unknown to the U.S. intelligence community for many months (see Document 22), was the 20 tons of heavy water that Norway had quietly sold to Israel upon an agreement signed in Oslo on 25 February 1959. The Norwegians claimed that they wanted to keep the transaction under wraps because disclosure could hurt their diplomatic standing and interfere with business prospects in the Middle East. Evidently, Israel had equally strong reasons of her own to keep the heavy water deal secret as well. For this reason, but also due to an availability issue, Norway used the U.K. as a key third party in the deal: NORATOM (the Norwegian state-sponsored company to promote Norwegian nuclear energy industry) had originally sold heavy water to the United Kingdom for its nuclear weapons program. Then, as part of the three-party arrangement, the Norwegians asked the British to resell their excess heavy water back to NORATOM; even though the product would be shipped directly from the United Kingdom to Israel, it was NORATOM that was selling it. This also enabled NORATOM to avoid the political difficulty of having to apply to the Norwegian government for an export license.[12]
According to Olaf Solli, a nuclear energy expert with the Norwegian Foreign Ministry, some British officials wanted to “inform” Washington of the Israeli heavy water deal, but ultimately London did not share the information, according to British press reports in 2005 and 2006 based on new declassifications in British archives.[13]
In any event, on 5 June 1959, the Norwegian Foreign Ministry informed AEC official William M. Fullerton, a division chief at the Office of International Affairs, about the agreement to sell heavy water to Israel — subject to “safeguards and inspections” — but the size of the transaction was not reported. The U.S Embassy in Oslo prepared the memo of conversation and some days later, on 15 June, embassy political officer Richard Kerry forwarded it to Philip J. Farley, the assistant to the secretary of state for disarmament and atomic energy, asking that Fullerton and his boss, Algie Wells, receive copies.
For unknown reasons the memo was lost in the shuffle and was not disseminated above the middle levels of the State Department and the AEC. Top Department officials, not to mention those at the CIA or from State Department intelligence, did not see that June 1959 memo until December 1960, although months before the CIA had learned there had been a deal.[14] Accordingly, the questions about the sale that could have been asked of the Israelis, the Norwegians, and the British were not.
In a follow-up conversation, Richard Kerry learned more, indirectly, about the political sensitivity of Norwegian secret deals with Israel from Gunnar Randers, the director of the Atomic Energy Institute, and the key figure in Norwegian nuclear policy after World War II. Referring to NORATOM’s negotiations with the Egyptians over “isotope work,” Randers saw a “delicate” situation concerning transactions with Israel, but as long as they did not reach the public the Norwegians would not face any “difficulties” from Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Randers was a close friend of the IAEC chair, David Bergmann, and this story supported Israel’s need for secrecy but it also suited Randers who had not kept the upper levels of the Norwegian Foreign Ministry in the picture (seeDocument 20).
Document 3: “French Atomic Energy Project in Israel”
U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv Despatch 75 to State Department, “French Atomic Energy Project in Israel,” 2 August 1960, Confidential
Source: National Archives (College Park), Record Group 59, Department of State records (RG 59), Central Decimal Files 1960-1963, 884A.1901/8-260
American Machine and Foundry (AMF) Atomics was the company which installed for Israel the 1 MW swimming pool type light water nuclear reactor at Nachal Soreq (known today as the Soreq Nuclear Research Center) that Israel received as a gift from the U.S. under the1955 “Atoms for Peace” bilateral agreement. In late July 1960, U.S. Embassy officials learned from a conversation with D. Anderson, an AMF employee, that French personnel were involved in building “a 60 megawatt atomic power reactor” in the Beersheba area. Anderson stated that this was his “impression, gained on conversations he had with an Israeli, Daniel Kimhi, the director of the Naptha Petroleum Company. According to Kimhi, the French nationals were working on a project described to him as ‘gas cooled power reactor capable of producing approximately 60 megawatts of electrical power.'” Anderson’s understanding was that the project had been under way for “about two years” with the completion date two years off.
As of this writing, this document is the first and earliest available declassified US document that makes explicit reference to the Dimona project. We should note that at the National Archives (College Park), over one hundred additional documents from 1960-1961 remain classified in the decimal files. A declassification request for them is pending.
The embassy reported this conversation to Washington and asked that the U.S. embassy in Paris look into the French government’s role, if any, in the alleged development. It took a few weeks before this information went to nuclear energy intelligence experts in Washington (at the AEC and CIA) who came to realize that they had missed other pieces of intelligence (See Document 27A) and began looking more closely at what was going on at the Dimona site.
Documents 4A-B: “The French CEA Was Not Collaborating with the Israelis”
A: State Department Instruction CA-3636 to U.S. Embassy Paris, “Reported Atomic Reactor Power Project at Beersheba,” 19 October 1960, confidential
B: U.S. Embassy Paris Airgram G-766 to State Department, 22 November 1960, Confidential
Sources: A: Record Group 84, Records of Foreign Service Posts, Classified Records of the U.S. Mission to the International Atomic Energy Agency, 1955-1963, box 1, Atomic Energy Developments Israel 1959-61; B: Freedom of Information release
When the U.S intelligence community got wind of the Tel Aviv embassy report on the French-Israeli reactor project (see Document 2), it took time to digest it; U.S. officials realized that more information was needed because apparently they had no independent sources to corroborate the report. (It is still a puzzle whether, and to what extent, U-2 overhead photographs were especially telling or whether they were being distributed within the intelligence community.)[15] According to the post-mortem (see Document 27A, PDF page 23), the CIA formulated a list of technical questions about French-Israeli collaboration, including the organizations involved in the project, reactor specifications, and plans for spent fuel, e.g. whether the Israelis were building a chemical separation plant. The State Department sent the CIA questions as an “Instruction” to the U.S. embassy in Israel, with the embassy in Paris and the U.S. mission to the IAEA also receiving copies. The request for information did not get high priority; it had a “Routine collection priority.”
If the U.S. embassy in Israel ever sent back a formal response, it is still classified. But U.S. military attaches at the Embassy in Tel Aviv did begin collecting information and sent photographs back to Washington. Another attempt to ferret out information is known: John Rouleau, the AEC’s representative in Paris, tried, but he met with complete denial from an unnamed member of the French Atomic Energy Commission. The latter, according to Rouleau’s account, “stated flatly that the French CEA was not collaborating with the Israelis in the construction of a nuclear power reactor.” Furthermore, the official denied that any French company could be working with the Israelis on a power reactor because “prior permission from the CEA would be required and such permission has neither been requested nor granted.”
While the French official denied any bilateral cooperation with Israel on a power reactor, he acknowledged the existence of an earlier 1954 agreement between the two national atomic energy commissions under which the bodies collaborated in two specific areas: (1) heavy water production and (2) extracting uranium from phosphates. In retrospect, it is impossible to say whether the CEA interlocutor truly knew nothing about the Dimona project-the Israeli-French deal was highly compartmentalized and secret within the CEA-or whether he made a deliberate effort to mislead the United States. Strictly speaking, however, his statement was not a lie because the Dimona reactor was not a power reactor.
Document 5: “The Know-How on Building Crude Atomic Bombs”
Memorandum of conversation, “Safeguards for Reactors,” 25 November 1960, Secret
Source: National Archives (College Park), Record Group 59, Department of State Records (hereinafter RG 59), Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, Records Relating to Atomic Energy Matters, 1948-1962, box 305, 12H P.U.S File: 18. Safeguards September-December 1960 [Part 2 of 3]
Despite the lack of cooperation from the French government, Washington was piecing together information about the site in the Negev Desert from a variety of intelligence sources. By 25 November, Secretary of State Herter was confident enough in the information accumulated so far to share its essence with British Ambassador Harold Caccia. While intelligence experts in London and Washington had already been consulting each other (see chronology with Document 27A), Herter took it to a higher level by telling Caccia that Washington had unconfirmed reports that a “plutonium-producing reactor may be being built in Israel with French aid.” Furthermore, France may be giving the Israelis the “know how” to build “crude atomic bombs.” What made the existence of the Israeli reactor project of special concern was that for months Washington and its allies had been trying to build a consensus at the IAEA in favor of effective safeguards on nuclear power plants; this “new factor emphasized the importance of providing adequate atomic energy safeguards.”
Documents 6A-C: Professor Gomberg’s Discoveries
A: Paris Embassy Telegram 2162 to State Department, 26 November 1960, Secret
B: Memorandum of conversation, [Title excised], 1 December 1960, Secret, excised copy
C: Central Intelligence Agency, Information Report, “Nuclear Engineering/Large Nuclear and Electric Power Plant Near Beersheba/French Nuclear Assistance to Israel/Israeli Attitude Toward the Announcement of its Large Scale Nuclear Effort/Opportunity for U.S. Participation in Nuclear Powered Water Conversion,” 9 February 1961, Confidential
Sources: A: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, Records Relating to Atomic Energy Matters, 1948-1962, box 305, 12H P.U.S File: 18. Safeguards September-December 1960 [Part 2 of 3], B: Freedom of Information release; C: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, 1948-1961, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1960
Flying back to Ann Arbor on his way back from Israel, Professor Henry Gomberg, on the faculty of the University of Michigan’s nuclear engineering department, briefly stopped in Paris on 25 November and met with Roleau. As a guest of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and a consultant on matters of nuclear education, Gomberg had picked up some “urgent and secret” pieces of information — and suspicions — about the Israeli nuclear program that he wanted to share with U.S. government officials. He tantalized Rouleau by holding back what he had learned, but the little he said implied that Israel, with French aid, was engaged in some sort of a large scale secret nuclear power project. Gomberg also noted that he learned from an unnamed personal friend of Ben-Gurion [he probably meant Dr. Bergmann] that within a few weeks Israel would announce a five year [atomic energy] plan and would disclose the construction at the Beersheba site.
Several days later, on 1 December, Gomberg came to Washington for a full debriefing of AEC and State Department representatives. His name is redacted from this release of the memorandum of that conversation (declassified in the early 1990s) but it is evident that Gomberg was the subject of the debriefing. The same is true of the subsequent CIA report dated 9 February which also masked Gomberg’s identity. This document, apparently based on an interview at the time of Gomberg’s visit, contains detailed information, including his observations and tentative conclusions.
Based on various meetings in Israel, Gomberg became convinced that the large site the Israelis had described as an “agricultural experiment station” was actually a “large classified project.” It was evident to him that all his Israeli interlocutors were “thoroughly briefed to restrict their discussion within security bounds,” and yet his discussions at the Technion led him to believe that the Israelis were creating a much larger and more thorough nuclear training program than was needed by their own declared programs. He got a similar impression in his discussions at the Weizmann Institute (Plant [Machon] #4) where one person distressed his guide by mentioning that Plant [Machon] #4 was expected “to be working with gram quantities of Plutonium and curie quantities of polonium.” The plutonium issue was probably the most sensitive matter for the Israelis because of its weapons implications.
Gomberg concluded that the classified project was probably “a large nuclear and electrical power plant,” whose construction had been underway for some three years, located east of Beersheba. In another part of his report he described the reactor as “far beyond any kind of a training reactor and it will be capable of producing weapons grade plutonium.” Gomberg noted that he believed the Israelis had the technical capability to construct and operate a nuclear plant up to the level of 200 MW thermal. Then he estimated that the power level of the Beersheba project would be approximately 250 MW thermal. Later Gomberg noted that US photographs that were shown to him indicated a very close resemblance to the French G-1 reactor in Marcoule.
In his last meeting with Dr. Bergmann, Gomberg pressed him for information about “activities which were not freely discussed”; the latter acknowledged that the original intention was to announce the Beersheba facility later in 1961, but that because of the many rumors Ben-Gurion would make an announcement about a power reactor project in about three weeks time.
Document 7: The “Cover Story Would Not be Successful for Long”
Memorandum from Deputy Operations Coordinator Charles E. Rogers, Office of Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, to Mr. Jones and Mr. Farley, 7 December 1960, Secret
Source: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, Records Relating to Atomic Energy Matters, 1948-1962, box 501, CF 21.50 Israel F. Reactor 1960
While the U.S. intelligence community was finalizing its estimate of the secret Israeli reactor, senior officials had already discussed the problem and what to do about it at a luncheon meeting of the Operations Coordinating Board, which served as the coordinating and implementing unit for President Eisenhower’s National Security Council system. After Gordon Gray, the president’s national security assistant, opened the discussion, Deputy Under Secretary of State Livingston Merchant emphasized the subject’s “political sensitivity” and cautioned against any comments that cast doubt upon an anticipated Israeli announcement, even though it was generally agreed that the Israeli “cover story would not be successful for long.” This was probably a reference to the description of the plant as a “power reactor.” In the entire matter, “the Department of State would be the sole spokesman.” A skeptical reader, possibly Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs G. Lewis Jones, wrote “Ha!” next to the “sole spokesman” comment because Jones believed that too many other agencies “wanted to get into the act” (see Jones letter to Reid with Document 19 below).
Document 8: “Plutonium Production for Weapons Is At least One Major Purpose
Special National Intelligence Estimate Number 100-8-60, “Implications of the Acquisition by Israel of a Nuclear Weapons Capability,” 8 December 1960, with Memoranda to Holders Attached, 22 and 29 December 1960, attached, Secret, Excised copy
Source: MDR appeal to ISCAP, declassified in 2009, presently undergoing further review
On the basis of intelligence collected during the summer and fall of 1960 (of which much remains classified), possibly including the most recent information from Henry Gomberg, on 8 December 1958 Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles signed off on a Special National Intelligence Estimate (SNIE) entitled “Implications of the Acquisition by Israel of a Nuclear Weapons Capability.” The U.S. Intelligence Board, whose member agencies participated in the drafting process, concurred in the estimate that same day. The SNIE began with a firm factual determination that “Israel is engaged in construction of a nuclear reactor complex in the Negev near Beersheba.” Acknowledging that there could be various ways to interpret the function of the Dimona complex, the authors believed that “on the basis of all available evidence” that “plutonium production for weapons is at least one major purpose of this effort.” The “surrounding” secrecy and Dimona’s remote location was strong evidence of the military purposes. The SNIE estimated “that Israel will produce some weapons grade plutonium in 1963-64 and possibly as early as 1962.”
France’s extensive aid was noted but the exact nature of the assistance, including details on the reactor, and whether, and to what extent, the complex also included plutonium extraction (reprocessing), has been excised from this version of the SNIE. Also excised is the information mentioned in several subsequent updates (“Memorandum to Holders” on 22 and 29 December 1960). The Norwegian heavy water sale to Israel was noted — the CIA had discovered the purchase earlier in the year — but whether the State Department had rediscovered its documentation on the transaction by this point is not clear.
The SNIE also included a detailed discussion of the broader implications of the Dimona reactor: what it said about French and Israeli motivations, the possible reactions by the Arab world and the Soviet bloc, as well as the overall “repercussions” among western allies.
The SNIE became controversial as soon as it was published because senior intelligence officials were learning that the intelligence agencies and other U.S. government organizations had collected telling evidence several years earlier indicating that Israel had a secret nuclear reactor program under way. This recognition led to the production of an intelligence post-mortem to look at what had been missed and why (See Document 27A).
Document 9:Memorandum of Discussion at the 470th Meeting of the National Security Council, December 8, 1960, Top Secret, excised copy
Source: U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958-1960 Volume XIII, Arab-Israeli Dispute; United Arab Republic; North Africa (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1992)
The day that the SNIE was issued, the National Security Council met, with Eisenhower presiding, and received a briefing on the estimate by Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles who passed around photos of Dimona taken by the U.S. Army attaché. Dulles began by noting that Israel was constructing, with French assistance, a nuclear complex in the Negev. The complex contained a reactor capable of “producing weapons-grade plutonium.” His initial statement included three more lines which are still classified. As to the French assistance, it included equipment, personnel and training, as well as “fuel elements.” Neither CIA nor the AEC believed, contrary to Israel’s anticipated statement that the project was “solely for peaceful purposes.” Secretary of State Herter noted that the Arab reaction to the discovery would be “severe.” (At that point four-and-a-half lines of Herter’s comment are classified.) He also claimed that the cost of the reactor might be 40 to 80 million dollars.
During the discussion of the nuclear proliferation implications of an Israeli weapons program, the conversation briefly turned to how the plant was financed. Under Secretary of the Treasury Fred Scribner suggested that an important funding source may have been “Jewish charitable organizations in the U.S.” which received tax-deductible contributions. This had caused past problems because some charitable funds had been “diverted to government operations in Israel.”
The still-classified portions of this meeting record are the subject of a mandatory declassification review request filed in 2014.
Telephone Call Logs of Secretary of State Christian Herter, 9 December 1960, Unclassified
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Christian Herter Papers
On 9 December, Secretary of State Herter summoned Israeli ambassador Avraham Harman to the State Department and showed him photos of the Dimona reactor, asking for an explanation that would remove “bases for concern.” Harman said he knew nothing of the project but would inform his government. Later that afternoon, Herter called Claude Lebel, the chargé d’affaires at the French embassy, and asked about French involvement in the project. Herter prefaced his question by referring to a report he had received from his embassy in Tel Aviv that Prime Minister Ben-Gurion was about to announce that a new experimental reactor had been built in the Negev with French aid. Herter noted that, according to information the United States had ascertained, Israel had been involved since 1958 in constructing a reactor “which is at least ten times as large as claimed,” and that the design appeared to be not for power but for plutonium production, hence, it would provide Israel “considerable weapons potential.” Furthermore, Herter noted that the cost of the reactor was between 40 to 80 million dollars. Lebel had no information to offer and promised to pass the query on to Paris.
Document 11: “He Assumed the Money Came From” the United States
Paris Embassy Telegram CAHTO 4, 16 December 1960, Top Secret
Source: RG 59. Records of the Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, Office of the Country Director for Israel and Arab-Israeli Affairs, Records Relating to Israel, 1964-1966, box 8, Israel Atomic Energy Program
A week later, Herter was in Paris for a NATO meeting where he met with his French counterpart, Foreign Minister Maurice Couve de Murville. The latter directly acknowledged the secret French-Israeli deal to build a “replica of [the] Marcoule plant.” Under the agreement, Couve de Murville added, France would supply the raw materials and receive any plutonium produced by the plant. The Israelis would not make any public statement without first consulting the French government. In reply to Herter’s question about how the plant was financed, Couve stated that he “assumed the money came from US.” Herter understood that comment to mean that the project was financed by the “diversion of US government or private [American] aid.”
Memorandum of Conversation, ” Suggested Guidance for Chairman McCone’s Use in ‘Meet the Press’ Interview December 18 If Asked About Reported Israeli Atomic Weapons Developments,” 17 December 1960, Secret
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3):
With AEC Chairman John McCone slated to appear on “Meet the Press,” AEC and State Department officials met to develop an integrated approach to ensure that what he said comported with the government’s over-all position. The officials developed an approach that he could follow “with dignity” and not “be drawn into implications” that the U.S. was associated with an alleged Israeli nuclear weapons program. With respect to earlier press reports from London about an Israeli atomic bomb project, McCone would not comment. He could say that the U.S. opposed the proliferation of nuclear weapons capabilities, and that it was “firmly established policy” that “our law does not permit us to assist other countries to develop” such capabilities, If questioned, McCone could acknowledge U.S. support for Israeli research under the “Atoms for Peace” program.
In his comments on “Meet the Press,” McCone took his own approach; his main disclosure was an acknowledgement that the Israelis had not “revealed” the reactor to the U.S. He further stated that Washington was trying to get more information, that the existence of the reactor did not necessarily mean a bomb project, although the reactor could produce plutonium, and that Israeli compliance with IAEA safeguards would provide a good test case for inspection and “allay fear of weapons intent.”[16]
Documents 13A-B: “Israel Should Forthwith Open the Plants”
A: White House Office of the Staff Secretary, “Memorandum of Conference with the President December 19, 1960”, 12 January 1961, Secret, Excised Copy
B: Department of State, “U.S. Notes Reports of Israel’s Atomic Energy Activities,” 19 December 1961
Sources: A: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3); B: Department of State Bulletin, 9 January 1961, No. 1124, page 45.
With the Washington Post and the New York Times publishing stories about Dimona, partly based on leaks by John McCone,[17] President Eisenhower convened his top aides to discuss the Israeli reactor, how to respond to the publicity, and what kind of a public stance it was appropriate to take. This record of a meeting between Eisenhower and his closest advisers was probably not the president’s first discussion of the discovery of Dimona and its implications, but it was probably the highest level formal gathering and the most wide-ranging discussion. The conference record reveals some remarkable points:
Purpose of the Dimona Complex and Reliability of US knowledge : Secretary of Defense Thomas S. Gates pointed out that “our information is that the plant is not for peaceful uses.” The President’s science advisor, Dr. George Kistiakowsky, responded that “there is some doubt about this” because it is unclear whether a chemical separation is on site (or being constructed). AEC Chairman McCone responded that his people believed that “there is a chemical separation plant there.” He added that it would make no sense that the Israelis would do just “part of the job.” This issue, whether Dimona had or did not have a secret separation plant, would haunt the US intelligence community for at least a decade. In retrospect, Gates and McCone were right from the start.
Cost and US financial Involvement: McCone observed that the Dimona plant “had probably been financed from US support to Israel” and Herter supported the claim, adding that “it is clear that they [the Israelis] have constructed this plant through diversions from private and public [US] aid to Israel.” Eisenhower himself noted that “we had evidence” that the project cost was in a range between $100 and $200 million. (Incidentally, these figures are more than double the figure Herter cited at the National Security Council meeting a week earlier.) The president added, “we do not know where they have obtained the funds,” but the US government has a strong interest in knowing “because of the aid we are giving them.” Eisenhower’s remark is one of the rare mentions of a financial estimate for the Dimona project.
Inspection: When McCone urged that the U.S. insist the Dimona plant be under IAEA safeguards, Gates suggested that the Israelis be asked to open the plant for inspection because Israel had signed the agreement that established the IAEA. Eisenhower agreed: the US statement should express confidence that because Israel was an IAEA member and had claimed that the reactor was for peaceful uses, it should allow inspections. When national security assistant Gordon Gray asked whether the US would insist on visiting the site, Eisenhower replied that it would not be necessary if the US was successful in forcing IAEA inspections.
Intentions and Concealment: CIA Director Allen Dulles noted that Israel was trying to create confusion by associating the Dimona plant, “which is a large production installation,” with the very small Soreq reactor built with U.S. aid.
The meeting ended with the decision that Dimona should be handled by the Department of State, not the White House. Since the issue had emerged in the very last weeks of the Eisenhower presidency it was apparent the White House could not set a lasting policy but if any public statement was to be made it was to be coordinated with Herter. Nevertheless, for Eisenhower, the key objective was for the government of Israeli to accept IAEA inspections on the plant so that they could demonstrate its peaceful purposes.
During the meeting Herter had said that a U.S. statement should “remove [us] from suspicion” because Washington was not complicit in Dimona. Thus, the public statement made later that day noted the press reports about the reactor and “welcomed” Israel’s assurance that the government had “no intention of producing nuclear weapons.” The U.S. had provided no assistance because that would be contrary to U.S. nonproliferation policy and the Atomic Energy Act. The U.S. was concerned about the Israeli project and had asked Ambassador Harman for information. “A response has not been received.”
Document 14: State Department telegram 3311 to U.S. Embassy London, 20 December 1960, Secret
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3)
On 20 December Herter met with Ambassador Harman for the second time to discuss Dimona. At this meeting Harman answered Herter’s earlier questions by providing a narrative that became Israel’s basic cover story: Yes, Israel was building an additional reactor in the Negev with 24 megawatt capacity, meaning, but it had “no industrial importance.” The purpose of the Dimona reactor was “the development of scientific knowledge for eventual industrial, agricultural, medical and other scientific purposes, as an interim step toward enabling Israel to build its own power reactors.” The project “would take some 3 to 4 years to complete and it would have no relationship to a weapons capacity.” Several times during the meeting Herter raised questions about safeguards and the plutonium that would be produced in the reactor; Harman could not answer them, but asserted that upon completion the facility would be open to students from “friendly counties” and that it was for peaceful purposes.
U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv telegram 574 to State Department, 23 December 1960, Secret
Source: National Archives, Record Group 469, U.S. Operations Mission to Israel, Executive Office Classified Central Files 1952-1961, box 10, Atomic Matters 1960
Far more candid than Harman was Addy Cohen, the Finance Ministry’s director of economic assistance; a graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, he served as a liaison to the U.S. embassy. Classified in the State Department’s “Roger Channel” for sensitive intelligence, this surprising telegram memorialized several conversations on 21 and 22 December between Cohen and U.S. diplomats and foreign aid officials: Deputy Chief of Mission Murat Williams, Director of the U.S. Operations Mission [USOM][18] C. Reed Liggit, and Agricultural Attaché Grover Chappell. In these discussions Cohen gave the impression that the reactor would “eventually be used for weapons purposes,” which could offer a “‘deterrent’ to Arab action against Israel.” He volunteered that he had concealed the nature of the “top secret” project during several helicopter fly-bys with U.S. officials; during one of them’, in February 1960, he had characterized the reactor construction site as a “textile plant” because as he put it “that was our story at the time.” Admitting that the government of Israel had “been misbehaving a little,” Cohen thought that displeasure over the reactor might be the reason why Washington had delayed the signing of the PL 480 agreement (on food aid to Israel). Finally, commenting on a recent Jerusalem Post article claiming that 250 million Israeli pounds had been spent on the project, Cohen said that Israel had not “spent that much yet.”
Also according to this message, an unidentified official close to Prime Minister Ben-Gurion had told the Canadian ambassador that the secrecy was unjustifiable and that it was “a stupid mistake on the part of Israel.” As to why the subject had come up at this time, December 1960, the same source speculated that the CIA had been “caught off guard” in 1956 when Israel invaded the Sinai desert and this time “did not want to be caught napping.”
Document 16: “Why in [the United] States is Everything Being Told [to] Everybody?”
U.S. Embassy Israel Telegram 577 to State Department, 24 December 1960, Secret
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3)
On 22 December Prime Minister Ben-Gurion gave a statement in the Knesset claiming the reactor was for peaceful purposes, a statement which the State Department welcomed.[19] Two days later, Ambassador Ogden Reid finally had a long discussion about Dimona with Ben-Gurion. The latter was plainly irritated about the questions and the press reports: “Why in [the] States is everything being told everybody?” He justified the secrecy because of the Arab boycott; the participating companies did not want their role disclosed so Israel had to protect their interests. Yet his account of the Dimona project consisted of the same story that he had told the Knesset (and the same story that he would use for his meeting with President Kennedy in late May 1961): the project was for the economic development of Israel and of the Negev in particular; electric power was a badly needed resource.[20]Yet when Reid asked if the reactor would be producing power, Ben-Gurion said no; it was for research and training.
On safeguards for plutonium, Ben-Gurion said that Israel was “three or four years” away from facing that problem. But, he declared: “When we get to that point we won’t be behind any power in the world in respect to safeguards.” A few weeks later, Ben-Gurion would take a different position (See Document 23).
Referring to Egyptian President Nasser’s declaration that an Israeli nuclear weapons program would mean war, Reid asked what Israel could do to alleviate those concerns; Ben-Gurion replied that the State Department’s statement welcoming the Israeli declarations, had been helpful.
Document 17: The Need for a Visit by “Internationally Known Scientists”
U.S. Embassy Israel Telegram 590 to State Department, 28 December 1960, Secret, excised copy
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3)
Mulling over Ben-Gurion’s evasions, Ambassador Reid suggested to the Department some ideas for bringing up the question of safeguards and inspection with Foreign Minister Golda Meir. One was to suggest a visit of “IAEA scientific designee or internationally known scientists”; another, a more low key approach, was to use an AEC inspection visit to the smaller American reactor in Nachal Rubin [Soreq] to ask Israel to visit the new [Dimona] reactor. While doubting whether Ben-Gurion would favor any such proposals, Reid thought State should press Israel to request IAEA safeguards as a step toward “tranquility and peace” in the region. Getting Ben-Gurion to go along would probably require concerted action by the U.S., France, and the United Kingdom. The note included also the embassy’s own estimate of the cost of the Dimona project, which by then was the lowest of all the U.S. estimates: 17.8 million dollars in foreign exchange and some 29.2 million in local currency (Israeli pounds) costs. In comments, Reid noted that Israel would need to be assured that the names of foreign firms involved in the project would be protected from inspectors. Moreover, until the Department agreed, Reid suggested deferring a proposal by Chief of Naval Operations Arleigh Burke for a visit to Dimona by a Navy nuclear expert, Commander Ragnwald Muller, who was with the Office of Naval Intelligence in Frankfurt, West Germany.
Document 18: Israel had “By No Means Come Clean with Us”
Memorandum from Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Livingston Merchant to
Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern AffairsG. Lewis Jones, 28 December 1960, Secret
Source: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, Records Relating to Atomic Energy Matters, 1948-1962, box 501, CF 21.50 Israel F. Reactor 1960
Under Secretary of State Merchant briefed Assistant Secretary Lewis Jones about an Operations Coordinating Board [OCB] discussion of the Israel nuclear problem where Allen Dulles had grumbled that Israel had “by no means come clean with us.” The participants were also annoyed that the Development Loan Fund (DLF) had authorized a loan to Israel despite the OCB’s agreement that such action should be delayed. Eisenhower’s national security assistant, Gordon Gray, emphasized that the president wanted further efforts to secure Israel’s agreement to IAEA inspections. Such efforts, however, were not to reach the press and any initiative should be “conducted quietly through diplomatic channels.”
Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs G. Lewis Jones to Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Livingston Merchant, “Israel’s Atomic Energy Activities,” 30 December 1960, Secret, with attachments [Transcript of letter from Jones to Reid, 28 December 1960 attached]
Source: RG 59. Records of the Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, Office of the Country Director for Israel and Arab-Israeli Affairs, Records Relating to Israel, 1964-1966, box 8, Israel Atomic Energy Program
Responding to Merchant’s request for an update on recent developments, Lewis Jones sent him documents relating to six different actions that various offices within the State Department were taking relating to the Israeli reactor, including his recent letter to Ambassador Reid and a message to the Embassy in Norway. In the letter, Jones let his hair down, writing about the “intemperate reaction” in Washington, which his bureau was trying to “calm down,” the “unnecessary Israeli caper;” the widespread impression that “the Israelis have inexcusably duped us;” the need for Israel to dispel doubts by letting U.S. scientists visit the site; and the possibility that the situation will “worsen” as suspicion grows. A briefing that Jones gave to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in early January conveyed a similar sense of being duped and the anger that influential members of the Senate felt about Israel’s secretiveness and evasive responses.
In the telegram to Oslo, the State Department asked the U.S. Embassy to seek further information on the Norwegian sale of heavy water to Israel and to ask that the government “exercise fully its safeguard rights” under the agreement. With the Norwegian heavy water sale being one of the pieces of the intelligence puzzle that Washington had missed, the administration was now investigating why, and what it had missed earlier.
Jones also enclosed a draft message to Ambassador Reid that had been prepared (not attached to this memo, but see Document 21) asking for replies to “unanswered questions” and to let Merchant know that other bureaus were preparing messages to get more information from the French and to advance the possibility of IAEA safeguards. Jones agreed with Merchant that what was most important was avoiding further publicity and the necessity for quiet diplomacy.
Document 20: “The Possibility of [It] Embarrassing the Government”
Letter from Richard Kerry, U.S. Embassy Oslo, to William Burdette, Office of British Commonwealth and Northern European Affairs, 30 December 1960, with Israeli-Norwegian agreement attached, with routine slip dated 6 January 1961
Source: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, 1948-1961, box 512, Z1.69 Country File Norway a. Norway-Israel Agreement 1961
In response to the State Department request, embassy officers in Oslo obtained more information on the Israel-Norway heavy water deal and the terms of the sale agreement, which included a “peaceful uses” stipulation. On 30 December, political officer Richard Kerry obtained a copy of the agreement which he believed could be embarrassing to the Norwegian government in light of its efforts to play the role of “honest broker” in international conflicts, including the Middle East. The agreement included an Israeli commitment that the use of the heavy water was for peaceful purposes, including an inspection clause.
According to Kerry’s letter, a major problem was that the heavy water sale had been initially treated as a commercial sale by the Norwegian firm NORATOM without appropriate vetting by political experts at the Foreign Ministry (like an earlier controversial sale of weapons to the Batista dictatorship in Cuba). Kerry asked the State Department to keep the transaction a secret and so it stayed until the late 1970s when the Stockholm Institute of Peace Research disclosed it. Kerry did not mention the British role in the affair and may, in fact, have forgotten it.[21]
State Department telegram 502 to U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv, 31 December 1960, Secret
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3)
This telegram, originally published in the FRUS in an excised version, showed how unhappy the State Department was with Ben-Gurion’s explanation of the Dimona reactor: his answers “appear evasive.” The State Department saw the “clearly apparent lack of candor [as] difficult to reconcile with [the] confidence which had traditionally characterized U.S.-Israel relations.” To restore confidence, Israel needed to answer questions about its plans to dispose of plutonium, the application of safeguards to plutonium produced, visits by IAEA or other scientists to the reactor site, and whether there were plans to build a third reactor. Moreover, “can Israel state unequivocally that it has no plans for producing nuclear weapons?”
Document 22:“Until All Reactors Are Treated as Equals”
In early January, Ambassador Reid had a meeting with Ben-Gurion, who provided answers to the State Department’s questions. The reporting telegram remains classified at the National Archives but a summary is available. The essence of the matter, according to Ben-Gurion, was that: 1) Israel “has no plans for producing nuclear weapons,” 2) Israel had no plutonium but “as far as we know” returning the plutonium produced by the reactor was a “condition” imposed by the country (France) that sold the uranium, 3) it would not accept IAEA inspection, especially if Russians were involved, or international safeguards “until all reactors are treated as equals,” 3) visits by representatives of “friendly powers” were possible, and 4) Israel had absolutely no plans for a third reactor. How State Department officials interpreted these statements remains unknown, but some may have seen the statement about nuclear weapons as equivocal and evasive.[22]
Document 23: “Damaging Air of Secrecy or Suspicions”
State Department telegram 2821 to U.S. Embassy Paris, 6 January 1961, Secret
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library, Dwight D. Eisenhower Papers, White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary, International Series, box 8, Israel (3)
Believing that neither France nor Israel had been forthright and that the lack of candor had damaging implications for Middle East stability, Herter asked U.S. Ambassador Amory Houghton to meet with Couve de Murville and discuss his earlier statement about the French-Israeli nuclear project. If the Dimona project is a “large scale production reactor,” the French need to be “unequivocally clear that [their] assistance is directed solely to peaceful uses.” The reply to this telegram is not yet available, but the substance can be found in Document 26.
Documents 24A-B: Molotov: “I Stayed Awake All Night and Worried”
A: U.S. Mission to International Atomic Energy Agency (Vienna) telegram 1087 to State Department, 11 January 1961, Secret
B: State Department telegram 1194 to U.S. Mission to International Atomic Energy Agency (Vienna), 13 January 1961, Secret
Source for both: RG 59, Central Decimal Files 1960-1963, 398.1901-IAEA/1-1161
The U.S. Mission to the IAEA which had been in the forefront of U.S. efforts to develop an effective safeguards policy, asked for policy guidance if the Dimona issue came up for debate at the upcoming meeting of the Board of Governors. Ben-Gurion’s declaration to the Knesset that the reactor was for peaceful purposes was “hardly adequate” because the Mission had been at loggerheads with the Soviets and the Indians who had argued that assurances were the only safeguards that were needed. Recognizing that the Israeli situation would be used to support arguments for strong safeguards, Vayecheslav Molotov, one of the senior Soviet representatives to the Agency (and once Stalin’s right hand man) sarcastically commented that he had “stayed awake all night and worried” when he read about the Israel reactor program.
Following the approach recommended by Lewis Jones and others, the State Department advised the IAEA Mission of the importance of promoting a “period of calm.” In discussions in Vienna, the Mission should “avoid impugning” Israeli statements about peaceful purposes but also avoid a “whitewash” of the Israeli position. It was in the U.S. “interest” to send scientists to visit the reactor site and to get “first-hand information” but the Department noted that the Israelis have “reacted strongly” against any proposal for inspection and are not likely to change in the “immediate future.”
Murat W. Williams to William L. Hamilton, “A Catalog of Replies Regarding the Reactor,” 16 January 1961, Secret, with transcript attached
Source: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, 1948-1961, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 1 of 2
On his way to an ambassadorship in El Salvador, Murat W. Williams, who had just left his post as deputy chief of mission at the Embassy in Tel Aviv, provided background on the various Israeli cover stories for the Dimona project. Apparently the most truthful response came from Minister of Development director general Eliezer Preminger who told Jack [John James] Haggerty, then the USOM director, that the site was a “military installation” and that he should ask the military attaché to look into it. Williams recounted the dissembling responses from Addy Cohen and other Israeli Foreign Liaison Officers [FLO] who, as noted elsewhere in this posting, had told Ambassador Reid and others that the construction site was for a textile factory, metallurgical research, meteorological installation, and part of a research program at a “new university.”
Document 26: “Israel Has No Plans for the Production of Atomic Weapons”
Letter, William B. McComber, Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Affairs, to James T. Ramey, Executive Director, Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy, 19 January 1961, Secret
Source: FOIA release
As the Eisenhower administration was winding down, the State Department submitted this comprehensive report (also published in the FRUS) to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy as a summary of all the information that the State Department had received officially from the Israeli and French governments in response to questions about the Dimona reactor. One must assume this body of information was used to brief the incoming Kennedy administration on what the Israelis and French had said on the record. Some of the answers may have been provided in response to the State Department telegram sent on 31 December (Document 21 above), for example, the statement that all plutonium to be produced in Dimona would be returned to France, and the ambiguous assurance that “Israel has no plans for the production of atomic weapons.” As for the French, they asserted that plutonium produced in the reactor would be returned to France, that France and Israel had agreed that the reactor was for “exclusively peaceful use,” and that French inspectors would be visiting the reactor. Oddly, what is missing is a claim, positive or negative, whether the complex actually included a chemical separation plant that could produce plutonium. Also, the financial estimate was a little different from that cited before (Document 13A).
Documents 27A-B: The Post-Mortem
A: U.S. Joint Atomic Energy Intelligence Committee, “Post-Mortem on SNIE 100-8-60: Implications of the Acquisition by Israel of a Nuclear Weapons Capability,” 31 January 1961, Draft, Secret
B: Memorandum, Phillip Farley to Hugh Cumming, Director of Intelligence and Research, “Post-Mortem on SNIE 100-8-60,” 28 January 1961
Source: RG 59, Records of Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, 1948-1961, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 1 of 2
This “post-mortem” study on SNIE 100-8-60 is one of the most intriguing documents in this collection. Its aim was to explain why the US intelligence community had failed to detect in real time the Israeli nuclear project, and indeed how late it was in making that determination. The chronology, on pages 8 through 17, provides an account of what was known, and when, about the Israeli nuclear program, concluding that Washington might have seen through Israeli “secrecy or deception” and better understood Israeli intentions at least a year earlier if the “atomic energy intelligence community had properly interpreted” the available information. In essence, the overall conclusion was that the root cause of the delay was not so much the absence of information as that some important reports and items of information had been lost in the shuffle and the dots not properly connected.
As the classification of this document is only “secret,” and the document is relatively brief and deliberately vague about the intelligence means and sources employed in the final determination (e.g. it does not refer explicitly to the U-2 flights), it is possible that the intelligence community had more sensitive information that it excluded from this version of the post-mortem or that a more thorough report on the subject existed with higher classification.
[Note: Several of the documents reproduced above were first published 1998 in “Israel and the Bomb” edited by Avner Cohen.]
Thanks to Ori Rabinowitz (Tel Aviv University), Sharik Bashir (University of Michigan) and Alexandra Hale (George Washington University) for their assistance with this project.
NOTES
[1] Shimon Peres, Battling for Peace: Memoirs, Edited by David Landau (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1995), 133-35.
[2] Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 44-47, 50-52, 65, 81-82.
[4] Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 32-34, 60-62, 83, 87.
[5] Note by Avner Cohen: During interviews I conducted in the 1990s for Israel and the Bomb I heard from different people more conspiratorial explanations for the U.S. intelligence failure on Dimona. Some interviewees claimed that certain people in the U.S. intelligence community were sympathetic to the Israelis and deliberately concealed or bypassed certain information instead of passing it along. For example, the late John Hadden, the CIA station chief in Tel Aviv from 1964-68, held that view strongly. He asked me to treat his suspicions with discretion so I did not publicize them when he was alive. According to Seymour Hersh’s The Samson Option (New York: Random House, 1991), the AEC chairman, Lewis Strauss, “knew as much about Dimona as anybody in the intelligence community by the time he left the AEC in 1958. There is no evidence, however, that he raised questions about the Israeli weapons program while in government. He most certainly did not tell McCone about it.” (83, 90) There are others who also believed that senior officials of the Eisenhower administration, including President Eisenhower himself , had known about Dimona early on but decided not to interfere. According to Dino A. Brugioni, who served at the CIA Photographic Intelligence Center, when U-2 photos of the excavations of the Beersheba site were taken sometimes in early-mid 1958 the activity was determined to be a “probable” nuclear-related site. The photos were shown by the Center director, Arthur C. Lundah, to both President Eisenhower and AEC chair Lewis Strauss, but neither reacted. “Lundhal and Brugioni were left with the impression that Eisenhower wanted Israel to acquire nuclear weapons” (Israel and the Bomb, 83). The same anecdote appears in much greater detail in Hersh’s The Samson Option (50-59).
[6] Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 90-95; Avner Cohen, The Worst-Kept Bargain (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010), 60-62.
[7] Choosing this strategy created long-terms risks and problems as well. In essence, it made it much more difficult for Israel to extract any security benefits from, or for, the nuclear project, even if Israel was willing at some point in the future to trade the project’s products for other security benefits. For a more detailed analysis of this evasive disclosure strategy, see Cohen, The Worst-Kept Secret, 61-62.
[8] When we refer to intelligence community, we mean not only the CIA, but also intelligence offices of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Department of State, and the armed services, all of which played a role in colleting and/or analyzing information about Dimona.
[9] On the French-Israeli 1954 bilateral agreement of cooperation in the field of atomic energy, based on the Israeli patents, see Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 32-34.
[10] Indeed, Bergmann and his IAEC were hardly consulted, let alone involved in the negotiations that Shimon Peres had conducted with the French. As became known years later, Peres, who was Dimona’s prime visionary and promoter, decided to compartmentalize and bypass Bergmann and the IAEC almost entirely about Dimona. In February 1958 all seven IAEC members except Bergmann resigned; the details of this incident remain obscure but it may have been a protest against the exclusion of the IAEC. There was even a time when Bergmann was not allowed to visit the Dimona site. See Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 14-17, 67-71.
[12] For background, see Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 60-62; Kristine Werdelin Bergan, editor, “The Norway-United Kingdom-Israel Heavy Water Deal, 1957-1959: New Translations from Norwegian Archives,” forthcoming electronic dossier for the Nuclear Proliferation International History Project.
[13] See “UK Helped Israel Get Nuclear Bomb,” BBC News, 4 August 2005; David Leigh, “US kept in the dark as secret nuclear deal was struck,” The Guardian, 3 August 2005; “Britain’s dirty secret: Exclusive – Secret papers show how Britain helped Israel make the A-bomb in the 1960s, ” The New Statesman, 13 March 2006. See also the Foreign Office Statement, 9 March 2006, BBC Two.
[15] On the U-2 issue, Seymour Hersh provides a fascinating and persuasive account, but the recollections of key participants need to be supported by government records. See The Samson Option, at pages 50-58.
[16] Warren Kornberg, “Israel Reactor ‘Not Revealed to Us,’ Says McCone, Avoiding Word ‘Secret,'” The Washington Post, 19 December 1960. See also, Hersh, The Samson Option, 77.
[17] Ibid., 71-72, for McCone’s role in leaking to the New York Times.
[18] The U.S. Operations Mission managed U.S. foreign aid programs.
[19] “U.S. Welcomes Israel Promises on Reactor,” The Washington Post, 23 December 1960.
[21] In 1986, Norway asked Israel whether the heavy water had been used in ways that were consistent with the agreement’s “peaceful uses” conditions. See Charles R. Babcock, “Norway Eyes Israel’s Use of Nuclear Ingredient,”Washington Post, 10 November 1986.
Us Government Jobs, Us Government Type, Us Government Shutdown, Us Government Spending, Us Government Budget, Us Government Security Clearance, Us Government Debt, Us Government News, Us Government Bonds, Us Government Passport, Us Government Agencies, Us Government Auctions, Us Government Accountability Office, Us Government And Politics, Us Government Articles, Us Government Annual Budget, Us Government And Politics Apex Answers, Us Government Ap Test, Us Government Arms Contracts, Us Government Assets, Us Government Budget, Us Government Bonds, Us Government Branches, Us Government Budget 2017, Us Government Budget 2016, Us Government Book, Us Government Bookstore, Us Government Bond Rates, Us Government Buildings, Us Government Bids, Us Government Contracts, Us Government Current Events, Us Government Corruption, Us Government Corporations, Us Government Checks And Balances, Us Government Credit Rating, Us Government Crash Course, Us Government Copyright Website, Us Government Chart, Us Government Clearance, Us Government Debt, Us Government Deficit, Us Government Definition, Us Government Debt To Gdp, Us Government Debt Clock, Us Government Data, Us Government Diagram, Us Government During Ww2, Us Government Documents, Us Government Definition Of Terrorism, Us Government Expenditures, Us Government Employees, Us Government Explained, Us Government Executive Branch, Us Government Employee Salaries, Us Government Exam Review, Us Government Employment, Us Government Education, Us Government Experiments, Us Government Expenditures 2016, Us Government Fiscal Year, Us Government Forms, Us Government For Dummies, Us Government Final Exam, Us Government Facts, Us Government Final Exam Study Guide, Us Government Free Credit Report, Us Government Funding, Us Government Flow Chart, Us Government Fiscal Year 2017, Us Government Grants, Us Government Grant Department, Us Government Gold Coins, Us Government Games, Us Government Gsa, Us Government Gs Pay Scale, Us Government Grant Money, Us Government Global Entry, Us Government Green Card, Us Government Gdp, Us Government Holidays, Us Government Hiring Freeze, Us Government Holidays 2017, Us Government Hierarchy, Us Government History, Us Government Healthcare, Us Government Healthcare Spending, Us Government Hacked, Us Government Health Insurance, Us Government House, Us Government Internships, Us Government Income, Us Government Id, Us Government Interest Reported As Dividends, Us Government Interest, Us Government Interest Taxable, Us Government Irs, Us Government Issues, Us Government Issued Id, Us Government Intelligence Agencies, Us Government Jobs, Us Government Jobs Abroad, Us Government Jobs In Japan, Us Government Jobs In Italy, Us Government Jobs In Germany, Us Government Judicial Branch, Us Government Jobs In Europe, Us Government Jeopardy, Us Government Jobs In Utah, Us Government Jobs In California, Us Government Killed Mlk, Us Government Kahoot, Us Government Kill List, Us Government Killed Dog, Us Government Killed Family Dog, Us Government Key Terms, Us Government Killed Jfk, Us Government Kaspersky, Us Government Kodi, Us Government Kenya Travel, Us Government Logo, Us Government Line Of Succession, Us Government License Plates, Us Government Leaders, Us Government Land For Sale, Us Government Loans, Us Government Legislative Branch, Us Government Laws, Us Government Lies, Us Government Leaks, Us Government Mint, Us Government Mileage Rate, Us Government Manual, Us Government Mileage Rate 2017, Us Government Medicare, Us Government Movies, Us Government Military Spending, Us Government Memes, Us Government Module 3 Dba, Us Government Mind Control, Us Government News, Us Government Net Worth, Us Government News Today, Us Government Number, Us Government Name, Us Government Notes, Us Government No Call List, Us Government News Articles, Us Government National Debt, Us Government Number Of Employees, Us Government Org Chart, Us Government Officials, Us Government Organizational Chart, Us Government Offices, Us Government Obligations, Us Government Organizations, Us Government Owned Companies, Us Government Official Mail, Us Government Online Textbook, Us Government Officials 2017, Us Government Passport, Us Government Per Diem, Us Government Printing Office, Us Government Passport Renewal, Us Government Pay Scale, Us Government Plates, Us Government Positions, Us Government Phone Number, Us Government Pension, Us Government Procurement, Us Government Quizlet, Us Government Quiz, Us Government Questions, Us Government Quotes, Us Government Quarters, Us Government Quizlet Chapter 2, Us Government Questions And Answers, Us Government Questions Test Practice, Us Government Quizlet Chapter 8, Us Government Quizlet Chapter 4, Us Government Revenue, Us Government Regents, Us Government Review, Us Government Revenue 2016, Us Government Retirement, Us Government Ranks, Us Government Renew Passport, Us Government Rfp, Us Government Revenue Sources, Us Government Regulations, Us Government Shutdown, Us Government Spending, Us Government Security Clearance, Us Government Shutdown 2017, Us Government System, Us Government Surplus, Us Government Spending Breakdown, Us Government Securities, Us Government Salaries, Us Government Savings Bonds, Us Government Type, Us Government Textbook, Us Government Travel Warnings, Us Government Tax Forms, Us Government Travel, Us Government Textbook Pdf, Us Government Test, Us Government Tax Revenue, Us Government Time, Us Government Trivia, Us Government Unclaimed Money, Us Government Unit 4, Us Government Unit 5, Us Government Unit 3, Us Government Unit 2 Quizlet, Us Government Unit 1, Us Government Ufo, Us Government Unit 5 Test Answers, Us Government Unit 1 Test, Us Government Unit 3 Test, Us Government Vocabulary, Us Government Visa, Us Government Vehicles, Us Government Videos, Us Government Vehicle Auction, Us Government Value Of Human Life, Us Government Vs German Government, Us Government Vs Ancient Rome, Us Government Venezuela, Us Government Veterans, Us Government Website, Us Government Worksheets, Us Government Wiki, Us Government Weather, Us Government Weed, Us Government Word Search, Us Government Whip, Us Government White Papers, Us Government Web Standards, Us Government Waste, Us Government X Files, Us Government Xml, Us Government Keystone Xl Pipeline, Us Government Windows Xp, Us Government Planet X, Us Government Yearly Budget, Us Government Yield Curve, Us Government Youtube, Us Government Yearly Revenue, Us Government Yields, Us Government Yellowbook, Us Government Year End, Us Government Youth Programs, Us Government Yearly Spending, Us Government Yemen, Us Government Zombie Plan, Us Government Zip Codes, Us Government Zombie, Us Government Zip Code Database, Us Government Zika, Us Government Zombie Protocol, Us Government Zero Coupon Bonds, Us Government Zombie Contingency Plan, Us Government Zombie Survival Guide, Us Government Zip Code Information, Israel News, Israel Map, Israel Flag, Israel Keyes, Israel Houghton, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole, Israel Palestine, Israel Population, Israel Houghton Kids, Israel Capital, Israel And Palestine, Israel Airlines, Israel Abbreviation, Israel Airport, Israel Apartheid, Israeli Army, Israel Anti Boycott Act, Israel Allies, Israel And Syria, Israel And New Breed, Israel Bonds, Israel Broussard, Israel Birthright, Israel Bombs Syria, Israel Borders, Israel Bombing, Israel Boone, Israel Beaches, Israel Baseball Hat, Israeli Border Wall, Israel Capital, Israel Continent, Israel Country Code, Israel Consulate Chicago, Israeli Couscous, Israel Climate, Israel Cities, Israel Conflict, Israel Capital City, Israel Coins, Israel Del Toro, Israel Definition, Israel Defense Forces, Israel Duffus, Israel Demographics, Israel Desert, Israel Diamonds, Israel Discount Bank, Israel Desalination, Israel Declares Independence, Israel Englander, Israel Egypt War, Israel Exports, Israel Established, Israel Experts, Israel Egypt, Israeli Embassy, Israel Etf, Israel Enemies, Israel Education, Israel Flag, Israel Facts, Israel Founded, Israel Flag Emoji, Israeli Food, Israel Fun Facts, Israel Flights, Israel Finkelstein, Israel Free Spirit, Israel Flag Meaning, Israel Government, Israel Gdp, Israel Geography, Israel Gdp Per Capita, Israel God, Israel Gutierrez, Israel Gross, Israel Gonzalez, Israel Gun Laws, Israel Gaza, Israel Houghton, Israel Houghton Kids, Israel History, Israel Hands, Israel Hayom, Israel Houghton Songs, Israel Holidays, Israel Hodish, Israel Houghton You Are Good, Israel Houghton Wedding, Israel Iz Kamakawiwo\u02bbole, Israel Independence Day, Israel Independence, Israel Iron Dome, Israel In Hebrew, Israel Isis, Israel In The Bible, Israel Iran, Israel India, Israel Idonije, Israel Jerusalem, Israel Jewish, Israel Jordan, Israel Jewish Population, Israel Jimenez, Israel Jesus, Israel Jobs, Israel Jacob, Israel Jewelry, Israel Juarbe, Israel Keyes, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole Wife, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole Songs, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole Somewhere Over The Rainbow, Israel Kristal, Israel Kali A K, Israel Kibbutz, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole Over The Rainbow, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole Net Worth, Israel Language, Israel Location, Israel Local Time, Israel Leader, Israel Liberzon, Israel Landscape, Israel Life Expectancy, Israel Literacy Rate, Israel Lebanon, Israel Lebanon War, Israel Map, Israel Meaning, Israel Museum, Israel Money, Israel Movie, Israel Music, Israel Middle East, Israel My Glory, Israel Meme, Israeli Military, Israel News, Israel Name Meaning, Israel National News, Israel National Anthem, Israel News Live, Israel Nash, Israel News Today, Israel Natural Resources, Israel Nukes, Israel Name, Israel On Map, Israel Of God, Israel Outdoors, Israel On World Map, Israel Official Language, Israel On The House, Israel Oil, Israel Or Palestine, Israel Outline, Israel Outlet, Israel Palestine, Israel Population, Israel Palestine Map, Israel Putnam, Israel Post, Israeli Prime Ministers, Israel Palestine Conflict Timeline, Israel Pictures, Israel Population 2017, Israel Pakistan, Israel Quotes, Israel Quizlet, Israel Qatar, Israel Quest, Israel Qatar Relations, Israel Quiz, Israel Questions, Israel Queen, Israel Quality Of Life, Israel Quest Reviews, Israel Religion, Israel Russia, Israel Regardie, Israel Real Estate, Israel Rodriguez, Israel Rose, Israel Radio, Israel Region, Israel Resources, Israel Railways, Israel Syria, Israel Settlements, Israel Size, Israel Somewhere Over The Rainbow, Israel Six Day War, Israel Square Miles, Israel Supports Isis, Israel Saudi Arabia, Israel Symbols, Israel Shamir, Israel Time, Israel Time Now, Israel Tours, Israel Travel, Israel Today, Israel Tourism, Israel Trump, Israel Trip, Israel Third Temple, Israel Timeline, Israel United In Christ, Israel Us Relations, Israel Update, Israel United In Christ Videos, Israel Un, Israel Unlimited, Israel Unemployment Rate, Israel Us Embassy, Israel Universal Health Care, Israel University, Israel Vs Palestine, Israel Vibration, Israel Video Network, Israel Vacation, Israel Visa, Israel Vs Iran, Israel Vaccinations, Israel Visa Requirements, Israel Vs Syria, Israel Vs Judah, Israel Wall, Israel World Baseball Classic, Israel Weather, Israel War, Israeli Women, Israel World Baseball Classic Roster, Israel Wikipedia, Israel World Map, Israel West Bank, Israel Western Wall, Israel X Factor, Israel Xp, Israeli X95, Israel X Factor 2016, Israel X, Israel X Factor 2017, Israeli X, Israel X Factor Judges, Israel Xbmc, Israel X Band Radar, Israel Youtube, Israel Year Of Independence, Israel Year, Israel Y Palestina, Israel Yad Vashem, Israel Yemen, Israel Young, Israel Y Moises, Israel Youtube Channel, Israel Yearly Weather, Israel Zangwill, Israel Zip Code, Israel Zamora, Israel Zin River, Israel Zionist, Israel Zolli, Israel Z, Israel Zangwill Melting Pot, Israeli Zoo, Israel Zip Code Lookup, Nuclear Bomb, Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Fusion, Nuclear War, Nuclear Family, Nuclear Fission, Nuclear Stress Test, Nuclear Option, Nuclear Triad, Nuclear Medicine, Nuclear Arms Race, Nuclear Attack, Nuclear Accidents, Nuclear Assault, Nuclear Arsenal, Nuclear Age, Nuclear Arms Race Cold War, Nuclear Apocalypse, Nuclear Alarm, Nuclear Annihilation, Nuclear Bomb, Nuclear Blast, Nuclear Blast Radius, Nuclear Bomb Test, Nuclear Bunker, Nuclear Bomb Shelter, Nuclear Binding Energy, Nuclear Blast Records, Nuclear Bone Scan, Nuclear Bomb Video, Nuclear Chemistry, Nuclear Clock, Nuclear Countries, Nuclear Chemistry Worksheet, Nuclear Charge, Nuclear Codes, Nuclear Cataract, Nuclear Chain Reaction, Nuclear Cardiology, Nuclear Cooling Tower, Nuclear Definition, Nuclear Decay, Nuclear Disasters, Nuclear Deterrence, Nuclear Decay Worksheet, Nuclear Disarmament, Nuclear Dna, Nuclear Detonation, Nuclear Decay Worksheet Answers, Nuclear Division, Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Explosion, Nuclear Energy Definition, Nuclear Engineering, Nuclear Envelope, Nuclear Engineer Salary, Nuclear Energy Pros And Cons, Nuclear Energy Examples, Nuclear Explosion Gif, Nuclear Equations, Nuclear Fusion, Nuclear Family, Nuclear Fission, Nuclear Fusion Definition, Nuclear Football, Nuclear Fission Definition, Nuclear Fallout, Nuclear Family Definition, Nuclear Fusion Reactor, Nuclear Fallout Map, Nuclear Glass, Nuclear Gas Mask, Nuclear Gandhi, Nuclear Gun, Nuclear Gif, Nuclear Generator, Nuclear Gravity Bomb, Nuclear Games, Nuclear Gas, Nuclear Grenade, Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Heart Test, Nuclear Half Life, Nuclear Hazard Symbol, Nuclear Holocaust Movies, Nuclear Hormone Receptors, Nuclear Hoax, Nuclear History, Nuclear Household, Nuclear Hand Grenade, Nuclear Imaging, Nuclear Incidents, Nuclear In Spanish, Nuclear Isotopes, Nuclear Icebreaker, Nuclear Icbm, Nuclear Issues, Nuclear Industry, Nuclear Icon, Nuclear Instruments And Methods, Nuclear Jobs, Nuclear Japan, Nuclear Jet Engine, Nuclear Jokes, Nuclear Jellyfish, Nuclear Jet, Nuclear Js, Nuclear Jobs Overseas, Nuclear Jobs Florida, Nuclear Jellyfish Of New Jersey, Nuclear Korea, Nuclear Korean Noodles, Nuclear Kidney Test, Nuclear Kenyan Sand Boa, Nuclear Kinetic Energy, Nuclear Key, Nuclear Kit, Nuclear Keychain, Nuclear Kill Radius, Nuclear Kid, Nuclear Localization Signal, Nuclear Lamina, Nuclear Launch Codes, Nuclear Logo, Nuclear Lyrics, Nuclear Launch Detected, Nuclear Lake, Nuclear Launch, Nuclear Lamins, Nuclear Leak, Nuclear Medicine, Nuclear Medicine Technologist, Nuclear Membrane, Nuclear Missile, Nuclear Meltdown, Nuclear Membrane Function, Nuclear Map, Nuclear Membrane Definition, Nuclear Medicine Technologist Jobs, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, Nuclear News, Nuclear Nations, Nuclear North Korea, Nuclear Notation, Nuclear Noodles, Nuclear Norm, Nuclear Navy, Nuclear Nadal, Nuclear Nucular, Nuclear Option, Nuclear Oncology, Nuclear Option 2013, Nuclear Option Harry Reid, Nuclear Overhauser Effect, Nuclear Outage, Nuclear Operator Salary, Nuclear Or Nucular, Nuclear Operator, Nuclear Option Fallout 4, Nuclear Power, Nuclear Power Plants, Nuclear Proliferation, Nuclear Power Plants In Us, Nuclear Physics, Nuclear Physicist, Nuclear Power Definition, Nuclear Power Pros And Cons, Nuclear Pharmacy, Nuclear Power Plants In Texas, Nuclear Quotes, Nuclear Quadrupole Resonance, Nuclear Questions, Nuclear Quiz, Nuclear Quality Assurance, Nuclear Quizlet, Nuclear Quadrupole Moment, Nuclear Quantum Effects, Nuclear Quality Assurance Jobs, Nuclear Quantum Numbers, Nuclear Reactor, Nuclear Radiation, Nuclear Reaction, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear Reactor Definition, Nuclear Reactor Diagram, Nuclear Receptor, Nuclear Reactors In Us, Nuclear Rocket, Nuclear Reaction Worksheet, Nuclear Stress Test, Nuclear Symbol, Nuclear Submarine, Nuclear Sclerosis, Nuclear Sign, Nuclear Shadow, Nuclear Shelter, Nuclear Secrecy, Nuclear Siren, Nuclear Scan, Nuclear Triad, Nuclear Throne, Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, Nuclear Test, Nuclear Technician, Nuclear Threat, Nuclear Throne Together, Nuclear Throne Wiki, Nuclear Technology, Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Apush, Nuclear Umbrella, Nuclear Uranium, Nuclear Uses, Nuclear Utilization Theory, Nuclear Ultrasound, Nuclear Us, Nuclear Usa, Nuclear Unit, Nuclear Union, Nuclear Ukraine, Nuclear Vs Atomic, Nuclear Vote, Nuclear Vs Nucular, Nuclear Valdez, Nuclear Vs Solar, Nuclear Vs Coal, Nuclear Vs Hydrogen Bomb, Nuclear Vs Extended Family, Nuclear Vs Mitochondrial Dna, Nuclear Video, Nuclear War, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear Winter, Nuclear Waste, Nuclear Waste Disposal, Nuclear War Now, Nuclear Weapons Definition, Nuclear War Movies, Nuclear Waste Policy Act, Nuclear Weapons Facts, Nuclear X Ray, Nuclear X, Nuclear Explosion, Nuclear X Met Rx, Nuclear Explosion Gif, Nuclear X Ray Technician Salary, Nuclear Explosion In Space, Nuclear Explosion Video, Nuclear Explosion Simulator, Nuclear Explosion Radius, Nuclear Yield, Nuclear Yield Map, Nuclear Youtube, Nuclear Yellow, Nuclear Yellow Cake, Nuclear Yacht, Nuclear Yemen, Nuclear Ymir, Nuclear Yap, Nuclear Yucca Mountain, Nuclear Zone, Nuclear Zomboy, Nuclear Zero, Nuclear Zombies, Nuclear Zomboy Lyrics, Nuclear Zone Theory, Nuclear Zone Hypothesis, Nuclear Zec, Nuclear Zone Terraforming Mars, Nuclear Zone In Russia, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Service, Secret Garden, Secret World Legends, Secret Flying, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Agent Man, Secret Admirer, Secret Aardvark, Secret Agent, Secret Annex, Secret And Lies, Secret Agent Man Song, Secret App, Secret Asian Man, Secret Agent Man Lyrics, Secretbuilders, Secret Book, Secret Beach Kauai, Secret Beach, Secret Ballot, Secret Box, Secret Beach Maui, Secret Bay Dominica, Secret Base, Secret Band, Secret Circle, Secret Church, Secret Caverns, Secret Classroom Superpowers, Secret Codes, Secret Clinical Strength, Secret Clearance, Secret Circle Cast, Secret Conversations Facebook, Secret Cameras, Secret Deodorant, Secret Definition, Secret Diary Of A Call Girl, Secret Door, Secret Deodorant Coupons, Secret Diary, Secret Deodorant Commercial, Secret Decoder Ring, Secret Daughter, Secret Door Lyrics, Secret Empire, Secret Extensions, Secret Escapes, Secret Empire #1, Secret Empire Reading Order, Secret Entourage, Secret Empire #0, Secret Empire #2, Secret Eaters, Secret Emoji, Secret Flying, Secret Forest, Secret Forest Ep 11, Secret Falls Kauai, Secret Flask, Secret Formula, Secret Facebook Group, Secret Frappuccino, Secret For The Mad Lyrics, Secret Falls, Secret Garden, Secret Garden Song, Secret Garden Movie, Secret Garden Cafe, Secret Garden Musical, Secret Garden Lyrics, Secret Garden Denver, Secret Garden Book, Secret Google Games, Secret Garden Miami, Secret Hitler Rules, Secret Hitler Game, Secret History Of Twin Peaks, Secret Hitler Online, Secret Hair Extensions, Secret Handshake, Secret History, Secret Hotel Deals, Secret Heart, Secret Hiding Places, Secret In Their Eyes, Secret In Spanish, Secret Ingredient, Secret Island, Secret In Their Eyes Cast, Secret Invasion, Secret In N Out Menu, Secret Invisible Solid, Secret Island In Texas, Secret In French, Secret Jardin, Secret Jewels, Secret Journal, Secret Jobs, Secret Jamaica, Secret Jieun, Secret Jardin Lodge, Secret Journey Police, Secret Journey To Planet Serpo, Secret Jardin Dr90, Secret Kpop, Secret Keeper Girl, Secret Keeper, Secret Key, Secret Korean Drama, Secret Knock, Secret Knowledge, Secret Krabby Patty Formula, Secret Key Starting Treatment Essence, Secret Kingdom, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Love Song, Secret Life Of Walter Mitty, Secret Lab Chair, Secret Life Of An American Teenager Cast, Secret Language, Secret Life Of Pets Imdb, Secret Menu, Secret Menu Items, Secret Mage, Secret Menu Starbucks, Secret Menu In N Out, Secret Messages, Secret Meaning, Secret Movie, Secret Mountain Fort Awesome, Secret Mage Deck, Secret Nails, Secret Nyc, Secret Netflix, Secret Nail Salon, Secret Names, Secret Netflix Codes, Secret Numbers, Secret News, Secret Nature From Jeju Peeling Gel, Secret Nation, Secret Of Mana, Secret Of Nimh, Secret Of The Snowy Peaks, Secret Of The Cedars, Secret Of Kells, Secret Of Evermore, Secret Of The Wings, Secret Of Moonacre, Secret Of Mana Rom, Secret Of Mana 2, Secret Pizza, Secret Police, Secret Project Robot, Secret Place, Secret Passion Fruit, Secret Power, Secret Passages, Secret Pizza Party, Secret Paladin, Secret Place Lyrics, Secret Quotes, Secret Question, Secret Quest, Secret Questions To Ask, Secret Questions To Ask Siri, Secret Quests Ffxv, Secret Quests Skyrim, Secret Qr Codes, Secret Questions To Ask Alexa, Secret Quote Spongebob, Secret Romance, Secret Resorts, Secret Recipe, Secret Rooms, Secret Rare Pokemon Cards, Secret Rainbow Hair, Secret Rare Ultra Ball, Secret Rendezvous, Secret Relationship, Secret Roku Channels, Secret Service, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Societies, Secret Synonym, Secret Starbucks Menu, Secret Service Jobs, Secret Sandwich Society, Secret Sisters, Secret Shopper Jobs, Secret Treasures, Secret Treasures Sleepwear, Secret Tunnel, Secret Things, Secret Tunnel Song, Secret The Pierces, Secret Thesaurus, Secret Travel, Secret Treasures Bra, Secret To Success, Secret Underground Cities, Secret Us Weapons, Secret Underground Bases, Secret Universe Of Names, Secret Underground, Secret Underground Medicine, Secret Upgrades Office Space, Secret Us Bases, Secret Us Military Bases, Secret Unscented, Secret Variety Training, Secret Village Of The Spellcasters, Secret Video Recorder, Secret Variety Training Ep 2, Secret Vault, Secret Vault 81, Secret Veneers, Secret Voice Recorder, Secret Video, Secret Volume, Secret World Legends, Secret Window, Secret Wood, Secret Wars, Secret Wood Rings, Secret World Legends Release Date, Secret World Of Arrietty, Secret Weapon, Secret Wars 2015, Secret Warriors, Secret X Folder, Secret Xtians, Secret Xscape, Secret X Folder Comic, Secret X, Secret Xbox One Gamerpics, Secret Xtend, Secret Xbox One Games, Secret Xbox One Codes, Secret X Folder Webtoon, Secret Youtube, Secret Yeahu, Secret Yellowstone, Secret Young Justice, Secret Youtube Videos, Secret Yosemite, Secret Youtube Tricks, Secret Youtube Website, Secret Yumiverse, Secret Yosemite Spots, Secret Zoo Series, Secret Zoo, Secret Zoo Book, Secret Zinger, Secret Zombies Calling Card, Secret Zodiac Sign, Secret Zion Hikes, Secret Zone, Secret Zombies Challenge Infinite Warfare, Secret Zombie Challenge
Nsa Jobs, Nsa Director, Nsa Softball, Nsa Meaning, Nsa Careers, Nsa Definition, Nsa Headquarters, Nsa Surveillance, Nsa Spying, Nsa Internships, Nsa Acronym, Nsa Address, Nsa Advisor, Nsa Agent, Nsa Alabama, Nsa Annapolis, Nsa Agent Salary, Nsa Arc, Nsa Approved Shredders, Nsa Agreement, Nsa Building, Nsa Bahrain, Nsa Budget, Nsa Bethesda, Nsa Baseball, Nsa Badge, Nsa Benefits, Nsa Building Nyc, Nsa Budget 2016, Nsa Backdoor, Nsa Careers, Nsa Chief, Nsa Colorado, Nsa Crane, Nsa Cyber Security, Nsa Conference, Nsa Csfc, Nsa Cae, Nsa Crypto Challenge, Nsa Css, Nsa Director, Nsa Definition, Nsa Data Center, Nsa Day Of Cyber, Nsa Director Salary, Nsa Data Collection, Nsa Domestic Surveillance, Nsa Datasheet, Nsa Deputy Director, Nsa Datasheet Is Called, Nsa Employment, Nsa Edward Snowden, Nsa Exploits, Nsa Employees, Nsa Email, Nsa Evaluated Products List, Nsa Echelon, Nsa Emblem, Nsa Encryption, Nsa Eternal Blue, Nsa Fastpitch, Nsa Florida Youth, Nsa Fort Meade, Nsa Flynn, Nsa Florida, Nsa Friend, Nsa Facebook, Nsa Fort Gordon, Nsa Foia, Nsa Facts, Nsa Georgia, Nsa Glassdoor, Nsa Government, Nsa Grindr, Nsa Github, Nsa Gift Shop, Nsa Game, Nsa Grants, Nsa Gif, Nsa Guy, Nsa Headquarters, Nsa Head, Nsa Hacking Tools, Nsa Hawaii, Nsa Hampton Roads, Nsa Hacked, Nsa History, Nsa Hiring Process, Nsa Hacking Tools Leaked, Nsa Headquarters Address, Nsa Internships, Nsa Industries, Nsa Intelligence Analyst, Nsa Indiana, Nsa Influence 2017, Nsa Iad, Nsa Ias 2017, Nsa India, Nsa Illinois, Nsa Insurance, Nsa Jobs, Nsa Juice Plus, Nsa Job Openings, Nsa Jobs Utah, Nsa Jobs Salary, Nsa Jokes, Nsa Job Requirements, Nsa Jurisdiction, Nsa Jobs In Md, Nsa Japan, Nsa Keywords, Nsa Kunia, Nsa Kc, Nsa Key, Nsa Kentucky, Nsa Kmi, Nsa Kankakee, Nsa Korea, Nsa Kaspersky, Nsa Keith Alexander, Nsa Leaker, Nsa Logo, Nsa Leak, Nsa Locations, Nsa Listening, Nsa Leader, Nsa Login, Nsa Leadership, Nsa Language Analyst, Nsa Leaked Tools, Nsa Meaning, Nsa Meme, Nsa Media, Nsa Meet, Nsa Mid South, Nsa Mike Rogers, Nsa Museum, Nsa Mcmaster, Nsa Maryland, Nsa Mission Statement, Nsa News, Nsa Naples, Nsa Name Generator, Nsa North, Nsa Number, Nsa Norfolk, Nsa Nyc, Nsa Nashville, Nsa Nursing, Nsa New Orleans, Nsa Orlando, Nsa Opm Test, Nsa Online Test, Nsa Offices, Nsa Obama, Nsa Organization, Nsa Operational Interview, Nsa Only, Nsa Org Chart, Nsa Of 1947, Nsa Prism, Nsa Police, Nsa Panama City, Nsa Police Officer, Nsa Phone Number, Nsa Philadelphia, Nsa Pay Scale, Nsa Play, Nsa Polygraph, Nsa Purpose, Nsa Quantum Computer, Nsa Quotes, Nsa Qualifications, Nsa Quantum, Nsa Quizlet, Nsa Questions, Nsa Qualifier, Nsa Quantum Computer Farm, Nsa Quartet, Nsa Quiz, Nsa Rogers, Nsa Requirements, Nsa Rules, Nsa Recruiting, Nsa Relationship, Nsa Rule Book, Nsa Ransomware, Nsa Russia, Nsa Responsibilities, Nsa Reno, Nsa Softball, Nsa Surveillance, Nsa Spying, Nsa Slang, Nsa Salary, Nsa Stands For, Nsa Soccer, Nsa Softball Rules, Nsa Scholarship, Nsa Scandal, Nsa Texas, Nsa Tournaments, Nsa Tools, Nsa Trump, Nsa Tao, Nsa Tools Leaked, Nsa Twitter, Nsa Tinder, Nsa Test, Nsa Training, Nsa Utah, Nsa Urban, Nsa Usa, Nsa Utah Facility, Nsa Unmasking, Nsa Utah Jobs, Nsa Unconstitutional, Nsa Umpire, Nsa Under Obama, Nsa Uniform, Nsa Vs Cia, Nsa Visitor Center, Nsa Virginia, Nsa Vs Fbi, Nsa Vs Cia Vs Fbi, Nsa Virus, Nsa Visitor Control Center, Nsa Vpn, Nsa Vanilla, Nsa Violation Of Privacy, Nsa Wiki, Nsa Whistleblower, Nsa Washington, Nsa Wiretapping, Nsa Website, Nsa Water Filter, Nsa Watchlist, Nsa World Series, Nsa Wikileaks, Nsa Wannacry, Nsa Xkeyscore, Nsa Xbox One, Nsa Xeno World Qualifier, Nsa Xkeyscore Download, Nsa Xcode, Nsa Xbox Live, Nsa Xeno Tournament, Nsa Xkeyscore Presentation, Nsa X, Nsa X Files, Nsa Youtube, Nsa Yogurt, Nsa Young Investigator Grant, Nsa Youth Florida, Nsa Yearly Budget, Nsa Yottabyte, Nsa Youth Program, Nsa Youth, Nsa Yellow Dots, Nsa Yakima, Nsa Zero Day, Nsa Zip Code, Nsa Zeus, Nsa Zimmermann Telegram, Nsa Zimbabwe, Nsa Za, Nsa Zero Day Exploit, Nsa Zyxel, Nsa Zero Division, Nsa Zone Store, Bomb Pop, Bomb Pop Shot, Bomb Threat, Bomb Timer, Bomb Pop Drink, Bomb Shelter, Bomb Voyage, Bomb Bowling, Bomb Girls, Bomb It 7, Bomb Angry Birds, Bomb Ash Ffxiv, Bomb Attack, Bomb Arena, Bomb Alarm Clock, Bomb Agrabah, Bomb Af, Bomb Arrows, Bomb Arrows Breath Of The Wild, Bomb Atomically, Bomb Bowling, Bomb Bomb, Bomb Book, Bomb Blast, Bomb Bundles, Bomb Bay, Bomb Bag, Bomb Bugs, Bomb Bat, Bomb Bowling Rules, Bomb Calorimeter, Bomb Clipart, Bomb Cartoon, Bomb City, Bomb Calorimetry, Bomb Cosmetics, Bomb Countdown, Bomb Crater, Bomb Calorimeter Equation, Bomb Cake, Bomb Diggity, Bomb Definition, Bomb Defusal Manual, Bomb Defusal Game, Bomb Dropped On Hiroshima, Bomb Dot Com, Bomb Drawing, Bomb Dropped On Isis, Bomb Digz, Bomb Dropped On Nagasaki, Bomb Emoji, Bomb Explosion, Bomb Explosion Gif, Bomb Explosion Sound, Bomb Energy Drink, Bomb Explodes, Bomb Eyebrows, Bomb Explosion Cartoon, Bomb Explosion Drawing, Bomb Etymology, Bomb Fire, Bomb Fire Pit, Bomb Factory, Bombfell, Bomb From Mario, Bomb First, Bomb Food, Bomb From Angry Birds, Bomb Fuse, Bomb For Roaches, Bomb Girls, Bomb Gif, Bomb Game, Bomb Girls Cast, Bomb Going Off, Bomb Group, Bomb Golf, Bomb Game Steam, Bomb Guy, Bomb Golf Balls, Bomb Has Been Defused, Bomb Has Been Planted, Bomb Head, Bomb Hills Not Countries, Bomb Hiroshima, Bomb Hat, Bomb Head Meme, Bomb Hugger, Bomb Hair, Bomb House, Bomb It 7, Bomb In Syria, Bomb It 6, Bomb It 5, Bomb It 2, Bomb It Unblocked, Bomb It 4, Bomb In Spanish, Bomb It 7 Unblocked, Bomb In Detroit, Bomber Jacket, Bomb Jokes, Bomber Jacket Men, Bomb Japan, Bomber Jacket Womens, Bomb Jatt, Bomb Jack, Bomb Jatt Lyrics, Bomb Juice, Bomb Jovi, Bomb King, Bomb King Build, Bomb Kirby, Bomb Korea, Bomb Ketch, Bomb King Guide, Bomb King Ffx, Bomb King Voice Lines, Bomb Kid, Bomb Kush, Bomb Logo, Bomb Lyrics, Bomb Lowrider, Bomb Little Boy, Bomb Lab, Bomb London, Bomb Levels, Bomb Lobber, Bomb Labs Steroids, Bomb Lance, Bomb Manual, Bomb Meme, Bomb Magazine, Bomb Map, Bomb Meaning, Bomb Man, Bomb Makeup, Bomb Mario, Bomb Manual Pdf, Bomb Movie, Bomb North Korea, Bomb News, Bomb Noise, Bomb Names, Bomb North Korea Now, Bomb Nagasaki, Bomb Nuclear, Bomb Naga, Bomb Nicknames, Bomb N Korea, Bomb On Syria, Bomb Omb, Bomb Omb Battlefield, Bomb On Nagasaki, Bomb Outfits, Bomb Of Hiroshima, Bomb On Isis, Bomb Outline, Bomb Of Gilead, Bomb One Punch Man, Bomb Pop, Bomb Pop Shot, Bomb Pop Drink, Bomb Prank, Bomb Pop Shot Recipe, Bomb Pop Smirnoff, Bomb Pop Vodka, Bomb Pop Mountain Dew, Bomb Pop Martini, Bomb Puns, Bomb Queen, Bomb Quotes, Bomb Queen Comic, Bomb Queen Cosplay, Bomb Questions, Bomb Queen Wiki, Bomb Queen Ffxi, Bomb Quesadilla Recipe, Bomb Quiz, Bomb Queen Review, Bomb Runner, Bomb Robot, Bomb Radius, Bomb Rush Blush, Bomb Recipes, Bomb Rhyme, Bomb Rush, Bomb Russia, Bomb Ravi, Bomb Run, Bomb Shelter, Bomb Squad, Bomb Syria, Bomb Shelter Near Me, Bomb Suit, Bomb Seeds, Bomb Simulator, Bomb Shot, Bomb Sound Effect, Bomb Synonym, Bomb Threat, Bomb Timer, Bomb Threat Today, Bomb Tech Golf, Bomb Tower Coc, Bomb The Music Industry, Bomb Threat Detroit, Bomb Tattoo, Bomb Threat Checklist, Bomb Technician, Bomb Urban Dictionary, Bomb Used On Hiroshima, Bomb Uk, Bomb Upgrade Zelda, Bomb Upgrade Breath Of The Wild, Bomb Us, Bomb Unicode, Bomb Under The Table, Bomb Unit Endless Frontier, Bomb Underwater, Bomb Voyage, Bomb Vest, Bomb Voyage Meme, Bomb Vector, Bomb Video, Bomb Voyage Gif, Bomb Vs Missile, Bomb Voyage Scene, Bomb Voyage Quotes, Bomb Victim, Bomb Wallpaper, Bomb Weed, Bomb With Face, Bomb Whistle, Bomb Warning, Bomb Watch, Bomb Water, Bomb Went Off, Bomb With Fuse, Bomb Website, Bomb X, Bomb X Wing, Bomb X Matilda, Bomb Xuzhou, Bomb X Amiga, Bomb X Energy Drink, Bomb Xml, Bomb Yemen, Bomb Yesterday, Bomb Youtube, Bomb Yield, Bomb Your Friends, Bomb Yellowstone, Bomb Your House For Roaches, Bomb Your Driver, Bomb Yourself, Bomb Your City, Bomb Zone, Bomb Zelda, Bomb Zquad, Bomb Zombies, Bomb Zero Password, Bomb Zip, Bomb Zone Battlegrounds, Bomb Zaventem, Bomb Zamalek, Bomb Z, China King, China Garden, China House, China Anne Mcclain, China One, China Star, China City, China Chef, China Jade, China Buffet, China Anne Mcclain, China Airlines, China And India, China And North Korea, China Anne Mcclain Age, China Anne Mcclain 2017, China Arnold, China Air Pollution, China Allies, China Attack On India, China Buffet, China Buffet Near Me, China Beach, China Best, China Bell, China Best Howell, China Bay, China Bistro, China Bus, China Bowl, China Chef, China Cook, China Cabinet, China Court, China Cafe, China Currency, China Chef Menu, China City, China Cottage, China Consulate Chicago, China Dynasty, China Dragon, China Doll, China Delight, China Daily, China Debt, China Doll Plant, China Dishes, China Delight New Haven Mi, China Definition, China Express, China Eastern Airlines, China Economy, China Eastern, China Express Menu, China Ems, China Explosion, China Express Monroe Michigan, China Etf, China East Buffet, China Flag, China Food, China Fair, China Fare, China Facts, China Fortune, China Flavor, China Fun, China Forbes, China Fare Ortonville Mi, China Garden, China Gate, China Gourmet, China Gate Ann Arbor, China Gold, China Garden Menu, China Gdp, China Gate Menu, China Government, China Glaze, China House, China House Menu, China House Inn, China House Canton Mi, China House Detroit, China House Temperance Mi, China Holidays 2017, China House Flat Rock, China House Pinckney Mi, China Hutch, China India, China Inn, China India War, China Inn Livonia, China Inn South, China Island, China Il, China India News, China In Chinese, China In Spanish, China Jade, China Jade Menu, China Japan, China Jade Grand Blanc, China Jade Waterford Michigan, China Jade Hours, China Jade Number, China Jerseys, China Jade Restaurant, China Jade Mckeesport, China King, China Kitchen, China King Menu, China King Belleville, China King Novi, China King Express, China King Ann Arbor, China King Belleville Mi, China Kitchen Menu, China Kingdom, China Lite, China Lee, China Lite Marysville, China Lite Port Huron, China Lake, China Leader, China Lite Menu, China Language, China Life Expectancy, China Lobster, China Moon, China Map, China Mountain, China Mcclain, China Michigan, China Moon Menu, China Mieville, China Mi, China Movie, China Military, China News, China North Korea, China Number 1, China North Korea Border, China North Korea News, China Natural Resources, China National Debt, China Nuclear Weapons, China North Korea Relations, China Ncap, China One, China One Menu, China One Milan, China One Buffet, China One Child Policy, China One Detroit, China On North Korea, China One Near Me, China One Woodward, China On Map, China Post Tracking, China Population, China Palace, China President, China Phoenix, China Pollution, China Panda, China Palace Menu, China Plates, China Palace Midland, China Quick, China Queen, China Quantum Computer, China Quizlet, China Quarterly, China Quantum Satellite, China Q, China Quotes, China Qin Dynasty, China Quiz, China Ruby, China Religion, China Ruby Menu, China Ruby Ferndale Menu, China Renaissance, China Rose, China Red, China Russia, China Replacements, China Rich Girlfriend, China Star, China Star Menu, China Southern Airlines, China Sea, China Star Hours, China Star Palace, China Syndrome, China Star Wyandotte, China Smog, China Study, Chinatown, China Time, China Township Mi, China Taste, China Tracking, China Trump, Chinatown Express, China Town West Bloomfield, China Time Zones, China Tours, China Us, China Uncensored, China Unemployment Rate, China Us Relations, China Unicom, China Usa, China Us War, China United Airlines, China Union Pay, China Under Mao, China Village, China Villa, China Visa, China Vs India, China Visa Application, China Villa Menu, China Vs Usa, China Vpn, China Village Menu, China Vs Japan, China Wok, China Wok Menu, China White, China Wall, China Wholesale, China Weather, China War, China Wok Port Huron Menu, China Wok Phone Number, China Wiki, China Xi, China X Reader Lemon, China X Reader, China Xinjiang, China X Russia, China Xinhua News, China Xian, China Xpress, China X, China Xiang, China Yuan, China Yi Wang, China Yuan To Usd, China Yellow River, China Youtube, China Yan, China Yield Curve, China Yeti Cooler, China Year, China Yulin, China Zip Code, China Zodiac, China Zoo, China Z Visa, China Zhangjiajie, China Zorrilla, China Zun, China Zhou, China Zhongwang, China Zip Code Beijing, Pakistan News, Pakistan Flag, Pakistan Vs India, Pakistan Language, Pakistan Map, Pakistan Population, Pakistan Cricket, Pakistan Capital, Pakistan Consulate Chicago, Pakistan Time, Pakistan And India, Pakistan Army, Pakistan Air Force, Pakistan Airlines, Pakistan Age Of Consent, Pakistan Acronym, Pakistan Allies, Pakistan And India War, Pakistan Afghanistan, Pakistan And Bangladesh, Pakistan Blast, Pakistan Bombing, Pakistan Boy Dancing, Pakistan Birth Rate, Pakistan Border, Pakistan Blasphemy Law, Pakistan Beaches, Pakistan Bangladesh, Pakistan Blasphemy, Pakistan Beliefs, Pakistan Cricket, Pakistan Capital, Pakistan Consulate Chicago, Pakistan Currency, Pakistan Cricket Team, Pakistan Cities, Pakistan Cricket Board, Pakistan Climate, Pakistan Country Code, Pakistani Culture, Pakistan Definition, Pakistan Defence Forum, Pakistan Demographics, Pakistan Desert, Pakistan Defence, Pakistan Dawn, Pakistani Dress, Pakistani Drama, Pakistan Debt, Pakistan Day, Pakistan Economy, Pakistan Embassy Chicago, Pakistan Embassy, Pakistan Express, Pakistan Education, Pakistan Ethnic Groups, Pakistan Exports, Pakistan Earthquake, Pakistan Earthquake 2005, Pakistan Elections, Pakistan Flag, Pakistan Facts, Pakistani Food, Pakistan Flag Emoji, Pakistani Food Near Me, Pakistan Flag Meaning, Pakistan Facebook, Pakistan Fertility Rate, Pakistan Founded, Pakistan Form Of Government, Pakistan Gdp, Pakistan Government, Pakistan Gdp Per Capita, Pakistan Government Type, Pakistan Geography, Pakistan Gdp Growth, Pakistani Girl, Pakistan Gift Online, Pakistan Genocide, Pakistan Gender Inequality, Pakistan History, Pakistan Holidays, Pakistan Houses, Pakistan Honor Killing, Pakistan Human Rights, Pakistan Hdi, Pakistan Hindu, Pakistan Heat Wave, Pakistan Hockey, Pakistan Hat, Pakistan International Airlines, Pakistan India, Pakistan Independence, Pakistan India Border, Pakistan India War, Pakistan Inbreeding, Pakistan Ipl, Pakistani Isi, Pakistan Iran, Pakistan India Relations, Pakistan Jokes, Pakistan Jersey, Pakistan Jobs, Pakistan Jit, Pakistan Jinnah, Pakistan Journal Of Medical Sciences, Pakistan Journal Of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Pakistan Journal Of Botany, Pakistan Jail, Pakistani Jewelry, Pakistan Karachi, Pakistan Knife, Pakistan Kid Dancing, Pakistan Kashmir, Pakistan Khan, Pakistan Karachi Time, Pakistan K2, Pakistan Killing, Pakistani Kush, Pakistan Karachi Weather, Pakistan Language, Pakistan Literacy Rate, Pakistan Leader, Pakistan Life Expectancy, Pakistan Location, Pakistan Local Time, Pakistan Latest News, Pakistan Landscape, Pakistan Lahore, Pakistan Landmarks, Pakistan Map, Pakistan Military, Pakistan Money, Pakistan Mulberry, Pakistan Mountains, Pakistan Mosque, Pakistani Music, Pakistani Men, Pakistan Middle East, Pakistan Major Cities, Pakistan News, Pakistan Newspaper, Pakistan Nuclear Weapons, Pakistan News Dawn, Pakistan News Media, Pakistan Navy, Pakistan National Animal, Pakistan News Live, Pakistan Names, Pakistan National Anthem, Pakistan On Map, Pakistan On World Map, Pakistan Official Language, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, Pakistan Origin Card, Pakistan Observer, Pakistan Outline, Pakistan Origin, Pakistan Oil, Pakistan On India, Pakistan Population, Pakistan President, Pakistan Prime Minister, Pakistan Provinces, Pakistan Population Density, Pakistan Post, Pakistan Politics, Pakistan Physical Features, Pakistan President List, Pakistan Punjab, Pakistan Qatar, Pakistan Quizlet, Pakistan Quotes, Pakistan Queen, Pakistan Quetta, Pakistan Quora, Pakistan Quality Of Life, Pakistan Quiz, Pakistan Quran, Pakistan Qaumi Tarana, Pakistan Religion, Pakistan Rupee To Usd, Pakistan River, Pakistan Rupee, Pakistan Russia, Pakistan Region, Pakistan Refugees, Pakistan Railways, Pakistan Rs To Usd, Pakistan Roster, Pakistan Shia Or Sunni, Pakistan Sports, Pakistan Size, Pakistan Stock Exchange, Pakistan Super League, Pakistan States, Pakistani Song, Pakistan Swords, Pakistan Sharia Law, Pakistan Ssg, Pakistan Time, Pakistan Time Now, Pakistan Time Zone, Pakistan Tax, Pakistan Tourism, Pakistan Taliban, Pakistan Talk, Pakistan Type Of Government, Pakistan Team, Pakistan Terrorist, Pakistan Us Relations, Pakistan Urdu Newspapers, Pakistan Unemployment Rate, Pakistan Urdu News, Pakistan Us Embassy, Pakistan University, Pakistan Upcoming Matches, Pakistan Used To Be India, Pakistan Un, Pakistan Urban Population, Pakistan Vs India, Pakistan Vs West Indies, Pakistan Visa, Pakistan Vs India Live Streaming, Pakistan Valley Kush, Pakistan Vs India War, Pakistan Vs India Cricket, Pakistan Vs West Indies Highlights, Pakistan Vs, Pakistan Vs West Indies Cricinfo, Pakistan Women, Pakistan Weather, Pakistan Wiki, Pakistan War, Pakistan World Map, Pakistan West Indies, Pakistani Wedding, Pakistan Was Established As A, Pakistan Water Crisis, Pakistan World Cup, Pakistan Cricket, Pakistan Capital, Pakistan Consulate Chicago, Pakistan Cricket Team, Pakistan Currency, Pakistan Xinjiang, Pakistan Cities, Pakistan Cricket Board, Pakistan Climate, Pakistan Country Code, Pakistan Youtube, Pakistan Year Of Independence, Pakistan Youtube Sites, Pakistan Yemen, Pakistan Youtube Unblock, Pakistan Youth, Pakistan Youtube Bgp, Pakistan Yahoo, Pakistan Year, Pakistan Youth Unemployment, Pakistan Zindabad, Pakistan Zip Code, Pakistan Zia, Pakistan Zoo, Pakistan Zia Ul Haq Death, Pakistan Zakat, Pakistan Zika, Pakistan Zindabad Song, Pakistan Zayn Malik, Pakistan Zindabad Documentary, Nuclear War Now, Nuclear War Movies, Nuclear War Simulation, Nuclear War Definition, Nuclear War Game, Nuclear War Simulation Game, Nuclear War News, Nuclear War North Korea, Nuclear War Clock, Nuclear War Map, Nuclear War Aftermath, Nuclear War Alert, Nuclear War Art, Nuclear War Alarm, Nuclear War Articles, Nuclear War Anxiety, Nuclear War Animation, Nuclear War Agreement, Nuclear War Against North Korea, Nuclear War App, Nuclear War Board Game, Nuclear War Books, Nuclear War Bunker, Nuclear War Between Us And Russia, Nuclear War Bible, Nuclear War Blast Radius, Nuclear War Background, Nuclear War Bomb, Nuclear War Bbc, Nuclear War Between North Korea And America, Nuclear War Clock, Nuclear War Card Game, Nuclear War Coming, Nuclear War Close Calls, Nuclear War Cold War, Nuclear War Chances, Nuclear War Cartoon, Nuclear War Consequences, Nuclear War Cnn, Nuclear War China, Nuclear War Definition, Nuclear War Documentary, Nuclear War Donald Trump, Nuclear War Dream, Nuclear War Damage, Nuclear War Date, Nuclear War Drills, Nuclear War During The Cold War, Nuclear War Drills In Schools, Nuclear War Declared, Nuclear War Effects, Nuclear War Emergency Kit, Nuclear War End Of The World, Nuclear War End Times, Nuclear War Extinction, Nuclear War Essay, Nuclear War Expert, Nuclear War Effects On Environment, Nuclear War Eas, Nuclear War Example, Nuclear War Fallout Map, Nuclear War Facts, Nuclear War Films, Nuclear War Fallout, Nuclear War Fiction, Nuclear War Fear, Nuclear War From Space, Nuclear War Flash Game, Nuclear Warfare, Nuclear War Fallout Shelter, Nuclear War Game, Nuclear War Game Online, Nuclear War Gas Mask, Nuclear War Gif, Nuclear War Gear, Nuclear War Games Unblocked, Nuclear War Game Theory, Nuclear War Global Warming, Nuclear War Games Pc, Nuclear War Game Movie, Nuclear Warhead, Nuclear War History, Nuclear War Hoax, Nuclear War Hawaii, Nuclear War Happening, Nuclear War Happening Soon, Nuclear War Human Extinction, Nuclear Warheads By Country, Nuclear War Has Become Thinkable Again, Nuclear Warhead Count, Nuclear War Imminent, Nuclear War In The Bible, Nuclear War Inevitable, Nuclear War Is Coming, Nuclear War In North Korea, Nuclear War In 2017, Nuclear War In Chicago, Nuclear War In Korea, Nuclear War Images, Nuclear War In America, Nuclear War Japan, Nuclear War Jokes, Nuclear War John F Kennedy, Nuclear War Jerwood, Nuclear War Justification, Nuclear War Jimmy Cliff, Nuclear War Jazz, Nuclear War June 2015, Nuclear War Justified, Nuclear War Jericho, Nuclear War Korea, Nuclear War Kit, Nuclear War Kennedy, Nuclear War Korean Peninsula, Nuclear War Korea Us, Nuclear War Kim Jong Un, Nuclear War Killed All Life On Mars, Nuclear War Kickstarter, Nuclear War Killed The Dinosaurs, Nuclear War Korea 2017, Nuclear War Likely, Nuclear War Likelihood 2017, Nuclear War Lyrics, Nuclear War Los Angeles, Nuclear War Lyrics Sun Ra, Nuclear War Laws, Nuclear War Level, Nuclear War Lesson Plan, Nuclear War Looming, Nuclear War Leads To Extinction, Nuclear War Movies, Nuclear War Map, Nuclear War Meme, Nuclear War Meaning, Nuclear War May 13, Nuclear War Map Usa, Nuclear War Movie 1980s, Nuclear War Mask, Nuclear War May 13 2017, Nuclear War Mars, Nuclear War Now, Nuclear War North Korea, Nuclear War News, Nuclear War Now Forum, Nuclear War Now Bandcamp, Nuclear War North Korea Scenario, Nuclear War Now Store, Nuclear War Novels, Nuclear War News 2017, Nuclear War Not Going To Happen, Nuclear War On Mars, Nuclear War Outcome, Nuclear War Odds, Nuclear War On Us, Nuclear War Online Game, Nuclear War On The Horizon, Nuclear War On May 13, Nuclear War On United States, Nuclear War On Us Soil, Nuclear War Over Syria, Nuclear War Predictions, Nuclear War Possibility, Nuclear War Prank, Nuclear War Prophecy, Nuclear War Protection, Nuclear War Political Cartoons, Nuclear War Prep, Nuclear War Pictures, Nuclear War Plans, Nuclear War Podcast, Nuclear War Quotes, Nuclear War Quizlet, Nuclear War Quora, Nuclear War Questions, Nuclear War Quiz, Nuclear War Question Time, Nuclear War Quran, Nuclear War Queen Speech, Einstein Nuclear War Quote, Mao Nuclear War Quote, Nuclear War Russia, Nuclear War Reddit, Nuclear War Risk, Nuclear War Results, Nuclear War Russia Us, Nuclear War Race, Nuclear War Radiation, Nuclear War Reality, Nuclear War Radius, Nuclear War Rules, Nuclear War Simulation, Nuclear War Simulation Game, Nuclear War Survival Skills, Nuclear War Survival, Nuclear War Survival Kit, Nuclear War Sun Ra, Nuclear War Strategy Game, Nuclear War Survival Guide, Nuclear War Scenarios, Nuclear War Siren, Nuclear War Threat, Nuclear War Trump, Nuclear War Targets, Nuclear War Today, Nuclear War Treaty, Nuclear War Timeline, Nuclear War Targets In Us, Nuclear War There Goes My Career, Nuclear War Terms, Nuclear War Targets In Usa, Nuclear War Usa, Nuclear War Us, Nuclear War Update, Nuclear War Us Targets, Nuclear War Us Map, Nuclear War Usa Map, Nuclear War Us Russia, Nuclear War Upon Us, Nuclear War Under Trump, Nuclear War Uk, Nuclear War Video Game, Nuclear War Video, Nuclear War Vice, Nuclear War V14, Nuclear War Vs Thermonuclear War, Nuclear War Vice News, Nuclear War Victims, Nuclear War Vietnam, Nuclear War Video Clips, Nuclear War Vs Biological War, Nuclear War With Russia, Nuclear War With Korea, Nuclear War Warning, Nuclear War With China, Nuclear War With North Korea, Nuclear War Warning System, Nuclear War Will Not Happen, Nuclear War Wiki, Nuclear War What To Do, Nuclear War Will End The World, Nuclear War Games Xbox 360, Xkcd Nuclear War, Nuclear War Youtube, Nuclear War Yo La Tengo, Nuclear War Yahoo Answers, Nuclear War Year, Nuclear War Yemen, Nuclear War Yes No, Nuclear War Yo La Tengo Lyrics, Nuclear War Yo La, Nuclear War Movies Youtube, Ancient Nuclear War Youtube, Nuclear War Zone, Nuclear War Zombies, Nuclear War Zero Sum Game, Nuclear War Safe Zones, Nuclear War New Zealand, Nuclear War Twilight Zone, Nuclear War Strike Zones, Nuclear War Blast Zones, Nuclear War Free Zone, Nuclear War Safe Zones In Us
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Terrorism Threat Handbook
Page Count: 101 pages Date: 2004 Restriction: For Official Use Only Originating Organization: Interagency OPSEC Support Staff (IOSS) File Type: pdf File Size: 25,784,158 bytes File Hash (SHA-256): B38555BE02E1693D27A26B385FF5EC6A00864423BE912CE68A8A3446D370CF7B
This document presents an overview of terrorism threats and terrorist methodologies to assist OPSEC managers in evaluating the threat and managing terrorist risks to organizations and personnel. As in other areas of security and intelligence concern, proper application of the OPSEC process in evaluating threat and risk1 helps an organization to make informed decisions on conducting its mission-critical activities without becoming unduly vulnerable.
OPSEC and the Terrorism Threat
Prior to 11 September 2001, for most Americans terrorism was an abstract concept that usually showed up only in television evening-news stories about violent events in distant lands. Almost without exception, terrorist acts were the work of unfamiliar groups operating outside the United States. The attacks of 11 September 2001, however, have served notice to all Americans that terrorism is an immediate threat. Operations Security (OPSEC can play an important role in mitigating the vulnerability of an organization and its personnel to that threat and many others. Threat and risk assessments, which are key decision support tools to establish and prioritize security program requirements for any organization or activity, are absolutely critical to defending against terrorism today. This means that it now is more vital than ever that OPSEC managers understand and communicate to their organizations what the current threats are and what form the risks associated with those threats are most likely to take place.
North Korea News, North Korea Map, North Korea War, North Korea Flag, North Korea President, North Korea Population, North Korea Allies, North Korea Military, North Korea Nuclear Test, North Korea At Night, North Korea Allies, North Korea At Night, North Korea And Us, North Korea Air Force, North Korea And China, North Korean Army, North Korea Attack, North Korea And South Korea, North Korea And Russia, North Korea And Trump, North Korea Bomb, North Korea Border, North Korea Breaking News, North Korea Bbc, North Korea Bombing Us, North Korea Book, North Korea Basketball, North Korea Best Korea, North Korea Beaches, North Korea Bomb Test, North Korea China, North Korea Cnn, North Korean Currency, North Korea Climate, North Korea Current Events, North Korea Crisis, North Korea Conflict, North Korea City, North Korea China Border, North Korean Culture, North Korea Dictator, North Korea Documentary, North Korea Declares War 2017, North Korea Dmz, North Korea Definition, North Korea Declares War Cnn, North Korea Daily Life, North Korea Death Camps, North Korea Declared War On Usa, North Korean Defector, North Korea Emp, North Korean Economy, North Korea Evacuation, North Korea Enemies, North Korea Education, North Korea Execution, North Korea Economic System, North Korea Election, North Korean Embassy, North Korea Electricity, North Korea Flag, North Korea Facts, North Korea From Space, North Korea Fires Missile, North Korea Fox News, North Korea Food, North Korea Failed Missile, North Korea Fake City, North Korean Famine, North Korea Flights, North Korea Gdp, North Korean Government, North Korea Google Maps, North Korea Geography, North Korea Google Earth, North Korea Gif, North Korea Genocide, North Korea Gdp 2016, North Korean Government Type, North Korean Girls, North Korea History, North Korea Hawaii, North Korea Hotel, North Korea Holidays, North Korea Haircut, North Korea Hard Labor, North Korean Human Rights, North Korea Hetalia, North Korea Hostages, North Korea Hacking, North Korea Icbm, North Korea Internet, North Korea Images, North Korea Is Best Korea, North Korea In World Map, North Korea Imports, North Korea In The News, North Korea Issues, North Korea Invaded South Korea, North Korea Iran, North Korea Japan, North Korea Jokes, North Korea Juche, North Korea Japan Relations, North Korea Jobs, North Korea Jail, North Korea Jets, North Korea Japan Missile, North Korea James Franco, North Korea Japan War, North Korea Kim, North Korea Kim Jong Un, North Korea Kim Jong Il, North Korea Kim Jong Un Wife, North Korea Kim Jong Un Brother, North Korea Kidnapping, North Korea Killings, North Korea Korean War, North Korea Kpop, North Korea Kn-08, North Korean Leader, North Korea Life, North Korea Latest, North Korea Life Expectancy, North Korea Literacy Rate, North Korean Laws, North Korea Language, North Korea Latest News Today, North Korea Latest News, North Korea Location, North Korea Map, North Korea Missile, North Korea Military, North Korea Memes, North Korea Missile Test, North Korea Missile Range, North Korea Missile Launch, North Korea Movie, North Korean Military Size, North Korea March, North Korea News, North Korea Nuclear Test, North Korea Nuclear, North Korea News Update, North Korea Nuclear Threat, North Korea Nukes, North Korea News Today, North Korean Navy, North Korea Natural Resources, North Korea News Cnn, North Korea On Map, North Korea Olympics, North Korea On World Map, North Korea Official Name, North Korea Options, North Korea Oil, North Korea Official Website, North Korea Obama, North Korea Oppression, North Korea On Trump, North Korea President, North Korea Population, North Korea Population 2017, North Korea Pictures, North Korea Poverty, North Korea Parade, North Korea President Age, North Korean Propaganda, North Korea Prison, North Korean People, North Korea Quotes, North Korea Quora, North Korea Quality Of Life, North Korea Questions, North Korea Quizlet, North Korea Quiz, North Korea Quiet, North Korea Quick Facts, North Korea Quantum Encryption, North Korea Quantum, North Korea Russia, North Korea Religion, North Korea Rules, North Korea Reddit, North Korea Ready For War, North Korea Russia Border, North Korea Resources, North Korean Ruler, North Korea Recent News, North Korea Russia Relations, North Korea Size, North Korea Satellite, North Korea Sanctions, North Korea South Korea, North Korea Square Miles, North Korea Strike, North Korea Situation, North Korea Seattle, North Korea Starvation, North Korean Submarine, North Korea Trump, North Korea Tourism, North Korea Today, North Korea Twitter, North Korea Threats, North Korea Time, North Korea Test, North Korea Tensions, North Korea Travel, North Korea The Great Illusion, North Korea Update, North Korea Us, North Korea Us War, North Korea United States, North Korea Us News, North Korea Un, North Korea Unicorn, North Korea Unemployment Rate, North Korea Usa News, North Korea University, North Korea Vs Usa, North Korea Video, North Korea Vs South Korea, North Korea Vs Us, North Korea Vacation, North Korea Vs Usa War, North Korea Vice, North Korea Vs China, North Korea Vs The World, North Korea Vs United States, North Korea War, North Korea Wiki, North Korea Website, North Korea Weapons, North Korea World Map, North Korea Ww3, North Korea Weather, North Korea Warning, North Korea World War 3, North Korea War 2017, North Korea Xi, North Korea Xi Jinping, North Korea X Reader, North Korea X South Korea Hetalia, North Korea X Reader Lemon, North Korea Xenophobia, North Korea Xi Trump, North Korea Xinhua, North Korea China, North Korea X America Hetalia, North Korea Youtube, North Korea Year, North Korea Yahoo, North Korea Youtube 2017, North Korea Yonhap, North Korea Yalu River, North Korea Youtube Video, North Korea Youth, North Korea Youtube Channel, North Korea Yeonmi Park, North Korea Zoo, North Korea Zip Code, North Korea Zone, North Korea Zombies, North Korea Zero Hedge, North Korea Zimbabwe, North Korea Zionist, North Korea Zionism, North Korea Zombie Apocalypse, North Korean Zoo Dog,
United Nations Security Council, United Nations Security Council Members, United Nations Security Council Resolutions, United Nations Security Council Permanent Members, United Nations Security Council Sanctions List, United Nations Security Council Reform, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, United Nations Security Council History, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, United Nations Security Council Apush, United Nations Security Council And India, United Nations Security Council Address, United Nations Security Council Agenda, United Nations Security Council Act 1947, United Nations Security Council Arms Embargoes, United Nations Security Council Australia, United Nations Security Council Act 1948, United Nations Security Council And The Iraq War, United Nations Security Council Achievements, United Nations Security Council Burundi, United Nations Security Council Blacklist, United Nations Security Council Building, United Nations Security Council Boko Haram, United Nations Security Council Bosnia, United Nations Security Council Brazil, United Nations Security Council Benefits, United Nations Security Council Background, United Nations Security Council Book, United Nations Security Council Big 5, United Nations Security Council Contact, United Nations Security Council Committee, United Nations Security Council Canada, United Nations Security Council Charter, United Nations Security Council Chapter 7, United Nations Security Council Cold War, United Nations Security Council Criticism, United Nations Security Council Charter Pdf, United Nations Security Council Counter Terrorism Committee, United Nations Security Council Chairman, United Nations Security Council Definition, United Nations Security Council Documents, United Nations Security Council Definition Of Terrorism, United Nations Security Council During Cold War, United Nations Security Council Decisions, United Nations Security Council Decision Making Process, United Nations Security Council Draft Resolutions, United Nations Security Council Debates, United Nations Security Council Documentary, United Nations Security Council Def, United Nations Security Council Election 2015, United Nations Security Council Expansion, United Nations Security Council Election 2014, United Nations Security Council Elections, United Nations Security Council Email Address, United Nations Security Council Embargoes, United Nations Security Council Essay, United Nations Security Council Election 2016, United Nations Security Council Effectiveness, United Nations Security Council Examines North Korea\u2019s Human Rights, United Nations Security Council Failures, United Nations Security Council Functions, United Nations Security Council Facebook, United Nations Security Council France, United Nations Security Council Flag, United Nations Security Council Facts, United Nations Security Council Formation, United Nations Security Council Flaws, United Nations Security Council Five Permanent Members, United Nations Security Council Foreign Fighters, United Nations Security Council General Assembly, United Nations Security Council Germany, United Nations Security Council Gulf War, United Nations Security Council Goals, United Nations Security Council Genocide, United Nations Security Council General Assembly Apush, United Nations Security Council Secretary General, United Nations Security Council Rwanda Genocide, United Nations Security Council Ap Human Geography, G4 United Nations Security Council, United Nations Security Council History, United Nations Security Council Headquarters, United Nations Security Council Has 5 Permanent Members With The Right Of Veto, United Nations Security Council Head, United Nations Security Council Human Rights, United Nations Security Council History Pdf, United Nations Security Council Halo, United Nations Security Council Has 5 Permanent Members, United Nations Security Council Hq, United Nations Security Council Head Office, United Nations Security Council India, United Nations Security Council Isis, United Nations Security Council Internship, United Nations Security Council Iran, United Nations Security Council Iraq, United Nations Security Council Iran Nuclear Program, United Nations Security Council Images, United Nations Security Council Israel, United Nations Security Council Issues, United Nations Security Council Iran Sanctions, United Nations Security Council Jobs, United Nations Security Council Japan, United Nations Security Council Jordan, Jpo United Nations Security Council, United Nations Security Council Resolution June 25 1950, United Nations Security Council Resolution 84 July 7 1950, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 10 June 1999, United Nations Security Council Korean War, United Nations Security Council Kosovo, United Nations Security Council Kenya, United Nations Security Council North Korea, United Nations Security Council Resolution Korean War, United Nations Security Council United Kingdom, United Nations Security Council Resolution On Kashmir, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 Kosovo, United Nations Security Council Examines North Korea\u2019s Human Rights, United Nations Security Council Sanctions Against North Korea, United Nations Security Council Logo, United Nations Security Council Live, United Nations Security Council List, United Nations Security Council Latest News, United Nations Security Council Libya, United Nations Security Council Location, United Nations Security Council List (Un 1267), United Nations Security Council Lithuania, United Nations Security Council Limitations, United Nations Security Council Leader, United Nations Security Council Members, United Nations Security Council Meeting, United Nations Security Council Members India, United Nations Security Council Mural, United Nations Security Council Meeting Today, United Nations Security Council Malaysia, United Nations Security Council Mandate, United Nations Security Council Meeting Schedule, United Nations Security Council Mailing Address, United Nations Security Council Members 1945, United Nations Security Council Non Permanent Members, United Nations Security Council News, United Nations Security Council North Korea, United Nations Security Council New Zealand, United Nations Security Council New York, United Nations Security Council New Members, United Nations Security Council Nigeria, United Nations Security Council Nuclear Weapons, United Nations Security Council In Hindi, United Nations Security Council In The Age Of Human Rights, United Nations Security Council Online, United Nations Security Council Official Records, United Nations Security Council Official Website, United Nations Security Council Office, United Nations Security Council On Syria, United Nations Security Council Obama, United Nations Security Council On Isis, United Nations Security Council Objectives, United Nations Security Council On Ukraine, United Nations Security Council On Burundi, United Nations Security Council Permanent Members, United Nations Security Council President, United Nations Security Council Pdf, United Nations Security Council Palestine, United Nations Security Council Painting, United Nations Security Council Purpose, United Nations Security Council Problems, United Nations Security Council Ppt, United Nations Security Council Press Releases, United Nations Security Council Pictures, United Nations Security Council Quizlet, United Nations Security Council Quotes, United Nations Security Council Quora, United Nations Security Council Apush Quizlet, United Nations Security Council Resolutions, United Nations Security Council Reform, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540, United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267, United Nations Security Council Resolution 2178, United Nations Security Council Sanctions List, United Nations Security Council Sanctions, United Nations Security Council Syria, United Nations Security Council Structure, United Nations Security Council Sanctions Against Iran, United Nations Security Council Schedule, United Nations Security Council Subsidiary Organs, United Nations Security Council Secretary General, United Nations Security Council Symbol, United Nations Security Council S 1267 Committee, United Nations Security Council Twitter, United Nations Security Council Terrorism List, United Nations Security Council Targeted Sanctions Lists, United Nations Security Council Temporary Members, United Nations Security Council Terrorism, United Nations Security Council Turkey, United Nations Security Council Tagalog, United Nations Security Council Topics, United Nations Security Council Today, United Nations Security Council Transcript, United Nations Security Council (Unsc), United Nations Security Council (Unsc) Sanctions, United Nations Security Council Ukraine, United Nations Security Council (Unsc) Sanctions List, United Nations Security Council Ukraine Live, United Nations Security Council Usa, United Nations Security Council Use Of Force, United Nations Security Council Resolution (Unscr) 1325, United Nations Security Council List (Un 1267), United Nations Security Council Resolution (Unscr) 1970 26 February 2011, United Nations Security Council Veto Power, United Nations Security Council Veto List, United Nations Security Council Vote On Palestine, United Nations Security Council Video, United Nations Security Council Voting, United Nations Security Council Veto Reform, United Nations Security Council Vacancies, United Nations Security Council Veto Syria, United Nations Security Council Veto Record, United Nations Security Council Vietnam War, United Nations Security Council Wiki, United Nations Security Council Website, United Nations Security Council Ww2, United Nations Security Council Webcast, United Nations Security Council Working Methods, The United Nations Security Council Was Quizlet, The United Nations Security Council Was Made Up Of, United Nations Security Council Korean War, United Nations Security Council Iraq War, United Nations Security Council And War, United Nations Security Council Yemen, United Nations Security Council Youtube, United Nations Security Council Yahoo Answers, United Nations Security Council New York, United Nations Security Council Meeting New York, United Nations Security Council New Zealand, Iran News, Iran Hostage Crisis, Iran Contra Affair, Iran Flag, Iran Iraq War, Iran Castillo, Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran Map, Iran Sanctions, Iran President, Iran Air, Iran Allies, Iran Air Flight 655, Iran And Iraq, Iran Air Force, Iran Army, Iran And Russia, Iran Ayatollah, Iran And Israel, Iran And North Korea, Iran Barkley, Iran Before 1979, Iran Brown, Iran Birth Rate, Iran Bennett, Iran Boeing, Iran Beaches, Iran Beliefs, Iran Bonyads, Iran Brain Drain, Iran Contra Affair, Iran Castillo, Iran Capital, Iran Contra Affair Apush, Iran Currency, Iran Culture, Iran Contra Hearings, Iran Continent, Iran Cities, Iran Contra Affair Summary, Iran Deal, Iran Definition, Iran Deal Obama, Iran Demographics, Iran Dictator, Iran Death Penalty, Iran Democracy, Iran During The Cold War, Iran Desert, Iran Drone, Iran Election, Iran Economy, Iran Eory, Iran Embassy, Iran Etf, Iran Ethnic Groups, Iran Exports, Iran Embassy Usa, Iran Eisenhower, Iran Execution, Iran Flag, Iran Facts, Iran Food, Iran Flag Emoji, Iran Football, Iran Fighter Jet, Iranefarda, Iran Foreign Policy, Iran Foreign Minister, Iran Flag Meaning, Iran Government, Iran Gdp, Iran Gdp Per Capita, Iran Geography, Iran Government Type, Iran Green Revolution, Iran Guardian Council, Iran Gdp 2016, Iran Gay, Iran Gross Domestic Product, Iran Hostage Crisis, Iran Hostage Crisis Apush, Iran History, Iran Hostage Crisis President, Iran Hostage Crisis Definition, Iran Hostage Movie, Iran Hostage Crisis Timeline, Iran Human Rights, Iran Hostage Crisis Video, Iran Holidays, Iran Iraq War, Iran In The 70s, Iran Israel, Iran Isis, Iran In Syria, Iran Iraq Map, Iran Iraq War Causes, Iran India, Iran Iraq War Timeline, Iran Is Shia, Iran Jokes, Iran Jcpoa, Iran Judicial Branch, Iran Jewish Population, Iran Jet, Iran Jobs, Iran Jet Fighter, Iran Jersey, Iran Jewelry, Iran Japan, Iran Khodro, Iran King, Iran Kedisi, Iran Khamenei, Iran Kurds, Iran Khomeini, Iran Korea, Iran Kuwait, Iran Kidney Market, Imran Khan, Iran Launches Satellite, Iran Language, Iran Leader, Iran Live Tv, Iran Location, Iran Local Time, Iran Literacy Rate, Iran Life Expectancy, Iran Landscape, Iran Leadership, Iran Map, Iran Military, Iran Missile Test, Iran Missile, Iran Money, Iran Music, Iran Military Strength, Iran Military News, Iran Mountains, Iron Man, Iran News, Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran Nuclear Weapons, Iran Nuclear, Iran News Today, Iran Navy, Iran National Football Team, Iran North Korea, Iran Natural Resources, Iran Newspaper, Iran On Map, Iran Oil, Iran Oil Production, Iran Official Language, Iran On World Map, Iran Opec, Iran Official Name, Iran Obama Deal, Iran Outline, Iran Oil Exports, Iran President, Iran Population, Iran People, Iranproud, Iran Pronunciation, Iran Presidential Election, Iran Prime Minister, Iran Persia, Iran Pictures, Iran Politics, Iran Qatar, Iran Qatar Relations, Iran Quizlet, Iran Quds Force, Iran Queen, Iran Quotes, Iran Qom, Iran Quora, Iran Qatar Pipeline, Iran Qaher 313, Iran Religion, Iran Revolution, Iran Russia, Iran Rial To Usd, Iran Rial, Iran Resources, Iran Race, Iran Restaurant, Iran Refugees, Iran Ruler, Iran Sanctions, Iran Satellite, Iran Supreme Leader, Iran Sunni Or Shia, Iran Syria, Iran So Far, Iran Shah, Iran Saudi Arabia, Iran Shia, Iran Soccer, Iran Time, Iran Tehran, Iran Today, Iran Tv, Iran Trump, Iran Tourism, Iran Timeline, Iran Type Of Government, Iran Travel, Iran Travel Ban, Iran Uk, Iran Us Relations, Iran Under The Shah, Iran Unemployment Rate, Iran Us News, Iran University Of Science And Technology, Iran Us Embassy, Iran Uzbekistan, Iran Us Nuclear Deal, Iran Us Dollar, Iran Vs Iraq, Iran Vs Usa, Iran Volleyball, Iran Visa, Iran Vs Israel, Iran Vs Saudi Arabia, Iran Vice President, Iran Vs Isis, Iran Volleyball Team, Iran Vote, Iran War, Iran Women, Iran Wiki, Iran Weather, Iran World Map, Iran Ww2, Iran World Cup, Iran Wrestling, Iran Wikitravel, Iran White Revolution, Iran Contra Affair, Iran Castillo, Iran Capital, Iran Contra Affair Apush, Iran X, Iran Currency, Iran Culture, Iran Contra Hearings, Iran Continent, Iran Cities, Iran Yemen, Iran Youtube, Iran Youth, Iran Year, Iran Yellow Pages, Iran Yazd, Iran Year Converter, Iran Young Population, Iran Youth Population, Iran Yahoo News, Iran Zip Code, Iran Zoroastrian, Iran Zamin, Iran Zabol, Iran Zarif, Iran Zagros Mountains, Iran Zamin Bank, Iran Zoo, Iran Zumba, Iran Zamin Tv, Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran Nuclear Weapons, Iran Nuclear Program, Iran Nuclear Treaty, Iran Nuclear Deal Trump, Iran Nuclear Deal Obama, Iran Nuclear Deal 2015, Iran Nuclear Virus, Iran Nuclear Deal Explained, Iran Nuclear Deal Date, Iran Nuclear Agreement, Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act Of 2015, Iran Nuclear Arms Deal, Iran Nuclear Agreement 2015, Iran Nuclear Arsenal, Iran Nuclear Agreement Definition, Iran Nuclear Ambitions, Iran Nuclear Agreement Summary, Iran Nuclear Agreement Meets With Public Skepticism, Iran Nuclear Bomb, Iran Nuclear Bug, Iran Nuclear Ban, Iran Nuclear Bomb Threat, Iran Nuclear Bomb Test, Iran Nuclear Breakout Time, Iran Nuclear Bbc, Iran Nuclear Bomb Capability, Iran Nuclear Bill, Iran Nuclear Bad Deal, Iran Nuclear Crisis, Iran Nuclear Capability, Iran Nuclear Centrifuges, Iran Nuclear Compliance, Iran Nuclear Crisis Timeline, Iran Nuclear Crisis Summary, Iran Nuclear Capacity, Iran Nuclear Country, Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran Nuclear Deal Trump, Iran Nuclear Deal Obama, Iran Nuclear Deal 2015, Iran Nuclear Deal Explained, Iran Nuclear Deal Definition, Iran Nuclear Deal Date, Iran Nuclear Deal Timeline, Iran Nuclear Deal Facts, Iran Nuclear Deal Political Cartoon, Iran Nuclear Energy, Iran Nuclear Enrichment, Iran Nuclear Explosion, Iran Nuclear Embargo, Iran Nuclear Emp, Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran Nuclear Extension, Iran Nuclear Explained, Iran Nuclear Experts, Iran Nuclear Energy Conflict, Iran Nuclear Facilities, Iran Nuclear Facts, Iran Nuclear Facility Virus, Iran Nuclear Facilities Map, Iran Nuclear Facilities Underground, Iran Nuclear Framework, Iran Nuclear Framework Agreement, Iran Nuclear Fact Sheet, Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran Nuclear Fuel, Iran Nuclear Geneva, Iran Nuclear Guardian, Iran Nuclear Graph, Iran Nuclear Game Theory, Iran Nuclear Gcc, Iran Nuclear Goals, Iran Nuclear Google Maps, Iran Getting Nuclear Weapons, Iran Going Nuclear, Iran Gets Nuclear Deal, Iran Nuclear Hack, Iran Nuclear History, Iran Nuclear Hack Documentary, Iran Nuclear History Timeline, Iran Nuclear Hack Ac Dc, Iran’s Nuclear History From The 1950s To 2005, Iran Nuclear Hearing, Iran Nuclear Holocaust, Iran Nuclear Hedging, Iran Nuclear Hoax, Iran Nuclear Inspections, Iran Nuclear Issue, Iran Nuclear Inspections 2017, Iran Nuclear Inspectors, Iran Nuclear Intentions And Capabilities, Iran Nuclear Israel, Iran Nuclear Icbm, Iran Nuclear Issue Summary, Iran Nuclear Jcpoa, Iran Nuclear Jokes, Iran Nuclear Joint Plan Of Action, Iran Nuclear June, Iran Nuclear June 30, Iran Nuclear Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action, Iran Nuclear Joint Statement, Iran Nuclear Japan, Iran Nuclear January, Nuclear Iran Jeremy Bernstein, Iran Nuclear Kerry, Iran Nuclear Khamenei, Iran Nuclear Kazakhstan, Iran Nuclear Korea, Iran Nuclear Key Points, Iran’s Key Nuclear Sites, Iran Korea Nuclear Weapons, Iran Nuclear Deal Key Points, Iran Nuclear Scientist Killed, Iran Nuclear Deal Kerry, Iran Nuclear Launch, Iran Nuclear Latest News, Iran Nuclear Lausanne, Iran Nuclear Letter, Iran Nuclear Locations, Iran Nuclear Live, Iran Nuclear Lies, Iran Nuclear Law, Iran Nuclear Legislation, Iran Nuclear Laptop, Iran Nuclear Missiles, Iran Nuclear Missile Test, Iran Nuclear Meltdown, Iran Nuclear Movie, Iran Nuclear Monitoring, Iran Nuclear Missile Program, Iran Nuclear Meeting, Iran Nuclear Material, Iran Nuclear Map, Iran Nuclear Mountain, Iran Nuclear News, Iran Nuclear Negotiations, Iran Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, Iran Nuclear North Korea, Iran Nuclear Negotiations Timeline, Iran Nuclear Negotiations History, Iran Nuclear News Today, Iran Nuclear New York Times, Iran Nuclear Negotiation Team, Iran Nuclear Obama, Iran Nuclear Oil, Iran Nuclear Oil Prices, Iran Nuclear Oman, Iran Nuclear Option, Iran On Nuclear Deal, Iran On Nuclear Weapons, Iran On Nuclear Edge, Iran Obtaining Nuclear Weapons, Iran On Nuclear Program, Iran Nuclear Program, Iran Nuclear Power, Iran Nuclear Proliferation, Iran Nuclear Program Timeline, Iran Nuclear Power Plant, Iran Nuclear Program Virus, Iran Nuclear Plant, Iran Nuclear Policy, Iran Nuclear Program Obama, Iran Nuclear Program Worm, Iran Nuclear Quotes, Iran Nuclear Quora, Iran Nuclear Questions, Iran Nuclear Quest, Iran Qom Nuclear Site, Iran Nuclear Deal Quora, Iran Nuclear Deal Quotes, Iran Nuclear Deal Questions, Iran Nuclear Deal Quick Facts, Iran Nuclear Deal Q&a, Iran Nuclear Reactor, Iran Nuclear Reactor Hacked, Iran Nuclear Review Act, Iran Nuclear Review Act Of 2015, Iran Nuclear Russia, Iran Nuclear Range, Iran Nuclear Research, Iran Nuclear Regulatory Authority, Iran Nuclear Rubik’s Cube, Iran Nuclear Sanctions, Iran Nuclear Sites, Iran Nuclear Submarine, Iran Nuclear Scientist, Iran Nuclear Sanctions Timeline, Iran Nuclear Situation, Iran Nuclear Sites Map, Iran Nuclear Stockpile, Iran Nuclear State, Iran Nuclear Status, Iran Nuclear Treaty, Iran Nuclear Treaty Apush, Iran Nuclear Threat, Iran Nuclear Test, Iran Nuclear Talks, Iran Nuclear Timeline, Iran Nuclear Treaty Debate, Iran Nuclear Treaty 2015, Iran Nuclear Trump, Iran Nuclear Technology, Iran Nuclear Update, Iran Nuclear Us, Iran Nuclear Un, Iran Nuclear Underground Bunkers, Iran Nuclear Underground, Iran Nuclear Us Congress, Iran Nuclear Uranium, Iran Nuclear Usb, Iran Nuclear Uranium Enrichment, Iran Nuclear United States, Iran Nuclear Virus, Iran Nuclear Vote, Iran Nuclear Vienna, Iran Nuclear Vote Count, Iran Nuclear Video, Iran Nuclear Violations, Iran Nuclear Vote Date, Iran Nuclear Verification, Iran Nuclear Virus Ac\/dc, Iran Nuclear Veto, Iran Nuclear Weapons, Iran Nuclear Weapons Program, Iran Nuclear War, Iran Nuclear Weapons Threat, Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal, Iran Nuclear Worm, Iran Nuclear Weapons 2017, Iran Nuclear Weapons Test, Iran Nuclear Weapons Timeline, Iran Nuclear Weapons Treaty, Iran Nuclear Youtube, Iran Nuclear Yahoo Answers, Youtube With Nuclear Iran, Iran Nuclear Yahoo, Iran Nuclear Yemen, Iran Nuclear Deal Youtube, Iran Nuclear Deal Yahoo Answers, Iran Nuclear New York Times, Iran Nuclear Deal Yahoo, Iran Nuclear Program Youtube, Iran Nuclear Zarif, Iran Nuclear Deal Zarif, Iran Nuclear Deal Zucker, Iran Nuclear Free Zone, Iran Nuclear Weapons Free Zone
Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Service, Secret Garden, Secret World Legends, Secret Flying, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Agent Man, Secret Admirer, Secret Aardvark, Secret Agent, Secret Annex, Secret And Lies, Secret Agent Man Song, Secret App, Secret Asian Man, Secret Agent Man Lyrics, Secretbuilders, Secret Book, Secret Beach Kauai, Secret Beach, Secret Ballot, Secret Box, Secret Beach Maui, Secret Bay Dominica, Secret Base, Secret Band, Secret Circle, Secret Church, Secret Caverns, Secret Classroom Superpowers, Secret Codes, Secret Clinical Strength, Secret Clearance, Secret Circle Cast, Secret Conversations Facebook, Secret Cameras, Secret Deodorant, Secret Definition, Secret Diary Of A Call Girl, Secret Door, Secret Deodorant Coupons, Secret Diary, Secret Deodorant Commercial, Secret Decoder Ring, Secret Daughter, Secret Door Lyrics, Secret Empire, Secret Extensions, Secret Escapes, Secret Empire #1, Secret Empire Reading Order, Secret Entourage, Secret Empire #0, Secret Empire #2, Secret Eaters, Secret Emoji, Secret Flying, Secret Forest, Secret Forest Ep 11, Secret Falls Kauai, Secret Flask, Secret Formula, Secret Facebook Group, Secret Frappuccino, Secret For The Mad Lyrics, Secret Falls, Secret Garden, Secret Garden Song, Secret Garden Movie, Secret Garden Cafe, Secret Garden Musical, Secret Garden Lyrics, Secret Garden Denver, Secret Garden Book, Secret Google Games, Secret Garden Miami, Secret Hitler Rules, Secret Hitler Game, Secret History Of Twin Peaks, Secret Hitler Online, Secret Hair Extensions, Secret Handshake, Secret History, Secret Hotel Deals, Secret Heart, Secret Hiding Places, Secret In Their Eyes, Secret In Spanish, Secret Ingredient, Secret Island, Secret In Their Eyes Cast, Secret Invasion, Secret In N Out Menu, Secret Invisible Solid, Secret Island In Texas, Secret In French, Secret Jardin, Secret Jewels, Secret Journal, Secret Jobs, Secret Jamaica, Secret Jieun, Secret Jardin Lodge, Secret Journey Police, Secret Journey To Planet Serpo, Secret Jardin Dr90, Secret Kpop, Secret Keeper Girl, Secret Keeper, Secret Key, Secret Korean Drama, Secret Knock, Secret Knowledge, Secret Krabby Patty Formula, Secret Key Starting Treatment Essence, Secret Kingdom, Secret Life Of Pets, Secret Life Of Bees, Secret Life Of Pets Cast, Secret Life Of The American Teenager, Secret Love Song, Secret Life Of Walter Mitty, Secret Lab Chair, Secret Life Of An American Teenager Cast, Secret Language, Secret Life Of Pets Imdb, Secret Menu, Secret Menu Items, Secret Mage, Secret Menu Starbucks, Secret Menu In N Out, Secret Messages, Secret Meaning, Secret Movie, Secret Mountain Fort Awesome, Secret Mage Deck, Secret Nails, Secret Nyc, Secret Netflix, Secret Nail Salon, Secret Names, Secret Netflix Codes, Secret Numbers, Secret News, Secret Nature From Jeju Peeling Gel, Secret Nation, Secret Of Mana, Secret Of Nimh, Secret Of The Snowy Peaks, Secret Of The Cedars, Secret Of Kells, Secret Of Evermore, Secret Of The Wings, Secret Of Moonacre, Secret Of Mana Rom, Secret Of Mana 2, Secret Pizza, Secret Police, Secret Project Robot, Secret Place, Secret Passion Fruit, Secret Power, Secret Passages, Secret Pizza Party, Secret Paladin, Secret Place Lyrics, Secret Quotes, Secret Question, Secret Quest, Secret Questions To Ask, Secret Questions To Ask Siri, Secret Quests Ffxv, Secret Quests Skyrim, Secret Qr Codes, Secret Questions To Ask Alexa, Secret Quote Spongebob, Secret Romance, Secret Resorts, Secret Recipe, Secret Rooms, Secret Rare Pokemon Cards, Secret Rainbow Hair, Secret Rare Ultra Ball, Secret Rendezvous, Secret Relationship, Secret Roku Channels, Secret Service, Secret Squirrel, Secret Shopper, Secret Societies, Secret Synonym, Secret Starbucks Menu, Secret Service Jobs, Secret Sandwich Society, Secret Sisters, Secret Shopper Jobs, Secret Treasures, Secret Treasures Sleepwear, Secret Tunnel, Secret Things, Secret Tunnel Song, Secret The Pierces, Secret Thesaurus, Secret Travel, Secret Treasures Bra, Secret To Success, Secret Underground Cities, Secret Us Weapons, Secret Underground Bases, Secret Universe Of Names, Secret Underground, Secret Underground Medicine, Secret Upgrades Office Space, Secret Us Bases, Secret Us Military Bases, Secret Unscented, Secret Variety Training, Secret Village Of The Spellcasters, Secret Video Recorder, Secret Variety Training Ep 2, Secret Vault, Secret Vault 81, Secret Veneers, Secret Voice Recorder, Secret Video, Secret Volume, Secret World Legends, Secret Window, Secret Wood, Secret Wars, Secret Wood Rings, Secret World Legends Release Date, Secret World Of Arrietty, Secret Weapon, Secret Wars 2015, Secret Warriors, Secret X Folder, Secret Xtians, Secret Xscape, Secret X Folder Comic, Secret X, Secret Xbox One Gamerpics, Secret Xtend, Secret Xbox One Games, Secret Xbox One Codes, Secret X Folder Webtoon, Secret Youtube, Secret Yeahu, Secret Yellowstone, Secret Young Justice, Secret Youtube Videos, Secret Yosemite, Secret Youtube Tricks, Secret Youtube Website, Secret Yumiverse, Secret Yosemite Spots, Secret Zoo Series, Secret Zoo, Secret Zoo Book, Secret Zinger, Secret Zombies Calling Card, Secret Zodiac Sign, Secret Zion Hikes, Secret Zone, Secret Zombies Challenge Infinite Warfare, Secret Zombie Challenge, Putin Wife,Putin News,Putin Net Worth,Putin Height,Putin Bay,Putin Memes,Putin Trump,Putin On The Ritz,Putin Age,Putin Trump Meeting,Putin And Trump,Putin Age,Putin And Trump Meeting,Putin Approval Rating,Putin And Obama,Putin Ally Crossword,Putin Assad,Putin And North Korea,Putin And Reagan,Putin As A Child,Putin Bay,Putin Bear,Putin Birthday,Putin Biography,Putin Bay Hotels,Putin Badass,Putin Bay Weather,Putin Blueberry Hill,Putin Bay Ferry,Putin Black Belt,Putin Children,Putin Calendar,Putin Clown,Putin Cartoon,Putin Chechnya,Putin Crying,Putin Canada,Putin Crimea,Putin Corruption,Putin Clinton,Putin Daughters,Putin Dog,Putin Documentary,Putin Dead,Putin Dog Merkel,Putin Definition,Putin Dancing,Putin Dolphins,Putin Drawing,Putin Dancing Gif,Putin Election,Putin Eating Popcorn,Putin English,Putin Election Results,Putin Erdogan,Putin Education,Putin Economy,Putin Eyes,Putin Exxon Deal,Putin Eye Color,Putin Family,Putin Food,Putin Funny,Putin Face,Putin Facts,Putin French,Putin Fishing,Poutine Fries,Putin Fascist,Putin Funny Face,Putin Gif,Putin Genocide,Putin Global Warming,Putin Gymnast,Putin Wife,Putin Gun,Putin Glasses,Putin Gangster,Putin Government,Putin Gorbachev,Putin Height,Putin Horse,Putin House,Putin Horseback,Putin Hockey,Putin History,Putin Hunting,Putin Hillary,Putin Human Rights,Putin Home,Putin Interview,Putin Images,Putin Israel,Putin Iq,Putin Isis,Putin In French,Putin Island,Putin Inauguration,Putin In Power,Putin Instagram,Putin Judo,Putin Jill Stein,Putin Journalists,Putin John Oliver,Putin Jehovah,Putin Jw,Putin Judo Gif,Putin Jesus,Putin James Bond,Putin Jehovah Witness,Putin Kgb,Putin Korea,Putin Karate,Putin Kremlin,Putin Kleptocracy,Putin Kim Jong Un,Putin Kraft Ring,Putin Kabaeva,Putin Khuilo,Putin Kid,Putin Laughing,Putin Laughing Gif,Putin Le Pen,Putin Languages,Putin Latest News,Putin Loves Trump,Putin Lollipop,Putin Likes Trump,Putin Limo,Putin Leadership,Putin Memes,Putin Merkel Dog,Putin Married,Putin Merkel,Putin Makeup,Putin Mask,Putin Martial Arts,Putin Meaning,Putin Macron,Putin Mansion,Putin News,Putin Net Worth,Putin North Korea,Putin New Wife,Putin Netanyahu,Putin Nato,Putin Net Worth Wiki,Putin Name Meaning,Putin Nickname,Putin Nuclear War,Putin On The Ritz,Putin On A Horse,Putin On Trump,Putin On North Korea,Putin Obama,Putin On The Ritz Gif,Putin On Syria,Putin Opposition,Putin On Snl,Putin On The Ritz Meme,Putin President,Putin Piano,Putin Palace,Putin Political Party,Putin Picture,Putin Poison,Putin Propaganda,Putin Puns,Putin Pop Song,Putin Popularity,Putin Quotes,Putin Quotes On Obama,Putin Queen Elizabeth,Putin Quotes Funny,Putin Quizlet,Putin Queen Elizabeth Stairs,Putin Quotes On Trump,Putin Quora,Putin Quote Immigrants,Putin Quebec,Putin Russia,Putin Reagan,Putin Riding Trump,Putin Rise To Power,Putin Reelection,Putin Richest Man In The World,Putin Riding A Ritz Cracker,Putin Response,Putin Ritz,Putin Rainbow,Putin Snl,Putin Syria,Putin Song,Putin Smiling,Putin Speech,Putin Shirt,Putin Speaking English,Putin Singing,Putin Salary,Putin Super Bowl Ring,Putin Trump,Putin Trump Meeting,Putin Twitter,Putin Trump Meme,Putin Trump Horse,Putin Trump Kiss,Putin Term Limit,Putin Trump Gif,Putin Term,Putin Today,Putin Ukraine,Putin Ussr,Putin Us Visit,Putin Unicorn,Putin Us Elections,Putin Un,Putin Undercover,Putin Urban Dictionary,Putin United Nations,Putin Us Relations,Putin Vs Trump,Putin Vs Obama,Putin Vladimir,Putin Video,Putin Vodka,Putin Vs Stalin,Putin Visits Trump,Putin Visit To White House,Putin Vampire,Putin Vs Obama Meme,Putin Wife,Putin Wiki,Putin Wealth,Putin Wink,Putin War,Putin Ww3,Putin Watch,Putin Winking Gif,Putin With Animals,Putin Walking,Putin Xi Jinping,Putin X Obama,Putin X Reader,Putin Xi,Putin And Trump,Putin And Obama,Putin And Assad,Putin And North Korea,Putin And Reagan,Putin And The Ritz,Putin Young,Putin Youtube,Putin Yacht,Putin Youth,Putin Yeltsin,Putin Yume,Putin Years As President,Putin Young Pictures,Putin Youth Army,Putin Yarmulke,Putin Zodiac Sign,Putin Zakaria,Putin Zassal,Putin Zassal Lyrics,Putin Zero Hedge,Putin Zeman,Putin Zil Limousine,Putin Zuma,Putin Za Makedonija,Putin Zapretio Albancima, Mossad 101, Mossad Agent, Mossad 9\/11, Mossad Training, Mossad Motto, Mossad Homeland, Mossad 101 Review, Mossad 101 Season 2, Mossad Movies, Mossad Book, Mossad Agent, Mossad Assassinations, Mossad Aliyah Bet, Mossad Agent Salary, Mossad Agent In Danger, Mossad And 9\/11, Mossad Application, Massad Ayoob, Mossad And Trump, Mossad Assassination Dubai, Mossad Book, Mossad Blacklist, Mossad Badge, Mossad By Deception, Mossad Beretta, Mossad Building, Mossad Budget, Mossad Book Pdf, Mossad Blackmail, Mossad Bodyguards, Mossad Cia, Mossad Careers, Mossad Created Isis, Mossad Covert Affairs, Mossad Cell Phone Bomb, Mossad Contact, Mossad Cz 75, Mossad Chemical Attack, Mossad Cz, Mossad Character Homeland, Mossad Definition, Mossad Documentary, Mossad Did 911, Mossad Dubai, Mossad Dogs, Mossad Draw, Mossad Director Orli Elbaz, Mossad Deception, Mossad Documentary On Netflix, Mossad Dagan, Mossad Eichmann, Mossad Emblem, Mossad Exodus, Mossad Employment, Mossad Equipment, Mossad Ethiopia, Mossad Eagle, Mossad Elite Unit, Mossad Eichmann Movie, Mossad English Website, Mossad False Flag, Mossad Flag, Masada Fortress, Mossad Facepalm, Mossad Failures, Mossad Facts, Mossad Film, Mossad Founder, Mossad Foreign Recruitment, Mossad Funds Isis, Mossad Guns, Mossad Gal Gadot, Mossad Gov Il, Mossad Greatest Hits, Mossad Gun Choice, Mossad Girl, Mossad Group, Mossad Germany, Mossad Greatest Missions Pdf, Mossad Greatest Missions, Mossad Homeland, Mossad History, Mossad Harav Kook, Mossad Headquarters, Mossad Handgun, Mossad Hit Squad, Mossad Honey Trap, Mossad Head, Mossad Hits, Mossad Hamas, Mossad Israel, Mossad Isis, Mossad Images, Mossad In Syria, Mossad In Usa, Mossad In Homeland, Mossad In India, Mossad In Iran, Mossad Internship, Mossad In Dubai, Mossad Jobs, Mossad Jfk, Mossad Jfk Killing, Mossad Jokes, Mossad Join, Mossad Jfk Assassination, Mossad Jewish, Mossad Jacket, Mossad Job Application Form, Mossad Job Openings, Mossad Kidon, Mossad Kidon Training, Mossad Kushner, Mossad Knife, Mossad Killings, Mossad Killed Jfk, Mossad Katsa, Mossad Kennedy, Mossad Kidnapping, Mossad Kush, Mossad Logo, Mossad Lealiyah Bet, Mossad London Attack, Mossad Lillehammer, Mossad Lebanon, Mossad London, Mossad Libro, Mossad Libya, Mossad Logo Translation, Mossad Links To Isis, Mossad Motto, Mossad Movies, Mossad Meaning, Mossad Munich, Mossad Meme, Mossad Murders, Mossad Mission Statement, Mossad Marked Pistol, Mossad Michael Bar-zohar, Mossad Manchester, Mossad Ncis, Mossad Netflix, Mossad News, Mossad Norway, Mossad North Korea, Mossad Nazi, Mossad Name Origin, Mossad Novels, Mossad Nazi Executions, Mossad Nazi Assassinations, Mossad Officer, Mossad Operation, Mossad On Netflix, Mossad Operation In Dubai, Mossad On Twitter, Mossad Official Website, Mossad Olympic Revenge Movie, Mossad Official Motto, Mossad Og, Mossad Operations Youtube, Mossad Pistol, Mossad Pistol For Sale, Mossad Pdf, Mossad Pen, Mossad Podcast, Mossad Pistol Training, Mossad Paris, Mossad Phone Bomb, Mossad Pics, Mossad Pronunciation, Mossad Quotes, Mossad Quora, Mossad Qualifications, Mossad Qatar, Mossad Quiz, Mossad Que Es, Mossad’s Quest, Mossad Quick Draw, Kidon Mossad, Mossad Quotations, Mossad Recruitment Website, Mossad Recruitment, Mossad Russia, Mossad Reddit, Mossad Recruitment Process, Mossad Ranks, Mossad Riddle, Mossad Harav Kook, Mossad Reputation, Mossad Retraining, Mossad Syria, Mossad Spy, Mossad Stole My Shoe, Mossad Stories, Mossad Shirt, Mossad Slogan, Mossad Show Netflix, Mossad Self Defense, Mossad Season 2, Mossad Series, Mossad Training, Mossad Tanfoglio, Mossad Twitter, Mossad Trump, Mossad Tv Show, Mossad Tactical, Mossad T Shirts, Mossad Tactical Duffle Bag, Mossad Training School, Mossad The Greatest Missions, Mossad Uae, Mossad Usa, Mossad Units, Mossad Uniform, Mossad Uk, Mossad Uganda Operation, Mossad Unit 8200, Mossad Ukraine, Mossad Vs Cia, Mossad Vs Kgb, Mossad Video, Mossad Vs Assad, Mossad And Shin Bet, Mossad Vanunu, Mossad Vs Seals, Mossad Vs Navy Seal, Mossad Vs Isi, Mossad Vs Raw, Mossad Website, Mossad Wiki, Mossad Weapons, Mossad Worldwide, Mossad War By Deception, Mossad Workout, Mossad Wikileaks, Mossad Wrath Of God, Mossad Weapons Of Choice, Mossad Ww2, Mossad X, X Mossad Agent, Mossad Prisoner X, Mossad Committee X, Comitato X Mossad, Mossad Xaqida, Comite X Mossad, Mossad Youtube, Mossad Yossi Cohen, Mossad Yearly Cyber Challenge, Mossad Yousef, Mossad Yahudi, Mossad Yemen, Mossad Yahoo Answers, Mossad Yom Kippur War, Massad Ymca, Mossad Youtube Dubai, Mossad Zionist, Mossad Ziva David, Mossad Zippo, Mossad Zohar, Mossad Zoo, Mossad Zamir, Mossad Znacenje, Mossad Zimbabwe, Mossad Zinc, Mossad Zohar Pdf, World War 3 News, World War 3 2017, World War 3 Date, World War 3 Predictions, World War 3 May 13, World War 3 Draft, World War 3 Trump, World War 3 Sides, World War 3 Memes, World War 3 Roster, World War 3 Allies, World War 3 About To Start, World War 3 Article, World War 3 Already Happened, World War 3 Alert, World War 3 April 2017, World War 3 And The Bible, World War 3 Already Started, World War 3 Announced, World War 3 Approaching, World War 3 Bible, World War 3 Begins, World War 3 Book, World War 3 Black Gold, World War 3 Bbc, World War 3 Bible Code, World War 3 Bracket, World War 3 Book Series, World War 3 Breaking News, World War 3 Bunkers, World War 3 Cnn, World War 3 Coming, World War 3 Countries, World War 3 Combatants, World War 3 Call Of Duty, World War 3 Chances, World War 3 Countdown, World War 3 China, World War 3 Clock, World War 3 Conspiracy, World War 3 Date, World War 3 Draft, World War 3 Draft Age, World War 3 Declared, World War 3 Donald Trump, World War 3 Documentary, World War 3 Date 2017, World War 3 Draft Meme, World War 3 Draft Letter, World War 3 Definition, World War 3 End Times, World War 3 End, World War 3 Europe, World War 3 Emp, World War 3 Effects, World War 3 Explained, World War 3 Exact Date, World War 3 Enquirer, World War 3 Events, World War 3 Estimated Date, World War 3 Fox News, World War 3 Fiction Books, World War 3 Fake, World War 3 Facts, World War 3 Fears, World War 3 Fake News, World War 3 Fiction, World War 3 Fatima, World War 3 Film, World War 3 Fox, World War 3 Game, World War 3 Going To Happen, World War 3 Google Trends, World War 3 Guns, World War 3 Gas, World War 3 Gif, World War 3 Germany, World War 3 Games For Pc, World War 3 Game Unblocked, World War 3 Google, World War 3 Has Begun, World War 3 Hoax, World War 3 Has Started, World War 3 Happening, World War 3 How To Prepare, World War 3 Happening Soon, World War 3 History, World War 3 Huffington Post, World War 3 Happening Right Now, World War 3 Horacio, World War 3 Is Coming, World War 3 In The Bible, World War 3 Imminent, World War 3 In Spanish, World War 3 Is Here, World War 3 India, World War 3 In 2017, World War 3 In Space, World War 3 Inevitable, World War 3 Illuminati, World War 3 Jokes, World War 3 Japan, World War 3 Just Started, World War 3 June 2017, World War 3 Jonas Brothers Lyrics, World War 3 Just Around The Corner, World War 3 Jesus, World War 3 July 2017, World War 3 Jadakiss, World War 3 Jw.org, World War 3 Korea, World War 3 Kmfdm, World War 3 Kfc, World War 3 Know Your Meme, World War 3 Kim Jong Un, World War 3 Kab Hogi, World War 3 Ki Bhavishyavani, World War 3 Kaskus, World War 3 Kab Hoga, World War 3 Korea China, World War 3 Lyrics, World War 3 Lineup, World War 3 Lyrics Ruth B, World War 3 Lean, World War 3 Latest News, World War 3 List, World War 3 Location, World War 3 Looming, World War 3 Likely, World War 3 Live, World War 3 May 13, World War 3 Memes, World War 3 Map, World War 3 Movie, World War 3 May 13th, World War 3 May, World War 3 Mexico, World War 3 Mystic, World War 3 Molly, World War 3 Middle East, World War 3 News, World War 3 North Korea, World War 3 News Today, World War 3 News 2017, World War 3 News Cnn, World War 3 Near, World War 3 New York Times, World War 3 Nostradamus, World War 3 Nuclear, World War 3 Novels, World War 3 On The Way, World War 3 Odds, World War 3 On May 13, World War 3 On The Horizon, World War 3 Outcome, World War 3 Opponents, World War 3 Onu, World War 3 On The Brink, World War 3 On The Rise, World War 3 On Pay Tv, World War 3 Predictions, World War 3 Prophecy, World War 3 Possible, World War 3 Prank, World War 3 Prediction Date, World War 3 Probability, World War 3 Pictures, World War 3 Players, World War 3 Prediction 2017, World War 3 Preparations, World War 3 Quotes, World War 3 Quora, World War 3 Quran, World War 3 Quiz, World War 3 Questions, World War 3 Quizlet, World War 3 Queen, World War 3 Qatar, World War 3 Quote Albert Einstein, World War 3 Quote Einstein, World War 3 Roster, World War 3 Reddit, World War 3 Russia, World War 3 Ruth B, World War 3 Ruth B Lyrics, World War 3 Rumors, World War 3 Russia Usa, World War 3 Release Date, World War 3 Real Or Fake, World War 3 Ruff Ryders, World War 3 Sides, World War 3 Scenario, World War 3 Simulation, World War 3 Started, World War 3 Soon, World War 3 Star Trek, World War 3 Start Date, World War 3 Song, World War 3 Syria, World War 3 Simulation Game, World War 3 Trump, World War 3 Teams, World War 3 Timeline, World War 3 Twitter, World War 3 Theories, World War 3 Today, World War 3 The Movie, World War 3 Threat, World War 3 Targets, World War 3 Trending, World War 3 Update, World War 3 Usa, World War 3 United States, World War 3 Unlikely, World War 3 Us, World War 3 Us Allies, World War 3 United Nations, World War 3 Upon Us, World War 3 Un, World War 3 Uk, World War 3 Video, World War 3 Video Games, World War 3 Veteran Hat, World War 3 Veterans, World War 3 Visions, World War 3 Vedic Astrology, World War 3 Videos Youtube, World War 3 Virgin Mary, World War 3 Vladimir Putin, World War 3 Vs, World War 3 Wiki, World War 3 Wcw, World War 3 Will Not Happen, World War 3 Will Be Fought With Nuclear Weapons, World War 3 When, World War 3 Weapons, World War 3 Will Happen, World War 3 Who Would Win, World War 3 Watch, World War 3 Warning, World War 3 Youtube, World War 3 Year, World War 3 Yahoo, World War 3 Youtube 2017, World War 3 Yes Or No, World War 3 Yet, World War 3 Youtube April 2017, World War 3 Year Predictions, World War 3 Youtube 2016, World War 3 Youtube Video, World War 3 Zombie, World War 3 Zdf, World War 3 Zee News, World War 3 Zombie Movie, World War 3 Zombie Outbreak, World War 3 Zionist, World War 3 Zdf English, World War 3 Z, World War 3 Zombie Edition, World War Z 3 Full Movie
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
NNSA an Iranian Target
I cannot reveal my source (to keep my VIP access as it is) which is an underground forum known to host many of groups, “the usual suspects”. I observed there is on going arrangement for release the results of an attack to Department of Energy. If the map on the forum thread means something, I presume the national labs were also attacked. I couldn’t realize which one of the players and groups were orchestrating the release though. Among the targets there is NNSA, I have seen other Iranian attack on NNSA before. I am personally curious is this an attempt to mess with the smart grid or just another hit and grab industrial data?
Messages [on drawing] all in Farsi and have slang codes within them to the extent translator is useless.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
By Françoise Daucé
In Russia as elsewhere, military journalists and war correspondents find themselves at the heart of the tensions between the discipline and confidentiality required in military matters and the independence and openness required by the media. Their task is to inform society and shape public opinion, but they are also bound by the rules of the armed forces1 in situations where their own safety is at stake and a war of information is often being waged alongside the war on the ground2. This tension is not particular to Russia3 but it is overt there perhaps more than in any other country. In the USSR, during wartime (whether the “Great Patriotic War” from 1941 or the Cold War until 1985), the constraints upon military journalists and war correspondents were severe, under the Main Political Directorate of the Soviet Army and Navy with its twofold responsibility for State censorship and Party ideological correctness. At a time when the media were called “means of mass information and propaganda”, what possible leeway did correspondents have between their “duty of self-restraint” and their “duty to speak up”? Under Gorbachev’s glasnost, starting in 1985, the coverage of military matters became a forum for expressing political criticism, whether by publicising the failures of the war in Afghanistan, bullying of new recruits, corruption among officers or the scandals of the nuclear deterrent. In the early 1990s, journalists put military discipline to one side in their work and devoted themselves to reporting on all the armed forces’ failings. Since the start of the new century, the authoritarian turn taken by the Russian government appears to have restored the priority of order, the “power vertical “and the “dictatorship of the law” both in the armed forces and the media, providing political control over media reporting on soldiers and war4.
5 C. Lemieux (dir), La subjectivité journalistique. Onze leçons sur le rôle de l’individualité dans l (…)
2What is the reality? What tensions are there in the particular task of military journalists? What compromises do they make? To answer these questions, this special report goes into the professional practices of journalists to reveal the trade-offs, stratagems and conflicts that make up their day-to-day work. The various articles describe people in action, professionals operating, journalists at work. This sociological approach, with people’s own opinions, transmitted directly or indirectly, shows both the extent of the constraints on their work and the degree of independence and subjectivity5 that exists in journalistic production. It outlines their participation in producing official discourse and their struggle to spell out alternative truths. Since the collapse of the USSR, the world of military journalists has been increasingly diverse and plural. Careers and backgrounds have broadened to include civilians, women, foreigners and non-specialists. They are committed in varying degrees to their jobs, which have been thrown open in ways that are politically, legally and technically complex. Even though there are indeed constraints, these are less the hierarchical, militarised type of the duty of self-restraint but more (neo-) liberalised in nature. This can be seen in the 2014 events in Ukraine, which have been particularly uncontrolled and dangerous for journalists on the ground. Our study of military journalism in the USSR and Russia provides an insight into the transformations within the Soviet and then Russian armed forces, the changes occurring in that country’s society and politics, the sociology of the media and journalism in Russia, and the contemporary world in general.
6 International Round Table. Military and War journalism from the USSR to Russia: Field Practices and (…)
3This special report comprises contributions that vary in form and content. There are duly verified scholarly articles and personal experiences of military journalists describing their ways of working. The report of a roundtable discussion in April 2014 in Moscow6 combines the views of journalists, historians and practitioners concerning the special features of military journalism. Book reviews remind the reader of how much research has been done in this area. Together the various sections offer new avenues for analysing military journalism in Russia.
Independence and subjectivity of war correspondents and military journalists
7 See Olga Pavlenko’s contribution to the April 2014 Round Table.
4Since the wars of the 19th century, particularly in the Crimea7, the history of military journalism has been marked by a gradual professionalization. An obviously male job until the end of the Cold War, military journalism and war reporting was done by officers and civilians, civil servants and writers, concerned to bear witness to the conflicts of their time. At the height of the Soviet 20th century, the drama of the Great Patriotic War featured the heroic figure of the war correspondent, whether international (such as Alexander Werth) or Soviet (Vasily Grossman). In the violence of the great clash between the Soviet and Nazi war machines, the reporting available shows how much independence and subjective freedom of expression journalists on the front could have. Nicolas Werth’s presentation of his father’s writings and career exemplifies the personal choices and commitments Alexander made on the Eastern Front. His articles were not so much the result of strategic constraints imposed by war as the account of a man fighting with the Soviet forces. In 1941-1945, war offered possibilities for journalistic expression that were perhaps greater than in later years, when the hierarchical and institutional apparatus was set up to control military journalism. After the victory, it was time to bureaucratise the army’s press section. The publications devoted to military matters during the Brezhnev years (Krasnaia Zvezda, the Soviet defence ministry’s daily newspaper, for example) showed this in their operations and content. Military journalists were trained by the army itself, as Ivan Chupin describes in his article on military journalists during the final years of the USSR, borne out by the journalist Nikolai Starodymov. The embargo on military information was clearly operating during the war in Afghanistan involving Soviet troops.
8 Concerning this weekly, see V. Solov’ev, “Stanovlenie nezavisimoi voennoi pechati v Rossii: opyt “N (…)
5As glasnost opened up reporting after 1985, military journalists became more diverse. The opening up and liberalisation of the Russian media world extended to military journalism. Censorship (Glavlit) disappeared. The former Soviet army newspapers did continue, working under the control of the defence ministry. They largely remained attached to the Soviet Army’s “Cold War” editorial line, as can be seen in Sophie Momzikoff’s article on Zarubezhnoe Voennoe Obozrenie. But journalists from these editorial offices seized the opportunity to criticise the armed forces as an institution and move into independent media at a time when their expert knowledge was valued. Civilian media developed their military coverage, written by correspondents and specialists. New publications devoted to military matters appeared (Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie in the mid-1990s, for example8). The amount of space given over to the armed forces became larger and more diverse. Personal accounts of the war in Afghanistan and the many conflicts that erupted in the post-Soviet zone (Chechnya, Moldova and Nagorno-Karabakh) were given pluralistic treatment in the press in the 1990s.
9 Iu. Zheglova, Fenomen “prikomandirovannoi” zhurnalistiki. In: Mikhail Pogorelyi, Ivan Safranchuk (e (…)
6Within this diversified environment, journalists made choices. Their careers reveal the tensions and controversies they encountered and the compromises they devised. Some Soviet military journalists escaped from the control of their former employers to join the civilian media (such as Aleksandr Golts). Others stayed put but altered their vision of the armed forces and modified their editorial line. These careers and practices became more diverse, and Ivan Chupin describes two conceptions of the work: one toeing the army line and the other critical and investigatory. In response, the military authorities attempted to keep control of these changes by sending their own journalists to write for civilian publications9. However, their control was losing its force. New professionals were appearing in the war journalist community. Foreign correspondents went out to operational areas in the former Soviet Union and established relations with Russian journalists (see the account by war photographer Yuri Tutov). These new arrangements raised the issue of the relations and exchanges between journalists of various origins and the specific constraints imposed on them. This period also saw women arriving in military journalism. Examples are Anna Politkovskaya covering the Chechnya War and Olga Allenova, a journalist on Kommersant, in the same theatre. This diversification brought plurality into the treatment of military information. In this issue of PIPSS, Allenova’s account shows how she shifted away from being a supporter of “restoring order” in Chechnya in the early 2000s as she saw the violence this entailed (see Amandine Regamey’s review of her book). Allenova describes her growing awareness of the criminal abuses of the anti-terrorist operation in Chechnya. The interview with Tutov reveals how he distanced himself from the interior ministry’s media and began to work more with international press agencies. These journalists displayed their independence of judgement in a changing military world. More recently, since the early 2000s, this independence has increased as a result of new information and communication technologies that extend the range of journalistic practice. Reduced technical constraints, miniaturisation of recording devices, and speed of transmission lead to faster circulation of information, including from war zones. The possibilities available to military journalists seem therefore to be widening.
Tensions and constraints at work
7But this diversification has aroused strong tensions. This could be seen at the round table discussion of military journalism held in April 2014 at the Russian State University for the Humanities (RGGU), Moscow, in partnership with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Andrei Raskin, journalism professor at the RGGU, listed the new difficulties facing military journalism at the present time. He said that untrained journalists are often sent to report on hostilities, showing great independence but at the risk of their personal safety. He expressed concern at the presence in operational theatres of independent journalists of uncertain status, given great freedom but little protection by their editorial managers. He also questioned women’s legitimacy to cover conflict: “War journalism as a whole is ‘not a place for women’ any way”, he said. Journalists’ independence, more diverse backgrounds and allegiance to the civilian community raise the question of their security in military theatres and arouse distrust from the professionals of military journalism.
10 A.-J. Bizimana, Au cœur du dispositif embedding: la surveillance des journalistes intégrés lors de (…)
11 H. Tumber, J. Palmer, Media at war. The Iraq crisis, London, Sage, 2004.
8In the Russian armed forces, this distrust has given rise to new communication strategies better suited to post-Soviet political and media reality. Raskin described a certain distrust in the armed forces towards independent journalists. But the military authorities are also aware of the need to work with journalists. More flexible types of constraint, often inspired by Western practice, are being tried out by the military institutions. Having “embedded” journalists during armed conflict makes it possible to control the transmission of information. Embedment enables journalists to be at the heart of events and broadcast authentic factual accounts of warfare but does raise the question of their surveillance10 and official exploitation of them at times of crisis11. The communication practice was developed by the Russian army during the Second Chechnya War from 1999 on. Journalists may even appreciate being enrolled in this way. Aleksandr Sladkov, a well-known Russian television presenter, said, “Embedded journalism is a good progressive way to regulate the links between civilians and the military. A large-scale example of embedded journalism would be in the Soviet Army, during World War II, when 280 operators were recording films”. This reference to the Great Patriotic War is used to justify current cooperation arrangements between the armed forces and journalists.
9The work of military journalists is regulated by new legislative codes. In the early 2010s, a large number of laws were passed to control the activities of newspapers, their editorial staff and the independent journalists who produce blogs (now deemed to be mass media if they have more than 3,000 hits a day). The role of Roskomnadzor (Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media) in controlling media content has also been extended. Although direct institutional constraint in the form of censorship has disappeared, political control over military journalists has taken on a variety of new forms. “The laws regulating journalism in Russia are not that bad since they are inspired by French laws; however, in the past few years they have been amended significantly. The laws now act in a more restrictive way, with the excuse of the last counterterrorist laws’ boundaries”, says Galina Arapova from the Mass Media Defence Centre. These legal forms of control of journalists’ activities do not guarantee the professionals’ security. Violence against critical independent journalists (the murders, for example, of Dmitri Kholodov and Anna Politkovskaya) illustrates the dangers of the profession. In the past three years, 250 journalists have been killed in Russia (according to Arapova).
10Since the spring of 2014, the fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of eastern Ukraine has ironically revealed both the freedoms military journalists enjoy and the constraints they work under. This conflict, widely covered by print and digital media, is also one of the most dangerous for journalists and most closely monitored in media terms. In this undeclared war, involving anti-terrorist operations, guerrilla warfare and undercover counter-espionage, the control over military journalism and war reporting is variable and may even be absent. Because there has been no official declaration of war, the system of embedding journalists with the armed forces is not operational. News reporting therefore depends on the initiative of special correspondents, accounts by members of the public, part-time and citizen journalism, web posts and blogs open to more than one interpretation. The ill-defined nature of the current conflict and doubts about the identity of its protagonists place journalists from outside in a dangerous position. According to statistics kept by Reporters sans frontières12, the arbitrary arrest and disappearance of journalists soared in eastern Ukraine in spring and summer 2014. The victims of the conflict come from every category of journalist of whatever nationality (Russian, Ukrainian or Western) or media (television, radio, print). The insurgents of the People’s Republic of Donetsk actually issued a decree in July 2014 prohibiting “journalists, cameramen and photo-reporters” from “being present in combat zones and near military installations” during armed operations. These measures restricting access to the theatre of operations allow the most divergent interpretations of the military situation. In the absence of any clear institutional, legal or political framework, the new freedoms afforded by post-Soviet liberalisation and new media have not automatically led to a pluralistic coverage of military events but do endanger both journalists and the pluralism of information. Military journalism is thus a reflection of the social and political transformations that have occurred in contemporary Russia and its areas of intervention. It may consist of bearing witness, expressing opinion and commitment—a sign of journalists’ independence. But this degree of subjectivity comes at a higher cost than elsewhere in the absence of any effective public procedures for protecting its authors.
Top of page
Notes
1 And also by a specifically military conception of writing and discourse: C. Oger, “De l’esprit de corps au corps du texte: cohésion militaire et dissolution journalistique”, Langage et société, # 4, 2000.
2 H. Tumber, J. Palmer, Media at war. The Iraq crisis, London, Sage, 2004.
3 A.-J. Bizimana, “Les relations militaires-journalistes: évolution du contexte américain”, Les cahiers du journalisme, # 16, Autumn 2006.
4 E. Sieca-Kozlowski, “From controlling military information to controlling society: the political interests involved in the transformation of the military media under Putin”, Small Wars and Insurgencies, vol. 20, # 2, 2009, pp. 300-318.
5 C. Lemieux (dir), La subjectivité journalistique. Onze leçons sur le rôle de l’individualité dans la production de l’information, Paris, Editions de l’EHESS, 2010.
6 International Round Table. Military and War journalism from the USSR to Russia: Field Practices and Legal Regulations. Moscow, 15 April 2014. Organised by the Regional Delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in the Russian Federation, Russian State University for the Humanities, Union of Journalists of Russia, Franco-Russian Centre for Social Sciences in Moscow and the journal PIPSS.
7 See Olga Pavlenko’s contribution to the April 2014 Round Table.
8 Concerning this weekly, see V. Solov’ev, “Stanovlenie nezavisimoi voennoi pechati v Rossii: opyt “Nezavisimogo voennogo obozrenia””, in M. Pogorelyi, I. Safranchuk (eds), Sovremennaia rossiiskaia voennaia zhurnalistika. Opyt, problemy, perspektivy, Moscow, Gendal’f, 2002, pp. 11-21.
10 A.-J. Bizimana, Au cœur du dispositif embedding: la surveillance des journalistes intégrés lors de la guerre en Irak, PhD Thesis, 2010, http://www.archipel.uqam.ca/3654/ (accessed on 21 October 2014).
11 H. Tumber, J. Palmer, Media at war. The Iraq crisis, London, Sage, 2004.
Françoise Daucé, « Military Journalists and War Correspondents From The USSR To Russia: Subjectivity Under Fire », The Journal of Power Institutions in Post-Soviet Societies [Online], Issue 16 | 2014, Online since 30 January 2014, connection on 22 March 2015. URL : http://pipss.revues.org/4121
War Correspondents Memorial, War Correspondents Movie, War Correspondents Memorial Arch, War Correspondents Vietnam War, War Correspondents Killed In Vietnam, War Correspondents Brooklyn Brewery, War Correspondents Arch, War Correspondents Killed In Action, War Correspondents Netflix, War Correspondents Memorial Maryland, War Correspondents Arch, War Correspondents At The Brooklyn Brewery, War Correspondents At Gallipoli, War Correspondents And Ptsd, War Correspondents Association, War Correspondents In Afghanistan, Canadian War Correspondents Association, War Correspondents Memorial Awm, War Correspondents Killed In Action, Australian War Correspondents, War Correspondents Brooklyn Brewery, War Correspondents Bbc, War Correspondents Book, Female War Correspondents Bbc, War Correspondents Boer War, Vietnam War Correspondents Books, Bbc War Correspondents List, British War Correspondents, Best War Correspondents, British War Correspondents Ww2, War Correspondents Crossword, War Correspondents Club, War Zone Correspondents Crossword, War Correspondents Memorial Canberra, Do War Correspondents Carry Weapons, War Correspondents Helen Chadwick, Gulf War Cnn Correspondents, Cnn War Correspondents, Civil War Correspondents Memorial Arch, Civil War Correspondents, War Correspondents During World War 2, War Correspondents Documentary, War Correspondents During Wwii, A War Correspondent’s Dilemma, War Correspondents Memorial Dedication, War Correspondents Who Have Died, Do War Correspondents Carry Weapons, War Correspondents During The Civil War, Define War Correspondents, English War Correspondents, Embedded War Correspondents, Early War Correspondents, Female War Correspondents, Famous War Correspondents, Female War Correspondents Wwii, Female War Correspondents Bbc, Falklands War Correspondents, Female War Correspondents Vietnam, Female War Correspondents In Iraq, Freelance War Correspondents, Female War Correspondents Ww2, Female War Correspondents Uk, War Correspondents Gallipoli, Vietnam War Correspondents Gather Saigon Reunion, Gulf War Correspondents, Greatest War Correspondents, How Much Do War Correspondents Get Paid, German War Correspondents, Can War Correspondents Carry Guns, War Correspondents Helen Chadwick, War Correspondents History, War Correspondents Who Have Died, War Correspondents In Ww2, War Correspondents In Vietnam, War Correspondents In Syria, War Correspondents In Afghanistan, War Correspondents In Ww1, War Correspondents Itv, War Correspondents Interview, War Correspondents Killed In Action, War Correspondents Killed In Ww2, War Correspondents Killed In Vietnam, War Correspondents Killed In Vietnam, War Correspondents Killed In Action, War Correspondents Killed In Ww2, British War Correspondents Killed, List Of War Correspondents Killed, Korean War Correspondents, War Correspondents List, Bbc War Correspondents List, War Correspondents Club London, Today Show War Correspondents List, War Correspondents Memorial, War Correspondents Movie, War Correspondents Memorial Canberra, War Correspondents Memorial Awm, War Correspondents Memorial Dedication, War Correspondents Meaning, Civil War Correspondents Memorial, Civil War Correspondents Monument, Female War Correspondents, Modern War Correspondents, War Correspondents Netflix, War Correspondents Memorial New York, Vietnam War Correspondents, Vietnam War News Correspondents, Iraq War News Correspondents, Civil War Newspaper Correspondents, Gulf War News Correspondents, Nbc War Correspondents, National War Correspondents Memorial, Notable War Correspondents, War Correspondents Ptsd, Pbs War Correspondents, War Correspondents Problems, War Correspondents Review, Russian War Correspondents, War Correspondents Salary, War Correspondents Scala, War Correspondents In Syria, Why Are War Correspondents So Important, Soviet War Correspondents, Vietnam War Correspondents Gather Saigon Reunion, Sky War Correspondents, War Correspondents Today, War Correspondents Today Crossword, War Correspondents At The Brooklyn Brewery, World War Two Correspondents, Tv War Correspondents, Top War Correspondents, Female War Correspondents Uk, Uk War Correspondents, What Camera Do War Correspondents Use, War Correspondents Vietnam War, Vietnam War Correspondents, Female War Correspondents Vietnam, Famous War Correspondents Vietnam, Australian War Correspondents Vietnam, War Correspondents Killed In Vietnam, Vietnam War Correspondents Gather Saigon Reunion, Victorian War Correspondents, Vietnam War Correspondents Books, War Correspondents Who Have Died, War Correspondents Ww2, War Correspondents Ww1, Female War Correspondents Wwii, Australian War Correspondents Ww1, Australian War Correspondents Ww2, Canadian War Correspondents Wwii, British War Correspondents Ww1, Female War Correspondents Ww2, Female War Correspondents Ww1, War Correspondents Memorial New York, War Zone Correspondents Crossword, War Zone Correspondents, Military Reporter Jobs, Military Reporters And Editors, Military Reporter, Military Reporter Crossword, Military Reporters Contest, Military Justice Reporter, Military Court Reporter, Military Law Reporter, Military Commission Reporter, Knsd Military Reporter, Military Reporter Crossword, Military Court Reporter, Military Commission Reporter, Cnn Military Reporter, Reporter Military Czapka, Florida Military Reporter, Military Reporter Jobs, Military Justice Reporter, Knsd Military Reporter, Reporter Military Kurtka, Military Law Reporter, Politico Military Reporter, Russian Military News, Russian Military Size, Russian Military Surplus, Russian Military Ranks, Russian Military Strength, Russian Military Bases, Russian Military Parade, Russian Military Budget, Russian Military Aircraft, Russian Military Equipment, Russian Military Aircraft, Russian Military Allies, Russian Military Academy, Russian Military Activity, Russian Military Alliance, Russian Military Arctic, Russian Military Alphabet, Russian Military Aggression, Russian Military Awards, Russian Military Action, Russian Military Bases, Russian Military Budget, Russian Military Branches, Russian Military Base In Syria, Russian Military Base In Arctic, Russian Military Buildup, Russian Military Bases In Russia, Russian Military Boots, Russian Military Budget 2016, Russian Military Base In Antarctica, Russian Military Capability, Russian Military Camo, Russian Military Cargo Planes, Russian Military Conscription, Russian Military Clothing, Russian Military Choir, Russian Military Coat, Russian Military Compared To Usa, Russian Military Commands, Russian Military Conflicts, Russian Military Doctrine, Russian Military Drones, Russian Military Districts, Russian Military Doctrine 2016, Russian Military Draft, Russian Military Dog, Russian Military Dress Uniform, Russian Military Deaths In Ww2, Russian Military Drills, Russian Military Divisions, Russian Military Equipment, Russian Military Exercises, Russian Military Expenditure, Russian Military Emblems, Russian Military Expansion, Russian Military Exports, Russian Military Equipment For Sale, Russian Military Exercises 2016, Russian Military Equipment In Syria, Russian Military Enlistment, Russian Military Forces, Russian Military Flag, Russian Military Facts, Russian Military Food, Russian Military Fatigues, Russian Military Fails, Russian Military Firearms, Russian Military Females, Russian Military Forces In Syria, Russian Military Fighter Jets, Russian Military Gear, Russian Military Guns, Russian Military Gas Mask, Russian Military Girl, Russian Military Gloves, Russian Military Groups, Russian Military Girl Singing, Russian Military Gear For Sale, Russian Military Growth, Russian Military Guns For Sale, Russian Military Hat, Russian Military Helicopters, Russian Military Helmet, Russian Military History, Russian Military Haircut, Russian Military Hovercraft, Russian Military Handguns, Russian Military Hazing, Russian Military Headquarters, Russian Military Hardware, Russian Military In Syria, Russian Military Intervention In Ukraine, Russian Military Intelligence, Russian Military Insignia, Russian Military In North Korea, Russian Military In Cuba, Russian Military In Arctic, Russian Military Involvement In Syria, Russian Military In Libya, Russian Military Is Weak, Russian Military Jets, Russian Military Jacket, Russian Military Jeep, Russian Military Jokes, Russian Military Jumpsuit, Russian Military Jet Fighters, Russian Military Journal, Russian Military Join, Russian Military Jets For Sale, Russian Military Jargon, Russian Military Knives, Russian Military Kit, Russian Military Korea, Russian Military Kettlebell, Russian Military Kettlebell Weight, Russian Military Killed In Syria, Russian Military Knives For Sale, Russian Military Kettlebell Training, Russian Military Kettlebell Test, Russian Military Kettlebell Routine, Russian Military Leaders, Russian Military Logo, Russian Military Loadout, Russian Military Leaders Ww2, Russian Military Latest News, Russian Military Leadership, Russian Military Logistics, Russian Military Libya, Russian Military Leader Ww1, Russian Military Losses, Russian Military Memes, Russian Military March, Russian Military Medals, Russian Military Mre, Russian Military Music, Russian Military Movements, Russian Military Modernization, Russian Military Might, Russian Military Martial Arts, Russian Military Motorcycle, Russian Military News, Russian Military North Korea, Russian Military Numbers, Russian Military Names, Russian Military North Korean Border, Russian Military Near North Korea, Russian Military Night Vision, Russian Military Nicknames, Russian Military Navy, Russian Military News In Syria, Russian Military Outfit, Russian Military Officer, Russian Military Optics, Russian Military Outdated, Russian Military On North Korean Border, Russian Military Operations, Russian Military Organization, Russian Military Orders, Russian Military On Korean Border, Russian Military Oath, Russian Military Parade, Russian Military Power, Russian Military Planes, Russian Military Population, Russian Military Pistol, Russian Military Police, Russian Military Parade 2017, Russian Military Power 2017, Russian Military Patches, Russian Military Phrases, Russian Military Quotes, Russian Military Quora, Russian Military Quality, Russian Military Quadcopter, Russian Military Quiz, Funny Russian Military Quotes, Russian Military Aircraft Quiz, Russian Military Vehicles Quiz, Russian Military Ranks, Russian Military Rifles, Russian Military Robot, Russian Military Ranks Ww2, Russian Military Rations, Russian Military Reform, Russian Military Radio, Russian Military Rocket Factory, Russian Military Requirements, Russian Military Ranks Ww1, Russian Military Size, Russian Military Surplus, Russian Military Strength, Russian Military Spending, Russian Military Sidearm, Russian Military Surplus Ammo, Russian Military Shirt, Russian Military Salute, Russian Military Symbols, Russian Military Strategy, Russian Military Training, Russian Military Technology, Russian Military Trucks, Russian Military Tanks, Russian Military Tactics, Russian Military Tattoos, Russian Military Terms, Russian Military Transport Aircraft, Russian Military Trucks For Sale, Russian Military Titles, Russian Military Uniforms, Russian Military Uniforms 2016, Russian Military Units, Russian Military Undershirt, Russian Military Ukraine, Russian Military Uniforms 1800, Russian Military Ushanka, Russian Military Uniforms Ww1, Russian Military Under Stalin, Russian Military Unit Names, Russian Military Vehicles, Russian Military Vs Us Military, Russian Military Vs Usa Military, Russian Military Vehicles For Sale, Russian Military Vest, Russian Military Vs American Military, Russian Military Vehicles For Sale Usa, Russian Military Victories, Russian Military Vocabulary, Russian Military Van, Russian Military Weapons, Russian Military Watches, Russian Military Ww2, Russian Military Ww1, Russian Military Wiki, Russian Military Weapons 2017, Russian Military Website, Russian Military Words, Russian Military Winter Hat, Russian Military Wallpaper, Russian Military Youtube, Russian Military Youtube Channel, Russian Military Yahoo Answers, Russian Military Yemen, Russian Military Yeti, Russian Military Yutube, Russian Youth Military Training, Russian Youth Military, Russian Military Power Youtube, Russian Military Songs Youtube, Russian Military Zombie Attack, Russian Military Zone, Russian Military Zeppelin, Russian Zil Military, Russian Military Exercise Zapad, Russian Military Trucks Zil, Russia News, Russia Flag, Russia Map, Russia Population, Russia Investigation, Russia And North Korea, Russia Trump, Russia Today, Russia Gdp, Russia World Cup, Russia And North Korea, Russia Allies, Russia And Us, Russia And Trump, Russia And Ukraine, Russia And Syria, Russia And China, Russia Alaska, Russia Afghanistan, Russia And Nato, Russia Breaking News, Russia Bombing, Russia Birth Rate, Russia Borders, Russia Bear, Russia Beyond The Headlines, Russia Building, Russia Bitcoin, Russia Beaches, Russia Before Ww1, Russia Continent, Russia Collusion, Russia China, Russian Currency, Russia Country Code, Russia Communist, Russia Climate, Russia Crimea, Russian Circles, Russian Cursive, Russia Demographics, Russia Dossier, Russia Drinking Age, Russia Day, Russia During Ww2, Russia Definition, Russian Debt, Russia During Ww1, Russia Donald Trump, Russia Dollar, Russia Economy, Russia Election, Russia Election Hacking, Russia Etf, Russia Exports, Russia Exchange Rate, Russia Eu4, Russia Europe, Russia Embassy, Russia Ethereum, Russia Flag, Russia Facts, Russia Food, Russia Flies Over Us, Russia Fake News, Russia Friend Enemy Or Frenemy, Russia Fifa 17, Russia France Election, Russia Fun Facts, Russia Fsb, Russia Gdp, Russia Gdp Per Capita, Russiagate, Russian Government, Russia Geography, Russia Gay, Russia Gif, Russia Georgia, Russia Gay Camps, Russian Gdp 2016, Russia Hetalia, Russia House, Russia Hacked Election, Russia History, Russia Hunger Games, Russia House Movie, Russia Hack, Russia Hearings, Russian Hacking, Russia Health Care, Russia Investigation, Russia Insider, Russia Investigation News, Russia In Russian, Russia Isis, Russia In Ww1, Russia In Syria, Russia In Ww2, Russia In Spanish, Russia Interference, Russia Jones, Russia Jehovah’s Witnesses, Russia Japan War, Russia Jokes, Russia Jw, Russia Jehovah, Russia Japan, Russia Jehovah’s Witnesses Ban, Russian Jets, Russia Join Nato, Russia Korea, Russia Kremlin, Russia Kgb, Russia Korea Border, Russia Kushner, Russia Killing Gay, Russia Kazan, Russian Keyboard, Russia Kislyak, Russia Kaliningrad, Russia Leader, Russia Life Expectancy, Russia Land Area, Russia Landmarks, Russia Location, Russia Latest News, Russia Lgbt, Russian Language, Russia Literacy Rate, Russia Lenin, Russia Map, Russia Memes, Russia Military, Russia Military News, Russia Moscow, Russia Military Power, Russian Money, Russia Missile, Russia Military Budget, Russia Map Unturned, Russia News, Russia North Korea, Russia North Korea Relations, Russia New Tank, Russia Nato, Russia Nuclear Weapons, Russia Natural Resources, Russia National Team, Russian National Anthem, Russia Newspaper, Russia On North Korea, Russia On Map, Russia Olympics, Russia Oil, Russia Ohio, Russia Outline, Russia On World Map, Russia Official Language, Russia Ocean, Russia Official Website, Russia Population, Russia Probe, Russia Putin, Russia Population Density, Russian Presidents, Russia People, Russia Probe News, Russia Population Map, Russia Pictures, Russia Political System, Russia Qatar, Russia Qualifiers, Russia Quotes, Russia Quizlet, Russia Quality Of Life, Russia Quiz, Russian Queen, Russia Questions, Russia Quick Facts, Russia Quora, Russia Religion, Russia Russia Russia, Russia Russia Russia Meme, Russia Religion News, Russia Role In The Syrian Civil War, Russian Revolution, Russia Real Estate, Russia Rivers, Russia Red Square, Russia Reddit, Russia Sanctions, Russia Syria, Russia Soccer, Russia Square Miles, Russia Size, Russia Soccer Team, Russia Syria News, Russia Sanctions Bill, Russian Super Tank, Russia Symbol, Russia Trump, Russia Today, Russia Time, Russia Time Now, Russia Time Zones, Russia Trump News, Russia Type Of Government, Russia Timeline, Russia To Alaska, Russia Tourism, Russia Us, Russia Ukraine, Russia Usa, Russia Us War, Russia United States, Russia Unemployment Rate, Russia Us Election, Russia Us News, Russia Uranium Deal, Russia Ukraine News, Russia Vs Usa, Russia Visa, Russia Vs Mexico, Russia Vs China, Russia Vs New Zealand, Russia Vs, Russia Visa Application, Russia Vs Germany, Russia Vs Usa War, Russia Vs Ukraine, Russia World Cup, Russia War, Russia Weather, Russia War News, Russia Wiki, Russia Ww2, Russia Ww1, Russia World Cup Tickets, Russia Ww3, Russia Word Whizzle, Russia X Reader, Russia X Reader Lemon, Russia X America, Russia X China, Russia X Reader Fluff, Russia X America Lemon, Russia X Male Reader Lemon, Russia X Prussia, Russia X Reader Lemon Forced, Russia X Male Reader, Russia Youtube, Russia Yeltsin, Russia Yemen, Russia Yahoo, Russian Yeti, Russia Ypg, Russian Youtube, Russia Yellowstone, Russia Yekaterinburg, Russia Year Founded, Russia Zip Code, Russia Zapad, Russia Zorbing Accident, Russia Zapad 2017, Russian Z, Russian Zombies, Russia Zorb, Russia Zigzagzigal, Russia Zip Code Format, Russia Zabivaka Tweet, Ussr Flag, Ussr Anthem, Ussr Map, Ussr Meaning, Ussr Countries, Ussr Definition, Ussr Anthem Lyrics, Ussr Leaders, Ussr Collapse, Ussr Symbol, Ussr Anthem, Ussr Anthem Lyrics, Ussr Anthem Earrape, Ussr Acronym, Ussr Atomic Bomb, Ussr Abolished, Ussr Anthem Sheet Music, Ussr And Usa, Ussr Army, Ussr Allies, Ussr Breakup, Ussr Beatles, Ussr Buran, Ussr Beatles Meaning, Ussr Bear, Ussr Ball, Ussr Borders, Ussr Background, Ussr Before And After, Ussr Bomb, Ussr Countries, Ussr Cold War, Ussr Communism, Ussr Currency, Ussr Constitution, Ussr Colors, Ussr Capital, Ussr Collapse Date, Ussr Casualties Ww2, Ussr Communism Characteristics, Ussr Definition, Ussr Dissolved, Ussr Dictators, Ussr During Cold War, Ussr During Ww2, Ussr Death Toll, Ussr Deaths Ww2, Ussr Documentary, Ussr Dates, Ussr Department 12, Ussr Earrape, Ussr Economy, Ussr Emoji, Ussr End, Ussr Emblem, Ussr Established, Ussr Economic Reform, Ussr Expansion, Ussr Explodes Atomic Bomb, Ussr Evil Empire, Ussr Flag, Ussr Fall, Ussr Flag Emoji, Ussr First Atomic Bomb, Ussr Facts, Ussr Five Year Plan, Ussr Full Name, Ussr Fidget Spinner, Ussr Founded, Ussr Flag For Sale, Ussr Gets Atomic Bomb, Ussr Government, Ussr Gdp, Ussr Genocide, Ussr Gorbachev, Ussr Gif, Ussr Gulag, Ussr Great Purge, Ussr Government During Ww2, Ussr Gdp Over Time, Ussr History, Ussr Hat, Ussr Hockey Jersey, Ussr Hydrogen Bomb, Ussr Hockey, Ussr Hoi4, Ussr Hymn, Ussr History Timeline, Ussr Homosexuality, Ussr Healthcare, Ussr In Russian, Ussr In Spanish, Ussr In Afghanistan, Ussr In Ww2, Ussr Invaded Afghanistan, Ussr Independence Day, Ussr In The Cold War, Ussr Invades Poland, Ussr Involvement In Vietnam War, Ussr In Cyrillic, Ussr Jokes, Ussr Jacket, Ussr Jersey, Ussr Japan Ww2, Ussr Jeep, Ussr Jfk Assassination, Ussr Jobs, Ussr Joins The League Of Nations, Ussr Jeans, Ussr Jfk, Ussr Korean War, Ussr Kursk, Ussr Kgb, Ussr Knife, Ussr Kazakhstan, Ussr Killings, Ussr Kremlin, Ussr Kirov, Ussr Keyboard, Ussr Khrushchev, Ussr Leaders, Ussr Logo, Ussr Leader During Ww2, Ussr Lyrics, Ussr Leaders During The Cold War, Ussr Launches Sputnik, Ussr Launches Sputnik 1, Ussr Launches Mir Space Station, Ussr Location, Ussr Lenin, Ussr Map, Ussr Meaning, Ussr Memes, Ussr Military, Ussr Music, Ussr Motto, Ussr Meaning In English, Ussr Money, Ussr Moon Landing, Ussr Members, Ussr National Anthem, Ussr National Anthem Lyrics, Ussr National Anthem Earrape, Ussr National Anthem Sheet Music, Ussr Nations, Ussr National Anthem Download, Ussr Navy, Ussr Nuclear Bomb, Ussr News, Ussr Nuclear Weapons, Ussr On Map, Ussr On World Map, Ussr Olympics, Ussr Or Soviet Union, Ussr Or U.s.s.r, Ussr Officer Uniform, Ussr Outfit, Ussr Or Russia, Ussr Outline, Ussr On The Moon, Ussr Propaganda, Ussr Presidents, Ussr Population, Ussr Propaganda Posters, Ussr Population 1940, Ussr Premiers, Ussr Population 1990, Ussr Passport, Ussr Poland, Ussr Posters, Ussr Quizlet, Ussr Quotes, Ussr Quiz, Ussr Quality Of Life, Ussr Quora, Ussr Quality Mark, Ussr Quotes From Cold War, Ussr Questions And Answers, Ussr Queues, Ussr Quick Facts, Ussr Russia, Ussr Republics, Ussr Religion, Ussr Rulers, Ussr Rocket, Ussr Revolution, Ussr Theme, Ussr Role In Ww2, Ussr Referendum, Ussr Rhino, Ussr Symbol, Ussr Stands For, Ussr Song, Ussr Salute, Ussr Space Program, Ussr States, Ussr Secret Police, Ussr Shirt, Ussr Space Race, Ussr Satellite States, Ussr Theme, Ussr Timeline, Ussr Theme Lyrics, Ussr To Russia, Ussr Territory, Ussr Today, Ussr Tanks, Ussr Test First Atomic Bomb, Ussr Totalitarianism, Ussr T Shirt, Ussr Uniform, Ussr Under Lenin, Ussr Under Stalin, Ussr Ushanka, Ussr Ukraine, Ussr Usa, Ussr Unemployment Rate, Ussr Unicode, Ussr United Nations, Ussr Under Gorbachev, Ussr Vs Usa, Ussr Vs Russia, Ussr Vs Soviet Union, Ussr Vs Russia Map, Ussr Vs Nazi, Ussr Vietnam War, Ussr Vs Germany, Ussr Vs Usa Hockey, Ussr Vs China, Ussr Vs Germany Spongebob, Ussr Ww2, Ussr Wiki, Ussr Wallpaper, Ussr Ww2 Rations, Ussr War In Afghanistan, Ussr World Map, Ussr Watch, Ussr Wars, Ussr Ww1, Ussr Weapons, Ussr X Ray Records, Ussr Xb3, Ussr Ymca, Ussr Ymca Lyrics, Ussr Years, Ussr Yugoslavia, Ussr Youtube, Ussr Young Pioneers, Ussr Yuri Gagarin, Ussr Youth, Ussr Youth Groups, Ussr Zangief, Ussr Zone 3, Ussr Zionism, Ussr Zippo, Ussr Zombies, Ussr Zenit Camera, Uss Zhukov, Ussr Zone 6, Ussr Zebra, Ussr Zone 4,
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Vladimir Putin is the latest celeb to fall victim to a death hoax
News of politician Vladimir Putin’s death spread quickly earlier this week causing concern among fans across the world. However the March 2015 report has now been confirmed as a complete hoax and just the latest in a string of fake celebrity death reports. Thankfully, the Russian president is alive and well.
Vladimir Putin death hoax spreads on Facebook
Rumors of the politician’s alleged demise gained traction on Sunday after a ‘R.I.P. Vladimir Putin’ Facebook page attracted nearly one million of ‘likes’. Those who read the ‘About’ page were given a believable account of the Russian politician’s passing:
“At about 11 a.m. ET on Sunday (March 01, 2015), our beloved politician Vladimir Putin passed away. Vladimir Putin was born on October 7, 1952 in Saint Petersburg. He will be missed but not forgotten. Please show your sympathy and condolences by commenting on and liking this page.”
Hundreds of fans immediately started writing their messages of condolence on the Facebook page, expressing their sadness that the talented 62-year-old politician and president was dead. And as usual, Twittersphere was frenzied over the death hoax.
Where as some trusting fans believed the post, others were immediately skeptical of the report, perhaps learning their lesson from the huge amount of fake death reports emerging about celebrities over recent months. Some pointed out that the news had not been carried on any major Russian network, indicating that it was a fake report, as the death of a politician of Vladimir Putin’s stature would be major news across networks.
A recent poll conducted for the Celebrity Post shows that a large majority (67%) of respondents think those Vladimir Putin death rumors are not funny anymore.
Vladimir Putin Death Hoax Dismissed Since Politician Is ‘Alive And Well’
On Monday (March 02) the politician’s reps officially confirmed that Vladimir Putin is not dead. “He joins the long list of celebrities who have been victimized by this hoax. He’s still alive and well, stop believing what you see on the Internet,” they said.
Some fans have expressed anger at the fake report saying it was reckless, distressing and hurtful to fans of the much loved politician. Others say this shows his extreme popularity across the globe.
Putin Wife,Putin News,Putin Net Worth,Putin Height,Putin Bay,Putin Memes,Putin Trump,Putin On The Ritz,Putin Age,Putin Trump Meeting,Putin And Trump,Putin Age,Putin And Trump Meeting,Putin Approval Rating,Putin And Obama,Putin Ally Crossword,Putin Assad,Putin And North Korea,Putin And Reagan,Putin As A Child,Putin Bay,Putin Bear,Putin Birthday,Putin Biography,Putin Bay Hotels,Putin Badass,Putin Bay Weather,Putin Blueberry Hill,Putin Bay Ferry,Putin Black Belt,Putin Children,Putin Calendar,Putin Clown,Putin Cartoon,Putin Chechnya,Putin Crying,Putin Canada,Putin Crimea,Putin Corruption,Putin Clinton,Putin Daughters,Putin Dog,Putin Documentary,Putin Dead,Putin Dog Merkel,Putin Definition,Putin Dancing,Putin Dolphins,Putin Drawing,Putin Dancing Gif,Putin Election,Putin Eating Popcorn,Putin English,Putin Election Results,Putin Erdogan,Putin Education,Putin Economy,Putin Eyes,Putin Exxon Deal,Putin Eye Color,Putin Family,Putin Food,Putin Funny,Putin Face,Putin Facts,Putin French,Putin Fishing,Poutine Fries,Putin Fascist,Putin Funny Face,Putin Gif,Putin Genocide,Putin Global Warming,Putin Gymnast,Putin Wife,Putin Gun,Putin Glasses,Putin Gangster,Putin Government,Putin Gorbachev,Putin Height,Putin Horse,Putin House,Putin Horseback,Putin Hockey,Putin History,Putin Hunting,Putin Hillary,Putin Human Rights,Putin Home,Putin Interview,Putin Images,Putin Israel,Putin Iq,Putin Isis,Putin In French,Putin Island,Putin Inauguration,Putin In Power,Putin Instagram,Putin Judo,Putin Jill Stein,Putin Journalists,Putin John Oliver,Putin Jehovah,Putin Jw,Putin Judo Gif,Putin Jesus,Putin James Bond,Putin Jehovah Witness,Putin Kgb,Putin Korea,Putin Karate,Putin Kremlin,Putin Kleptocracy,Putin Kim Jong Un,Putin Kraft Ring,Putin Kabaeva,Putin Khuilo,Putin Kid,Putin Laughing,Putin Laughing Gif,Putin Le Pen,Putin Languages,Putin Latest News,Putin Loves Trump,Putin Lollipop,Putin Likes Trump,Putin Limo,Putin Leadership,Putin Memes,Putin Merkel Dog,Putin Married,Putin Merkel,Putin Makeup,Putin Mask,Putin Martial Arts,Putin Meaning,Putin Macron,Putin Mansion,Putin News,Putin Net Worth,Putin North Korea,Putin New Wife,Putin Netanyahu,Putin Nato,Putin Net Worth Wiki,Putin Name Meaning,Putin Nickname,Putin Nuclear War,Putin On The Ritz,Putin On A Horse,Putin On Trump,Putin On North Korea,Putin Obama,Putin On The Ritz Gif,Putin On Syria,Putin Opposition,Putin On Snl,Putin On The Ritz Meme,Putin President,Putin Piano,Putin Palace,Putin Political Party,Putin Picture,Putin Poison,Putin Propaganda,Putin Puns,Putin Pop Song,Putin Popularity,Putin Quotes,Putin Quotes On Obama,Putin Queen Elizabeth,Putin Quotes Funny,Putin Quizlet,Putin Queen Elizabeth Stairs,Putin Quotes On Trump,Putin Quora,Putin Quote Immigrants,Putin Quebec,Putin Russia,Putin Reagan,Putin Riding Trump,Putin Rise To Power,Putin Reelection,Putin Richest Man In The World,Putin Riding A Ritz Cracker,Putin Response,Putin Ritz,Putin Rainbow,Putin Snl,Putin Syria,Putin Song,Putin Smiling,Putin Speech,Putin Shirt,Putin Speaking English,Putin Singing,Putin Salary,Putin Super Bowl Ring,Putin Trump,Putin Trump Meeting,Putin Twitter,Putin Trump Meme,Putin Trump Horse,Putin Trump Kiss,Putin Term Limit,Putin Trump Gif,Putin Term,Putin Today,Putin Ukraine,Putin Ussr,Putin Us Visit,Putin Unicorn,Putin Us Elections,Putin Un,Putin Undercover,Putin Urban Dictionary,Putin United Nations,Putin Us Relations,Putin Vs Trump,Putin Vs Obama,Putin Vladimir,Putin Video,Putin Vodka,Putin Vs Stalin,Putin Visits Trump,Putin Visit To White House,Putin Vampire,Putin Vs Obama Meme,Putin Wife,Putin Wiki,Putin Wealth,Putin Wink,Putin War,Putin Ww3,Putin Watch,Putin Winking Gif,Putin With Animals,Putin Walking,Putin Xi Jinping,Putin X Obama,Putin X Reader,Putin Xi,Putin And Trump,Putin And Obama,Putin And Assad,Putin And North Korea,Putin And Reagan,Putin And The Ritz,Putin Young,Putin Youtube,Putin Yacht,Putin Youth,Putin Yeltsin,Putin Yume,Putin Years As President,Putin Young Pictures,Putin Youth Army,Putin Yarmulke,Putin Zodiac Sign,Putin Zakaria,Putin Zassal,Putin Zassal Lyrics,Putin Zero Hedge,Putin Zeman,Putin Zil Limousine,Putin Zuma,Putin Za Makedonija,Putin Zapretio Albancima,
Putin Wife,Putin News,Putin Net Worth,Putin Height,Putin Bay,Putin Memes,Putin Trump,Putin On The Ritz,Putin Age,Putin Trump Meeting,Putin And Trump,Putin Age,Putin And Trump Meeting,Putin Approval Rating,Putin And Obama,Putin Ally Crossword,Putin Assad,Putin And North Korea,Putin And Reagan,Putin As A Child,Putin Bay,Putin Bear,Putin Birthday,Putin Biography,Putin Bay Hotels,Putin Badass,Putin Bay Weather,Putin Blueberry Hill,Putin Bay Ferry,Putin Black Belt,Putin Children,Putin Calendar,Putin Clown,Putin Cartoon,Putin Chechnya,Putin Crying,Putin Canada,Putin Crimea,Putin Corruption,Putin Clinton,Putin Daughters,Putin Dog,Putin Documentary,Putin Dead,Putin Dog Merkel,Putin Definition,Putin Dancing,Putin Dolphins,Putin Drawing,Putin Dancing Gif,Putin Election,Putin Eating Popcorn,Putin English,Putin Election Results,Putin Erdogan,Putin Education,Putin Economy,Putin Eyes,Putin Exxon Deal,Putin Eye Color,Putin Family,Putin Food,Putin Funny,Putin Face,Putin Facts,Putin French,Putin Fishing,Poutine Fries,Putin Fascist,Putin Funny Face,Putin Gif,Putin Genocide,Putin Global Warming,Putin Gymnast,Putin Wife,Putin Gun,Putin Glasses,Putin Gangster,Putin Government,Putin Gorbachev,Putin Height,Putin Horse,Putin House,Putin Horseback,Putin Hockey,Putin History,Putin Hunting,Putin Hillary,Putin Human Rights,Putin Home,Putin Interview,Putin Images,Putin Israel,Putin Iq,Putin Isis,Putin In French,Putin Island,Putin Inauguration,Putin In Power,Putin Instagram,Putin Judo,Putin Jill Stein,Putin Journalists,Putin John Oliver,Putin Jehovah,Putin Jw,Putin Judo Gif,Putin Jesus,Putin James Bond,Putin Jehovah Witness,Putin Kgb,Putin Korea,Putin Karate,Putin Kremlin,Putin Kleptocracy,Putin Kim Jong Un,Putin Kraft Ring,Putin Kabaeva,Putin Khuilo,Putin Kid,Putin Laughing,Putin Laughing Gif,Putin Le Pen,Putin Languages,Putin Latest News,Putin Loves Trump,Putin Lollipop,Putin Likes Trump,Putin Limo,Putin Leadership,Putin Memes,Putin Merkel Dog,Putin Married,Putin Merkel,Putin Makeup,Putin Mask,Putin Martial Arts,Putin Meaning,Putin Macron,Putin Mansion,Putin News,Putin Net Worth,Putin North Korea,Putin New Wife,Putin Netanyahu,Putin Nato,Putin Net Worth Wiki,Putin Name Meaning,Putin Nickname,Putin Nuclear War,Putin On The Ritz,Putin On A Horse,Putin On Trump,Putin On North Korea,Putin Obama,Putin On The Ritz Gif,Putin On Syria,Putin Opposition,Putin On Snl,Putin On The Ritz Meme,Putin President,Putin Piano,Putin Palace,Putin Political Party,Putin Picture,Putin Poison,Putin Propaganda,Putin Puns,Putin Pop Song,Putin Popularity,Putin Quotes,Putin Quotes On Obama,Putin Queen Elizabeth,Putin Quotes Funny,Putin Quizlet,Putin Queen Elizabeth Stairs,Putin Quotes On Trump,Putin Quora,Putin Quote Immigrants,Putin Quebec,Putin Russia,Putin Reagan,Putin Riding Trump,Putin Rise To Power,Putin Reelection,Putin Richest Man In The World,Putin Riding A Ritz Cracker,Putin Response,Putin Ritz,Putin Rainbow,Putin Snl,Putin Syria,Putin Song,Putin Smiling,Putin Speech,Putin Shirt,Putin Speaking English,Putin Singing,Putin Salary,Putin Super Bowl Ring,Putin Trump,Putin Trump Meeting,Putin Twitter,Putin Trump Meme,Putin Trump Horse,Putin Trump Kiss,Putin Term Limit,Putin Trump Gif,Putin Term,Putin Today,Putin Ukraine,Putin Ussr,Putin Us Visit,Putin Unicorn,Putin Us Elections,Putin Un,Putin Undercover,Putin Urban Dictionary,Putin United Nations,Putin Us Relations,Putin Vs Trump,Putin Vs Obama,Putin Vladimir,Putin Video,Putin Vodka,Putin Vs Stalin,Putin Visits Trump,Putin Visit To White House,Putin Vampire,Putin Vs Obama Meme,Putin Wife,Putin Wiki,Putin Wealth,Putin Wink,Putin War,Putin Ww3,Putin Watch,Putin Winking Gif,Putin With Animals,Putin Walking,Putin Xi Jinping,Putin X Obama,Putin X Reader,Putin Xi,Putin And Trump,Putin And Obama,Putin And Assad,Putin And North Korea,Putin And Reagan,Putin And The Ritz,Putin Young,Putin Youtube,Putin Yacht,Putin Youth,Putin Yeltsin,Putin Yume,Putin Years As President,Putin Young Pictures,Putin Youth Army,Putin Yarmulke,Putin Zodiac Sign,Putin Zakaria,Putin Zassal,Putin Zassal Lyrics,Putin Zero Hedge,Putin Zeman,Putin Zil Limousine,Putin Zuma,Putin Za Makedonija,Putin Zapretio Albancima,
Plutonium processing is performed in the Plutonium Building (Building 4, Figure 4-32, Sheet 1), which is a two-story laboratory of approximately 151,000 ft2 (46,025 m2). The exterior walls and roof are of reinforced concrete. A concrete fire wall divides the building into two halves, each of which contains its own ventilation systems and electrical substations. One half of the process floor is divided by a central corridor into Areas 100 and 200. This half contains the plutonium research and development laboratories, the 238Pu operations, and the personnel decontamination area. The other half is divided into Areas 300 and 400 by another corridor. This half houses plutonium recovery, metal preparation and fabrication, and nondestructive analysis laboratories.
Each of the processing areas is further divided into a number of rooms that contain the gloveboxes for plutonium work. The ventilation systems that service the gloveboxes and all other utilities are located in the basement of the facility. The basement also houses critical support equipment, including all other ventilation equipment, the packing/unpacking room, waste-handling areas, the isopress laboratory, and the plutonium storage vault.
Three levels of containment are provided for plutonium processing. The primary confinement system includes gloveboxes, hoods, vessels, tanks, piping, and the glovebox ventilation exhaust system. The secondary confinement system includes the walls, floors, ceiling, and doors of the laboratories containing the gloveboxes, as well as the laboratory recirculation and bleed-off exhaust system. The exterior walls, floor, roof, and doors of the structure, along with the basement exhaust system, provide the tertiary confinement system.
The ventilation system in the facility has four zones, all of which are maintained at a lower pressure than that of the outside air. Air enters the two halves of the facility through an intake stack that has four ducts. Two ducts supply air to each half of the building. The ventilation system is designed so that each zone operates as a separate building with its own filtered exhaust stack. Exhaust from each confinement area is sent through at least two stages of HEPA filtration to prevent radioactive particles from being discharged to the environment.
The conveyor system in the facility transports contaminated material and equipment to almost any point on the first floor. Elevated stainless steel tunnels equipped with a trolley hoist system connect the gloveboxes. The vertical portions of the tunnels connect the overhead system to the gloveboxes at drop boxes located on the first floor. These drop boxes are the transfer points in which items are hoisted up to the trolley in the overhead tunnel system for eventual offsite waste disposal.
The criticality detection system monitors operations on the main processing floor of the Plutonium Facility and in the basement vault to detect gamma energy released from fission of SNM. The system is designed to detect conditions that could lead to a criticality accident in this facility and to sound an audible alarm. The alarm initiates immediate evacuation to minimize personnel exposure. This system consists of 20 Geiger-Mueller detector heads and associated circuitry located throughout the first-floor process areas and basement vault.
A continuous air-monitoring system is used to sample and analyze air from multiple points throughout the laboratory areas, basement, ductwork, and exhaust stacks. A continuous stream of sample air is drawn to a solid-state alpha detector, whose data are used for man/machine interface (lights, meter, squealer) and for monitoring by the operations center.
Other supporting systems include fire detection and suppression systems, a chilled-water system, an instrument air system, electrical power, water distribution systems, and a vacuum system. Voice communication is provided by a paging system and a telephone system. The emergency system provides paging throughout the TA-55 area and sounds the criticality and fire alarms.
4.32.2.1.1.2 Nuclear Materials Storage Facility
The Nuclear Materials Storage Facility (Building 41, Figure 4-32, Sheet 1) will eventually contain a significant amount of stored nuclear material. This facility is primarily intended for intermediate and long-term storage of SNM. Although completed in 1987, the Nuclear Materials Storage Facility has never operated because of design and construction deficiencies. A major renovation project is being planned to correct those deficiencies so that the facility can operate. The renovation project is expected to be completed by 2001.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
After Briefing on Likely Death Tolls, JFK Remarked: “And We Call Ourselves the Human Race”
Net Evaluation Subcommittee Nevertheless Initially Projected U.S. Prevailing in Global Nuclear Conflict — Although Final Report Described a “Nuclear Stalemate”
Some Studies Depicted U.S. as Launching First, Preemptively
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 480
For more information contact:
William Burr – 202/994-7000 or nsarchiv@gwu.edu
Reports of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee
Estimated distribution of radioactive fall-out on U.S. caused by a Soviet retaliatory launch-on-warning (LOW) attack in mid-1965 on a range of U.S. target systems: urban-industrial (also Canadian), air defenses (also Canadian), SAC bases, naval bases, command-and-control, and military depots.
Washington, D.C., 2014 – On the morning of 20 July 1961, while the Berlin Crisis was simmering, President John F. Kennedy and the members of the National Security Council heard a briefing on the consequences of nuclear war by the NSC’s highly secret Net Evaluation Subcommittee. The report, published in excerpts today for the first time by the National Security Archive, depicted a Soviet surprise attack on the United States in the fall of 1963 that began with submarine-launched missile strikes against Strategic Air Command bases. An estimated 48 to 71 million Americans were “killed outright,” while at its maximum casualty-producing radioactive fallout blanketed from 45 to 71 percent of the nation’s residences. In the USSR and China, at the end of one month 67 and 76 million people, respectively, had been killed.
This was President Kennedy’s first exposure to a NESC report, but the secret studies of nuclear war scenarios had been initiated by his predecessor, Dwight D. Eisenhower. It may have been after this briefing, described by Secretary of State Dean Rusk as “an awesome experience,” that a dismayed Kennedy turned to Rusk, and said: “And we call ourselves the human race.”
The NESC reports on nuclear war were multi-volume, highly classified studies and none has ever been declassified in their entirety. The summaries published here today — for the annual reports from 1957 to 1963 — provide a glimpse of the full reports, although important elements remain classified. Besides the summaries and fuller reports for 1962 and 1963, today’s posting includes a number of special studies prepared by the NESC, including an especially secret report requested by President Eisenhower that led to the production of the comprehensive U.S. nuclear war plan in 1960, the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP).
The National Security Council’s Net Evaluation Subcommittee was a small and highly secret organization that prepared annual reports analyzing the “net” impact of a U.S.-Soviet nuclear exchange, in terms of losses of people, military assets, and industrial resources. For Eisenhower such studies were essential; he came to believe that a U.S.-Soviet military conflict would quickly go nuclear and that as long as winning was what mattered, “one could not be meticulous as to the methods by which the force was brought to bear.”[1] Studies on nuclear war, mainly the estimated impact of a U.S. atomic air offensive, had begun during the Truman administration — for example, the 1948 Harmon report and Weapons System Evaluation Group [WSEG] study 1 — but they were not prepared at the presidential level and did not estimate the impact of a Soviet attack on the United States.[2]
For years, the very existence of the NESC was a well-kept secret. Its name leaked to the press only once when a deputy director died in a 1956 plane crash in the Potomac, but the news stories provided no explanation of the NESC’s work. Historians and the interested public did not know anything about the Subcommittee until the 1980s and 90s, when presidential libraries started to declassify documents about its role in government, and the State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States series began to publish records of NSC meetings where the NESC presented its findings.[3]
Directors of the National Security Council’s Net Evaluation Subcommittee, from the late 1950s through 1964
Lt. General Thomas Hickey (U.S. Army), 1959-1961. (Copy from photo collections, U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center)
General Leon W. Johnson (U.S. Air Force), 1962-1964. (Copy from Still Pictures Division, National Archives, RG 342B, box 493)
With the end of the Cold War, the NESC scenarios of a U.S.-Soviet general nuclear war appear obsolete and irrelevant. Even with renewed tensions with Russia, the possibility of nuclear war or even a direct conventional military confrontation is exceedingly remote. Nevertheless, the terrifying NESC scenarios are a reminder of the concerns that motivated Kennedy and his successors to seek to control the nuclear arms race and to avoid conflicts by pursuing détente with the Soviet Union. In any event, the threat of nuclear war is not an imaginary one. Today India and Pakistan are pursuing a dangerous and destructive nuclear arms race and war could produce terrible consequences for the people of South Asia. Whether the leaders of those countries have asked their nuclear experts to undertake NESC-like studies is unknown, but they may find the reports of the Eisenhower-Kennedy era to be useful examples for projecting the possible consequences of the worst-case scenario.
With the focus on the relative power positions of the United States and the Soviet Union, the conclusions of the annual reports present an interesting progression, with some confidence about the outcome in the earlier studies and a more sober assessment at the end. The 1958 study suggested that despite the terrible destruction, the United States would come out ahead in terms of the “balance of strength” in strategic nuclear forces and industrial capacity. In the 1959 study, the Soviet Union “would receive the greater industrial damage and population casualties.” Some of the conclusions are excised from the 1961 study, but the 1962 report concluded that in the two general war scenarios reviewed the “US strategic military posture would remain superior to that of the Soviet Union.” The next year, however, the NESC found no advantage: “neither the US nor the USSR can emerge from a full nuclear exchange without suffering very severe damage and high casualties.” That held true even if the United States launched first. Thus, President Kennedy concluded that Moscow and Washington had reached a “nuclear stalemate.”[4]
The 1963 report was the last of the NESC’s annual assessments. Perhaps because the studies showed the same terrible consequences year after year, policymakers asked the NESC to look more closely at crisis management issues. A report in late 1963 focused on “The Management and Termination of War with the Soviet Union,” while one the following year examined a military crisis in Western Europe. By early 1965, at the instigation of a turf-conscious Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, the NESC no longer existed. McNamara argued for its abolition on grounds of organizational efficiencies, but a key problem was that the NESC had prepared a report that was not to his liking [See documents 10A-C].
The declassification of NESC reports raises questions about the claim that the “U.S. was never the aggressor” in war games and other exercises depicted as occurring in an “official future.”[5] This claim needs to be considered carefully because the Subcommittee produced several reports — namely, for 1962 and 1963 — that postulated the United States as the initiator of preemptive nuclear attacks, close to a classic first strike. Whether a preemptive strike is “aggressive” depends on the point of view; the concept of preemption depends on accurate strategic warning of an attack, so it could be seen as an aggressive response to imminent aggression. But a preemptive strike based on an inaccurate warning would be both aggressive and catastrophic. In any event, well before 1962, preemption was an element of U.S. nuclear war planning and U.S. military planners continued to assess whether it was advantageous or not.[6]
The classified NESC reports are under the control of the National Security Staff at the White House. At the close of the Clinton administration, the NSS turned over most of the historical National Security Council institutional files to the presidential libraries but a sub-set of intelligence files, such as records of the 303 and 40 committees that vetted intelligence operations, remain in White House hands. The Staff works with the presidential libraries and documents in this collection can be requested from the relevant library. Because the NESC reports are large, multi-volume works, the Archive began by requesting summaries of the reports during 1957-1963. That alone, including a prolonged appeals process, took over 12 years to accomplish. In the meantime, the Defense Department has denied in its entirety a 2001 FOIA request for reports from the Eisenhower period, necessitating a new appeal. Separate requests for declassification of the first volumes of the 1956, 1961 and the 1963 reports are also underway.
THE DOCUMENTS
Document 1: Report of the Net Capabilities Evaluation Subcommittee, 3 November 1954, Top Secret, excised copy, released under appeal
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower Library (DDEL), National Security Council Staff Records, 1948-1961. Disaster File, box 37, Net Evaluation Subcommittee (3)
The NESC had forerunners, including a Special Evaluation Subcommittee and a Net Capabilities Evaluation Subcommittee, both of which focused on the methodology of a Soviet attack and the damage that it would cause the United States.[7] The report of the Net Capabilities Evaluation Subcommittee, which reviews a Soviet attack on the United States in mid-1957, was recently declassified. It provides great detail on how and why the Soviets would attack — to strike the “first blow” against an expected U.S. attack, essentially a preemptive strike. According to the report, the Soviets would prefer a non-nuclear war because of the U.S. nuclear advantage, but they also understood that Washington “would not permit itself to be deprived of its most powerful weapon.”
The estimated Soviet nuclear stockpile was relatively small, which led the analysts to posit an attack centering on Strategic Air Command bases and strategically important U.S. metropolitan areas. The bases were critically important because Moscow would see destroying them as essential to “blunting the retaliatory blow that … would be directed at the USSR upon the initiation of hostilities.” Reflecting Cold War suspicions and anxieties, clandestine detonations were an essential element of the Soviet attack. The Soviet air offensive could take different forms, low- or high-altitude or even a small “sneak attack.” However the offensive unfolded, Soviet air crews would be flying one-way missions and would have to be induced to “accept missions for which there would be little chance of return.”
The report includes a detailed description of the estimated damage that an attack by some 1,000 Soviet long-range bombers would cause to U.S. military installations and economic resources, including industry, money-credit system, and nuclear energy facilities. The damage assessment includes an estimate of death caused by high-altitude or low-altitude attacks, with or without evacuation from cities. Without evacuation, the high-level attack would cause 9,600,000 deaths in industrial areas; but with evacuation the numbers would be in the range of 4,400,000. For the low-altitude attack, the numbers were 3,100,000 and 5,100,000 respectively.
Document 2: National Security Council Staff, “Megatonnage Involved in Previous Net Evaluation Studies,” attached to “Planning Board Questions Net Evaluation Presentation,” 26 April 1960, Top Secret
Source: National Archives, Record Group 273. Records of the National Security Council, box 84, 442nd Meeting of the National Security Council, April 26, 1960
When the NSC Net Evaluation Subcommittee was established in 1955, it started by focusing on the net impact of a Soviet attack, although U.S. retaliatory strikes would be taken into account. In 1956 the NESC received instructions to look in detail at the impact of the U.S. attack on Soviet bloc targets. Each of the reports would postulate the total megatons detonated by Soviet and U.S. nuclear strikes. Over the years this information has been classified but it was disclosed in this FOIA release. For the purposes of comparison, one megaton-a million tons-of explosive yield is equivalent to about 66 of the 20 kiloton weapon that devastated Hiroshima.
Document 3: “Summary and Conclusions,” 1957 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council, 15 November 1957, Top Secret, excised copy
Source: DDEL FOIA release
The NESC’s report for 1957 analyzed the consequences of four Soviet bomber-missile attacks launched under various circumstances in 1960, three of which were surprise attacks on U.S. forces at different states of readiness. Except for air defenses, U.S. forces were at “full alert” for the fourth scenario. All four attacks were devastating although the attack under condition II was less so because U.S. air defense forces were in a high state of readiness. Thus, the U.S. suffered an estimated 46 million fatalities instead of 85 million.
The attack scenario began with the detonation of clandestinely-introduced nuclear devices in New York City and Washington, D.C. This was a scenario that reflected Cold War suspicions and obsessions, but by the mid-1950s, U.S. intelligence estimated that the Soviets had the capability to introduce clandestine devices under diplomatic cover but would be more likely to use them as an “auxiliary” method of attack than as an important means of disabling the United States. In the NESC scenario, the surprise detonations provided early warning to SAC alert forces which made it possible for them to launch a devastating strike that left the Soviet Union with “no remaining capability to deliver a nuclear attack” against the United States. Nevertheless, “a nuclear war initiated by the USSR against the United States under circumstances of either ‘Strategic Surprise’ or ‘Full Alert’ would result in the devastation” of both countries.
The NESC looked closely at the U.S. retaliatory attack that would be launched in response to the Soviet attack under condition VI. Seven hundred and twenty SAC bombers and 47 strategic missiles delivered an attack on military targets in the Soviet Union, including 74 government control centers. SAC did not target industry or populations per se, so devastation and fatalities were caused by the “fallout and the bonus received from the blast and thermal effects of’ weapons detonating off their desired targets or on military targets in population centers.” “Bonus” conveyed the idea of unplanned but nevertheless useful destruction, but is misleading because blast and thermal effects were inherent features of the weapons.
The NESC analysts argued that the study demonstrated the need for more effective defenses and robust alert forces: air defenses, anti-ballistic missile systems, dispersed nuclear forces on constant alert, hardened ballistic missile sites, fallout shelters, and electronic systems for warning of Soviet missile attacks. Such recommendations recurred in subsequent reports.
Document 4A-D: The 1958 Report
A:”Summary and Conclusions,” 1958 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council, 10 November 1958, Top Secret, excised copy
B: Memorandum by NSC Executive Secretary S. Everett Gleason, “Discussion at the 387th Meeting of the National Security Council, Thursday, November 20, 1958,” 20 November 1958, Top Secret
C: Gerard C. Smith to Under Secretary of State Herter, “Oral Presentation of the Annual Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee,” 25 November 1958, Top Secret
Sources: A: FOIA request to DDEL; B: DDEL, Ann Whitman File. NSC Series. Box 10. 387th Meeting of the National Security Council; C: Record Group 59, Records of the Department of State, Policy Planning Staff Records, 1957-1961, box 205, S/P Chron, 1957-59
The NESC report for 1958 presented a devastating Soviet attack in 1961 involving the detonation of 553 nuclear weapons on the United States with a total yield of 2,186 megatons. The attack produced “widespread fires” burning out 169,000 square miles or 5.7 per cent of the U.S. land area.[8] Moreover, a “lethal blanket of radiation” covered “at its maximum one-half the nation, and persisted in small areas for over two years.” Fifty million Americans were dead and nine million were sick or injured, out of a pre-attack population of 179 million. When housing and food supplies were destroyed, exposure and starvation caused more deaths.
The U.S. retaliatory attack on the Sino-Soviet bloc was by 805 bombers, 5 ICBMs and 41 IRBMs. At President Eisenhower’s instruction, the NESC staff was to posit an attack on a combined military/urban-industrial target system. That included, according to the NSC minutes and a memorandum by Gerard C. Smith, every city with a population of over 25,000. Moscow itself was targeted with a 100-megaton attack by missiles and bombers.
The contemplated U.S. attack completely destroyed “command facilities” in Moscow, Beijing, and Pyongyang and killed 71 million people at once; 30 days later, a total of 196 million people had died (out of a total of 952 million people in the bloc). The attack reduced the Soviet GNP by 75 per cent for the year following the attack. The total bloc GNP was decreased by about 56 percent. The U.S. attack “would virtually eliminate [the Soviet Union] as a world power.” Thus, as the NESC observed, the 1958 report, like the earlier one, drew a picture of a devastated U.S. and Soviet Union. Nevertheless, according to the report, at the end of the nuclear exchange, “The balance of strength would be on the side of the United States.”
The report generated rather differing assessments by Smith and President Eisenhower, but also an important nuclear planning initiative. Smith raised questions about morality and over-destruction, while Eisenhower suggested that the destructiveness was about right, but should not be increased. . Noting that that the estimated attack would “paralyze the Russian nation” and “[destroy] the will of the Soviet Union to fight,” Eisenhower thought it would be wrong to go further and to “require a 100 per cent pulverization of the Soviet Union.” “There was obviously a limit — a human limit — to the devastation which human beings could endure.” These considerations led Eisenhower to request a study on what types of retaliatory attacks would best deter the Soviet Union from future attacks: an attack on a military-target system or an “optimum mix” of military and urban-industrial targets. The request was NSC Action 2009 and the resulting studies would lead to the first Single Integrated Operational Plan.
Documents 5A-B: The 1959 Report
A: “Summary and Conclusions,” 1959 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council, n.d., Top Secret, excised copy
B: Lt. Col. Brian Gunderson to General Martin, “Briefing to Net Evaluation Subcommittee,” 2 December 1958, Top Secret
Sources: A: DDEL FOIA release; B: FOIA release from NARA, Record Group 341, United States Air Force (Air Staff), Directorate of Plans, Records for 1958, box 36, OPS 40 (Speeches, Briefings, Presentations) (6 Sept 58-Dec 58).
This report evaluated a different Soviet surprise attack, occurring in 1962 but under different circumstances: with U.S. and allied military forces on high alert beginning 48 hours in advance. The damage to the United States inflicted by the Soviet attack was: “of such magnitude that [it] could not fully return to pre-attack status for years.” Within a year of the attack, 60 million Americans had died, over half from radiation exposure. In this scenario, Soviet missiles caused about 1/3 of the damage. The U.S. counterattack caused 96 million Russian fatalities, over half from fallout as in the United States. Because U.S. forces were on high alert, The USSR would receive the greater industrial damage and population casualties. But, according to the NESC, the “initial nuclear exchange” did not settle the war’s outcome since both sides “would retain significant military forces capable of further limited operations.”
A briefing by Colonel Brian Gunderson on “Air Force Concept of Operations in the 1962 Time Period for Unrestricted General War” provides an example of the kind of input that the NESC received to develop its scenarios. Noting that U.S. policy rejected preventive war, Gunderson argued that this did not mean the United States must “suffer a surprise, direct and possibly massive and devastating attack before our strategic offensive force is launched.” It was possible to initiate “hostilities … under other circumstances” To destroy Soviet counter-force targets, the Air Force could take the “initiative” by which Gunderson probably meant preemption; consistent with this, he later mentioned the possibility of receiving a strategic warning. In the event of a surprise attack that inflicted substantial losses, the Air Force needed a force that could “prevail” by having a capability to destroy remaining Soviet strategic-nuclear forces.
For Gunderson, a force that could “prevail” would be a deterrent. “The U.S. must have a force in-being that can inflict decisive damage on the complete nuclear delivery capability of the Soviets, and we must convince our enemies of our determination to employ this force if we are to deter them and save this nation from nuclear devastation.”
Net Evaluation Subcommittee, Appraisal of the Relative Merits, from the Point of View of Effective Deterrence, of Alternative Retaliatory Efforts, 30 October 1959, Top Secret, excised copy. Page 13 missing in file and page 39 incomplete.
Source: DDEL MDR release, under appeal
In late 1960, as one of the last acts of his administration, President Eisenhower signed off on the first Single Integrated Operational Plans, SIOP-62 (for fiscal year 1962). The history of SIOP-62 is well known, thanks to David A. Rosenberg’s path-breaking studies and the declassification of significant documents from the period.[9] Nevertheless, this study, a key starting point for SIOP-62, has been classified for decades and is still only available in part. Requested by President Eisenhower in December 1958, the study was so secret that the regular members of the NESC, such as the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission and the Federal Civil Defense Administrator, were out of the loop. Only Staff Director Lt. General Thomas Hickey (U.S. Army) and the Committee staff were involved in its production.
Following Eisenhower’s instructions, General Hickey and the NESC staff reviewed three target systems-military, urban-industrial, and an “optimum-mix” of urban-industrial/military targets-to determine the extent to which a capability to destroy them would provide an effective deterrent and enable the United States to “prevail” in the event of general war. The result of the NESC’s effort was a several-hundred-page study, some of which has been declassified with excisions (annexes E, F, and G are still undergoing review). But the basic conclusion stands out: compared with retaliation against urban-industrial targets or military targets only, the attack on the “optimum mix” target-system, if successful, would “substantially destroy or neutralize the enemy nuclear delivery capability, retard the movement of land, sea, and air forces in the USSR and China, substantially destroy primary and secondary military and government controls, cause in excess of 35 percent casualties in the USSR and 15 percent in China, and indefinitely paralyze the war-supporting industries of both countries. Such extensive destruction would place the United States in “a position of relative advantage from which to ultimately prevail.” That sanguine assumption became the premise of SIOP-62.[10]
The official definition of “prevail,” found in National Security Council document 5904 (and repeated in Annex C) posited that the United States would “survive as a nation” and that its adversaries will have “lost their will and ability to wage war.” Yet the NESC observed that by the early 1960s the assumption of prevailing would become “questionable” when the Soviet Union had a long-range missile force, whether ground- or submarine-launched. With both bombers and missiles, the Soviets would be able to launch an attack with such “overall-weight” that “survival might be doubtful.” Therefore, the United States would in the future have to develop a capability to counter a missile attack by “destroying the force at its source.” Moreover, a capability to provide adequate warning of a missile attack was essential: “The point cannot be made too strongly that survival and prevailing are directly dependent on receiving the maximum amount of warning at the tactical level.”
Estimates of destruction or damage expectancy and of assurance of delivering a weapon to the Bomb Release Line were significant elements of the report. Assurance of delivery ranged from 75 to 90 percent. Because 100 percent destruction was impractical and too expensive, the NESC called for a 90 percent probability of achieving varying degrees of damage-ranging from “severe” to “significant.” Anything less than 90 percent would raise questions about the value of the target as such. When the first SIOP was constructed by the Joint Strategic Target Planning Staff, 90 percent (or higher) was boiler plate, which White House science adviser George Kistiakowsky and some Navy and Army leaders saw as a sign of excessive destruction or “overkill” that needed to be scaled back. Nevertheless, high levels of damage expectancy remained a basic feature of the SIOP for years to come.
Document 7A-D: The 1961 Briefing
A: “Summary and Conclusions,” 1961 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council, n.d., Top Secret, excised copy
B: “Notes on National Security Council Meeting, 20 July 1961,” Top Secret
C: President’s Daily Schedule, 20 July 1961, excerpt
Sources: A: FOIA Release, B: Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library, VP National Security File. National Security Council (II); C: John F. Kennedy Library, President’s Office File, President’s Secretary File, D: John F. Kennedy Library at http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/Archives/JFKNSF-313-016.aspx
President Kennedy received his first NESC briefing during a well-attended NSC meeting at 10 a.m. on 20 July 1961, in the midst of the Berlin crisis. What has been declassified from the summary presents a dire picture of a post-attack United States and Soviet Union, and the excised portions may show an even more calamitous picture. It may have been after the presentation, described by Secretary of State Dean Rusk as “an awesome experience,” that a dismayed John F. Kennedy turned to Rusk and said: “And we call ourselves the human race.”[11]
On the basis of a sketchy record of this NSC meeting, one researcher concluded that the 1961 report was an actual plan for a “preemptive strike” on the former Soviet Union.[12] But this confuses the NESC’s analytical purposes with the nuclear war planning which went on elsewhere in the federal government. The topic of the 1961 report was the usual Soviet surprise attack and U.S. retaliation, all taking place in the fall of 1963. The summary included a striking overview statement: “the scope and intensity of destruction and the shattering of the established political, military and economic structure resulting from such an exchange would be so vast as to practically defy accurate assessment.” Estimated population losses were huge: in the USSR and China at the end of one month: 67 million and 76 million people respectively. The United States “suffered severe damage and destruction from the surprise Soviet attack … Tens of millions of Americans were killed outright; millions more died in subsequent weeks. The framework of the federal and of many state governments was shattered.” Between 48 and 71 million were killed and casualties increased during the year that followed.
A detailed record of this meeting has not surfaced, but the previously mentioned summary includes President Kennedy’s admonition that the meeting and its purpose were to be kept secret. Nevertheless, some word about the event leaked and an article by Fletcher Knebel-co-author of Seven Days in May published in 1962-mentioning the briefing appeared in Look Magazine on 21 November 1961. In a memorandum to President Kennedy, McGeorge Bundy rebutted the Knebel article point-by-point.
Documents 8A-B: Strategic Systems Requirements
A: “A Study of Requirements for US Strategic Systems; Final Report,” 1 December 1961, Top Secret, excised copy
B: Memorandum for Secretary of Defense from Defense Department Comptroller Charles Hitch, “Review of the Hickey Study,” with evaluation attached, 22 December 1961, Top Secret, excised copy
Sources: A: FOIA request; B: MDR request
The report on targeting [Document 6] was not the last special project requested of the NESC. Another one came in March 1961 when Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara asked General Hickey to prepare a study that would serve as a “foundation for the determination of requirements for delivery vehicles for strategic nuclear weapons” and to do this by laying out alternative U.S. nuclear postures and strategic objectives and to evaluate them in terms of the achievement of strategic objectives, implications for budgets, Soviet objectives/postures/budget levels, and “alternative circumstances of war outbreak and termination.” The first study, not yet available, was due 1 June 1961. The Final Report, prepared months later, represented an attempt to “flesh out” the actual strategic force levels, for each year from 1961 to 1971, required for implementing the Kennedy administration’s “controlled response” strategy.
Among the new systems proposed by the report was an Advanced Minuteman, a new Polaris submarine-launched ballistic missile, an advanced Titan II ICBM, “Supersonic Low-Altitude Penetrators” launched by “Standoff Missile Launching Aircraft,” and a reconnaissance strike aircraft (RS/X). Some of the proposed systems would contribute toward the strategic “reserve force”-the heart of “controlled response”-needed to survive a surprise attack and help improve “intra-war bargaining power.” Other purposes were to deter “wanton wartime strikes against U.S. cities,” and provide a capability to “strengthen prospects for war termination on favorable terms by having an option to selectively attack urban-industrial targets even during the later stages of a war.”
The Final Report was the topic of a detailed summary and assessment prepared for McNamara by his comptroller, Charles Hitch, who noted that the force postures proposed by Hickey “inherently have varying degrees of first-strike capability” which needed to be analyzed. Taking exception to some of the specific recommendations, Hitch argued that “the requirements for a controlled response strategy are … exaggerated and its feasibility is underestimated.” According to Hitch, strategic programs then under way, should provide a “satisfactory posture” for controlled response by 1964 “if not sooner.”
Documents 9A-C: The 1962 Report
A: Introduction and Conclusion, 1962 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council, n.d. [Circa 22 August 1962], Top Secret, excised copy
B. “1962 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council,” Volume 1, n.d., [circa 22 August 1962], Top Secret, excised copy
C: Memorandum for the Chairman, Net Evaluation Subcommittee, 22 August 1962
Source: A: FOIA release by Kennedy Library; B and C: NARA, Record Group 218, Records of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Records of JCS Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer, box 19, 381 Net Evaluation
In 2006, five years after the Archive requested summaries of the NESC reports from the Kennedy years, volume 1 of the 1962 report was declassified from JCS records at the National Archives. So far, this is the most complete release of any of the NESC annual reports and it is more complete than the excerpts for 1962 released under FOIA. The declassification at NARA included a list of the attendees at the briefing: President Kennedy and members of the National Security Council, along with Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, civil defense chief Edward McDermott, and several senior White House staffers. Substantially fewer people attended this briefing than the one held the previous July, probably because of the press leak mentioned earlier.
This NESC report is of a Vietnam War scenario in 1965 with conflict stemming from a North Vietnamese invasion of South Vietnam and Laos escalating into general war with China and Soviet Union. The NESC depicted two “general wars,” one involving Soviet preemption against the U.S., the other a U.S. preemptive attack against the Soviet Union. Both wars started out with counterforce strikes against nuclear targets, but they culminated with massive targeting of urban-industrial targets. As expected, both wars involved enormous destruction with millions of fatalities and injuries on both sides; nevertheless, the NESC found that in both wars “the net balance …would favor the US.” In both scenarios, the “US strategic military posture would remain superior to that of the Soviet Union.” In overall terms, the Subcommittee found that in both scenarios “the net balance … would favor the US.” The next year’s report provided a striking contrast.
Documents 10A-B: The 1963 Report
A: “Summary and Conclusions,” 1963 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council,” n.d., Top Secret, excised copy
B: 1963 Report of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, National Security Council Oral Presentation, 27 August 1963, Top Secret, excised copy
C: McGeorge Bundy to President Kennedy, “Net Evaluation Subcommittee Report 1963,” 12 September 1963, Top Secret
Sources: A: John F. Kennedy Library; B: NARA, Record Group 218, Records of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Records of JCS Chairman Maxwell Taylor, box 25, 381 Net Evaluation; C: NARA, Record Group 273, Records of the National Security Council, Records of NSC Representative on Internal Security, box 66, Net Evaluation Subcommittee, 1961-64
Summarizing the longer report, the “Oral Presentation” prepared for an NSC meeting analyzed several hypothetical nuclear wars during 1964-1968; like the 1962 report, in each, one of the superpowers initiated a preemptive strike and the other retaliated. The NESC’s conclusions were grim: for “the years of this study … neither the US nor the USSR can emerge from a full nuclear exchange without suffering very severe damage and high casualties.”
Soon after the report was completed, the National Security Council received a briefing by the NESC’s director, General Leon Johnson, on 12 September 1963. McGeorge Bundy had already prepared President Kennedy with the basic conclusions as well as some questions that he could raise. According to the record of the meeting, the judgment that the United States would not suffer less damage than the Soviet Union brought President Kennedy to the conclusion that the superpowers were in a “nuclear stalemate” and that preemption, which Bundy had equated to a first strike, no longer offered an advantage. While NESC director Johnson believed that in the new stalemated situation “nuclear war is impossible if rational men control governments,” Rusk was skeptical, arguing that “if both sides believed that neither side would use nuclear weapons, one side or the other would be tempted to act in a way which would push the other side beyond its tolerance level.”
Even with the stalemate, the SIOP would continue to include a preemptive option in the unlikely event that decision-makers had “strategic warning” of an impending Soviet attack. Moreover, by the 1970s, with the Defense Support System giving approximately 25 minutes of warning before an attack, a launch on warning option became available although it was fraught with risk of a false alarm.
Documents 11A-B: The War Termination Study
A: Net Evaluation Subcommittee, “The Management and Termination of War with the Soviet Union,” 15 November 1963, Top Secret
B: Memorandum from Colonel William Y. Smith to General Maxwell Taylor, 7 November 1963, Top Secret
Sources: A: Record Group 59, Department of State Records, Records of Policy Planning Council, 1963-64, box 280, file “War Aims,” previously posted on National Security Archive Web site; B: Record Group 218, Records of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Maxwell Taylor Papers, box 25
Not long after the presentation of the 1963 report, the NESC staff completed the first U.S. government systematic study of the problem of nuclear war termination. Worried about the inflexibility of U.S. nuclear strategy, the Kennedy administration had begun to look closely at “flexible response” and “controlled response” strategies for fighting conventional war or lower-level nuclear conflicts in NATO Europe. Consistent with that, the NESC took up the daunting task of considering whether it was possible to fight a nuclear war in a “discriminating manner” so that it ended on “acceptable terms” to the United States while avoiding “unnecessary damage” to adversaries and allies. To illustrate the problem of war termination, the NESC presented three scenarios of a U.S.-Soviet nuclear war, 1) an all-out Soviet attack on the U.S., 2) a U.S. preemptive counterforce attack (based on certain knowledge of Soviet attack preparations), and 3) escalation from conventional to limited nuclear conflict, with scenarios of European and Far Eastern conflicts.
Commenting on a nearly final draft of this study, Col. William Y. Smith, then assistant to JCS Chairman Maxwell Taylor, summarized key points. He found the recommendations unsurprising: a need for improved command and control, better planning, more discriminate weapons, etc. Some readers, he observed, “may question that [the report] makes the unreal seem possible, by treating the possibility of exerting some control over the use of nuclear weapons at the tactical and strategic level.”
Documents 12A-C: The End of the NESC
A: JCS Chairman Wheeler to McGeorge Bundy, 15 October 1964, Top Secret
B: McGeorge Bundy to Wheeler, 26 October 1964, Confidential
C: Robert McNamara to Secretary of State et al., enclosing memorandum to the President, “Elimination of the Net Evaluation Subcommittee of the National Security Council,” 23 December 1964
Sources: A and B: NARA, Record Group 273. National Security Council. Records of NSC Representative on Internal Security, box 66. 1964 Net Evaluation; C: NARA, Records of Department of State Participation in the Operations Coordinating Board and the National Security Council, 1947-1963, box 96, NSC 5816
The last NESC report on the management of possible U.S.-Soviet crises remains classified but a short summary is available, as is Secretary of Defense McNamara’s proposal to abolish the NESC immediately thereafter. To prepare the report, members of the subcommittee staff, including James E. Goodby, met with top U.S. military officers in Western Europe, including Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Lyman Lemnitzer. A meeting with 7th Army Commander General William Quinn (father of Washington Post journalist Sally Quinn) was especially important because Quinn questioned the deployment of Allied forces in West Germany and the degree to which they could counter a Soviet attack. Goodby recalls that the report addressed a number of issues that the military thought needed attention, but which Defense Department planners were not considering, such as maldeployment of Allied forces across the North German plain. The implication was that the task of creating a non-nuclear flexible response that would be compatible with forward defense was a tougher problem than McNamara was portraying and would probably require greater defense expenditures by the Allies than he had proposed..
Recalling that McNamara became “visibly angry” during the briefing, Goodby surmised that he saw the NESC as a challenge to his authority because it was an independent channel for the military to provide its analysis to the White House. The next day, McNamara proposed to President Johnson that he abolish the NESC.[13] McNamara’s proposal did not mention policy disagreements. Instead, he emphasized organizational efficiencies; for example, that the Subcommittee duplicated functions that Pentagon offices, such as the JCS Special Studies Group, were already performing better. According to McNamara, while the NESC’s “annual study program …had value and relevance in 1958, its contribution today is marginal.” President Johnson concurred and the NESC was soon disbanded.
NOTES
[1] Quoted from Marc Trachtenberg, “A Wasting Asset: American Strategy and the Shifting Nuclear Balance,” History and Strategy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), page 138.
[2] David A. Rosenberg, “American Atomic Strategy and the Hydrogen Bomb Decision,” Journal of American History 66 (1979): 62-87.
[3] See, for example, Andreas Wenger, Living with Peril: Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Nuclear Weapons (Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield, 1997), 143, and Lawrence Freedman, Kennedy’s Wars: Berlin, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 282-284. Freedman does not mention the NESC as such, but discusses the findings of the 1963 report as referred to in FRUS (see note 2).
[4] See “Summary Record of the 517th Meeting of the National Security Council,” 12 September 1963, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States 1961-1963 VIII (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1996), Document 141
[5] Matthew Connelly et al, “‘General, I Have Fought Just as Many Nuclear Wars as You Have’: Forecasts, Future Scenarios, and the Politics of Armageddon,” The American Historical Review 117 (2013), 1451.
[6] For the role of preemption in nuclear planning and its relationship to launch-on-warning options, see Bruce Blair, The Logic of Accidental Nuclear War (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1993).
[8] This is one of the few explicit references to mass fires in the NESC summaries, although fires and fire storms are a predictable feature of nuclear explosions and can be much more destructive than blast effects. See Lynn Eden: Whole World on Fire: Organizations, Knowledge, and Nuclear Weapons Devastation (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2004).
[9] David Allan Rosenberg, “The Origins of Overkill: Nuclear Weapons and American Strategy, 1945-1960,” International Security 7 (Spring 1983): 3-71. See also “New Evidence on the Origins of Overkill,” National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 236.
[10] For divergent JCS views on the NESC report, but approval of the “Optimum Mix” concept, see Memorandum from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to President Eisenhower, “Appraisal of Relevant Merits, from the Point of View of Effective Deterrence, of Alternative Retaliatory Efforts,” 12 February 1960,” U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States 1958-1960 Volume III (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1996), 383-385.
[11] Dean Rusk, As I Saw It (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1990): 246-247.
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
Washington, D.C. – The National Security Archive has initiated a special project on the Chinese nuclear weapons program and U.S. policy toward it. The purpose is to discover how the U.S. government monitored the Chinese nuclear program and ascertain what it knew (or believed that it knew) and thought about that program from the late 1950s to the present. Besides investigating U.S. thinking about, and intelligence collection on, the Chinese nuclear program as such, the Archive’s staff is exploring its broader foreign policy significance, especially the impact on China’s relations with its neighbors and the regional proliferation of nuclear weapons capabilities. Through archival research and systematic declassification requests, the Archive is working to collect key U.S. documents on important developments in Chinese nuclear history, including weapons, delivery systems, and strategic thinking. To put the nuclear issue in the broader context of the changing relations between the United States and China, the Archive is also trying to secure the declassification of key U. S. policy papers that elucidate changes in the relationship.
In particular, the Archive’s project is exploring Washington’s thinking about the Chinese nuclear weapons program in the context of U.S. nuclear proliferation policy. The Archive is probing Washington’s initial effort to brake the development of the Chinese advanced weapons program by encouraging allies and others to abstain from the shipment of products that could have direct or indirect military applications. Moreover, the Archive is seeking the declassification of materials that shed light on an important concern since the late 1980s, China’s alleged role as a contributor to the proliferation of nuclear capabilities in South Asia and elsewhere. To the extent possible, the Archive will try to document the U.S. government’s knowledge of, and policy toward, China’s role as a nuclear proliferator and its efforts to balance proliferation concerns with a policy of cooperation with Beijing.
In the spring of 1996, the Archive began a series of Freedom of Information and mandatory review requests to the CIA, State Department, Defense Department, National Archives, and other agencies to prompt the release of relevant documents. Although this will take time, the State Department’s own systematic declassification review of central files from the 1960s has already made available some very useful material. Moreover, previous declassification requests by the Archive are beginning to generate significant material. This makes it possible for the Archive to display, on our Web site, some newly released documents on U.S. policy toward the Chinese nuclear weapons program.
The documents that follow are from 1964 when U.S. government officials recognized that China would soon acquire a nuclear weapons capability. As this material indicates, the degree of apprehension varied, with some officials truly worried that a nuclear armed China would constitute a formidable threat to the security of China’s neighbors as well as the United States. Others, however, believed that Beijing’s orientation was fundamentally cautious and defensive and that the political and psychological implications would be more immediately consequential than any military threat. Although China’s attitude toward U.S.-Soviet nonproliferation efforts was hostile, as far as can be determined, no one anticipated a development of later decades: the PRC’s apparent role as a purveyor of nuclear weapons and delivery systems technologies.
* * *
This briefing book was prepared by William Burr, the Archive’s analyst for the China nuclear weapons project and for a related project on U.S. nuclear weapons policies and programs. Currently a member of Dipomatic History‘s editorial board, he has published articles there and in the Bulletin of the Cold War International History Project. He previously directed the Archive’s project on the Berlin Crisis, 1958-1962 (published by Chadwyck-Healey in 1992).
The National Security Archive thanks the W. Alton Jones Foundation for the generous financial support that made this project possible. Anthony Wai, Duke University, and Matthew Shabatt, Stanford University, provided invaluable research assistance for this project.
THE DOCUMENTS
Document 1: “Implications of a Chinese Communist Nuclear Capability”, by Robert H. Johnson, State Department Policy Planning Staff, with forwarding memorandum to President Johnson by Policy Planning Council director Walt W. Rostow, 17 April 1964.
Source: U.S. National Archives, Record Group 59, Department of State Records, Central Foreign Policy Files, 1964-1966, file DEF 12-1 Chicom.
Robert Johnson (now associated with the National Planning Association) was one of the Department’s leading China experts. Between 1962 and 1964, he directed a number of studies on the Chinese nuclear program and its ramifications, not only for the United States but also for China’s neighbors in East and South Asia. This document is a summary of a longer study which remains classified but is undergoing declassification review. In this paper Johnson minimized the immediate military threat of a nuclear China, suggesting instead that Chinese leaders were more interested in a nuclear capability’s deterrent effect and were unlikely to engage in high-risk activities. Consistent with his relatively moderate interpretation, Johnson ruled out preemptive action against Chinese nuclear facilities except in “response to major ChiCom aggression.” Johnson explored the issue of preemption in another study: “The Bases for Direct Action Against Chinese Communist Nuclear Facilities,” also April 1964. That study is unavailable but is discussed in document 5.
Document 2: Special National Intelligence Estimate, “The Chances of an Imminent Communist Chinese Nuclear Explosion” 26 August 1964.
Source: Lyndon B. Johnson Library
The timing of a Chinese atomic test was a controversial subject during the summer and fall of 1964. As this document shows, CIA officials believed that the Chinese would not test a weapon until “sometime after the end of 1964.” State Department China specialist Allen Whiting, an official at the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, thought otherwise. Like his colleagues he was unaware that the Chinese had an operating gaseous diffusion plant which was producing weapons-grade material. Yet, he made more than the CIA of the fact that the Chinese had already constructed a 325 foot test tower at Lop Nur. Whiting was certain that the Chinese would not have taken the trouble to construct a tower unless a test was impending, although CIA technical experts were dubious. As other intelligence information becomes available, Whiting estimated a test on 1 October. (Interview with Whiting by William Burr, 13 December 1996).
Document 3: Memorandum for the Record, McGeorge Bundy, 15 September 1964
Source: Lyndon B. Johnson Library.
This report of a meeting between President Johnson’s top advisers discloses the administration’s basic approach toward the first Chinese nuclear test but nevertheless raises questions that have yet to be settled. Although it is evident that the administration had provisionally ruled out a preemptive strike, it is unclear whether Secretary of State Rusk ever had any substantive discussions of the Chinese nuclear issue with Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin during the weeks after this meeting.
Until recently, paragraph 3 of this document was entirely excised but a successful appeal by the National Security Archive led the National Archives to release all but the date of the proposed “Chinat” overflight, presumably by a U-2. The date of the overflight is unknown although a number took place in late 1964 and early 1965 to monitor Chinese nuclear weapons facilities.
Document 4: “China As a Nuclear Power (Some Thoughts Prior to the Chinese Test)”, 7 October 1964
Source: FOIA request to State Department
This document was prepared by the Office of International Security Affairs at the Department of Defense, possibly by, or under the supervision of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Henry S. Rowen, who drafted other papers on the Chinese nuclear program during this period. It probably typified the “worst case” scenarios developed by those who believed that a nuclear China would become such a serious threat that it would be necessary to attack Chinese nuclear weapons facilities as a counter-proliferation measure.
Document 5: State Department Telegram No. 2025 to U.S. Embassy Paris, 9 October 1964
Source: U.S. National Archives, Record Group 59, Department of State Records, Central Foreign Policy Files, 1964-1966, file DEF 12-1 Chicom
This document provides one example of Washington’s efforts to get “hard” information on the PRC’s atomic test not long before it occurred on 16 October. In early September, several weeks before the State Department sent this cable, Allen Whiting saw a CIA report on a meeting earlier in the year between Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai and President of Mali Modibo Keita, when Zhou was visiting West Africa. Zhou told Keita that China would be testing an atomic device in October and asked him to give political support to the test when it occurred. Whiting was sure that Zhou’s statement should be taken seriously and on the basis of this and other information he convinced Secretary of State Rusk to announce, on 29 September, that a test would soon occur. (Interview with Whiting). The CIA report is unavailable but this telegram suggests that Zhou’s statement or similar comments by PRC officials to friendly governments may have leaked to the press.
Document 6: “Destruction of Chinese Nuclear Weapons Capabilities”, by G.W. Rathjens, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 14 December 1964.
Source: FOIA request to State Department
George Rathjens, the author of this document, was an ACDA official serving on an interagency group, directed by White House staffer Spurgeon Keeny, that assisted the President’s Task Force on the Spread of Nuclear Weapons, better known as the Gilpatric Committee after its chairman, former Deputy Secretary of Defense Roswell Gilpatric. Whether Rathjens prepared it as his own initiative or at the Committee’s request is unclear, but it may have been the latter because the Committee considered the possibility of recommending an attack on Chinese nuclear weapons facilities as part of a program to check nuclear proliferation. In this document, Rathjens summarized Roben Johnson’s still classified study of the costs and benefits of various types of attacks on the Chinese nuclear weapons complex. Apparently one of the possibilities, an “air drop of GRC [Government of the Republic of China] sabotage team” received serious consideration earlier in the year.
Taking a more bullish view of the benefits of attacking Chinese nuclear facilities, Rathjens took issue with Johnson’s conclusion that the “significance of a [Chicom nuclear] capability is not such as to justify the undertaking of actions which would involve great political costs or high military risks.” However confident Rathjens may have been that a successful attack could discourage imitators and check nuclear proliferation, that recommendation did not go into the final report, which has recently been declassified in full.
Before ACDA declassified this document in its entirety, a lightly excised version was available at the Johnson Library. Shane Maddock of the U.S. Coast Guard Academy’s History Department, published the excised version with stimulating commentary in the April 1996 issue of the SHAFR Newsletter.
Document 7: “As Explosive as a Nuclear Weapon”: The Gilpatric Report on Nuclear Proliferation, January 1965
Source: Freedom of Information Act request to State Department
Sections excised from previous releases are outlined in red.
Note: Since the Archive published this document, the Department of State has released Foreign Relations of the United States, Arms Control and Disarmament, 1964-1968, Volume XI, which includes the full text of the Gilpatric Report along with valuable background material.
Here the Archive publishes, for the first time, the complete text of the “Gilpatric Report”, the earliest major U.S. government-sponsored policy review of the spread of nuclear weapons. Largely motivated by concern over the first Chinese atomic test in October 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson asked Wall Street lawyer and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Roswell Gilpatric to lead a special task force in investigating, and making policy recommendations on, the spread of nuclear weapons. Owing to his extensive connections in high-level corporate and governmental circles, Gilpatric was able to recruit a group of unusually senior former government officials, including DCI Allen Dulles, U. S. High Commissioner to Germany John J. McCloy, White House Science Adviser George Kistiakowsky, and SACEUR Alfred Gruenther. Johnson announced the formation of the committee on 1 November 1964. The committee completed its report in early 1965 and presented it to President Johnson on 21 January 1965.
The report came at a time when senior Johnson administration officials had important disagreements over nuclear proliferation policy. Johnson and Secretary of State Dean Rusk were already heavily committed to a Multilateral Force [MLF] designed to give the Germans and other European allies the feeling of sharing control over NATO nuclear weapons decisions while diverting them from developing independent nuclear capabilities. This complicated negotiations with Moscow which saw the MLF as incompatible with a nonproliferation treaty; nevertheless, Johnson and Rusk gave the MLF priority on the grounds that it would secure West Germany’s non-nuclear status1. Further, some senior officials thought that nuclear proliferation was inevitable and, among the right countries, potentially desirable. Thus, during a November 1964 meeting, Rusk stated that he was not convinced that “the U.S. should oppose other countries obtaining nuclear weapons.” Not only could he “conceive of situations where the Japanese or the Indians might desirably have their own nuclear weapons”, Rusk asked “should it always be the U.S. which would have to use nuclear weapons against Red China?” Robert McNamara thought otherwise: it was “unlikely that the Indians or the Japanese would ever have a suitable nuclear deterrent2.
The Gilpatric Committee tried to resolve the debate by taking an unhesitatingly strong position against nuclear proliferation, recommending that the United States “greatly intensify” its efforts to halt the spread of nuclear weapons. Besides calling for an international treaty on “non-dissemination and non-acquisition of nuclear weapons”, the report included a range of suggestions for inhibiting proliferation in specific countries in Europe, the Near East, and Asia. The latter generally involved a carrot and stick approach: inducements to discourage independent nuclear programs but a more assertive policy if inducements failed. For example, with respect to Israel, Washington would continue to offer “assurances” against Egyptian-Syrian attack; however, “make clear to Israel that those assurances would be withdrawn if she develops a nuclear weapons capability.” With respect to the MLF controversy, the report questioned Johnson administration policy by suggesting the “urgent exploration of alternatives” to permanently inhibit German nuclear weapons potential.
Spurgeon Keeny, the Committee’s staff director, believes that the report “got to LBJ that the Establishment was really worried about nuclear proliferation and that steps could be taken to do something about it”3. Yet, however Johnson may have thought about the report’s line of argument and recommendations, his immediate response appears to have been skeptical because it challenged the Administration’s emphasis on the MLF as a means to manage the German nuclear problem. Unquestionably, this contributed heavily to his decision to bar circulation of the report except at the cabinet level. Dean Rusk fully agreed, according to Glenn Seaborg’s account of a briefing for Johnson, Rusk opined that the report was “as explosive as a nuclear weapon.” Like Johnson, Rusk worried about leaks; moreover, he opposed the report’s message on Germany as well as other countries that it singled out. Uncontrolled revelations about the report would have quickly complicated U.S. relations with France, Germany, and lsrael, among others4.
One important section of the report, on possible initiatives toward the Soviet Union and their relationship to nonproliferation goals, has been declassified for some time. In it (beginning on p. 16), the Committee called for a verified fissile material cutoff (although production of tritium permitted) and strategic arms control agreements. By recommending a strategic delivery vehicle freeze (misspelled “free” in text), significant reductions in strategic force levels, and a moratorium on ABM and ICBM construction, the report presaged (and went beyond) the SALT I agreement of 1972. Elsewhere (p. 8) the Committee called for U.S. efforts to work with the Soviets in building support for a comprehensive nuclear test ban. For the Committee, U.S.-Soviet cooperation in those areas were essential because they would help create an “atmosphere conducive to wide acceptance of restraints on nuclear proliferation.”
Participants and close observers have offered conflicting analyses of the report’s impact. Some, such as Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Glenn Seaborg, downplay its significance noting that other political developments had more influence on Johnson administration policy. Others, such as Keeny and Raymond Garthoff (who represented the State Department on the Committee’s interagency staff) believe that even if the Gilpatric report did not quickly lead to tangible policy changes, it educated the President as well as its members on the significance of the nuclear proliferation issue. Keeny further argues that the report helped prepare Johnson to give strong support to a nonproliferation treaty in 1966 after the MLF approach to the German nuclear problem had lost momentum5.
No doubt owing to classification problems, the literature on the Gilpatric Committee and the early history of U.S. non- proliferation policy is sparse6. With the report fully declassified and other related information becoming available, it should now be possible for historians and social scientists to assess the Gilpatric Committee’s contribution to Lyndon Johnson’s nuclear proliferation policy. Whatever the Gilpatric report’s immediate impact may have been, the future turned out very differently than its critics anticipated. The slowing of nuclear proliferation has proven to be possible and a major goal of the Gilpatric committee–a nearly universal nonproliferation regime–came to pass. To the extent, however, that important measures supported by the Committee have yet to be acted upon–e.g., a fissile materials production cut off–or ratified, e.g., the CTBT–the report stands in harsh judgement of current international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation.
NOTES
1. For a useful overview of the MLF-NPT interrelationships, see George Bunn, Arms Control By Committee, Managing Negotiations with the Russians (Stanford University Press, 1992), 64-72. 2. Presumably, Rusk thought it better that Asians use nuclear weapons against each other rather than Euro-Americans using them against Asians. Quotations from memorandum of conversation by Herbert Scoville, ACDA, “Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons- Course of Action for UNGA – Discussed by the Committee of Principals”, 23 November 1964, National Archives, Record Group 359, White House Office of Science and Technology, FOIA Release to National Security Archive. 3. Telephone conversation with Spurgeon Keeny, 24 March 1997. 4. Glenn Seaborg with Benjamin S. Loeb, Stemming the Tide: Arms Control in the Johnson Years (Lexington, MA: 1987), 143-145. This is the only generally available account of Johnson’s meeting with the committee. Neither Dean Rusk’s nor Lyndon Johnson’s memoirs mention the report. 5. Seaborg, Stemming the Tide, 148-149, although he provides a dissent from Keeny. Herbert York, Making Weapons, Talking Peace: A Physicists odyssey from Hiroshima to Geneva (New York, 1987), also downplays the report’s significance. Telephone conversation with Keeny, 24 March 1997; conversation with Raymond Garthoff, 28 March 1997. George Bunn, Arms Control by Committee, 75-81, is useful on the negotiations but does not mention the report. 6. George Perkovich’s “India’s Ambiguous Bomb” (forthcoming Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia), explores the impact of the Gilpatric report on Johnson’s policy, among other subjects.
For further reading:
Willis C. Armstrong et al., “The Hazards of Single-Outcome Forecasting,” in H. Bradford Westerfield, Inside ClA ‘s Private World: Declassified Articles from the Agency’s Internal Journal, 1955-1992 (New Haven, 1995), 238-254
Gordon H. Chang, Friends and Enemies: The United States, China, and the Soviet Union, 1948-1972 (Stanford, 1990)
Rosemary Foot, The Practice of Power, U.S. Relations with China Since 1949 (Oxford, 1995)
John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, China Builds The Bomb (Stanford, 1988)
Chris Pocock, Dragon Lady: The History of the U-2 Spyplane (Airlife, England, 1989), especially ch. 6, “Parting the Bamboo Curtain”
Become a Patron! True Information is the most valuable resource and we ask you to give back.
The Obama administration is seeking to compel a writer to testify about his confidential sources for a 2006 book about the Central Intelligence Agency, a rare step that was authorized by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.
The author, James Risen, who is a reporter for The New York Times, received a subpoena on Monday requiring him to provide documents and to testify May 4 before a grand jury in Alexandria, Va., about his sources for a chapter of his book, “State of War: The Secret History of the C.I.A. and the Bush Administration.” The chapter largely focuses on problems with a covert C.I.A. effort to disrupt alleged Iranian nuclear weapons research. …
Justice Department was seeking information only about Mr. Risen’s sources for the ninth chapter, which centers on the C.I.A.’s effort to disrupt Iranian nuclear research. That material did not appear in The Times.
The book describes how the agency sent a Russian nuclear scientist — who had defected to the United States and was secretly working for the C.I.A. — to Vienna in February 2000 to give plans for a nuclear bomb triggering device to an Iranian official under the pretext that he would provide further assistance in exchange for money. The C.I.A. had hidden a technical flaw in the designs.
STATE OF WAR: THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE CIA AND THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
James Risen
FREE PRESS
NEW YORK. LONDON. TORONTO. SYDNEY
A NOTE ON SOURCES
Many people have criticized the use of anonymous sources of late. Yet all reporters know that the very best stories — the most important, the most sensitive — rely on them. This book would not be possible without the cooperation of many current and former officials from the Bush administration, the intelligence community, and other parts of the government. Many of them were willing to discuss sensitive matters only on the condition of anonymity.
__________
[Pages 193-218.]
Chapter 9
A ROGUE OPERATION
SHE HAD PROBABLY done this a dozen times before. Modern digital technology had made clandestine communications with overseas agents seem routine. Back in the Cold War, contacting a secret agent in Moscow or Beijing was a dangerous, labor-intensive process that could take days or even weeks to arrange. But by 2004, it was possible to send high-speed, encrypted messages directly and instantaneously from CIA headquarters to agents in the field who were equipped with small, covert personal communications devices. So the officer at CIA headquarters assigned to handle communications with the agency’s spies in I ran probably didn’t think twice when she began her latest download. With a few simple commands, she sent a secret data flow to one of the Iranian agents in the CI A’s spy network. Just like she had done so many times before.
But this time, the ease and speed of the technology betrayed her. The CIA officer had made a disastrous mistake. She had sent information to one Iranian agent meant for an entire spy network; the data could be used to identify virtually every spy the CIA had inside Iran.
Mistake piled on mistake. As the CIA later learned, the Iranian who received the download was actually a double agent. The agent quickly turned the data over to Iranian security officials, and it enabled them to “roll up” the CIA’s agent network throughout Iran. CIA sources say that several of the Iranian agents were arrested and jailed, while the fates of some of the others is still unknown.
This espionage disaster, of course, was not reported in the press. It left the CIA virtually blind in Iran, unable to provide any significant intelligence on one of the most critical issues facing the United States — whether Tehran was about to go nuclear.
In fact, just as President Bush and his aides were making the case in 2004 and 2005 that Iran was moving rapidly to develop nuclear weapons, the American intelligence community found itself unable to provide the evidence to back up the administration’s public arguments. On the heels of the CIA’s failure to provide accurate prewar intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, the agency was once again clueless in the Middle East. In the spring of 2005, in the wake of the CIA’s Iranian disaster, Porter Goss, the CIA’s new director, told President Bush in a White House briefing that the CIA really didn’t know how close Iran was to becoming a nuclear power.
The Bush administration has never publicly disclosed the extent to which it is now operating in the blind on Iran. But deep in the bowels of the CIA, someone must be nervously, but very privately, wondering: Whatever happened to those nuclear blueprints we gave to the Iranians?
The story dates back to the Clinton administration and February 2000, when one frightened Russian scientist walked Vienna’s winter streets. Enveloped by the February cold, he dodged the bright red and white Strassenbahn, the quaint electric tramcars that roll in slow circuits around the city, while he debated whether to go through with his secret mission.
I’m not a spy, he thought to himself. I’m a scientist. What am I doing here?
He fingered the package stuffed in his overcoat, making certain the priceless documents were still there and that this crazy job wasn’t just a bad dream.
The Russian pulled the note out of his pocket, looked at the address one more time, and then plowed ahead, confused. He knew nothing about Vienna and quickly found himself lost along the operatic city’s broad avenues. Was he looking for something called Rueppgasse, or was it called Heinestrasse? Was he supposed to take Strassenbahn 21? He rode two full circuits on the S-Bahn 21 train, searching in vain for the right stop. Should he switch to the U-Bahn, Vienna’s subway? The Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) wasn’t the easiest office in Vienna to find.
They could have at least given me good directions.
As he stumbled along into Vienna’s north end, in the unglamorous neighborhood surrounding the Praterstern U-Bahn station, the same question pounded in his brain again and again, but he couldn’t find an answer.
What was the CIA thinking?
The Russian had good reason to be afraid. He was walking around Vienna with blueprints for a nuclear bomb.
To be precise, he was carrying technical designs for a TBA 480 high-voltage block, otherwise known as a “firing set,” for a Russian-designed nuclear weapon. He held in his hands knowledge needed to create a perfect implosion that could trigger a nuclear chain reaction inside a small spherical core. It was one of the greatest engineering secrets in the world, providing the solution to one of a handful of problems that separated nuclear powers such as the United States and Russia from the rogue countries like Iran that were desperate to join the nuclear club but had so far fallen short.
He still couldn’t believe the orders he had received from CIA headquarters. The CIA had given him the nuclear blueprints and then sent him to Vienna to sell them — or simply give them — to the Iranian representatives to the IAEA. With the Russian doing Langley’s bidding, the CIA appeared to be about to help Iran leapfrog one of the last remaining engineering hurdles blocking its path to a nuclear weapon. The dangerous irony was not lost on the Russian — the IAEA was an international organization created to restrict the spread of nuclear technology. The IAEA’s Vienna headquarters, inside the United Nation’s sprawling concrete compound, a jumble of geometric-shaped buildings assembled like a Christmas pile of children’s toys along the Danube River just outside the city center, was the leading forum for international debate over the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. It was the place where the United States came to level charges against rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea over their clandestine nuclear programs. IAEA experts traveled the world to try to police the use of nuclear power, to make certain that peaceful energy-generation programs weren’t providing cover for the clandestine development of nuclear weapons. In 2005, the IAEA and its chief, Mohamed El Baradei, would win the Nobel Peace Prize for their counter proliferation efforts.
But in 2000, the CIA was coming to Vienna to stage an operation that could help one of the most dangerous regimes in the world obtain a nuclear weapon.
The Russian stood out like a poor eastern cousin on Vienna’s jeweled cityscape.
He was a nuclear engineer who had defected to the United States years earlier and quietly settled in America. He went through the CIA’s defector resettlement program and endured long debriefings in which CIA experts and scientists from the national laboratories tried to drain him of everything he knew about the status of Russia’s nuclear weapons program. Like many other Russian defectors before him, his tiresome complaints about money and status had gained him a reputation within the CIA of being difficult to manage. But he was too valuable for the CIA to toss away.
One secret CIA report said that the Russian “was a known handling problem due to his demanding and overbearing nature.” Yet the same report stated that he was also a “sensitive asset” who could be used in a “high-priority covert-action operation.” So despite their disputes, the CIA had arranged for the Russian to become an American citizen and had kept him on the payroll, to the tune of $5,000 a month. It really did seem like easy money, with few strings attached. Life was good. He was happy to be on the CIA gravy tram.
Until now. The CIA was placing him on the front lines of a plan that seemed to be completely at odds with the interests of the United States, and it had taken a lot of persuading by his CIA case officer to convince him to go through with what appeared to be a rogue operation.
The case officer worked hard to convince him — even though the officer had doubts about the plan as well. As he was sweet-talking the Russian into flying to Vienna, the case officer wondered whether he was being set up by CIA management, in some dark political or bureaucratic game that he didn’t understand. Was he involved in an illegal covert action? Should he expect to be hauled before a congressional committee and grilled because he was the officer who helped give nuclear blueprints to Iran? The code name for this operation was MERLIN; to the officer, that seemed like a wry tip-off that nothing about this program was what it appeared to be. He did his best to hide his concerns from his Russian agent.
The Russian’s assignment from the CIA was to pose as an unemployed and greedy scientist who was willing to sell his soul — and the secrets of the atomic bomb — to the highest bidder. By hook or by crook, the CIA told him, he was to get the nuclear blueprints to the Iranians. They would quickly recognize their value and rush them back to their superiors in Tehran.
The plan had been laid out for the defector during a CIA-financed trip to San Francisco, where he had meetings with CIA officers and nuclear experts mixed in with leisurely wine-tasting trips to Sonoma Country. In a luxurious San Francisco hotel room, a senior CIA official involved in the operation walked the Russian through the details of the plan. He brought in experts from one of the national laboratories to go over the blueprints that he was supposed to give the Iranians.
The senior CIA officer could see that the Russian was nervous, and so he tried to downplay the significance of what they were asking him to do. He told the Russian that the CIA was mounting the operation simply to find out where the Iranians are with their nuclear program. This was just an intelligence-gathering effort, the CIA officer said, not an illegal attempt to give Iran the bomb. He suggested that the Iranians already had the technology he was going to hand over to them. It was all a game. Nothing too serious.
The Russian reluctantly agreed, but he was still clearly suspicious of the CIA’s motives.
He was afraid because he fully understood the value of the information he was supposed to pass to the Iranians. He certainly understood it better than did his CIA handlers. Before he defected, he had worked as an engineer at Arzamas-16, the original center of the Soviet nuclear weapons program and the Russian equivalent of Los Alamos, the home of the Manhattan Project. Founded in 1946, when Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was rushing to catch up with the Americans and trying to turn the Soviet Union into a nuclear power, Arzamas-16 had once been so secret that it was known only as the “installation” or the “site.” Built on the grounds of a czarist-era monastery, about 400 kilometers from Moscow at the old town of Sarova, the complex’s first name was Arzamas-60, since it was 60 kilometers from the town of Arzamas; but the Soviets realized that name was too revealing about its location, so they changed it to Arzamas-16. In 1947, the entire city of Sarov officially disappeared from Russian maps.
Arzamas-16 was where the Soviets built their first atomic and hydrogen bombs, and today, 30,000 people still work at nuclear weapons-related facilities located within a restricted area in the heavily guarded Arzamas-16 district. It wasn’t until 1995 that Russian President Boris Yeltsin changed its name back to Sarov.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States feared that poverty-stricken scientists from Arzamas-16 and other facilities like it would be tempted to work for Iraq, North Korea — or Iran. Weapons proliferation really meant the spread of scientific knowledge and the spread of scientists.
The end of the Cold War meant the end of regular paychecks for Russian nuclear scientists, and there was a real danger that Russian technical expertise would spread like a virus to the totalitarian states of the third world. In the 1990s, in fact, the director of one Russian nuclear institute killed himself, reportedly over the government’s failure to meet his payroll. There were Russian press accounts of uranium being stolen from Arzamas-16. What was to stop underpaid Russian scientists from walking off with technical expertise, and perhaps the blueprints and even the fissile material needed to help rogue states build a bomb?
Fortunately, at just the right moment, two centrist American senators, one Democrat and one Republican, saw the danger and came up with one of the most farsighted U.S. foreign relations programs since the Marshall Plan. In 1991, Sam Nunn, a Georgia Democrat and the party’s leading voice on national security, and Richard Lugar, a cautious Republican and former mayor of Indianapolis who had turned himself into a foreign affairs specialist in the Senate, crafted legislation that helped prevent a massive drain of nuclear technology out of the former Soviet Union. Known as the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, the legislation created joint U.S.-Russian programs to deactivate thousands of nuclear warheads in the former Soviet Union, and helped rid the Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus of the nuclear weapons they had inherited at the time of the breakup of the Soviet Union.
Equally important was Nunn-Lugar’s impact on the lives of Russian scientists. Nunn-Lugar helped more than twenty thousand Russian experts involved in Soviet weapons programs find alternative, and more peaceful, forms of research. Arzamas-16 even forged new, cooperative ties with Los Alamos. By 1993, Los Alamos and Sarov were officially sister cities.
Behind the public face of Nunn-Lugar, the CIA was also doing its part, quietly helping Russian nuclear scientists to defect and resettle in the United States, rather than go to Iran or Iraq, providing them new lives and enough money to keep their talents off the open market. It was this CIA defector program that brought the Russian to the United States.
But now, the CIA was no longer keeping the Russian engineer off the nuclear market, nor was it keeping Russian know-how under wraps. The blueprints the Russian was to hand over to the Iranians were originally from the Arzamas complex, brought to the CIA by another defector.
What better way for the CIA to hide its involvement in this operation than to have a veteran of Arzamas personally hand over the Russian nuclear designs?
His CIA case officer had coached the Russian as best he could on how to make contact with the Iranians. It wasn’t easy; you don’t just look up the address for the covert Iranian nuclear weapons program in the Yellow Pages. Still, maybe there was a way you could make contact on the Internet. Maybe it really was as simple as sending out e-mail.
At the case officer’s urging, the Russian started sending messages to Iranian scientists, scholars, and even Iranian diplomats stationed at the IAEA in Vienna. In his e-mails, he would explain that he had information of great interest to Iran and that he was seeking a meeting with someone who could hear him out. The messages were designed to be playfully intriguing, but not quite revealing. Just enough to prompt a response.
He also started attending academic conferences in the United States attended by Iranian-American scientists. These conferences sometimes attracted scientists visiting from Iran, and they might be good contacts. The Russian stood out like a sore thumb among the Iranian academics, but that was the point. He wanted people to notice him. He was a nuclear salesman, ready for business.
Of course, it wasn’t unusual for Russian and Iranian scientists to mix, and that was another point the CIA was counting on. There was a well-established channel of Russian technical support for Iran’s nuclear power generation program. Moscow had an $800 million contract to help Iran build a light water reactor at Bushehr. The United States had publicly complained that Iran was using Bushehr and the country’s commercial nuclear program to advance its nuclear weapons development efforts. American officials, in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, consistently asked why Iran needed a nuclear power program when it had so much oil and natural gas; in one State Department statement, Washington noted that Iran annually flares off more natural gas than Bushehr could produce. For at least a decade, a key sticking point in U.S.-Russian diplomatic relations has been Russia’s ties to Iran and Moscow’s willingness to view Iran as an eager customer for Russian arms, rather than as a growing strategic threat in the Middle East.
With Tehran serving as a major shopping bazaar for Russia’s post-Cold War arms sales, it certainly wasn’t unusual to find Russian and Iranian technicians and bureaucrats mingling. The Russian defector could exploit that tendency to make inroads with the Iranians.
As he mingled with the scientists and other academics, the Russian picked up business cards and e-mail addresses. The Russian began to e-mail his new contacts, sending intriguing messages explaining that he wanted to talk with them about his ability to provide materials of interest to Iran. Finally, at one conference, he hit pay dirt when he met a physics professor visiting from Tehran.
After the CIA checked out his background, the agency decided that the contact with the Iranian professor was promising. The CIA hoped the Iranian academic might serve as the Russian’s entree into the secret world of Tehran’s nuclear program. At the least, he might be able to put the Russian in contact with the right people in Iran.
The Russian followed up his chance encounter with e-mails to the scientist back at his university in Iran. The Russian explained that he had information that was extremely important, and he wanted to make an offer. After some delays, the Iranian finally responded, with a wary message, asking what he had in mind.
That was enough for the CIA. Now the Russian could tell Iranian officials in Vienna that he had been in touch with a respected scientist in Tehran before he showed up on their doorstep.
The CIA had discovered that a high-ranking Iranian official would be traveling to Vienna and visiting the Iranian mission to the IAEA, and so the agency decided to take the next step and send the Russian to Vienna at the same time. It was hoped that he could make contact with either the Iranian ambassador to the IAEA or the visitor from Tehran.
The CIA sent him to Vienna without any backup. Langley didn’t want to risk exposure. The CIA station in Vienna wasn’t asked to play any role to support the Russian; this operation was dubbed a “special access program,” and its existence was a tightly held secret. Only a handful of CIA officers knew of the existence of MERLIN. Better to let the Russian get lost and fumble his way around town than tell more officers about the operation. Sending him to Vienna without any minders would also convince anyone watching that he was just what he appeared to be-an amateur at this game, freelancing.
The Russian’s cover story was that he was the go-between for the other Russian scientist who had brought the nuclear blueprints out of Arzamas. I n truth, he had never met the other defector, but that didn’t matter. The story would help answer any questions the Iranians might have about how he came to acquire the blueprints, which were not easy to access or remove from Arzamas.
The Russian was also told not to try to hide the fact that he now lived in the United States. His story should be as close to the truth as possible. Just because he was living in America didn’t mean he was working for the CIA.
But now that he was in Vienna, he was playing the role of bumbling scientist too well, unable to find the Iranian mission, uncertain even where to get off the train. “I spent a lot of time to ask people as I could [language problem] and they told me that no streets with this name are around,” the Russian later explained to the CIA, in his imperfect English.
Maybe deep down, he didn’t want to get off the tram, and didn’t want to find the right office. He had to find time to think.
He could not stop thinking about his trip to San Francisco, when he had studied the blueprints the CIA had given him. Within minutes of being handed the designs, he had identified a flaw. “This isn’t right,” he told the CIA officers gathered around the hotel room. “There is something wrong.” His comments prompted stony looks, but no straight answers from the CIA men in the room. No one in the San Francisco meeting seemed surprised by the Russian’s assertion that the blueprints didn’t look quite right, but no one wanted to enlighten him further on the matter, either.
In fact, the CIA case officer who was the Russian’s personal handler had been stunned by the Russian’s statement. During a break, he took the senior CIA officer aside. “He wasn’t supposed to know that,” the CIA case officer told his superior. “He wasn’t supposed to find a flaw.” “Don’t worry,” the senior CIA officer calmly replied. “It doesn’t matter.” The CIA case officer couldn’t believe the senior CIA officer’s answer, but he still managed to keep his fears from the Russian, and he continued to train him for his mission.
After their trip to San Francisco, the case officer handed the Russian a sealed envelope with the nuclear blueprints inside. The Russian was told not to open the envelope under any circumstances. He was to follow the CIA’s instructions to find the Iranians and give them the envelope with the documents inside. Keep it simple, and get out of Vienna safe and alive, the Russian was told. But the defector was more worried than ever about what kind of game the CIA was getting him into. And he had his own ideas about how he might play that game.
In Vienna, the Russian went over his options one more time and made a decision. He unsealed the envelope with the nuclear blueprints and included a personal letter of his own to the Iranians. No matter what the CIA told him, he was going to hedge his bets. There was obviously something wrong with these blueprints — so he decided to mention that fact to the Iranians in his letter. They would certainly find flaws for themselves, and if he didn’t tell them first, they would never want to deal with him again. In his badly broken English, the Russian addressed the Iranians as if they were academic colleagues. He later gave a copy of his letter to the CIA.
To University:First, let me introduce myself. I am a person, who worked for many years in atomic industry. Please check out next page for my personal info please.
I would like to inform you I have very valuable information about design and production of atomic weapon. At this time I possess a description of one of key elements of modern system, TEA 480 high-voltage automatic block. Described device is known as a fire switch which lets to initiate simultaneously all detonators at a weapon core (spherical charge). I am sure other devices can be available for your review in the future. I did not contact right people in your country directly because unfortunately I could not find them. Of course, I tried many other ways to attract attention to this info by telling little bit about what I have but it does not work. Whole misunderstanding, and accordingly wasting time and disappointing. So I decided to offer this absolutely real and valuable basic information for free now and you can evaluate that. Also I sent e-mail to inform [the Iranian professor] about this possible event. Please let him know you have this package.
What is purpose of my offer?
If you try to create a similar device you will need to ask some practical questions. No problem. You will get answers but I expect to be paid for that. Let’s talk about details later when I see a real interest in it.
Now just take your time for professional study of enclosed documentation. My contact info on next page.
The Russian was thus warning the Iranians as carefully as he could that there was a flaw somewhere in the nuclear blueprints, and he could help them find it. At the same time, he was still going through with the CIA’s operation in the only way he thought would work.
The Russian slid his letter in with the blueprints and resealed the envelope.
After his day of floundering around Vienna, the Russian returned to his hotel, near the city’s large Stadtpark. He did a computer search and found the right street address for the Iranian mission. His courage bolstered, he decided he would go back and finish the job in the morning.
By 8:00 A.M., he found 19 Heinstrasse, a five-story office and apartment building with a flat, pale green and beige facade in a quiet., slightly down-at-the-heels neighborhood in Vienna’s north end. The street was crowded with tobacco shops, bars, and cafes, a tanning salon, even a strip club. Now the Russian realized why he had missed it; there was no sign announcing the Iranian mission. The only proof that this was the right place was a mail directory, with three rows of tenants’ names on the wall beside the building’s front door. Amid the list of Austrian tenants, there was one simple line: “PM/Iran.” The Iranians clearly didn’t want publicity.
19 Heinstrasse, Vienna, Austria. Bing.com/maps. [Images added by Cryptome.]
The Russian’s fevered rush of adrenaline as he approached the building suddenly cooled when he realized the Iranian office was closed for the day for some unexplained reason. Once again, he spent the day walking Vienna, and once again mulling over the CIA’s orders. He returned to his hotel again that night, still clutching the undelivered documents.
He returned one last time to the Iranian mission early the next morning and stood for a few agonizing minutes on the empty sidewalk outside.
He came back that afternoon, and an Austrian postman finally helped him make up his mind. As the Russian stood silently by, the postman opened the building door, dropped off the mail, and walked quietly away to complete his neighborhood rounds. His courage finally reinforced, the Russian decided to follow suit; he now realized that he could leave his package without actually having to talk to anyone. He slipped through the front door, and hurriedly shoved his envelope through the inner door slot at the Iranian office.
“At 1:30 P.M. I got a chance to be inside of the gate,” at the entrance to the Iranian mission, the Russian later explained in writing to the CIA. “They have two mailboxes: one after gate on left side for post mail (I could not open it without key) and other one nearby an internal door to the mission. Last one has easy access to insert mail and also it was locked. I passed internal door and reached the mission entry door and put a package inside their mailbox on left side of their door. I cover it old newspaper but if somebody wants that is possible to remove this package from mailbox, in my opinion, I had no choice.” The Russian fled the mission without being seen. He was deeply relieved that he had finally made the handoff without ever having to come face to face with a real live Iranian. He flew back to the United States without being detected by either Austrian security or, more important, by Iranian intelligence.
From its headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland, the National Security Agency monitors global airline reservation databases, constantly checking on the travel arrangements of foreign officials and others targeted by American intelligence around the world. In February 2000, the NSA was also eavesdropping on the telephone lines of the Iranian mission in Vienna. It could intercept communications between the mission and Tehran. In addition, the NSA had broken the codes of the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, Iran’s foreign intelligence service. The Americans had several different ways to track the movements of Iranian officials in and out of Vienna.
Just days after the Russian dropped off his package at the Iranian mission, the NSA reported that an Iranian official in Vienna abruptly changed his schedule and suddenly made airline reservations and flew home to Iran. The odds were that the nuclear blueprints were now in Tehran.
The Russian scientist’s fears about the operation were well founded. He was the front man for what may have been one of the most reckless operations in the modern history of the CIA, one that may have helped put nuclear weapons in the hands of a charter member of what President George W. Bush has called the “axis of evil.” Operation MERLIN has been one of the most closely guarded secrets in the Clinton and Bush administrations. And it may not be over. Some officials have suggested that it might be repeated against other countries.
* * * [Stars in original]
MERLIN was born out of frustration. For more than a decade, one post-Cold War CIA director after another went before Congress and the nation to vow that America’s spies were now focused on new, gathering threats posed by a set of “hard targets.” Terrorists. Rogue nations. Weapons of mass destruction. Each new director promised that the CIA was changing rapidly to adapt to this complex new world in which the Soviet Union was no longer the main enemy. But the CIA has failed in its new mission and has never found out enough about any of these new targets. Iran’s nuclear program remains one of the most impenetrable of them all.
Even before the disastrous collapse of its Iranian spy network in 2004, the CIA was able to pick up only fragmentary information about Iran’s nuclear program. Officials who are critical of the CIA’s efforts say that the agency’s counterproliferation programs have relied far too heavily on intelligence collected from technical methods — spy satellites, eavesdropping, and code breaking, as well as “measurement and signature” intelligence, which includes the collection and analysis of data from hidden equipment like remote ground sensors. Lacking definitive answers about Iran’s atomic program, the CIA has instead offered a series of safe and cautious estimates. Over the years, the agency has repeatedly stated that Iran was within five to ten years of becoming a nuclear power. Those five to ten years keep stretching and expanding.
The Counterproliferation Division within the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, the agency’s clandestine espionage arm, came up with MERLIN and other clandestine operations as creative, if unorthodox, ways to try to penetrate Tehran’s nuclear development program. In some cases, the CIA has worked jointly with Israeli intelligence on such operations, according to people familiar with the convert program. None are known to have worked.
One bizarre plan called for the sabotage of Iran’s electrical grid in areas of the country near its secret nuclear installations. The CIA conducted tests of the electrical sabotage equipment at the U.S. government’s Nevada nuclear test range. The plan called for an electromagnetic pulse device that could be smuggled into Iran and then hidden next to large power transmission lines carrying electricity into the country’s nuclear facilities. The CIA would later remotely detonate the device, which would send a massive electrical pulse down the power lines, shorting out the computer systems inside the Iranian nuclear complex.
The CIA worked with Mossad, Israel’s spy service, on the plan, and Mossad agents volunteered to smuggle the devices into Iran. The Israelis told the CIA that they had Iranian agents who would carry out the plan on their behalf.
But there were major technical problems that made the plan unworkable. The electromagnetic devices were so large that they had to be carried in a large truck, and then parked next to the power lines; the CIA realized that was impossible.
Then there was MERLIN. On paper, MERLIN was supposed to stunt the development of Tehran’s nuclear program by sending Iran’s weapons experts down the wrong technical path. The CIA believed that once the Iranians had the blueprints and studied them, they would believe the designs were usable and so would start to build an atom bomb based on the flawed designs. But Tehran would get a big surprise when its scientists tried to explode their new bomb.
Instead of a mushroom cloud, the Iranian scientists would witness a disappointing fizzle. The Iranian nuclear program would suffer a humiliating setback, and Tehran’s goal of becoming a nuclear power would have been delayed by several years. In the meantime, the CIA, by watching Iran’s reaction to the blueprints, would have gained a wealth of information about the status of Iran’s weapons program, which has been shrouded in secrecy.
It’s not clear who originally came up with the idea, but the plan was first approved by President Bill Clinton. After the Russian scientist’s fateful trip to Vienna, however, the MERLIN operation was endorsed by the Bush administration, possibly with an eye toward repeating it against North Korea or other dangerous states.
The CIA had obtained genuine Russian nuclear weapons blueprints from a Russian scientist and had forwarded them to one of the national laboratories — almost certainly Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico — to be scrutinized by American nuclear experts. Sandia, in Albuquerque, is one of the jewels in the crown of the American nuclear establishment. Its origins were in the so-called Z Division of the Los Alamos National Laboratory during the Manhattan Project. Z Division conducted the engineering and design work for the nonnuclear portions of the first atomic bomb, including the weapons assembly. Sandia thus houses the U.S. government’s institutional memory for how a nuclear bomb is put together.
Scientists at the national laboratory were asked to implant flaws into the Russian blueprints. The flaws were supposed to be so clever and well hidden that no one could detect their presence.
Next, the agency needed to figure out how to get the designs to the Iranians without Tehran realizing that the blueprints were coming from the CIA.
That job was assigned to the CIA’s Counterproliferation Division. The CPD chose the Russian defector.
That was the idea behind MERLIN, anyway. But like so many of the CIA’s other recent operations, this one didn’t go according to plan. First, of course, the Russian spotted flaws in the blueprints. Second, the CIA never maintained adequate controls over the nuclear blueprints — or over the Russian. The Russian was supposed to believe that he was handing over genuine nuclear designs. Instead, his cover letter may have convinced the Iranians to be wary of the blueprints. Furthermore, the CIA also gave the blueprints to the Iranians without any certain way of monitoring their use by Iranian scientists.
The CIA was flying blind — dangerously so. In effect, the CIA asked the Russian to throw the blueprints over the transom, and then the agency just hoped for the best.
Several former CIA officials say that the theory behind MERLIN — handing over tainted weapons designs to confound one of America’s adversaries — is a trick that has been used many times in past operations, stretching back to the Cold War. But in previous cases, such Trojan horse operations involved conventional weapons; none of the former officials had ever heard of the CIA attempting to conduct this kind of high-risk operation with designs for a nuclear bomb. The former officials also said these kind of programs must be closely monitored by senior CIA managers in order to control the flow of information to the adversary. If mishandled, they could easily help an enemy accelerate its weapons development.
That may be what happened with MERLIN.
The CIA case officer was deeply concerned by the ease with which the Russian had discovered flaws in the designs. He knew that that meant the Iranians could, too, and that they could then fix and make use of the repaired blueprints to help them build a bomb. If so, the CIA would have assisted the Iranians in joining the nuclear club. He grew so concerned about whether he had aided the Iranian nuclear program that he went to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to tell congressional investigators about the problems with the program. But no action was ever taken.
For his part, the Russian never understood why the CIA wanted him to give the Iranians blueprints that contained such obvious mistakes. It made no sense. And so he wrote the Iranians his personal letter.
It is not known whether the Russian ever communicated again with the Iranians, or whether they tried to contact him. But after receiving his letter warning them that they would need further help to make the blueprints useful, it is entirely possible that the Iranians showed the plans to other experts familiar with Russian nuclear designs and thereby identified the defects.
Iran has spent nearly twenty years trying to develop nuclear weapons, and in the process has created a strong base of sophisticated scientists knowledgeable enough to spot flaws in nuclear blueprints.
What’s more, the Iranians have received extensive support for years from Russian and Chinese nuclear experts who could help the Iranians review the material. In addition, Tehran also obtained nuclear blueprints from the black-market network of Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan, and so already had workable blueprints against which to compare the designs obtained from the CIA.
Even if the Iranians were interested in using the blueprints provided by the mysterious Russian, they would certainly examine and test the data in the documents before ever actually trying to build a bomb. Nuclear experts say that they would thus be able to extract valuable information from the blueprints while ignoring the flaws. “If a country of seventy million inhabitants [Iran], with quite a good scientific and technical community, got [nuclear documents with supposedly hidden flaws], they might learn something,” warned a nuclear weapons expert with the IAEA. “If [the flaw] is bad enough, they will find it quite quickly. That would be my fear.”
MERLIN has been conducted in the darkest corner of the American national security establishment at one of the most significant moments in the long and bitter history of U.S.-Iran relations. Iran has bedeviled American presidents since Jimmy Carter and the embassy hostage crisis, and neither Bill Clinton nor George W. Bush have based their policies on an adequate understanding of the volatile political dynamics under way in Iran.
Throughout the late 1990s, the Clinton administration was convinced that political reformers and youthful moderates were ascendant in Iran, and so the White House twisted itself in knots trying to open back-channel talks with Tehran. But in order to reach out to the Iranians, Clinton had to downplay evidence that Tehran was still the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, that Iran was still an Islamic republic whose security apparatus was controlled by powerful, conservative mullahs who wanted nothing to do with the United States, and that the Iranian regime was eager to become a nuclear power.
Critics say that Clinton and his lieutenants repeatedly tried to ignore intelligence indicating that Iran was linked to the deadly Khobar Towers bombing in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia in June 1996, which killed nineteen American military personnel. Saudi Hezbollah, an offshoot of the Lebanese-based extremist group backed by Iran, carried out the attack, and it did so with training and logistical support from Iran.
Senior CIA officials played an important role in the Clinton administration’s efforts to downplay evidence of Iran’s terrorist ties in the late 1990s, according to several CIA sources. In 1996 or 1997, a well-placed officer with the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, Iran’s foreign intelligence service, was cooperating with the CIA. In meetings in Europe, just months after the Khobar attack occurred, the Iranian source provided the CIA with evidence that Iran was behind the bombing, according to CIA officials. The Iranian told the CIA he had been meeting with several senior Iranian officials after the bombing, and they were celebrating their successful operation.
He also told his CIA contact that sometime after the Khobar bombing, an American government aircraft had secretly landed in Tehran, carrying a senior American official. Several top Iranian officials went out to the airport to meet the American, the source said.
To the officers working on the CIA’s Iran Task Force handling the reporting from this Iranian source, it appeared that the Clinton administration was cutting a secret deal with Tehran just after nineteen Americans had been murdered by the same regime. Senior CIA officials responded to this explosive intelligence by suppressing it, according to several CIA sources. According to one CIA source, reports from the Iranian source were delivered to high-ranking CIA officials, but none of the reports was disseminated throughout the intelligence community, and no record of the reports was distributed inside the CIA. It is not known whether President Clinton or other top White House officials were ever told about the reports from the Iranian source. Certainly, then-FBI Director Louis J. Freeh believed that President Clinton and his lieutenants were downplaying intelligence concerning Iran’s involvement in Khobar Towers. As he has recently detailed in his memoirs, his anger over the way the Khobar case was handled by the Clinton administration was at the heart of his long-running dispute with the White House. It is not known whether Freeh was ever told about the reports from the source who detailed Iran’s role, however.
It wasn’t until June 2001, five years after the bombing, and after Clinton had left office, that the Justice Department issued indictments of fourteen people in the Khobar bombing that alleged that unidentified Iranian officials were behind the terrorist attack. The indictment notwithstanding, in its first few months, the new Bush team largely ignored Iran while obsessing over Iraq. It was only after 9/11 that senior Bush administration officials began to pay attention to low-level, back-channel talks with Iran that had been under way in Geneva since the Clinton days.
Through those Geneva meetings, the Bush team discovered that Iran was strongly supportive of the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan because of Tehran’s deep hatred for the ruling Taliban, Sunni Muslims heavily dependent on Pakistani support to retain power in Kabul. Shia-dominated Iran long feared the Taliban’s radical influence on its own Sunni minority. Tehran also wanted to retain its influence over western Afghanistan, particularly the trading center of Herat.
In 1998, Iran and the Taliban had come close to a shooting war. After nine Iranian diplomats were murdered in Afghanistan and thousands of Shiites were killed following the Taliban seizure of the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif, Iran massed troops on the border for a military “exercise,” and Pakistan had to step in to calm things down. At the time, Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, made it clear that Iran’s patience with the Taliban was wearing thin. “I have so far prevented the lighting of a fire in this region which would be hard to extinguish, but all should know that a very great and wide danger is quite near,” he declared, prompting a response from the Taliban that the cleric’s statements reflected his “mental ineptitude.” Iran had also supported the opposition Northern Alliance against the Taliban, and after 9/11, Iranian officials at the Geneva meetings were actually impatient with the sluggish start to American military operations in Afghanistan. Publicly, the Iranians said little about the war and provided little overt support to the Americans, apart from promising to allow rescue operations for any downed pilots over its territory. But in Geneva, Iranian officials were eager to help and even brought out maps to try to tell the United States the best targets to bomb.
Iran also held some al Qaeda operatives who tried to flee Afghanistan into Iran. In early 2002, Iran detained about 290 al Qaeda fighters who had been picked up as they crossed the border. They weren’t willing to turn them over directly to the United States, but they eventually did hand over some to third countries, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, which were working with the United States.
But by that time, the Bush administration’s attitude toward Iran was changing, hardening. Iran was now a member of the “axis of evil.” The Iranians responded to Bush’s axis of evil speech with pique; Tehran released Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a ruthless Afghan warlord who had been on the CIA payroll during the 1980s but who was now opposed to the American occupation of Afghanistan. Soon after his release, Hekmatyar’s Hezb-i-Islami forces were battling U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and in May 2002 the CIA launched a missile from an armed Predator drone in a vain effort to try to kill him.
The 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, on Iran’s other border, was met with deep ambivalence in Tehran. The Iranians were happy that the United States was getting rid of their old enemy Saddam Hussein, opening the door for Iraq’s majority Shia population to gain power, with, of course, the guidance of Iran. But two consecutive wars in two neighboring countries, first in Afghanistan and now Iraq, had placed thousands of American troops on Iran’s exposed flanks, and so it was not hard to see why the Iranians might be getting a little paranoid about the Bush administration’s intentions.
In May 2003, one month after the fall of Baghdad, the Iranians approached the United States once again, offering to turn over top al Qaeda lieutenants, including both Saif al-Adel, al Qaeda’s chief of operations, and Saad bin Laden, Osama bin Laden’s son. This time, the Iranians wanted a trade; in return for the al Qaeda leaders, Tehran wanted the Americans to hand over members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), an Iranian exile terrorist organization that had been supported by Saddam Hussein and based in Iraq since 1986. After the fall of Baghdad, the U.S. military had disarmed the MEK’s thousands of fighters and taken custody of the group’s heavy military equipment, more than two thousand tanks, artillery pieces, armored personnel carriers, and other vehicles provided by Saddam Hussein. But the Bush administration was divided over what to do with the group next.
In a principals committee meeting at the White House in May, the Iranian prisoner exchange proposal was discussed by President Bush and his top advisors. According to people who were in the meeting, President Bush said that he thought it sounded like a good deal, since the MEK was a terrorist organization. After all, the MEK had been a puppet of Saddam Hussein, conducting assassinations and sabotage operations inside Iran from its sanctuary in Iraq. The MEK was officially listed as a foreign terrorist group by the State Department; back in the 1970s, the group had killed several Americans living in Iran, including CIA officers based there during the shah’s regime.
Before any exchange could be conducted, the United States would need solid assurances from the Iranians that the MEK members would not be executed or tortured; in the end, that obstacle may have made any such prisoner trade impossible.
But the idea never got that far. Hard-liners at the Pentagon dug in and ultimately torpedoed any talk of an agreement with the Iranians. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz seemed to think that the MEK could be useful in a future war with Iran, and so they appeared eager to keep the group in place inside Iraq. CIA and State Department officials were stunned that the Pentagon leadership would so openly flaunt their willingness to cut a deal with the MEK; they were even more surprised that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz paid no price for their actions. At the White House, officials soon learned that the Pentagon was dreaming up excuses to avoid following through on any further actions to rein in the MEK. One argument was that the military was too busy, with too many other responsibilities in Iraq, to devote the manpower to dismantling the MEK. The Pentagon basically told the White House that “we will get around to it when we get around to it,” noted one former Bush administration official. “And they got away with it.” The bottom line was that the United States lost a potential opportunity to get its hands on several top al Qaeda operatives, including Osama bin Laden’s son. It became clear to frustrated aides that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice was not only failing to curb the Pentagon, but was also allowing decision making on Iran policy to drift.
The MEK’s political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, understands how to gain attention in the West, particularly after watching the prewar success of the Iraqi National Congress, the Iraqi exile group headed by Ahmed Chalabi. Like Chalabi’s group, the Iranian exiles have used the American press to issue claims about Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs in order to build the case for a tougher U.S. policy toward Tehran.
While the war in Iraq has overshadowed the issue and forced the Bush administration to move slowly, some administration officials have been advocating a more forceful policy of pressuring the Iranians to disarm. The odds of a confrontation between the United States and Iran seemed to increase in the fall and winter of 2004, when the IAEA reported that Iran was not fully cooperating with international inspectors, and there were new reports that Iran was going ahead with plans to produce enriched uranium despite past assurances to the IAEA that it would freeze such activity. By 2005, Iran’s apparent intentions to continue to develop its nuclear program was inevitably leading to a full-fledged diplomatic crisis.
A detailed and visual report on Shahab family of missiles, their components and their capabilities.
Shahab is considered Iran’s most important offense and defense platform that is comparable to Russian and Chinese ICBMs. Our Persian observers tell us this is the first public and full-spectrum report on this weapon that includes technical and visual elements and is not as far as we know based on foreign intelligence or Iranian opposition forces, considering Mashreghnews’s alleged affiliations with Iranian armed forces.
In the report 3 other missile families based on Shahab’s platform is discussed: Safir, Ghiyam and Sejjil. All Shahab-based missiles are reported to be ballistic and at the moment, said to be flying as far as 2000 Km and Sejjil series are solid fuel branches with aims to go beyond 2500 Km.
Based on the report, Zelzal and Fateh missiles particularly Zelzal which is Iran’s early-stage middle range offense-only ground to ground road-mobile system (previously reported in Cryptome as Iranian IRGC controlled missile set to allegedly attack U.S bases in the region) are only sharing solid fuel technology with Shahab.
Safir is also reported to be the carriers of the Iranian satellites. What we found as a promising piece of “News” in this observation is the name of Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, in this report. According to our native observer, late Major general Tehrani Moghaddam was the chief of IRGC’s self-sufficiency (home-brew technologies) organization who was killed among reportedly up to 30 other IRGC officers in a mysterious explosion last year in a secret missile depot.
Based on publicly aired media from Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khameneiee, the Iranian supreme leader, attended his funeral ceremony personally, which is something he does very rarely. At the same dates, we have had other inputs indicating there are rumors that the explosion was related to Israeli sabotage operations. IRGC spokesman officially denied it immediately, which also was something they do very rarely when it comes to Israel.
Our analysis is that IRGC’s claim about the incident as a ammunition mishandling was false. A year before that we had other inputs about a very similar explosion in Imam Ali Missile base in eastern Iran very close to Iraqi boarders and we had reports many Shahab missiles were depoted there.
Later our native observers told us there are many indications among Iranian opposition media outlets that both explosions were internally considered as an act of sabotage by IRGC counterintelligence.
We have an reliable source who tells us the second explosion, which resulted in the death of said general, was actually set as a plot to kill Ali Khameneiee himself since he was allegedly paying a visit to that site that particular day during the nuclear talks hurricane back last year but several suspicious calls to and from the site stopped his personal secret service from attending the event.
Therefore the attack was considered a major step from Israelis by Iranian intelligence and Khameneiee attended his burial service with a tough language against Israel. In a recent speech this week at the beginning of the New Persian year, as Obama was visiting Tel Aviv, Khemeneiee offered two clear statements:
– Ff Israel makes a wrong move we target Tel Aviv and Haifa- If U.S is honest in its claims toward a diplomatic approach they shall stop supporting Israel
We find the picked items as a clear sign the Iranian leadership and the US-based powers are rooting more toward an Israeli solution out of their problems and to the best of our knowledge from modern history some stuff have been solved in London, Berlin, Moscow and even Tripoli, not in Tel Aviv though.
Clippers tickets are pretty spendy these days — especially in the front row — but that’s where Khloe Kardashian’s Celine bag sat for the game last night. What’s worse, the BAG cost more than the SEATS!
TOP-SECRET – Report of the Ministry of Defense about Nuclear Weapons and their misconduct through Cyberterrorists
CTO Vision writes:
Bottom Line Up Front: After reviewing all available evidence and rigorously weighing threat information, a Task Force of the Defense Science Board (DSB) concludes that:
The United States cannot be confident that our critical Information Technology (IT) systems will work under attack from a sophisticated and well-resourced opponent.
How does that make you feel? You know yourself what adversaries are doing when it comes to intellectual property theft. Now read on for more about what the DSB sees as the threat to military systems.
Here are more details:
The Defense Science Board (DSB) provides advice, assessments and reports as chartered by DoD leadership. It has studied cyber security and related topics for years and has been instrumental in providing new ideas and perspectives for action by DoD leadership.
The DSB was recently chartered to look at an interesting and somewhat intellectually stimulating topic, that of how US military systems could withstand cyber attack and remain able to execute their mission. The chartered group, a task force on Resilient Military Systems, produced a report with a set of recommendations designed to improve DoD’s ability to accomplish its missions. The overarching strategy recommended by the DSB is one that enhanced the department’s defenses in the face of attacks, decreases the effectiveness of adversaries, increases the cost to adversaries, and deters the most significant adversaries by ensuring the US maintains the ability to deliver desired mission capabilities in the face of catastrophic cyber attack.
Here is more from the forwarding letter to the report:
The final report of the DSB Task Force on Resilient Military Systems is attached. This report is based on the perspective of 24 Task Force members who received more than 50 briefings from practitioners and senior officials throughout the Department of Defense (DoD), Intelligence Community (IC), commercial sector, academia, national laboratories, and policymakers. This Task Force was asked to review and make recommendations to improve the resilience of DoD systems to cyber attacks, and to develop a set of metrics that the Department could use to track progress and shape investment priorities.
After conducting an 18-month study, this Task Force concluded that the cyber threat is serious and that the United States cannot be confident that our critical Information Technology (IT) systems will work under attack from a sophisticated and well-resourced opponent utilizing cyber capabilities in combination with all of their military and intelligence capabilities (a “full spectrum” adversary). While this is also true for others (e.g. Allies, rivals, and public/private networks), this Task Force strongly believes the DoD needs to take the lead and build an effective response to measurably increase confidence in the IT systems we depend on (public and private) and at the same time decrease a would-be attacker’s confidence in the effectiveness of their capabilities to compromise DoD systems. This conclusion was developed upon several factors, including the success adversaries have had penetrating our networks; the relative ease that our Red Teams have in disrupting, or completely beating, our forces in exercises using exploits available on the Internet; and the weak cyber hygiene position of DoD networks and systems. The Task Force believes that the recommendations of this report create the basis for a strategy to address this broad and pervasive threat.
Nearly every conceivable component within DoD is networked. These networked systems and components are inextricably linked to the Department’s ability to project military force and the associated mission assurance. Yet, DoD’s networks are built on inherently insecure architectures that are composed of, and increasingly using, foreign parts. While DoD takes great care to secure the use and operation of the “hardware” of its weapon systems, the same level of resource and attention is not spent on the complex network of information technology (IT) systems that are used to support and operate those weapons or critical IT capabilities embedded within them.
DoD’s dependence on this vulnerable technology is a magnet to U.S. opponents. In fact, DoD and its contractor base have already sustained staggering losses of system design information incorporating decades of combat knowledge and experience that provide adversaries insight to technical designs and system use. Despite numerous DoD actions, efforts are fragmented, and the Department is not currently prepared to mitigate the threat.
That forwarding letter was signed by the task force co-chairs, Mr. Lewis Von Thaer and Mr. James R. Gosler, two of the most professional, well thought out leaders I have ever worked with.
Please dive deep into the full document now. You will find some information you already know, but I promise some surprises as well.
Our Persian observer reports that Iran has made its southern missile and rocket launchers and silos ready for a probable 1-day attack. Based on what we hear, there is high chance of a very small scale fire exchange between the two sides and then call it a mistake. It is a common practice in such situations and we think such test must happen before the upcoming Iranian presidential election, to have a added-value score for Americans. It is a military text book fact that such event is going to happen and this article tips off Iranians are concentrating on the south. It also offer thorough details of Zelzaal, a solid fuel rocket that is set to destroy American airplanes before they get the chance to fly off the band [ground].
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65220-65231]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26299]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2012-0257; EA-12-062]
Certain Licensees Requesting Unescorted Access to Radioactive
Material; Order Imposing Trustworthiness and Reliability Requirements
for Unescorted Access to Certain Radioactive Material (Effective
Immediately)
I
The Licensee identified in Attachment 1 \1\ to this Order holds a
license issued by an Agreement State, in accordance with the Atomic
Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended. The license authorizes it to
perform services on devices containing certain radioactive material for
customers licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) or
an Agreement State to possess and use certain quantities of the
radioactive materials listed in Attachment 2 to this Order. Commission
regulations at 10 CFR 20.1801 or equivalent Agreement State regulations
require Licensees to secure, from unauthorized removal or access,
licensed materials that are stored in controlled or unrestricted areas.
Commission regulations at 10 CFR 20.1802 or equivalent Agreement State
regulations require Licensees to control and maintain constant
surveillance of licensed material that is in a controlled or
unrestricted area and that is not in storage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and will not be
released to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II
Subsequent to the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, the NRC
issued immediately effective security Orders to NRC and Agreement State
Licensees under the Commission's authority to protect the common
defense and security of the nation. The Orders required certain
manufacturing and distribution (M&D) Licensees to implement Additional
Security Measures (ASMs) for the radioactive materials listed in
Attachment 2 to this Order (the radionuclides of concern), to
supplement the existing regulatory requirements. The ASMs included
requirements for determining the trustworthiness and reliability of
individuals that require unescorted access to the radionuclides of
concern. Section 652 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which became law
on August 8, 2005, amended Section 149 of the AEA to require
fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
identification and criminal history records check for ``any individual
who is permitted unescorted access to radioactive materials or other
property subject to regulation by the Commission that the Commission
determines to be of such significance to the public health and safety
or the common defense and security as to warrant fingerprinting and
background checks.'' Section 149 of the AEA also requires that ``all
fingerprints obtained by a Licensee or applicant* * *shall be submitted
to the Attorney General of the United States through the Commission for
identification and a criminal history records check.'' As a result, the
trustworthiness and reliability requirements of the ASMs were updated
and the M&D Licensees were issued additional Orders imposing the new
fingerprinting requirements.
In late 2005, the NRC and the Agreement States began issuing
Increased Controls (IC) Orders or other legally binding requirements to
Licensees who are authorized to possess the radionuclides of concern.
Paragraph IC 1.c of the IC requirements stated that ``service providers
shall be escorted unless determined to be trustworthy and reliable by
an NRC-required background investigation as an employee of a
Manufacturing and Distribution Licensee.'' Starting in December 2007,
the NRC and the Agreement States began issuing additional Orders or
other legally binding requirements to the IC Licensees, imposing the
new fingerprinting requirements. In the December 2007 Fingerprinting
Order, Paragraph IC 1.c of the IC requirements was superseded by the
requirement that ``Service provider Licensee employees shall be
escorted unless determined to be trustworthy and reliable by an NRC-
required background investigation.'' However, NRC did not require
background investigations for non-M&D service provider Licensees.
Consequently, only service representatives of certain M&D Licensees may
be granted unescorted access to the radionuclides of concern at an IC
Licensee facility, even though non-M&D service provider Licensees
provide similar services and have the same degree of knowledge of the
devices they service as M&D Licensees. To maintain appropriate access
control to the radionuclides of concern, and to allow M&D Licensees and
non-M&D service provider Licensees to have the same level of access at
customers' facilities, NRC is imposing trustworthiness and reliability
requirements for unescorted access to radionuclides of concern, as set
forth in this Order. These requirements apply to non-M&D service
provider Licensees that request and have a need for unescorted access
by their representatives to the radionuclides of concern at IC Licensee
facilities. These trustworthiness and reliability requirements are
equivalent to the requirements for M&D Licensees who perform services
requiring unescorted access to the radionuclides of concern.
In order to provide assurance that non-M&D service provider
Licensees are implementing prudent measures to achieve a consistent
level of protection for service providers requiring unescorted access
to the radionuclides of concern at IC Licensee facilities, the Licensee
identified in Attachment 1 to this Order shall implement the
requirements of this Order. In addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202,
because of potentially significant adverse impacts associated with a
deliberate malevolent act by an individual with unescorted
[[Page 65221]]
access to the radionuclides of concern, I find that the public health,
safety, and interest require this Order to be effective immediately.
III
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 149, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182,
and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR Parts 20, 30 and 33,
it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that the licensee
identified in attachment 1 to this order comply with the requirements
set forth in this order.
A.1. The Licensee shall establish and maintain a fingerprinting
program that meets the requirements of Attachment 3 to this Order for
individuals that require unescorted access to the radionuclides of
concern. The Licensee shall complete implementation of the requirements
of Attachment 3 to this Order within one hundred eighty (180) days of
the date of this Order, or before providing written verification to
another Licensee subject to the IC requirements, or attesting to or
certifying the trustworthiness and reliability of a service provider
for unescorted access to the radionuclides of concern at a customer's
facility.
A.2. Within ninety (90) days of the date of this Order, the
Licensee shall designate a ``Reviewing Official'' for determining
unescorted access to the radioactive materials as listed in Attachment
2 to this Order by other individuals. The designated Reviewing Official
shall be determined to be trustworthy and reliable by the Licensee in
accordance with the requirements described in Attachment 3 to this
Order and must be authorized to have unescorted access to the
radioactive materials listed in Attachment 2 to this Order as part of
his or her job duties.
A.3. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if a
designated Reviewing Official is relieved from the fingerprinting
requirement by 10 CFR 73.61, or has been favorably adjudicated by a
U.S. Government program involving fingerprinting and a FBI
identification and criminal history records check \2\ within the last
five (5) years, or for any person who has an active Federal security
clearance (provided in the latter two cases that they make available
the appropriate documentation \3\). The Licensee may provide, for NRC
review, written confirmation from the agency/employer which granted the
Federal security clearance or reviewed the FBI identification and
criminal history records results based upon a fingerprint
identification check. The NRC will determine whether, based on the
written confirmation, the designated Reviewing Official may have
unescorted access to the radioactive materials listed in Attachment 2
to this Order, and therefore, be permitted to serve as the Licensee's
Reviewing Official.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Examples of such programs include (1) National Agency Check,
(2) Transportation Worker Identification Credentials in accordance
with 49 CFR Part 1572, (3) Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and
Explosives background checks and clearances in accordance with 27
CFR Part 555, (4) Health and Human Services security risk
assessments for possession and use of select agents and toxins in
accordance with 42 CFR Part 73, and (5) Hazardous Material security
threat assessment for hazardous material endorsement to commercial
drivers license in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Customs and
Border Patrol's Free and Secure Trade (FAST) Program. The FAST
program is a cooperative effort between the Bureau of Customs and
Border Patrol and the governments of Canada and Mexico to coordinate
processes for the clearance of commercial shipments at the U.S.-
Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. Participants in the FAST program,
which requires successful completion of a background records check,
may receive expedited entrance privileges at the northern and
southern borders.
\3\ This documentation must allow the NRC or NRC-approved
Reviewing Official to verify that the individual has fulfilled the
unescorted access requirements of Section 149 of the AEA by
submitting to fingerprinting and a FBI identification and criminal
history records check.
\4\ The NRC's determination of this individual's unescorted
access to the radionuclides of concern in accordance with the
process described in Enclosure 4 to the transmittal letter of this
Order is an administrative determination that is outside the scope
of this Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.4. A designated Reviewing Official may not review the results
from the FBI identification and criminal history records checks or make
unescorted access determinations until the NRC has approved the
individual as the Licensee's Reviewing Official.
A.5. The NRC will determine whether this individual (or any
subsequent Reviewing Official) may have unescorted access to the
radionuclides of concern, and therefore, will be permitted to serve as
the Licensee's Reviewing Official. The NRC-approved Reviewing Official
shall be the recipient of the results of the FBI identification and
criminal history records check of the other Licensee employees
requiring unescorted access to the radioactive materials listed in
Attachment 2 to this Order, and shall control such information as
specified in the ``Protection of Information'' section of Attachment 3
to this Order.
A.6. The NRC-approved Reviewing Official shall determine whether an
individual may have unescorted access to radioactive materials that
equal or exceed the quantities in Attachment 2 to this Order, in
accordance with the requirements described in Attachment 3 to this
Order.
B. Prior to requesting fingerprints from a Licensee employee, a
copy of this Order shall be provided to that person.
C.1. The Licensee shall, in writing, within twenty-five (25) days
of the date of this Order, notify the Commission (1) if it is unable to
comply with any of the requirements described in this Order, including
Attachment 3 to this Order, (2) if compliance with any of the
requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances, or (3) if
implementation of any of the requirements would cause the Licensee to
be in violation of the provisions of any Commission or Agreement State
regulation or its license. The notification shall provide the
Licensee's justification for seeking relief from or variation of any
specific requirement.
C.2. The Licensee shall complete implementation of the requirements
of Attachment 3 to this Order within one hundred eighty (180) days of
the date of this Order.
C.3. The Licensee shall report to the Commission when they have
achieved full compliance with the requirements described in Attachment
3 to this Order. The report shall be made within twenty-five (25) days
after full compliance has been achieved.
C.4. If during the implementation period of this Order, the
Licensee is unable, due to circumstances beyond its control, to meet
the requirements of this Order by [December 3, 2012], the Licensee
shall request, in writing, that the Commission grant an extension of
time to implement the requirements. The request shall provide the
Licensee's justification for seeking additional time to comply with the
requirements of this Order.
C.5. Licensees shall notify the NRC's Headquarters Operations
Office at 301-816-5100 within 24 hours if the results from a FBI
identification and criminal history records check indicate that an
individual is identified on the FBI's Terrorist Screening Data Base.
Licensee responses to C.1, C.2., C.3., and C.4. above shall be
submitted in writing to the Director, Office of Federal and State
Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Licensee responses shall
be marked as ``Security-Related Information--Withhold Under 10 CFR
2.390.''
The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or rescind
any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good cause by the
Licensee.
[[Page 65222]]
IV
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other
person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this
Order within twenty-five (25) days of the date of this Order. In
addition, the Licensee and any other person adversely affected by this
Order may request a hearing of this Order within twenty-five (25) days
of the date of the Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will
be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for
extension of time must be made, in writing, to the Director, Division
of Materials Safety and State Agreements, Office of Federal and State
Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of
good cause for the extension.
The answer may consent to this Order. If the answer includes a
request for a hearing, it shall, under oath or affirmation,
specifically set forth the matters of fact and law on which the
Licensee relies and the reasons as to why the Order should not have
been issued. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing,
that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his
interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the
criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d).
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139,
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help
/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the NRC's public Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document
via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public
Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call to 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded
[[Page 65223]]
pursuant to an order of the Commission, or the presiding officer.
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information,
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers
in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires
submission of such information. With respect to copyrighted works,
except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory
filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are
requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a person whose
interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order
designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held the
issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order
should be sustained.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition to
requesting a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move
the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the
Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate
effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion,
unfounded allegations, or error.
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions
specified in Section III above shall be (final twenty-five (25) days)
from the date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an
extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the
provisions specified in Section III shall be final when the extension
expires if a hearing request has not been received. An answer or a
request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this
order.
Dated this 16th day of October, 2012.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mark A. Satorius,
Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
Attachments:
1. Applicable Materials Licensee
2. Table 1: Radionuclides of Concern
3. Requirements for Service Provider Licensees Providing Written
VerificationAttesting to or Certifying the Trustworthiness and
Reliability of Service Providers forUnescorted Access to Certain
Radioactive Material at Customer Facilities, including Requirements for
Fingerprinting and Criminal History Checks
Attachment 1: Applicable Materials Licensee Redacted
Attachment 2: Order Imposing Trustworthiness and Reliability
Requirements for Unescorted Access to Certain Radioactive Material
Table 1--Radionuclides of Concern
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantity of concern Quantity of
Radionuclide \1\ (TBq) concern \2\ (Ci )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am-241.......................... 0.6................ 16
Am-241/Be....................... 0.6................ 16
Cf-252.......................... 0.2................ 5.4
Cm-244.......................... 0.5................ 14
Co-60........................... 0.3................ 8.1
Cs-137.......................... 1.................. 27
Gd-153.......................... 10................. 270
Ir-192.......................... 0.8................ 22
Pm-147.......................... 400................ 11,000
Pu-238.......................... 0.6................ 16
Pu-239/Be....................... 0.6................ 16
Ra-226 \3\...................... 0.4................ 11
Se-75........................... 2.................. 54
Sr-90 (Y-90).................... 10................. 270
Tm-170.......................... 200................ 5,400
Yb-169.......................... 3.................. 81
Combinations of radioactive See Footnote Below
materials listed above \4\. \5\.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The aggregate activity of multiple, collocated sources of the same
radionuclide should be included when the total activity equals or
exceeds the quantity of concern.
\2\ The primary values used for compliance with this Order are TBq. The
curie (Ci) values are rounded to two significant figures for
informational purposes only.
\3\ The Atomic Energy Act, as amended by the Energy Policy Act of 2005,
authorizes NRC to regulate Ra-226 and NRC is in the process of
amending its regulations for discrete sources of Ra-226.
\4\ Radioactive materials are to be considered aggregated or collocated
if breaching a common physical security barrier (e.g., a locked door
at the entrance to a storage room) would allow access to the
radioactive material or devices containing the radioactive material.
\5\ If several radionuclides are aggregated, the sum of the ratios of
the activity of each source, i of radionuclide, n, A(i,n), to the
quantity of concern for radionuclide n, Q(n), listed for that
radionuclide equals or exceeds one. [(aggregated source activity for
radionuclide A) / (quantity of concern for radionuclide A)] +
[(aggregated source activity for radionuclide B) / (quantity of
concern for radionuclide B)] + etc.* * * >1.
Guidance for Aggregation of Sources
NRC supports the use of the International Atomic Energy
Association's (IAEA) source categorization methodology as defined in
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. RS-G-1.9, ``Categorization of
Radioactive Sources,'' (2005) (see http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1227_web.pdf) and as endorsed by the agency's
Code of Conduct for the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources,
January 2004 (see http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Code-2004_web.pdf). The Code defines a three-tiered source
categorization scheme. Category 1 corresponds to the largest source
strength (equal to or greater than 100 times the quantity of concern
values listed in Table 1) and Category 3, the smallest (equal or
exceeding one-tenth the quantity of concern values listed in Table
1. Additional security measures apply to sources that are equal to
or greater than the quantity of concern values listed in Table 1,
plus aggregations of smaller sources that are equal to or greater
than the quantities in Table 1. Aggregation only applies to sources
that are collocated.
Licensees who possess individual sources in total quantities
that equal or exceed the Table 1 quantities are required to
implement additional security measures. Where there are many small
(less than the quantity of concern values) collocated sources whose
total aggregate activity equals or exceeds the Table 1 values,
licensees are to implement additional security measures.
[[Page 65224]]
Some source handling or storage activities may cover several
buildings, or several locations within specific buildings. The
question then becomes, ``When are sources considered collocated for
purposes of aggregation''? For purposes of the additional controls,
sources are considered collocated if breaching a single barrier
(e.g., a locked door at the entrance to a storage room) would allow
access to the sources. Sources behind an outer barrier should be
aggregated separately from those behind an inner barrier (e.g., a
locked source safe inside the locked storage room). However, if both
barriers are simultaneously open, then all sources within these two
barriers are considered to be collocated. This logic should be
continued for other barriers within or behind the inner barrier.
The following example illustrates the point: A lockable room has
sources stored in it. Inside the lockable room, there are two
shielded safes with additional sources in them. Inventories are as
follows:
The room has the following sources outside the safes: Cf-252,
0.12 TBq (3.2 Ci); Co-60, 0.18 TBq (4.9 Ci), and Pu-238, 0.3 TBq
(8.1 Ci). Application of the unity rule yields: (0.12 / 0.2) + (0.18
/ 0.3) + (0.3 / 0.6) = 0.6 + 0.6 + 0.5 = 1.7. Therefore, the sources
would require additional security measures.
Shielded safe 1 has a 1.9 TBq (51 Ci) Cs-137 source and
a 0.8 TBq (22 Ci) Am-241 source. In this case, the sources would
require additional security measures, regardless of location,
because they each exceed the quantities in Table 1.
Shielded safe 2 has two Ir-192 sources, each having an
activity of 0.3 TBq (8.1 Ci). In this case, the sources would not
require additional security measures while locked in the safe. The
combined activity does not exceed the threshold quantity 0.8 TBq (22
Ci).
Because certain barriers may cease to exist during source
handling operations (e.g., a storage location may be unlocked during
periods of active source usage), licensees should, to the extent
practicable, consider two modes of source usage --``operations''
(active source usage) and ``shutdown'' (source storage mode).
Whichever mode results in the greatest inventory (considering
barrier status) would require additional security measures for each
location.
Use the following method to determine which sources of
radioactive material require implementation of the Additional
Security Measures:
Include any single source equal to or greater than the
quantity of concern in Table 1
Include multiple collocated sources of the same
radionuclide when the combined quantity equals or exceeds the
quantity of concern
For combinations of radionuclides, include multiple
collocated sources of different radionuclides when the aggregate
quantities satisfy the following unity rule: [(amount of
radionuclide A) / (quantity of concern of radionuclide A)] +
[(amount of radionuclide B) / (quantity of concern of radionuclide
B)] + etc. * * * >= 1
Attachment 3: Requirements for Service Provider Licensees Providing
Written Verification Attesting to or Certifying the Trustworthiness and
Reliability of Service Providers for Unescorted Access to Certain
Radioactive Material at Customer Facilities, Including Requirements for
Fingerprinting and Criminal History Records Checks
A. General Requirements
Licensees subject to the provisions of this Order shall comply
with the requirements of this attachment. The term ``certain
radioactive material'' means the radionuclides in quantities equal
to or greater than the quantities listed in Attachment 2 to this
Order.
1. The Licensee shall provide the customer's facility written
verification attesting to or certifying the trustworthiness and
reliability of an individual as a service provider only for
employees the Licensee has approved in writing (see requirement A.3
below). The Licensee shall request unescorted access to certain
radioactive material at customer licensee facilities only for
approved service providers that require the unescorted access in
order to perform a job duty.
2. The trustworthiness, reliability, and true identity of a
service provider shall be determined based on a background
investigation. The background investigation shall address at least
the past three (3) years, and as a minimum, include fingerprinting
and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) criminal history records
check as required in Section B, verification of employment history,
education, and personal references. If a service provider's
employment has been less than the required three (3) year period,
educational references may be used in lieu of employment history.
3. The Licensee shall document the basis for concluding that
there is reasonable assurance that a service provider requiring
unescorted access to certain radioactive material at a customer
facility is trustworthy and reliable, and does not constitute an
unreasonable risk for unauthorized use of the radioactive material.
The Licensee shall maintain a list of service providers approved for
unescorted access to certain radioactive material.
4. The Licensee shall retain documentation regarding the
trustworthiness and reliability of approved service providers for
(3) years after the individual no longer requires unescorted access
to certain radioactive material associated with the Licensee's
activities.
5. Each time the Licensee revises the list of approved service
providers (see requirement 3 above), the Licensee shall retain the
previous list for three (3) years after the revision.
6. The Licensee shall provide to a customer written
certification for each service provider for whom unescorted access
to certain radioactive material at the customer's facility is
required and requested. The written certification shall be dated and
signed by the Reviewing Official. A new written certification is not
required if an individual service provider returns to the customer
facility within three (3) years, provided the customer has retained
the prior certification.
B. Specific Requirements Pertaining to Fingerprinting and Criminal
History Records Checks
1. The Licensee shall fingerprint each service provider to be
approved for unescorted access to certain radioactive materials
following the procedures outlined in Enclosure 3 of the transmittal
letter. The Licensee shall review and use the information received
from the FBI identification and criminal history records check and
ensure that the provisions contained in the subject Order and this
attachment are satisfied.
2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the
fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal
history record and inform the individual of the procedures for
revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as
specified in the ``Right to Correct and Complete Information''
section of this attachment.
3. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an
employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor,
manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting
requirement by 10 CFR 73.61, or any person who has been favorably-
decided by a U.S. Government program involving fingerprinting and an
FBI identification and criminal history records check (e.g.,
National Agency Check, Transportation Worker Identification
Credentials in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Bureau of Alcohol
Tobacco Firearms and Explosives background checks and clearances in
accordance with 27 CFR Part 555, Health and Human Services security
risk assessments for possession and use of select agents and toxins
in accordance with 42 CFR Part 73, Hazardous Material security
threat assessment for hazardous material endorsement to commercial
drivers license in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Customs and
Border Patrol's Free and Secure Trade Program \5\) within the last
five (5) years, or any person who has an active Federal Security
Clearance (provided in the latter two cases that they make available
the appropriate documentation \6\). Written confirmation from the
Agency/employer which granted the Federal Security Clearance or
reviewed the FBI criminal history records results based upon a
fingerprint identification check must be provided. The Licensee must
retain this documentation for a period of three (3) years from the
date the
[[Page 65225]]
individual no longer requires unescorted access to certain
radioactive material associated with the Licensee's activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The FAST program is a cooperative effort between the Bureau
of Customs and Border Patrol and the governments of Canada and
Mexico to coordinate processes for the clearance of commercial
shipments at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. Participants
in the FAST program, which requires successful completion of a
background records check, may receive expedited entrance privileges
at the northern and southern borders.
\6\ This documentation must allow the Reviewing Official to
verify that the individual has fulfilled the unescorted access
requirements of Section 149 of the AEA by submitting to
fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history
records check.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this
Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the
FBI.
5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the
FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthiness and
reliability requirements of Section A of this attachment, in making
a determination whether to approve and certify the individual for
unescorted access to certain radioactive materials.
6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a
criminal history records check solely for the purpose of determining
an individual's suitability for unescorted access to certain
radioactive materials.
7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination
whether to approve the individual for unescorted access to certain
radioactive materials.
C. Prohibitions
A Licensee shall not base a final determination to not provide
certification for unescorted access to certain radioactive material
for an individual solely on the basis of information received from
the FBI involving: an arrest more than one (1) year old for which
there is no information of the disposition of the case, or an arrest
that resulted in dismissal of the charge or an acquittal.
A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal
history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that would
infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the Licensee use
the information in any way which would discriminate among
individuals on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, or
age.
D. Right to Correct and Complete Information
Prior to any final adverse determination, the Licensee shall
make available to the individual the contents of any criminal
records obtained from the FBI for the purpose of assuring correct
and complete information. Written confirmation by the individual of
receipt of this notification must be maintained by the Licensee for
a period of one (1) year from the date of the notification. If,
after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is
incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change,
correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any matter
in the record, the individual may initiate challenge procedures.
These procedures include either direct application by the individual
challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law enforcement agency)
that contributed the questioned information, or direct challenge as
to the accuracy or completeness of any entry on the criminal history
record to the Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Identification Division, Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in
28 CFR 16.30 through 16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards
the challenge to the agency that submitted the data and requests
that agency to verify or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt
of an Official communication directly from the agency that
contributed the original information, the FBI Identification
Division makes any changes necessary in accordance with the
information supplied by that agency. The Licensee must provide at
least ten (10) days for an individual to initiate an action
challenging the results of an FBI identification and criminal
history records check after the record is made available for his/her
review. The Licensee may make a final unescorted access to certain
radioactive material determination based upon the criminal history
record only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate confirmation or
correction of the record. Upon a final adverse determination on
unescorted access to certain radioactive material, the Licensee
shall provide the individual its documented basis for denial.
Unescorted access to certain radioactive material shall not be
granted to an individual during the review process.
E. Protection of Information
1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal history record on an
individual pursuant to this Order shall establish and maintain a
system of files and procedures for protecting the record and the
personal information from unauthorized disclosure.
2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal
information collected and maintained to persons other than the
subject individual, his/her representative, or to those who have a
need to access the information in performing assigned duties in the
process of determining whether to verify the individual for
unescorted access to certain radioactive material. No individual
authorized to have access to the information may re-disseminate the
information to any other individual who does not have a need-to-
know.
3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a
criminal history record check may be transferred to another Licensee
if the Licensee holding the criminal history record check receives
the individual's written request to re-disseminate the information
contained in his/her file, and the gaining Licensee verifies
information such as the individual's name, date of birth, social
security number, sex, and other applicable physical characteristics
for identification purposes.
4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained
under this section, available for examination by an authorized
representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the
regulations and laws.
5. The Licensee shall retain all fingerprints and criminal
history records from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file has
been transferred:
a. for three (3) years after the individual no longer requires
unescorted access, or
b. for three (3) years after unescorted access to certain
radioactive material was denied.
After the required three (3) year period, these documents shall be
destroyed by a method that will prevent reconstruction of the
information in whole or in part.
Implementing Guidance for Service Provider Licensees That are not
Manufacturers or Distributors
A. Initial Actions
1. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a
Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS 2007-15) informing all NRC licensees
that are non-manufacturer and distributor (non-M&D) service
providers, and all Agreement State Radiation Control Program
Directors and State Liaison Officers about the non-M&D Service
Provider Order.
2. Each non-M&D service provider licensee should review the RIS
and determine if a need exists for its service representatives to
have unescorted access to radioactive material in quantities of
concern at client facilities.
3. If the licensee determines that unescorted access is required
the licensee must request, in writing, that NRC issue the Order.
B. NRC Issues Order in Response to the Licensee's Request
1. After receiving the Order, the licensee selects a candidate
Reviewing Official. As part of the selection, the licensee must
perform a trustworthiness and reliability review per the
requirements in Attachment 3 of the Order. Note: the Reviewing
Official MUST BE an individual that requires unescorted access to
radioactive material in quantities of concern as part of his/her job
duties.
2. The licensee designates the Reviewing Official to NRC by
submitting the individual's fingerprints and processing fee.
3. NRC processes the fingerprints through the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, and reviews the results of the criminal history
investigation. If the investigation does not find disqualifying
information, NRC will authorize the designated individual to serve
as the licensees Reviewing Official.
4. The Reviewing Official performs the trustworthiness and
reliability reviews for other licensee service representatives that
require unescorted access to radioactive material in quantities of
concern. The Reviewing Official must submit the fingerprints of the
service representatives to NRC and receive the criminal history
investigation results. The reviews must be performed per the
requirements in Attachment 3 of the Order and Enclosure 4 of the
transmittal letter. Based on the information and investigation
results, the Reviewing Official determines if the service
representative is trustworthy and reliable and that the service
representative may be granted unescorted access to radioactive
materials in quantities of concern.
5. The Reviewing Official prepares, on company letterhead, an
attestation or certification that indicates the service
representative (by name) has been determined to be trustworthy and
reliable in accordance with the NRC security Order for non-M&D
Service Providers. The Reviewing Official signs and dates this
document.
6. Client licensees may accept the signed and dated document in
lieu of conducting their own trustworthiness and reliability review
of the named service representative.
[[Page 65226]]
C. NRC Actions During Future Inspections
1. During future inspections, both the service provider licensee
and the client licensee will be audited to assure compliance with
the Order requirements and the implementation process.
Questions and Answers With Regards to Fingerprinting and FBI Criminal
History Records Checks
1. Information on how I would be required to respond to this
notice when I receive it does not appear to be included with the
implementing guidance? Will my response include sensitive
information?
The information on how to respond to the NRC Order requiring
implementation of the fingerprinting requirements is contained in
the Order itself. The NRC Orders are not considered sensitive
information. Examples of previous Orders can be found by searching
ADAMS or NRC's Web site.
Licensee responses to the Order are considered sensitive
information and should be marked appropriately at the top of the
page with ``Security Related Information--Withhold Under 10 CFR
2.390.''
2. Does a National Agency Check (NAC) satisfy the provisions of
the Order?
If the NAC has been conducted within the past five (5) calendar
years and the employee can provide documentation of favorable
results to the NRC or licensee's Reviewing Official, as appropriate,
then this would satisfy the provisions of the Order.
3. Can the Human Resources department be designated as the
licensee's Reviewing Official to review criminal history records? Do
they have to be fingerprinted to be able to review and approve
others?
The requirements for fingerprinting and criminal history records
should be incorporated into the licensee's current program of
reviewing and approving background information of its employees. The
duties of a Reviewing Official can be delegated to the Human
Resources department or any other appropriate department as long as
the individual(s) involved in the determining of an employee's
trustworthiness and reliability have been determined themselves to
be trustworthy and reliable by the licensee, are permitted to have
unescorted access to radioactive material in quantities of concern
as part of their job duties, and have been approved by the NRC to be
the licensee's Reviewing Official.
4. What is a Reviewing Official? Who can be a Reviewing
Official?
A Reviewing Official is an NRC-approved individual that requires
unescorted access to radioactive material in quantities of concern
as part of his/her job duties, and who shall make the
trustworthiness and reliability determinations of other Licensee
employees to determine whether the individual may have, or continue
to have, unescorted access.
5. I was only provided a few fingerprint cards, where can I get
more?
You can request more fingerprint cards by writing to the Office
of Information Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, by calling (301) 492-3531, or by email to
forms@nrc.gov.
6. What information do I need to include on the card?
Incomplete fingerprint cards will not be processed and will be
returned to the licensee. Licensees need to include the following
information on each card:
a. Last name, first name, middle name
b. Signature of person being fingerprinted
c. Residence of person being fingerprinted
d. Date
e. Signature of official taking the fingerprints
f. Employer and address
g. Reason for being fingerprinted
h. Aliases
i. Citizenship
j. Social security number and any of the other corresponding numbers
requested on the card if applicable
k. Date of birth
l. Place of birth
m. Sex
n. Race
o. Height
p. Weight
q. Eye color
r. Hair color
7. I was able to get more fingerprint cards from my local law
enforcement agency, can I use those instead?
No, because of problems that have been experienced in the past
with some of the cards.
8. Who do I send my fingerprints to?
A completed fingerprint card should be sent to: Director,
Division of Facilities and Security, U.S. NRC, Two White Flint
North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, ATTN:
Criminal History Program, Mail Stop TWB-05B32M.
9. Is there a fee associated with the NRC processing the
fingerprints?
The current fee to process each fingerprint card is a $26.00 per
card. Additional fees may be charged by the entity taking the
fingerprints.
10. What method of payment does the NRC accept?
NRC's preferred method of payment is electronic payment through
http://www.pay.gov. Please refer to the instructions (in Enclosure
3) included with the transmittal letter of the Order for details on
how to pay electronically. NRC also accepts checks, cashier checks
or money orders made out to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
along with the submission of fingerprint cards. Fingerprint cards
along with checks, cashier checks or money orders should be sent to:
Director, Division of Facilities and Security, U.S. NRC, Two White
Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, Attn:
Criminal History Program, Mail Stop TWB-05B32M.
11. When are licensees required to submit fingerprints to the
NRC?
Licensees are required to fingerprint and review the criminal
history results for all materials quantities of concern to the NRC
within 90 days after the Order is issued.
12. Will guidance be provided on how to determine
trustworthiness and reliability based on FBI identification and
criminal history records checks?
Guidance is included with the Order documents; however, it will
ultimately be the decision of the licensee's Reviewing Official to
determine whether an individual should be granted unescorted access
to the radioactive material, based on the results of the criminal
records history check, and the other trustworthiness and reliability
requirements of the Order.
13. My fingerprints have been returned several times as
unclassifiable, can I get an extension to submit my fingerprints?
On a rare case that a licensee needs additional time to
implement the fingerprinting requirements beyond the implementation
time, the NRC will consider granting extensions only on a case by
case basis. Licensees must take the appropriate actions to minimize
any potential impacts in delays from receiving the criminal history
results from the NRC. In a rare case that an extension is needed,
the request must be date-stamped before the deadline to implement
the requirements and must include the licensee's justification as to
why additional time is needed beyond the implementation period and
the appropriate compensatory actions that will be implemented until
the fingerprints are processed.
14. What does unescorted access to the material mean?
Unescorted access to the material means that an individual can
exert some physical control over the material or device while they
are alone.
15. If I decide that based on a Federal criminal records history
check one of my employees previously granted unescorted access
should not have unescorted access to radioactive material what
actions can I take?
The licensee is ultimately responsible to determine the best
course of action.
16. Does the denial of unescorted access create legal liability
for the licensee?
The NRC acknowledges that employer liability potentially exists
through the process for determining trustworthiness and reliability,
just as employer liability potentially exists throughout the hiring
process. A finding that results in denying someone employment may be
actionable on the part of the employee/employee candidate, and this
is no different.
17. How far back do the criminal history record checks go? Can
the NRC provide guidance on what types of information could be
considered when granting unescorted access?
The criminal history records check provides information on all
arrests since the individual's eighteenth birthday. Guidance on
criminal offenses that could be considered is included in Enclosure
4 of the transmittal letter. However, the list of offenses is not
inclusive. There may be additional offenses not listed in the
guidance that the licensee wants to consider as part of unescorted
access approval process. It is the licensee's ultimate business
decision as to what criteria it uses for the bases of the
trustworthiness and reliability determination.
18. Is there a process to request an exemption from
fingerprinting? Do employees that have been fingerprinted in the
past need to be fingerprinted again?
Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an
employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor,
manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting
requirement by 10 CFR 73.61,
[[Page 65227]]
or any person who has been favorably-decided by a U.S. Government
program involving fingerprinting and an FBI identification and
criminal history records check (e.g., National Agency Check,
Transportation Worker Identification Credentials in accordance with
49 CFR Part 1572, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives
background checks and clearances in accordance with 27 CFR Part 555,
Health and Human Services security risk assessments for possession
and use of select agents and toxins in accordance with 42 CFR Part
73, Hazardous Material security threat assessment for hazardous
material endorsement to commercial drivers license in accordance
with 49 CFR Part 1572, Customs and Border Patrol's Free and Secure
Trade Program \7\) within the last five (5) years, or any person who
has an active Federal Security Clearance (provided in the latter two
cases that they make available the appropriate documentation).
Written confirmation from the Agency/employer which granted the
Federal security clearance or reviewed the FBI criminal history
records results based upon a fingerprint identification check must
be provided. The Licensee must retain this documentation for a
period of three (3) years from the date the individual no longer
requires unescorted access to certain radioactive material
associated with the Licensee's activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The FAST program is a cooperative effort between the Bureau
of Customs and Border Patrol and the governments of Canada and
Mexico to coordinate processes for the clearance of commercial
shipments at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. Participants
in the FAST program, which requires successful completion of a
background records check, may receive expedited entrance privileges
at the northern and southern borders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Is fingerprinting meant to replace the trustworthiness and
reliability determination?
No, fingerprinting is only one component of the trustworthiness
and reliability determination. A trustworthiness and reliability
determination should be based, at a minimum, by verifying employment
history, education, personal references and a federal criminal
history check. All four of these components need to be considered
when making a trustworthiness and reliability determination.
20. How will compliance with the fingerprinting component be
verified?
Compliance will be verified at the time the licensee's
trustworthiness and reliability program is inspected by the NRC.
21. Is there financial aid or funding available to assist in the
implementation of the fingerprinting requirements? Will the
licensees be compensated in any way?
The NRC will not provide financial aid and there is no funding
available to assist in the implementation of the fingerprinting
requirements.
22. Will there be a reevaluation period?
At the moment there is no reevaluation period. The reevaluation
of criminal history records will be addressed during the NRC's
rulemaking process.
23. The Order requires that the licensee shall provide under
oath or affirmation a certification that the Reviewing Official is
deemed trustworthy and reliable. What does it mean to submit
documents to the NRC ``under oath or affirmation''?
The requirement to submit documents to the NRC under oath or
affirmation may be satisfied by using a notary public to
authenticate oaths or affirmations and to certify that the
information provided is correct and true. An alternate method for
complying with the oath or affirmation requirement is presented in
the United States Code, Title 28, Section 1746 (28 U.S.C. 1746).
This method allows use of the following unsworn declaration to
satisfy the oath or affirmation requirement:
I declare [or certify, verify, state] under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on [date] [Signature]
When applying this declaration, it must be used verbatim. Licensing
documents accompanied by this unsworn declaration satisfy the
requirement that such documents be submitted under oath or
affirmation.
24. Can additional employees (e.g., new hires or existing
employees changing positions within the company who did NOT have
unescorted access prior to the date of the Order) be granted
unescorted access to radioactive materials quantities of concern
prior to the establishment of a fingerprinting program and
certification that the Reviewing Official is deemed trustworthy and
reliable?
No. Prior to being granted unescorted access to material, all
additional employees the licensee identifies after the date of the
Order as requiring unescorted access, must be determined to be
trustworthy and reliable based upon the requirements of the Order
and the review of their FBI identification and criminal history
records. The Order also requires that within 180 days of the date of
the Order that licensees establish a fingerprinting program and
within 90 days of the date of the Order provide under oath or
affirmation a certification that the Reviewing Official is deemed
trustworthy and reliable by the licensee.
Only after the Reviewing Official has been certified to be
trustworthy and reliable by the licensee and approved by the NRC,
can the Reviewing Official make trustworthiness and reliability
determinations for any employee who requires unescorted access after
the date of the Order. For administrative purposes, each submittal
of fingerprints to the NRC should be accompanied by the name and
address of the Reviewing Official to whom the criminal history
records should be returned.
25. Who can perform the task of fingerprinting for my employees?
Licensees must have their fingerprints taken by an authorized
official, such as a representative from a local law enforcement
agency. However, an authorized official, for the purposes of taking
fingerprints, could be available through private entities,
contractors, or an established on-site fingerprinting program. If a
licensee has fingerprints taken at a facility other than that of a
recognized Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency, the
licensee should ensure that the prints are taken legibly and match
the identity of the individual named on the fingerprint card.
In these cases, the individual taking fingerprints should at a
minimum:
(1) Be trained to take fingerprints (Training to take
fingerprints is offered through the FBI, or may be available from
local law enforcement agencies and some professional associations.);
(2) Verify the identity of the individual being fingerprinted by
checking a government-issued picture identification (e.g., a
passport or driver's license) and that the name on the card matches
the government issued identification.
(3) Sign the block on the fingerprint card labeled ``SIGNATURE
OF OFFICIAL TAKING THE FINGERPRINTS.''
The licensee must ensure that complete and accurate information
is provided in accordance with 10 CFR 30.9. available at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part030/part030-0009.html
26. How is the initial trustworthiness and reliability (T&R)
determination and certification made (based on fingerprints and a
criminal history record check) if the individual to be designated as
the Reviewing Official is also the license custodian, initiator, or
applicant, and has unescorted access?
In most cases, there will be no one within an organization or
company, above the custodian or initiator of a license
(``licensee''), previously determined trustworthy and reliable for
purposes of evaluating background check and criminal history
information and making the initial determination as to whether a
designated Reviewing Official is trustworthy and reliable.
Within the licensing process, there are a series of screening
criteria used by the reviewer to assess information regarding the
applicant. The purpose of the screening criteria is to provide
reasonable assurance that radioactive material will be used as
intended. The fact that a regulatory authority, using established
processes, has authorized the individual applicant to provide
services to devices containing radioactive material quantities of
concern provides the basis for allowing the applicant to appoint
Reviewing Officials.
Where the licensee or applicant requires unescorted access and
intends to designate himself or herself as the Reviewing Official,
the licensee or applicant should submit fingerprints to the NRC for
approval. Once approved by the NRC, the licensee or applicant can
then make T&R determinations for other employees who require
unescorted access subject to the fingerprinting requirements.
27. When completing the fingerprint cards, NRC Licensees should
use their NRC docket number in the field ``YOUR NO. OCA.'' Since
Agreement State Licensees do not have NRC docket numbers, what
should they use to complete the field?
Agreement State Licensees should use their two letter State
abbreviation followed by a dash and the Licensee's license number
(e.g., CA-123456).
28. When making a payment to the NRC through Pay.gov for
processing of
[[Page 65228]]
fingerprints, Pay.gov requires a TCN. What is a TCN and what
information should go in this field?
TCN stands for ``Transaction Control Number'' and it identifies
payment for the processing of fingerprints for any given individual.
The TCN is a tool for Licensees to track their submissions and may
include any number of identifying information that would be useful
for that purpose. For instance, Licensees can include the names of
one or more individuals for whom payment is being made, Licensee's
name and/or date of submittal.
29. Can I submit my fingerprints electronically to the NRC?
Yes. Some Licensees may choose to make arrangement with the NRC
to submit fingerprints electronically to the NRC. However, for many
Licensees this option may be prohibitive, due to the cost associated
with the purchase of electronic fingerprinting equipment. To
establish an electronic fingerprinting program with the NRC, please
contact NRC's Facility Security Branch at 301-492-3531. Please note
that electronic submission of fingerprints to the NRC must come
directly from the Licensee.
30. What happens to the fingerprint cards after the NRC receives
it from the Licensee?
The NRC scans the fingerprint cards to transmit to the FBI
electronically. The cards are retained and secured for approximately
a month after which time they are destroyed in accordance with
Federal guidelines.
31. How should large companies that are licensed in multiple
jurisdictions respond to the fingerprinting requirements?
The fingerprinting requirements are imposed based on the
license, not the company. If a company holds multiple licenses
subject to the fingerprinting requirements, it must respond for each
license. For example, if a company holds two NRC licenses, it must
respond for both licenses. If convenient, the company may submit a
combined response covering both licenses, but the response must
address each of the licenses (i.e., ``Joe Smith, RSO for both of our
licenses, will serve as the Reviewing Official for both licenses XX-
XXXXX-01 and XX-XXXXX-02.'').
32. The implementation deadline has passed and I have not
completed the trustworthiness and reliability adjudication process
for certain individuals because I have not received classifiable
fingerprint/FBI criminal history check results. Should I submit a
request for relief from the implementation deadline?
A request for relief from the implementation deadline is not
necessary if the initial fingerprint submissions for individuals
requiring unescorted access to radioactive materials in quantities
of concern were submitted to the (NRC) by the implementation
deadline. For these individuals, the trustworthiness and reliability
adjudication process should be completed within a maximum of 35 days
from the date of receipt of classifiable fingerprints and criminal
history reports.
33. What are the next steps in the process if the FBI rejects a
Form FD-258 (fingerprint card) because the fingerprints are not
classifiable? What options are available to licensees if an
individual's fingerprints cannot be classified based on conditions
other than poor quality after multiple attempts?
The overwhelming majority of fingerprint cards are returned as
classifiable (i.e., can be read by the FBI and used to identify the
individual). If the initial fingerprint submission is returned by
the FBI because the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified,
the fingerprints may be retaken and resubmitted (i.e., new Form-258
or submission) for a second attempt. The licensee will not be
charged for the resubmission if the licensee provides a copy of the
FBI response indicating the fingerprints could not be classified.
If the FBI is unable to classify the second submission of
fingerprints, the licensee can submit additional fingerprint
impressions for the individual, as follows:
1. The third fingerprint card submission will require payment of
an additional $26 processing fee.
2. If the third submission is also returned as unclassifiable,
the licensee may submit a fourth set of fingerprints. An additional
fee is not required because the fee for the third submission
includes one resubmission. As with the second submission, the FBI
response should be included, or the submission may be treated as a
new request and an additional fee may be charged.
Please note that a licensee can opt to take and submit the third
and fourth sets of fingerprints together to avoid a potential delay
in the response. If the third set is returned as unclassifiable, NRC
will automatically resubmit the fourth set.
3. If the fourth submission is returned as unclassifiable, the
licensee should submit six (6) additional fingerprint cards for the
individual. All six cards will be forwarded to the FBI, who will
take what they believe to be the best quality prints from each card
to make a complete set of fingerprints. An additional $26 processing
fee is required and covers the processing of all six fingerprint
cards, but does not include an additional resubmission.
4. If the FBI is unable to obtain classifiable fingerprints from
the six cards, based on conditions other than poor quality (e.g.,
medical conditions or physical anomalies that prevent the taking of
readable prints), then the NRC will automatically request a check
based on a name search for the individual, and will forward the
results to the licensee.
5. No further submissions will be required, and the licensee can
consider the results of the name search-FBI identification and
criminal history records check as a component in determining
trustworthiness and reliability in accordance with the Order.
The NRC will consider licensee requests for deviation from the
above process for good cause (e.g., a demonstrated history of
difficulty providing classifiable fingerprints during other
fingerprinting programs or a documented medical condition or
physical anomaly that can prevent the taking of readable prints).
Licensees may submit a request for consideration of alternatives,
and provide the basis for the need for an alternative process to
NRC's Facilities Security Branch in the Division of Facilities and
Security (requests may be made by phone at 301-492-3531, mailed to
the mailing address in Enclosure 3 to the Order, by FAX to the
attention of Doreen Turner at 301-492-3448 with a cover sheet
attached, or emailed to Doreen.turner@nrc.gov). Please note that
requests for an alternative to the above process will not affect a
licensee's responsibility to fingerprint individuals for unescorted
access or to comply with the trustworthiness and reliability
requirements of the Order.
Licensees should be aware that Steps 3 and 4 do not occur often,
and should take notice that Step 4 may only occur in instances where
the FBI has determined that the fingerprints cannot be classified
based on conditions other than poor quality. Failure to provide
quality fingerprint impressions may result in the individual not
able to be considered for unescorted access.
Fingerprints may be unclassifiable for a number of reasons,
including:
1. Incomplete impressions (fingers not completely rolled from
one side of the nail to the other).
2. Left and right hands reversed on the fingerprint card.
3. The same hand or finger printed twice on the card.
4. Fingerprints are not clear and distinct (smudged, uneven, too
dark or light, etc.).
5. Fingers on the card are missing or partially missing without
an explanation.
To avoid rejection of fingerprints by the FBI as
``unclassifiable,'' the person taking the prints should ensure they
are of good quality and do not include any of these deficiencies,
and follow the instructions on the back of the fingerprint card.
Also, fingerprint cards with incomplete or missing information will
be returned to the licensee to provide complete information,
resulting in a delay in processing.
The FBI has provided guidance on the taking of fingerprints for
submission to the FBI at http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/takingfps.html.
This guidance also discusses special situations, such as
fingerprinting an individual with abnormalities of the fingers,
thumbs or hands, and the appropriate way to identify such situations
on the fingerprint card. A checklist to verify that the fingerprint
impressions meet the FBI's requirements is also included.
34. Will guidance be provided on what determines trustworthiness
and reliability?
No, however, IC1(b) provides the minimum basis upon which a
determination may be made. Alternative sources may be used depending
on the information available to the licensee. It is the licensee's
responsibility to make a trustworthiness and reliability
determination for an employee granted unescorted access. This is a
licensee's business decision as to what criteria it uses for the
bases of the trustworthiness and reliability determination.
The trustworthy and reliability determination is designed to
identify past actions to help verify one's character and reputation
which provide reasonable assurance of an individual's future
reliability.
The following are some indicators that licensees may want to
consider for what may be a trustworthiness and reliability concern:
[[Page 65229]]
1. Impaired performance attributable to psychological or other
disorders.
2. Conduct that warrants referral for criminal investigation or
results in arrest or conviction.
3. Indication of deceitful or delinquent behavior.
4. Attempted or threatened destruction of property or life.
5. Suicidal tendencies or attempted suicide.
6. Illegal drug use or the abuse of legal drugs.
7. Alcohol abuse disorders.
8. Recurring financial irresponsibility.
9. Irresponsibility performing assigned duties.
10. Inability to deal with stress, or having the appearance of
being under unusual stress.
11. Failure to comply with work directives.
12. Hostility or aggression toward fellow workers or authority.
13. Uncontrolled anger, violation of safety or security
procedures, or repeated absenteeism.
14. Significant behavioral changes, moodiness or depression.
These indicators are not meant to be all inclusive or intended
to be disqualifying factors. Licensees can also consider extenuating
or mitigating factors in their determinations.
Procedures for Processing Fingerprint Checks
For the purpose of complying with this Order, Licensees should:
1. Submit one completed, legible standard fingerprint card (Form
FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) for each individual seeking unescorted access
to certain radioactive material to the Director, Division of
Facilities and Security.
2. Include a cover letter with the name and address of the NRC-
approved Reviewing Official to whom the criminal history records
should be returned.
3. Mail applications to the following address (overnight mail is
preferred): Director, Division of Facilities and Security, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
20852-2738, ATTN: CRIMINAL HISTORY PROGRAM, MAIL STOP TWB-05B32M.
4. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an
employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor,
manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting
requirement by 10 CFR 73.61, or any person who has been favorably-
decided by a U.S. Government program involving fingerprinting and an
FBI identification and criminal history records check (e.g.,
National Agency Check, Transportation Worker Identification
Credentials in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Bureau of Alcohol
Tobacco Firearms and Explosives background checks and clearances in
accordance with 27 CFR Part 555, Health and Human Services security
risk assessments for possession and use of select agents and toxins
in accordance with 42 CFR Part 73, Hazardous Material security
threat assessment for hazardous material endorsement to commercial
drivers license in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Customs and
Border Patrol's Free and Secure Trade Program \8\) within the last
five (5) years, or any person who has an active Federal security
clearance (provided in the latter two cases that they make available
the appropriate documentation \9\). Written confirmation from the
Agency/employer which granted the federal security clearance or
reviewed the FBI criminal history records results based upon a
fingerprint identification check must be provided. The Licensee must
retain this documentation for a period of three (3) years from the
date the individual no longer requires unescorted access to certain
radioactive material associated with the Licensee's activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The FAST program is a cooperative effort between the Bureau
of Customs and Border Patrol and the governments of Canada and
Mexico to coordinate processes for the clearance of commercial
shipments at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. Participants
in the FAST program, which requires successful completion of a
background records check, may receive expedited entrance privileges
at the northern and southern borders.
\9\ This documentation must allow the Reviewing Official to
verify that the individual has fulfilled the unescorted access
requirements of Section 149 of the AEA by submitting to
fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history
records check.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional copies of Form FD-258 may be obtained by writing the
Office of Information Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, by calling (301) 492-3531, or by email to
forms@nrc.gov. The Licensee should establish procedures to ensure
that the quality of the fingerprints taken results in minimizing the
rejection rate of fingerprint cards due to illegible or incomplete
cards.
Licensees must have their fingerprints taken by an official
authorized to take fingerprints, such as a representative from a
local law enforcement agency or a private entity qualified to take
fingerprints, because the official must certify the identity of the
person being fingerprinted.
The NRC will review submitted fingerprint cards for
completeness. Any Form FD-258 fingerprint record containing
omissions or evident errors will be returned to the Licensee for
corrections.
The fee for processing fingerprint checks includes one re-
submission if the initial submission is returned by the FBI because
the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified (e.g., due to poor
quality, incomplete impressions, or other errors in the taking of
the fingerprints). The licensee will not be charged for the one re-
submission if the licensee provides the FBI Transaction Control
Number (TCN) or a copy of the FBI response indicating the
fingerprints could not be classified. If additional re-submissions
are necessary, they will be treated as initial submittals and will
require an additional payment of the processing fee.
Fees for processing fingerprint checks are due upon application
(Note: local law enforcement agencies or contractors taking the
fingerprints may charge an additional fee for this service).
Licensees should submit payments electronically via http://www.pay.gov.
Payments through Pay.gov can be made directly from the
Licensee's credit/debit card. Licensees will need to establish a
password and user ID before they can access Pay.gov. To establish an
account, Licensees should send a request for an account to
paygo@nrc.gov. The request must include the Licensee's name,
address, point of contact, email address, and contact phone number.
The NRC will forward each request to Pay.gov and Pay.gov will
contact the Licensee with all of the necessary account information.
Licensees without a credit or debit card that can be linked to
Pay.gov can pay the fees by check, cashier check or money order made
out to the NRC and submitted with the fingerprint cards.
The payment of the fees for processing fingerprints must be made
before or with the submission of applications to the NRC. Combined
payment for multiple applications is acceptable. Licensees should
include the Pay.gov payment receipt(s), or a check, cashier check,
or money order for the fee(s) along with the application(s). For
additional guidance on making electronic payments, contact the
Facilities Security Branch, Division of Facilities and Security, at
(301) 492-3531. The application fee (currently $26) is the sum of
the user fee charged by the FBI for each fingerprint card or other
fingerprint record submitted by the NRC on behalf of a Licensee, and
an NRC processing fee, which covers administrative costs associated
with NRC handling of Licensee fingerprint applications. The
Commission will directly notify Licensees subject to this
requirement of any fee changes.
It is necessary for a Licensee to resubmit fingerprints only
under two conditions:
1. The FBI has determined that the fingerprints cannot be
classified due to poor quality in the mechanics of taking the
initial impressions.
2. The initial submission has been lost.
If the FBI advises the fingerprints are unclassifiable based on
conditions other than poor quality, the Licensee may submit a
request to NRC for alternatives. The Commission will receive and
forward to the submitting Licensee all data from the FBI as a result
of the Licensee's application(s) for criminal history records
checks, including the FBI fingerprint record(s). When the results
are received from the FBI, no further fingerprint-related search is
necessary.
Guidance for Evaluating FBI Identification and Criminal History Records
Checks for Allowing Unescorted Access to Certain Radioactive Material
Each Licensee is responsible for determining whether to grant an
individual unescorted access to certain radioactive materials. The
Licensee shall allow only trustworthy and reliable individuals,
approved in writing by the Licensee, to have unescorted access to
radioactive material quantities of concern (listed in Attachment 2
of the Order) and devices containing that radioactive material. The
trustworthiness and reliability determination, to grant an
individual unescorted access to certain radioactive materials, is
made by the Licensee's Reviewing Official, based on information
gathered from all four elements of the background check and
evaluated by the Reviewing Official. The minimum four background
check elements are: (1)
[[Page 65230]]
Fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
identification and criminal history records check, (2) verifying
employment history, (3) verifying education, and 4) personal
references. The purpose of this guidance is to address the
fingerprinting component of the determination.
Unescorted access determinations require an evaluation of a
person's trustworthiness and reliability. When a person's life
history shows evidence of unreliability or untrustworthiness,
questions arise whether the person can be relied on and trusted to
exercise the responsibility necessary for working with risk-
significant radioactive materials. The purpose of the
trustworthiness and reliability determination requirement, for
unescorted access, is to provide reasonable assurance that those
individuals are trustworthy and reliable, and do not constitute an
unreasonable risk to the public health and safety, including the
potential to commit or aid theft and/or radiological sabotage. This
is a Licensee's business decision as to what criteria it uses for
the bases of the trustworthiness and reliability determination. Some
indicators that Licensees should consider for what may be a
trustworthiness and reliability concern can be found in Increased
Control guidance in Q and A 34 (Enclosure 2 to the
transmittal letter of this Order).
In evaluating the relevance of an individual's conduct, the
Reviewing Official should consider the following factors:
(1) The nature, extent, and seriousness of the conduct;
(2) The circumstances surrounding the conduct, to include
knowledgeable participation;
(3) The frequency and recency of the conduct;
(4) the individual's age and maturity at the time of the
conduct;
(5) The extent to which participation is voluntary;
(6) the presence or absence of rehabilitation and other
permanent behavioral changes;
(7) The motivation for the conduct;
(8) The potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or
duress; and
(9) The likelihood of continuation or recurrence.
Each case must be judged on its own merits, and final
determination remains the responsibility of the Licensee. In every
case, the Reviewing Official should evaluate trustworthiness and
reliability based on an accumulation of information which supports a
positive finding, prior to granting unescorted access. Items to
consider include:
1. The Reviewing Official should evaluate the information
collected for consistency and adequacy.
2. True identity should be evaluated by comparing applicant
provided identification and personal history data to pertinent
information from the background check, and other data sources.
3. The Reviewing Official should determine whether
inconsistencies determined through review or investigation, are
intentional, innocent, or an oversight. Willful or intentional acts
of omission or untruthfulness could be grounds for denial of
unescorted access.
When a Licensee submits fingerprints to the NRC pursuant to an
NRC Order, it will receive a FBI identification and criminal history
record since the individual's eighteenth birthday. The Licensee will
receive the information from the criminal history check of those
individuals requiring unescorted access to radioactive materials,
and the Licensee's Reviewing Official should evaluate that
information using the guidance below.
The Licensee's Reviewing Official is required to evaluate all
available information in making a T&R determination for unescorted
access to radioactive materials, including the criminal history
records information pertaining to the individual as required by the
NRC Order. The FBI identification and criminal history records check
is used in the determination of whether the individual has a record
of criminal activity that indicates that the individual should not
have unescorted access to radioactive materials subject to this
Order. Each determination of trustworthiness and reliability for
unescorted access to radioactive materials, which includes a review
of criminal history information, must be documented to include the
basis for the decision made.
Licensees shall not make a final determination solely on the
basis of criminal history checks information involving an arrest
more than 1 year old for which there is not information on the
disposition of the case, or an arrest that resulted in dismissal of
the charge or an acquittal.
All information collected is to be considered by the Licensee in
making a trustworthiness or reliability determination for unescorted
access. Potentially disqualifying information obtained from
confidential/unnamed sources must be substantiated and documented,
and should not be used as a sole basis to deny access authorization
unless corroborated. Licensees should establish criteria in writing
that would disqualify someone from being granted authorized access.
The FBI identification and criminal history records check is
used to evaluate whether the individual has a record of criminal
activity that may compromise his or her trustworthiness and
reliability. Identification of a criminal history through the FBI
criminal history records check does not automatically indicate
unreliability or lack of trustworthiness of the employee. The
licensee will have to judge the nature of the criminal activity,
length of employment, and recency of the criminal activity. The
licensee can authorize individuals with criminal records for
unescorted access to radioactive materials, based on a documented
evaluation of the basis for determining that the employee was
reliable and trustworthy notwithstanding his or her criminal
history. Each evaluation conducted in review of criminal history and
other background checks information, should be documented to include
the decision making basis.
At a minimum, the Licensee should consider the following
elements when evaluating the results of the FBI Identification and
Criminal History Records check:
1. Committed, attempted to commit, aided, or abetted another who
committed or attempted to commit any act of sabotage, espionage,
treason, sedition, or terrorism.
2. Publicly or privately advocated actions that may be inimical
to the interest of the United States, or publicly or privately
advocated the use of force or violence to overthrow the Government
of the United States or the alteration of the form of government of
the United States by unconstitutional means.
3. Knowingly established or continued a sympathetic association
with a saboteur, spy, traitor, seditionist, anarchist, terrorist, or
revolutionist, or with an espionage agent or other secret agent or
representative of a foreign nation whose interests may be inimical
to the interests of the United States, or with any person who
advocates the use of force or violence to overthrow the Government
of the United States or the alteration of the form of government of
the United States by unconstitutional means. (Ordinarily, the
Licensee should not consider chance or casual meetings or contacts
limited to normal business or official relations.)
4. Joined or engaged in any activity knowingly in sympathy with
or in support of any foreign or domestic organization, association,
movement, group, or combination of persons which unlawfully
advocates or practices the commission of acts of force or violence
to prevent others from exercising their rights under the
Constitution or laws of the United States or any State or any
subdivisions thereof by unlawful means, or which advocate the use of
force and violence to overthrow the Government of the United States
or the alteration of the form of government of the United States by
unconstitutional means. (Ordinarily, the Licensee should not
consider chance or casual meetings or contacts limited to normal
business or official relations.)
5. Deliberately misrepresented, falsified or omitted relevant
and material facts from documentation provided to the Licensee.
6. Has been convicted of a crime(s) which, in the Reviewing
Official's opinion, indicate poor judgment, unreliability, or
untrustworthiness.
These indicators are not meant to be all inclusive nor intended
to be disqualifying factors. Licensees can also consider how recent
such indicators occurred and other extenuating or mitigating factors
in their determinations. Section 149.c.(2)(B) of the AEA requires
that the information obtained as a result of fingerprinting be used
solely for the purposes of making a determination as to unescorted
access suitability. Unescorted access suitability is not a hiring
decision, and the NRC does not intend for licensees to use this
guidance as such. Because a particular individual may not be
suitable for unescorted access does not necessarily mean that he is
not suitable for escorted access or some other position that does
not involve NRC-regulated activities.
Process To Challenge NRC Denials or Revocations of Unescorted Access to
Certain Radioactive Material
1. Policy.
This policy establishes a process for individuals whom NRC
licensees nominate
[[Page 65231]]
as Reviewing Officials to challenge and appeal NRC denials or
revocations of access to certain radioactive material. Any
individual designated as a licensee Reviewing Official whom the NRC
has determined may not have unescorted access to certain radioactive
material shall, to the extent provided below, be afforded an
opportunity to challenge and appeal the NRC's determination. This
policy shall not be construed to create a liberty or property
interest of any kind in the unescorted access of any individual to
certain radioactive material.
2. Applicability.
This policy applies solely to those employees of licensees who
are designated as a Reviewing Official, and who are thus to be
considered by the NRC for initial or continued unescorted access to
certain radioactive material in that position.
3. Unescorted Access Determination Criteria.
Determinations for granting a designated Reviewing Official
unescorted access to certain radioactive material will be made by
the NRC staff. Unescorted access shall be denied or revoked whenever
it is determined that an individual does not meet the applicable
standards. Any doubt about an individual's eligibility for initial
or continued unescorted access to certain radioactive material shall
be resolved in favor of national security and result in denial or
revocation of unescorted access.
4. Procedures to Challenge the Contents of Records Obtained from
the FBI.
Prior to a determination by the NRC Facilities Security Branch
Chief that an individual designated as a Reviewing Official is
denied or revoked unescorted access to certain radioactive material,
the individual shall:
a. Be provided the contents of records obtained from the FBI for
the purpose of assuring correct and complete information. If, after
reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is incorrect or
incomplete in any respect and wishes to change, correct, or update
the alleged deficiency, or to explain any matter in the record, the
individual may initiate challenge procedures. These procedures
include either direct application by the individual challenging the
record to the agency (i.e., law enforcement agency) that contributed
the questioned information, or direct challenge as to the accuracy
or completeness of any entry on the criminal history record to the
Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification
Division, Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 C.F.R. Sec.
16.30 through 16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the
challenge to the agency that submitted the data and requests that
agency to verify or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an
official communication directly from the agency that contributed the
original information, the FBI Identification Division makes any
changes necessary in accordance with the information supplied by
that agency.
b. Be afforded 10 days to initiate an action challenging the
results of an FBI criminal history records check (described in (a),
above) after the record is made available for the individual's
review. If such a challenge is initiated, the NRC Facilities
Security Branch Chief may make a determination based upon the
criminal history record only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate
confirmation or correction of the record.
5. Procedures to Provide Additional Information.
Prior to a determination by the NRC Facilities Security Branch
Chief that an individual designated as a Reviewing Official is
denied or revoked access to certain radioactive material, the
individual shall be afforded an opportunity to submit information
relevant to the individual's trustworthiness and reliability. The
NRC Facilities Security Branch Chief shall, in writing, notify the
individual of this opportunity, and any deadlines for submitting
this information. The NRC Facilities Security Branch Chief may make
a determination of unescorted access to certain radioactive material
only upon receipt of the additional information submitted by the
individual, or, if no such information is submitted, when the
deadline to submit such information has passed.
6. Procedures to Notify an Individual of the NRC Facilities
Security Branch Chief Determination to Deny or Revoke Access to
Certain Radioactive Material.
Upon a determination by the NRC Facilities Security Branch Chief
that an individual nominated as a Reviewing Official is denied or
revoked access to certain radioactive material, the individual shall
be provided a written explanation of the basis for this
determination.
7. Procedures to Appeal an NRC Determination to Deny or Revoke
Access to Certain Radioactive Material.
Upon a determination by the NRC Facilities Security Branch Chief
that an individual nominated as a reviewing official is denied or
revoked access to certain radioactive material, the individual shall
be afforded an opportunity to appeal this determination to the
Director, Division of Facilities and Security. The determination
must be appealed within 20 days of receipt of the written notice of
the determination by the Facilities Security Branch Chief, and may
either be in writing or in person. Any appeal made in person shall
take place at the NRC's headquarters, and shall be at the
individual's own expense. The determination by the Director,
Division of Facilities and Security, shall be rendered within 60
days after receipt of the appeal.
8. Procedures to Notify an Individual of the Determination by
the Director, Division of Facilities and Security, Upon an Appeal.
A determination by the Director, Division of Facilities and
Security, shall be provided to the individual in writing and include
an explanation of the basis for this determination. A determination
by the Director, Division of Facilities and Security, to affirm the
Facilities Branch Chief's determination to deny or revoke an
individual's access to certain radioactive material is final and not
subject to further administrative appeals.
[FR Doc. 2012-26299 Filed 10-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65210-65215]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26292]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2012-0255; EA-12-148]
In the Matter of Licensee Identified in Attachment 1 and all
Other Persons Who Seek or Obtain Access to Safeguards Information
Described Herein; Order Imposing Fingerprinting and Criminal History
Records Check Requirements for Access to Safeguards Information
(Effective Immediately)
I
The Licensee identified in Attachment 1\1\ to this Order, holds a
license issued in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954,
as amended, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the
Commission), authorizing them to engage in an activity subject to
regulation by the Commission or Agreement States. In accordance with
Section 149 of the AEA, fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) identification and criminal history records check
are required of any person who is to be permitted to have access to
Safeguards Information (SGI).\2\ The AEA permits the Commission by rule
to except certain categories of individuals from the fingerprinting
requirement, which the Commission has done (see 10 CFR 73.59, 71 FR
33989; June 13, 2006). Individuals relieved from fingerprinting and
criminal history records checks
[[Page 65211]]
under the relief rule include Federal, State, and local officials and
law enforcement personnel; Agreement State inspectors who conduct
security inspections on behalf of the NRC; members of Congress and
certain employees of members of Congress or Congressional Committees,
and representatives of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or
certain foreign government organizations. In addition, individuals who
have a favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history records check
within the last five (5) years, or individuals who have active Federal
security clearances (provided in either case that they make available
the appropriate documentation), have satisfied the AEA fingerprinting
requirement and need not be fingerprinted again. Therefore, in
accordance with Section 149 of the AEA the Commission is imposing
additional requirements for access to SGI, as set forth by this Order,
so that affected licensees can obtain and grant access to SGI. This
Order also imposes requirements for access to SGI by any person, from
any person,\3\ whether or not a Licensee, Applicant, or Certificate
Holder of the Commission or Agreement States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and will not be
released to the public.
\2\ Safeguards Information is a form of sensitive, unclassified,
security-related information that the Commission has the authority
to designate and protect under section 147 of the AEA.
\3\ Person means (1) any individual, corporation, partnership,
firm, association, trust, estate, public or private institution,
group, government agency other than the Commission or the Department
of Energy, except that the Department of Energy shall be considered
a person with respect to those facilities of the Department of
Energy specified in section 202 of the Energy Reorganization Act of
1974 (88 Stat. 1244), any State or any political subdivision of, or
any political entity within a State, any foreign government or
nation or any political subdivision of any such government or
nation, or other entity; and (2) any legal successor,
representative, agent, or agency of the foregoing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II
The Commission has broad statutory authority to protect and
prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of SGI. Section 147 of the AEA
grants the Commission explicit authority to issue such Orders as
necessary to prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of SGI. Furthermore,
Section 149 of the AEA requires fingerprinting and an FBI
identification and a criminal history records check of each individual
who seeks access to SGI. In addition, no person may have access to SGI
unless the person has an established need-to-know the information and
satisfies the trustworthy and reliability requirements described in
Attachment 3 to Order EA-12-147.
In order to provide assurance that the Licensee identified in
Attachment 1 to this Order is implementing appropriate measures to
comply with the fingerprinting and criminal history records check
requirements for access to SGI, the Licensee identified in Attachment 1
to this Order shall implement the requirements of this Order. In
addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that in light of the common
defense and security matters identified above, which warrant the
issuance of this Order, the public health, safety and interest require
that this Order be effective immediately.
III
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 147, 149, 161b, 161i, 161o,
182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR Parts 30 and 73, it is
hereby ordered, effective immediately, that the licensee identified in
attachment 1 to this order and all other persons who seek or obtain
access to safeguards information, as described above, shall comply with
the requirements set forth in this order.
A. 1. No person may have access to SGI unless that person has a
need-to-know the SGI, has been fingerprinted or who has a favorably-
decided FBI identification and criminal history records check, and
satisfies all other applicable requirements for access to SGI.
Fingerprinting and the FBI identification and criminal history records
check are not required, however, for any person who is relieved from
that requirement by 10 CFR 73.59 (71 Fed. Reg. 33,989 (June 13, 2006)),
or who has a favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history records
check within the last five (5) years, or who has an active Federal
security clearance, provided in the latter two cases that the
appropriate documentation is made available to the Licensee's NRC-
approved reviewing official described in paragraph III.C.2 of this
Order.
2. No person may have access to any SGI if the NRC has determined,
based on fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history
records check, that the person may not have access to SGI.
B. No person may provide SGI to any other person except in
accordance with Condition III.A. above. Prior to providing SGI to any
person, a copy of this Order shall be provided to that person.
C. The Licensee identified in Attachment 1 to this Order shall
comply with the following requirements:
1. The Licensee shall, within twenty (20) days of the date of this
Order, establish and maintain a fingerprinting program that meets the
requirements of Attachment 2 to this Order.
2. The Licensee shall, within twenty (20) days of the date of this
Order, submit the fingerprints of one (1) individual who a) the
Licensee nominates as the ``reviewing official'' for determining access
to SGI by other individuals, and b) has an established need-to-know the
information and has been determined to be trustworthy and reliable in
accordance with the requirements described in Attachment 3 to Order EA-
12-147. The NRC will determine whether this individual (or any
subsequent reviewing official) may have access to SGI and, therefore,
will be permitted to serve as the Licensee's reviewing official.\4\ The
Licensee may, at the same time or later, submit the fingerprints of
other individuals to whom the Licensee seeks to grant access to SGI or
designate an additional reviewing official(s). Fingerprints shall be
submitted and reviewed in accordance with the procedures described in
Attachment 2 of this Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The NRC's determination of this individual's access to SGI
in accordance with the process described in Enclosure 5 to the
transmittal letter of this Order is an administrative determination
that is outside the scope of this Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The Licensee shall, in writing, within twenty (20) days of the
date of this Order, notify the Commission, (1) if it is unable to
comply with any of the requirements described in this Order, including
Attachment 2 to this Order, or (2) if compliance with any of the
requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances. The
notification shall provide the Licensee's justification for seeking
relief from or variation of any specific requirement.
Licensee responses to C.1., C.2., and C.3. above shall be submitted
to the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. In addition, Licensee responses shall be marked
as ``Security-Related Information--Withhold Under 10 CFR 2.390.''
The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or rescind
any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good cause by the
Licensee.
IV
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other
person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this
Order within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. In addition,
the Licensee and any other person adversely affected by this Order may
request a hearing of this Order within twenty (20) days of the
[[Page 65212]]
date of the Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be
given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for
extension of time must be made, in writing, to the Director, Office of
Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and include a
statement of good cause for the extension.
The answer may consent to this Order. If the answer includes a
request for a hearing, it shall, under oath or affirmation,
specifically set forth the matters of fact and law on which the
Licensee relies and the reasons as to why the Order should not have
been issued. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing,
that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his
interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the
criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d).
All documents filed in the NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including
a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139;
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the NRC's public Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRC guidance
available on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document
via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With
respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve
the purpose of the
[[Page 65213]]
adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application,
participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in
their submission.
If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a person whose
interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order
designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held the
issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order
should be sustained.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition to
requesting a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move
the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the
Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate
effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion,
unfounded allegations, or error.
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions
specified in Section III above shall be final twenty (20) days from the
date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an
extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the
provisions specified in Section III shall be final when the extension
expires if a hearing request has not been received. AN ANSWER OR A
REQUEST FOR HEARING SHALL NOT STAY THE IMMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS
ORDER.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of October, 2012.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mark A. Satorius,
Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
Attachment 1: Applicable Materials Licensees Redacted
Attachment 2: Requirements for Fingerprinting and Criminal History
Records Checks of Individuals When Licensee's Reviewing Official is
Determining Access to Safeguards Information
General Requirements
Licensees shall comply with the requirements of this attachment.
A. 1. Each Licensee subject to the provisions of this attachment
shall fingerprint each individual who is seeking or permitted access
to Safeguards Information (SGI). The Licensee shall review and use
the information received from the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) and ensure that the provisions contained in the subject Order
and this attachment are satisfied.
2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the
fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal
history record and inform the individual of the procedures for
revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as
specified in the ``Right to Correct and Complete Information''
section of this attachment.
3. Fingerprints need not be taken if an employed individual
(e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor, manufacturer, or supplier)
is relieved from the fingerprinting requirement by 10 CFR 73.59, has
a favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history records check
within the last five (5) years, or has an active Federal security
clearance. Written confirmation from the Agency/employer which
granted the Federal security clearance or reviewed the criminal
history records check must be provided. The Licensee must retain
this documentation for a period of three (3) years from the date the
individual no longer requires access to SGI associated with the
Licensee's activities.
4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this
Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the
FBI.
5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the
FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthy and
reliability requirements included in Attachment 3 to NRC Order EA-
08-161, in making a determination whether to grant access to SGI to
individuals who have a need-to-know the SGI.
6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a
criminal history records check solely for the purpose of determining
an individual's suitability for access to SGI.
7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination
whether to grant access to SGI.
B. The Licensee shall notify the NRC of any desired change in
reviewing officials. The NRC will determine whether the individual
nominated as the new reviewing official may have access to SGI based
on a previously-obtained or new criminal history check and,
therefore, will be permitted to serve as the Licensee's reviewing
official.
Prohibitions
A Licensee shall not base a final determination to deny an
individual access to SGI solely on the basis of information received
from the FBI involving: An arrest more than one (1) year old for
which there is no information of the disposition of the case, or an
arrest that resulted in dismissal of the charge or an acquittal.
A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal
history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that would
infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the Licensee use
the information in any way which would discriminate among
individuals on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, or
age.
Procedures for Processing Fingerprint Checks
For the purpose of complying with this Order, Licensees shall,
using an appropriate method listed in 10 CFR 73.4, submit to the
NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T-6E46, one
completed, legible standard fingerprint card (Form FD-258,
ORIMDNRCOOOZ) or, where practicable, other fingerprint records for
each individual seeking access to Safeguards Information, to the
Director of the Division of Facilities and Security, marked for the
attention of the Division's Criminal History Check Section. Copies
of these forms may be obtained by writing the Office of Information
Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, by calling 301-415-7232, or by email to
forms.resource@nrc.gov. Practicable alternative formats are set
forth in 10 CFR 73.4. The Licensee shall establish procedures to
ensure that the quality of the fingerprints taken results in
minimizing the rejection rate of fingerprint cards due to illegible
or incomplete cards.
The NRC will review submitted fingerprint cards for
completeness. Any Form FD-258 fingerprint record containing
omissions or evident errors will be returned to the Licensee for
corrections. The fee for processing fingerprint checks includes one
re-submission if the initial submission is returned by the FBI
because the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified. The one
free re-submission must have the FBI Transaction Control Number
reflected on the re-submission. If additional submissions are
necessary, they will be treated as initial submittals and will
require a second payment of the processing fee.
Fees for processing fingerprint checks are due upon application.
Licensees shall submit payment with the application for processing
fingerprints by corporate check, certified check, cashier's check,
or money order, made payable to ``U.S. NRC.'' [For guidance on
making electronic payments, contact the Facilities Security Branch,
Division of Facilities and Security, at 301-415-7404.] Combined
payment for multiple applications is acceptable. The application fee
(currently $36) is the sum of the user fee charged by the FBI for
each fingerprint card or other fingerprint record submitted by the
NRC on behalf of a Licensee, and an NRC processing fee, which covers
administrative costs associated with NRC handling of Licensee
fingerprint submissions. The Commission will directly notify
Licensees who are subject to this regulation of any fee changes. The
Commission will forward to the submitting Licensee all data received
from the FBI as a result of the Licensee's application(s) for
criminal history records checks, including the FBI fingerprint
record.
Right To Correct and Complete Information
Prior to any final adverse determination, the Licensee shall
make available to the individual the contents of any criminal
records obtained from the FBI for the purpose of assuring correct
and complete information. Written confirmation by the individual of
receipt of this notification must be maintained by the Licensee for
a period of one (1) year from the date of the notification.
If, after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it
is incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change,
correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any matter
in the record, the individual may initiate challenge procedures.
These procedures include either direct application by the individual
challenging the record to
[[Page 65214]]
the agency (i.e., law enforcement agency) that contributed the
questioned information, or direct challenge as to the accuracy or
completeness of any entry on the criminal history record to the
Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification
Division, Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 CFR 16.30
through 16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the challenge
to the agency that submitted the data and requests that agency to
verify or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an official
communication directly from the agency that contributed the original
information, the FBI Identification Division makes any changes
necessary in accordance with the information supplied by that
agency. The Licensee must provide at least ten (10) days for an
individual to initiate an action challenging the results of an FBI
criminal history records check after the record is made available
for his/her review. The Licensee may make a final SGI access
determination based upon the criminal history record only upon
receipt of the FBI's ultimate confirmation or correction of the
record. Upon a final adverse determination on access to SGI, the
Licensee shall provide the individual its documented basis for
denial. Access to SGI shall not be granted to an individual during
the review process.
Protection of Information
1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal history record on an
individual pursuant to this Order shall establish and maintain a
system of files and procedures for protecting the record and the
personal information from unauthorized disclosure.
2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal
information collected and maintained to persons other than the
subject individual, his/her representative, or to those who have a
need to access the information in performing assigned duties in the
process of determining access to Safeguards Information. No
individual authorized to have access to the information may re-
disseminate the information to any other individual who does not
have a need-to-know.
3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a
criminal history record check may be transferred to another Licensee
if the Licensee holding the criminal history record check receives
the individual's written request to re-disseminate the information
contained in his/her file, and the gaining Licensee verifies
information such as the individual's name, date of birth, social
security number, sex, and other applicable physical characteristics
for identification purposes.
4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained
under this section, available for examination by an authorized
representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the
regulations and laws.
5. The Licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal
history records received from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's
file has been transferred, for three (3) years after termination of
employment or determination of access to SGI (whether access was
approved or denied). After the required three (3) year period, these
documents shall be destroyed by a method that will prevent
reconstruction of the information in whole or in part.
Guidance for Licensee's Evaluation of Access to Safeguards Information
With the Inclusion of Criminal History Records (Fingerprint) Checks
When a Licensee submits fingerprints to the NRC pursuant to an
NRC Order, it will receive a criminal history summary of
information, provided in Federal records, since the individual's
eighteenth birthday. Individuals retain the right to correct and
complete information and to initiate challenge procedures described
in Attachment 2 of Enclosure 1. The Licensee will receive the
information from the criminal history records check of those
individuals requiring access to Safeguards Information, and the
reviewing official should evaluate that information using the
guidance below. Furthermore, the requirements of all Orders which
apply to the information and material to which access is being
granted must be met.
The Licensee's reviewing official is required to evaluate all
pertinent and available information in making a determination of
access to SGI, including the criminal history information pertaining
to the individual as required by the NRC Order. The criminal history
records check is used in the determination of whether the individual
has a record of criminal activity that indicates that the individual
should not have access to SGI. Each determination of access to SGI,
which includes a review of criminal history information, must be
documented to include the basis for the decision made.
(i) If negative information is discovered that was not provided
by the individual, or which is different in any material respect
from the information provided by the individual, this information
should be considered, and decisions made based on these findings,
must be documented.
(ii) Any record containing a pattern of behaviors which
indicates that the behaviors could be expected to recur or continue,
or recent behaviors which cast questions on whether an individual
should have access to SGI, should be carefully evaluated prior to
any authorization of access to SGI.
It is necessary for a Licensee to resubmit fingerprints only
under two conditions:
(1) the FBI has determined that the fingerprints cannot be
classified due to poor quality in the mechanics of taking the
initial impressions; or
(2) the initial submission has been lost.
If the FBI advises that six sets of fingerprints are
unclassifiable based on conditions other than poor quality, the
licensee may submit a request to NRC for alternatives. When those
search results are received from the FBI, no further search is
necessary.
Process To Challenge NRC Denials or Revocations of Access to Safeguards
Information
1. Policy.
This policy establishes a process for individuals whom NRC
licensees nominate as reviewing officials to challenge and appeal
NRC denials or revocations of access to Safeguards Information
(SGI). Any individual nominated as a licensee reviewing official
whom the NRC has determined may not have access to SGI shall, to the
extent provided below, be afforded an opportunity to challenge and
appeal the NRC's determination. This policy shall not be construed
to require the disclosure of SGI to any person, nor shall it be
construed to create a liberty or property interest of any kind in
the access of any individual to SGI.
2. Applicability.
This policy applies solely to those employees of licensees who
are nominated as a reviewing official, and who are thus to be
considered by the NRC for initial or continued access to SGI in that
position.
3. SGI Access Determination Criteria.
Determinations for granting a nominated reviewing official
access to SGI will be made by the NRC staff. Access to SGI shall be
denied or revoked whenever it is determined that an individual does
not meet the applicable standards. Any doubt about an individual's
eligibility for initial or continued access to SGI shall be resolved
in favor of the national security and access will be denied or
revoked.
4. Procedures to Challenge the Contents of Records Obtained from
the FBI.
a. Prior to a determination by the NRC Facilities Security
Branch Chief that an individual nominated as a reviewing official is
denied or revoked access to SGI, the individual shall:
(i) Be provided the contents of records obtained from the FBI
for the purpose of assuring correct and complete information. If,
after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is
incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change,
correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any matter
in the record, the individual may initiate challenge procedures.
These procedures include either direct application by the individual
challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law enforcement agency)
that contributed the questioned information, or direct challenge as
to the accuracy or completeness of any entry on the criminal history
record to the Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Identification Division, Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in
28 CFR 16.30 through 16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards
the challenge to the agency that submitted the data and requests
that agency to verify or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt
of an official communication directly from the agency that
contributed the original information, the FBI Identification
Division makes any changes necessary in accordance with the
information supplied by that agency.
(ii) Be afforded 10 days to initiate an action challenging the
results of an FBI criminal history records check (described in (i),
above) after the record is made available for the individual's
review. If such a challenge is initiated, the NRC Facilities
Security Branch Chief may make a determination based upon the
criminal history record only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate
confirmation or correction of the record.
5. Procedures to Provide Additional Information.
[[Page 65215]]
a. Prior to a determination by the NRC Facilities Security
Branch Chief that an individual nominated as a reviewing official is
denied or revoked access to SGI, the individual shall:
(i) Be afforded an opportunity to submit information relevant to
the individual's trustworthiness and reliability. The NRC Facilities
Security Branch Chief shall, in writing, notify the individual of
this opportunity, and any deadlines for submitting this information.
The NRC Facilities Security Branch Chief may make a determination of
access to SGI only upon receipt of the additional information
submitted by the individual, or, if no such information is
submitted, when the deadline to submit such information has passed.
6. Procedures to Notify an Individual of the NRC Facilities
Security Branch Chief Determination to Deny or Revoke Access to SGI.
a. Upon a determination by the NRC Facilities Security Branch
Chief that an individual nominated as a reviewing official is denied
or revoked access to SGI, the individual shall be provided a written
explanation of the basis for this determination.
7. Procedures to Appeal an NRC Determination to Deny or Revoke
Access to SGI.
a. Upon a determination by the NRC Facilities Security Branch
Chief that an individual nominated as a reviewing official is denied
or revoked access to SGI, the individual shall be afforded an
opportunity to appeal this determination to the Director, Division
of Facilities and Security. The determination must be appealed
within 20 days of receipt of the written notice of the determination
by the Facilities Security Branch Chief, and may either be in
writing or in person. Any appeal made in person shall take place at
the NRC's headquarters, and shall be at the individual's own
expense. The determination by the Director, Division of Facilities
and Security, shall be rendered within 60 days after receipt of the
appeal.
8. Procedures to Notify an Individual of the Determination by
the Director, Division of Facilities and Security, Upon an Appeal.
a. A determination by the Director, Division of Facilities and
Security, shall be provided to the individual in writing and include
an explanation of the basis for this determination. A determination
by the Director, Division of Facilities and Security, to affirm the
Facilities Branch Chief's determination to deny or revoke an
individual's access to SGI is final and not subject to further
administrative appeals.
[FR Doc. 2012-26292 Filed 10-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65215-65220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26288]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2012-0254; EA-12-147]
In the Matter of Licensee Identified in Attachment 1 and all
Other Persons Who Obtain Safeguards Information Described Herein; Order
Imposing Requirements for the Protection of Certain Safeguards
Information (Effective Immediately)
I
The Licensee, identified in Attachment 1 \1\ to this Order, holds a
license issued in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, (AEA) by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the
Commission), authorizing it to possess, use, and transfer items
containing radioactive material quantities of concern. The NRC intends
to issue a security Order to this Licensee in the near future. The
Order will require compliance with specific Additional Security
Measures to enhance the security for certain radioactive material
quantities of concern. The Commission has determined that these
documents will contain Safeguards Information, will not be released to
the public, and must be protected from unauthorized disclosure.
Therefore, the Commission is imposing the requirements, as set forth in
Attachments 2 and 3 to this Order and in Order EA-12-148, so that the
Licensee can receive these documents. This Order also imposes
requirements for the protection of Safeguards Information in the hands
of any person,\2\ whether or not a licensee of the Commission, who
produces, receives, or acquires Safeguards Information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and will not be
released to the public.
\2\ Person means (1) any individual, corporation, partnership,
firm, association, trust, estate, public or private institution,
group, government agency other than the Commission or the Department
of Energy, except that the Department of Energy shall be considered
a person with respect to those facilities of the Department of
Energy specified in section 202 of the Energy Reorganization Act of
1974 (88 Stat. 1244), any State or any political subdivision of, or
any political entity within a State, any foreign government or
nation or any political subdivision of any such government or
nation, or other entity; and (2) any legal successor,
representative, agent, or agency of the foregoing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II
The Commission has broad statutory authority to protect and
prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of Safeguards Information. Section
147 of the AEA grants the Commission explicit authority to ``* * *
issue such orders, as necessary to prohibit the unauthorized disclosure
of safeguards information * * *.'' This authority extends to
information concerning the security measures for the physical
protection of special nuclear material, source material, and byproduct
material. Licensees and all persons who produce, receive, or acquire
Safeguards Information must ensure proper handling and protection of
Safeguards Information to avoid unauthorized disclosure in accordance
with the specific requirements for the protection of Safeguards
Information contained in Attachments 2 and 3 to this Order. The
Commission hereby provides notice that it intends to treat violations
of the requirements contained in Attachments 2 and 3 to this Order,
applicable to the handling and unauthorized disclosure of Safeguards
Information, as serious breaches of adequate protection of the public
health and safety and the common defense and security of the United
States.
Access to Safeguards Information is limited to those persons who
have established the need-to-know the information and are considered to
be trustworthy and reliable, and meet the requirements of Order EA-12-
148. A need-to-know means a determination by a person having
responsibility for protecting Safeguards Information that a proposed
recipient's access to Safeguards Information is necessary in the
performance of official, contractual, or licensee duties of employment.
The Licensee and all other persons who obtain Safeguards
Information must ensure that they develop, maintain and implement
strict policies and procedures for the proper handling of Safeguards
Information to prevent unauthorized disclosure, in accordance with the
requirements in Attachments 2 and 3 to this Order. The Licensee must
ensure that all contractors whose employees may have access to
Safeguards Information either adhere to the Licensee's policies and
procedures on Safeguards Information or develop, or maintain and
implement their own acceptable policies and procedures. The Licensee
remains responsible for the conduct of their contractors. The policies
and procedures necessary to ensure compliance with applicable
requirements contained in Attachments 2 and 3 to this Order must
address, at a minimum, the following: the general performance
requirement that each person who produces, receives, or acquires
Safeguards Information shall ensure that Safeguards Information is
protected against unauthorized disclosure; protection of Safeguards
Information at fixed sites, in use and in storage, and while in
transit; correspondence containing Safeguards
[[Page 65216]]
Information; access to Safeguards Information; preparation, marking,
reproduction and destruction of documents; external transmission of
documents; use of automatic data processing systems; removal of the
Safeguards Information category; the need-to-know the information; and
background checks to determine access to the information.
In order to provide assurance that the Licensee is implementing
prudent measures to achieve a consistent level of protection to
prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of Safeguards Information, the
Licensee shall implement the requirements identified in Attachments 2
and 3 to this Order. In addition, pursuant to Attachments 2 and 3 to
this Order, I find that in light of the common defense and security
matters identified above, which warrant the issuance of this Order, the
public health, safety and interest require that this Order be effective
immediately.
III
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 147, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182
and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR Part 30, 10 CFR Part
32, 10 CFR Part 35, 10 CFR Part 70, and 10 CFR Part 73, it is hereby
ordered, effective immediately, that the licensee identified in
attachment 1 to this order and all other persons who produce, receive,
or acquire the additional security measures identified above (whether
draft or final) or any related safeguards information shall comply with
the requirements of attachments 2 and 3.
The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or rescind
any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good cause by the
Licensee.
IV
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other
person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this
Order within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. In addition,
the Licensee and any other person adversely affected by this Order may
request a hearing of this Order within twenty (20) days of the date of
the Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to
extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of
time must be made, in writing, to the Director, Office of Federal and
State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and include a
statement of good cause for the extension.
The answer may consent to this Order. If the answer includes a
request for a hearing, it shall, under oath or affirmation,
specifically set forth the matters of fact and law on which the
Licensee relies and the reasons as to why the Order should not have
been issued. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing,
that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his
interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the
criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d). Pursuant to 10 CFR
2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee or any other person adversely affected by
this Order may, in addition to requesting a hearing, at the time the
answer is filed or sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the
immediate effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order,
including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on
adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, ungrounded allegations or
error.
All documents filed in the NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including
a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139;
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the NRC's public Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRC guidance
available on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must
[[Page 65217]]
apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing
request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access
to the document via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing
the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer,
having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With
respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve
the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use
application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted
materials in their submission.
If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a person whose
interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order
designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held the
issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order
should be sustained.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition to
requesting a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move
the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the
Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate
effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion,
unfounded allegations, or error.
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions
specified in Section III above shall be final twenty (20) days from the
date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an
extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the
provisions specified in Section III shall be final when the extension
expires if a hearing request has not been received. An answer or a
request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this
order.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of October, 2012.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mark A. Satorius,
Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
Attachment 1: Applicable Materials Licensees Redacted
Attachment 2--Modified Handling Requirements for the Protection of
Certain Safeguards Information (SGI-M) General Requirement
Information and material that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) determines are safeguards information must be
protected from unauthorized disclosure. In order to distinguish
information needing modified protection requirements from the
safeguards information for reactors and fuel cycle facilities that
require a higher level of protection, the term ``Safeguards
Information--Modified Handling'' (SGI-M) is being used as the
distinguishing marking for certain materials licensees. Each person who
produces, receives, or acquires SGI-M shall ensure that it is protected
against unauthorized disclosure. To meet this requirement, licensees
and persons shall establish and maintain an information protection
system that includes the measures specified below. Information
protection procedures employed by State and local police forces are
deemed to meet these requirements.
Persons Subject to These Requirements
Any person, whether or not a licensee of the NRC, who produces,
receives, or acquires SGI-M is subject to the requirements (and
sanctions) of this document. Firms and their employees that supply
services or equipment to materials licensees would fall under this
requirement if they possess facility SGI-M. A licensee must inform
contractors and suppliers of the existence of these requirements and
the need for proper protection. (See more under Conditions for Access)
State or local police units who have access to SGI-M are also subject
to these requirements. However, these organizations are deemed to have
adequate information protection systems. The conditions for transfer of
information to a third party, i.e., need-to-know, would still apply to
the police organization as would sanctions for unlawful disclosure.
Again, it would be prudent for licensees who have arrangements with
local police to advise them of the existence of these requirements.
Criminal and Civil Sanctions
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, explicitly provides that
any person, ``whether or not a licensee of the Commission, who violates
any regulations adopted under this section shall be subject to the
civil monetary penalties of section 234 of this Act.'' Furthermore,
willful violation of any regulation or order governing safeguards
information is a felony subject to criminal penalties in the form of
fines or imprisonment, or both. See sections 147b. and 223 of the Act.
Conditions for Access
Access to SGI-M beyond the initial recipients of the order will be
governed by the background check requirements imposed by the order.
Access to SGI-M by licensee employees, agents, or contractors must
include both an appropriate need-to-know determination by the licensee,
as well as a determination concerning the trustworthiness of
individuals having access to the information. Employees of an
organization affiliated with the licensee's company (e.g., a parent
company), may be considered as
[[Page 65218]]
employees of the licensee for access purposes.
Need-to-Know
Need-to-know is defined as a determination by a person having
responsibility for protecting SGI-M that a proposed recipient's access
to SGI-M is necessary in the performance of official, contractual, or
licensee duties of employment. The recipient should be made aware that
the information is SGI-M and those having access to it are subject to
these requirements as well as criminal and civil sanctions for
mishandling the information.
Occupational Groups
Dissemination of SGI-M is limited to individuals who have an
established need-to-know and who are members of certain occupational
groups. These occupational groups are:
A. An employee, agent, or contractor of an applicant, a licensee,
the Commission, or the United States Government;
B. A member of a duly authorized committee of the Congress;
C. The Governor of a State or his designated representative;
D. A representative of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) engaged in activities associated with the U.S./IAEA Safeguards
Agreement who has been certified by the NRC;
E. A member of a State or local law enforcement authority that is
responsible for responding to requests for assistance during safeguards
emergencies; or
F. A person to whom disclosure is ordered pursuant to Section
2.744(e) of Part 2 of Part 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
G. State Radiation Control Program Directors (and State Homeland
Security Directors) or their designees.
In a generic sense, the individuals described above in (A) through
(G) are considered to be trustworthy by virtue of their employment
status. For non-governmental individuals in group (A) above, a
determination of reliability and trustworthiness is required.
Discretion must be exercised in granting access to these individuals.
If there is any indication that the recipient would be unwilling or
unable to provide proper protection for the SGI-M, they are not
authorized to receive SGI-M.
Information Considered for Safeguards Information Designation
Information deemed SGI-M is information the disclosure of which
could reasonably be expected to have a significant adverse effect on
the health and safety of the public or the common defense and security
by significantly increasing the likelihood of theft, diversion, or
sabotage of materials or facilities subject to NRC jurisdiction.
SGI-M identifies safeguards information which is subject to these
requirements. These requirements are necessary in order to protect
quantities of nuclear material significant to the health and safety of
the public or common defense and security.
The overall measure for consideration of SGI-M is the usefulness of
the information (security or otherwise) to an adversary in planning or
attempting a malevolent act. The specificity of the information
increases the likelihood that it will be useful to an adversary.
Protection While in Use
While in use, SGI-M shall be under the control of an authorized
individual. This requirement is satisfied if the SGI-M is attended by
an authorized individual even though the information is in fact not
constantly being used. SGI-M, therefore, within alarm stations,
continuously manned guard posts or ready rooms need not be locked in
file drawers or storage containers.
Under certain conditions the general control exercised over
security zones or areas would be considered to meet this requirement.
The primary consideration is limiting access to those who have a need-
to-know. Some examples would be:
Alarm stations, guard posts and guard ready rooms;
Engineering or drafting areas if visitors are escorted and information
is not clearly visible;
Plant maintenance areas if access is restricted and information is not
clearly visible;
Administrative offices (e.g., central records or purchasing) if
visitors are escorted and information is not clearly visible.
Protection While in Storage
While unattended, SGI-M shall be stored in a locked file drawer or
container. Knowledge of lock combinations or access to keys protecting
SGI-M shall be limited to a minimum number of personnel for operating
purposes who have a ``need-to-know'' and are otherwise authorized
access to SGI-M in accordance with these requirements. Access to lock
combinations or keys shall be strictly controlled so as to prevent
disclosure to an unauthorized individual.
Transportation of Documents and Other Matter
Documents containing SGI-M when transmitted outside an authorized
place of use or storage shall be enclosed in two sealed envelopes or
wrappers. The inner envelope or wrapper shall contain the name and
address of the intended recipient, and be marked both sides, top and
bottom with the words ``Safeguards Information--Modified Handling.''
The outer envelope or wrapper must be addressed to the intended
recipient, must contain the address of the sender, and must not bear
any markings or indication that the document contains SGI-M.
SGI-M may be transported by any commercial delivery company that
provides nation-wide overnight service with computer tracking features,
US first class, registered, express, or certified mail, or by any
individual authorized access pursuant to these requirements. Within a
facility, SGI-M may be transmitted using a single opaque envelope. It
may also be transmitted within a facility without single or double
wrapping, provided adequate measures are taken to protect the material
against unauthorized disclosure. Individuals transporting SGI-M should
retain the documents in their personal possession at all times or
ensure that the information is appropriately wrapped and also secured
to preclude compromise by an unauthorized individual.
Preparation and Marking of Documents
While the NRC is the sole authority for determining what specific
information may be designated as ``SGI-M,'' originators of documents
are responsible for determining whether those documents contain such
information. Each document or other matter that contains SGI-M shall be
marked ``Safeguards Information--Modified Handling'' in a conspicuous
manner on the top and bottom of the first page to indicate the presence
of protected information. The first page of the document must also
contain (i) the name, title, and organization of the individual
authorized to make a SGI-M determination, and who has determined that
the document contains SGI-M, (ii) the date the document was originated
or the determination made, (iii) an indication that the document
contains SGI-M, and (iv) an indication that unauthorized disclosure
would be subject to civil and criminal sanctions. Each additional page
shall be marked in a conspicuous fashion at the top and bottom with
letters denoting
[[Page 65219]]
``Safeguards Information Modified Handling.''
In additional to the ``Safeguards Information--Modified Handling''
markings at the top and bottom of each page, transmittal letters or
memoranda which do not in themselves contain SGI-M shall be marked to
indicate that attachments or enclosures contain SGI-M but that the
transmittal does not (e.g., ``When separated from SGI-M enclosure(s),
this document is decontrolled'').
In addition to the information required on the face of the
document, each item of correspondence that contains SGI-M shall, by
marking or other means, clearly indicate which portions (e.g.,
paragraphs, pages, or appendices) contain SGI-M and which do not.
Portion marking is not required for physical security and safeguards
contingency plans.
All documents or other matter containing SGI-M in use or storage
shall be marked in accordance with these requirements. A specific
exception is provided for documents in the possession of contractors
and agents of licensees that were produced more than one year prior to
the effective date of the order. Such documents need not be marked
unless they are removed from file drawers or containers. The same
exception applies to old documents stored away from the facility in
central files or corporation headquarters.
Since information protection procedures employed by state and local
police forces are deemed to meet NRC requirements, documents in the
possession of these agencies need not be marked as set forth in this
document.
Removal From SGI-M Category
Documents containing SGI-M shall be removed from the SGI-M category
(decontrolled) only after the NRC determines that the information no
longer meets the criteria of SGI-M. Licensees have the authority to
make determinations that specific documents which they created no
longer contain SGI-M information and may be decontrolled. Consideration
must be exercised to ensure that any document decontrolled shall not
disclose SGI-M in some other form or be combined with other unprotected
information to disclose SGI-M.
The authority to determine that a document may be decontrolled may
be exercised only by, or with the permission of, the individual (or
office) who made the original determination. The document shall
indicate the name and organization of the individual removing the
document from the SGI-M category and the date of the removal. Other
persons who have the document in their possession should be notified of
the decontrolling of the document.
Reproduction of Matter Containing SGI-M
SGI-M may be reproduced to the minimum extent necessary consistent
with need without permission of the originator. Newer digital copiers
which scan and retain images of documents represent a potential
security concern. If the copier is retaining SGI-M information in
memory, the copier cannot be connected to a network. It should also be
placed in a location that is cleared and controlled for the authorized
processing of SGI-M information. Different copiers have different
capabilities, including some which come with features that allow the
memory to be erased. Each copier would have to be examined from a
physical security perspective.
Use of Automatic Data Processing (ADP) Systems
SGI-M may be processed or produced on an ADP system provided that
the system is assigned to the licensee's or contractor's facility and
requires the use of an entry code/password for access to stored
information. Licensees are encouraged to process this information in a
computing environment that has adequate computer security controls in
place to prevent unauthorized access to the information. An ADP system
is defined here as a data processing system having the capability of
long term storage of SGI-M. Word processors such as typewriters are not
subject to the requirements as long as they do not transmit information
offsite. (Note: if SGI-M is produced on a typewriter, the ribbon must
be removed and stored in the same manner as other SGI-M information or
media.) The basic objective of these restrictions is to prevent access
and retrieval of stored SGI-M by unauthorized individuals, particularly
from remote terminals. Specific files containing SGI-M will be password
protected to preclude access by an unauthorized individual. The
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) maintains a
listing of all validated encryption systems at http://csrc.nist.gov/cryptval/1401/1401val.htm. SGI-M files may be transmitted over a
network if the file is encrypted. In such cases, the licensee will
select a commercially available encryption system that NIST has
validated as conforming to Federal Information Processing Standards
(FIPS). SGI-M files shall be properly labeled as ``Safeguards
Information--Modified Handling'' and saved to removable media and
stored in a locked file drawer or cabinet.
Telecommunications
SGI-M may not be transmitted by unprotected telecommunications
circuits except under emergency or extraordinary conditions. For the
purpose of this requirement, emergency or extraordinary conditions are
defined as any circumstances that require immediate communications in
order to report, summon assistance for, or respond to a security event
(or an event that has potential security significance).
This restriction applies to telephone, telegraph, teletype,
facsimile circuits, and to radio. Routine telephone or radio
transmission between site security personnel, or between the site and
local police, should be limited to message formats or codes that do not
disclose facility security features or response procedures. Similarly,
call-ins during transport should not disclose information useful to a
potential adversary. Infrequent or non-repetitive telephone
conversations regarding a physical security plan or program are
permitted provided that the discussion is general in nature.
Individuals should use care when discussing SGI-M at meetings or in
the presence of others to insure that the conversation is not overheard
by persons not authorized access. Transcripts, tapes or minutes of
meetings or hearings that contain SGI-M shall be marked and protected
in accordance with these requirements.
Destruction
Documents containing SGI-M should be destroyed when no longer
needed. They may be destroyed by tearing into small pieces, burning,
shredding or any other method that precludes reconstruction by means
available to the public at large. Piece sizes one half inch or smaller
composed of several pages or documents and thoroughly mixed would be
considered completely destroyed.
Attachment 3--Trustworthiness and Reliability Requirements for
Individuals Handling Safeguards Information
In order to ensure the safe handling, use, and control of
information designated as Safeguards Information, each licensee shall
control and limit access to the information to only those individuals
who have established the need-to-know the information, and are
considered to be trustworthy and reliable. Licensees shall document the
basis for concluding that there is reasonable assurance that
individuals
[[Page 65220]]
granted access to Safeguards Information are trustworthy and reliable,
and do not constitute an unreasonable risk for malevolent use of the
information.
The Licensee shall comply with the requirements of this attachment:
1. The trustworthiness and reliability of an individual shall be
determined based on a background investigation:
(a) The background investigation shall address at least the past
three (3) years, and, at a minimum, include verification of employment,
education, and personal references. The licensee shall also, to the
extent possible, obtain independent information to corroborate that
provided by the employee (i.e., seeking references not supplied by the
individual).
(b.) If an individual's employment has been less than the required
three (3) year period, educational references may be used in lieu of
employment history.
The licensee's background investigation requirements may be satisfied
for an individual that has an active Federal security clearance.
2. The licensee shall retain documentation regarding the
trustworthiness and reliability of individual employees for three years
after the individual's employment ends. In order for an individual to
be granted access to Safeguards Information, the individual must be
determined to be trustworthy and reliable, as describe in requirement 1
above, and meet the requirements of NRC Order EA-12-148.
DG-SGI-1, Designation Guide for Safeguards Information Redacted
[FR Doc. 2012-26288 Filed 10-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Yesterday, on Yom Kippur, the holiest day for world Jewry, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, stood before the nations of the world as a respected speaker at the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
Not since ancient times—when Queen Esther foiled Haman’s genocidal designs—has a threat this serious to the future of our people emanated from that land.
And it is not just about nuclear weapons.
Long before the current nuclear crisis, Tehran’s blood feud against Israel, her people and her Judaic traditions were a centerpiece of the mullahtocracy ever since the Ayatollah Khomeini seized power.
In his new Simon Wiesenthal Center report,Iran Targets Israel: The Fateful Confrontation, historian Dr. Harold Brackman outlines the multifaceted scope of the Iranian regime’s existential hatred for the Jewish State.
In the report, you will learn about the:
• Evolution of Holocaust Denial and Jew hatred as the cornerstone of Iranian statecraft
• Ayatollah Khomeini’s overthrow of the Shah four decades ago
• Iran’s terror network stretching from Syria and Lebanon to North Korea to Argentina and now in Venezuela
• The current Iranian nuclear threat
Iran Targets Israel: The Fateful Confrontation indicates that there are no easy answers posed by the Iranian regime’s bombast and threats. The only certainty is that to do nothing—retreating into wishful thinking and anti-Israel scapegoating, will produce unspeakable catastrophic results for the Jewish state and all countries in the Middle East and beyond.
Ahmadinejad: “Israel will be eliminated” – United Nations, September 2012
“Iranian President Ahmadinejad should not be speaking from a podium at the UN General Assembly. Instead, he should be in the dock of the International Court of Justice in the Hague for planning and inciting the destruction of Israel, a UN member state in good standing, and genocide against the Israeli people,”
In this piece of video IRGC’s aerospace force commander makes crucial statement. He is saying we are not going to go to a technical war with our advanced adversary, instead, we have designed specific targeted attacks and scenarios for specific places we would want to hit without hesitation with huge amount of missiles — then the report shows a test attack with mid range and ballistic missiles on a “one-to-one” size “American” base in Kuwait which its specifies obtained by UAVs and “local posts” and explains how the air defense systems will be evaded with simple targeted techniques instead of huge all purpose arsenals.
The page contains references to Iranian military official quotes that they will hit U.S navy carriers in case of a war using missiles and UAVs. At the end of the page there is a Video taken by some of these UAVs. They get close to U.S carriers and “identify” the model of air planes it is carrying or the planes that take off including F-16s.
Considering Iran does not have stand-alone Satellites to have a reliable C4ISR for wide area wars, including the type of operations that is being discussed — there are serious questions whether Iran is exploiting U.S. owned satellite communications for its own purposes under cover of commercial or emergency services? U.S. army’s C4ISR is highly dependent on services such as the ones offered by ViaSat or Inmarsat and there is absolutely no other remotely comparable infrastructure. Adding the Iranian attack on lockheed martin’s “Monster” there are debates within Satellite and ISR production engineers whether Iranians are actually using U.S.’s own “wide area ISR model and technologies” in their attacks?
There are hints given to us that BGAN, the 4th generation of Inmarsat infrastructure, that claims military grade security have been exploited several times recently by Hezbollah operative’s in Syria and Russian ISR battleship floating around that same area since many inter-operations between NATO elements and U.S. army is based on BGAN. Public documents are available on Inmarsat’s government services site, last I checked. BGAN services are reported accepted and working — source is a reporter just came back from Tehran’s NAM, she broadcast live Video feed using BGAN. We have experiences with Iran that shows when they cannot control or monitor something, they do their best on jamming and disruptions. They are not even officially shy about it anymore. We believe there might be a serious dark hole in U.S.’s infrastructure and least we can certain about it Hezbollah (=Iran) and Russians have the capabilities to exploit these types of holes.
“Farsnews” is one of Iran’s semi-official News Agencies that has tight ties with Power elements, including IRGC and MOIS .
The page is reporting IRGC’s aerospace commander, General Hajizadeh, said in an interview tonight “We consider American bases as a part of American Soil, not as a part of Qatar -Bahrain and Afghanistan”. The interview ends with this statement: “we will attack these bases in case of a war, no doubt”.
Iranian official says an in interview that starting from tonight up until undetermined time, Google’s services including Gmail will be Filtered in Iran. He added that the decision was made due to huge number of calls people made to remove contents related to recent insults on Prophet Mohammad. Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, Blogspot and wordpress were already Filtered in Iran for a couple of years.
600 Photos of Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS March 11-28, 2011
On 11 September 2012 Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) released 600 photos taken March 11-28, 2011 after the tsunami hit the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station. These are the TEPCO links to 40 collections within the 600.
The following report was compiled by the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey convened during the Roosevelt administration to analyze strategic bombing in both the European and Pacific campaigns during World War II. The following report from 1946 on the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is held at the Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. A more legible version of the report from a later printing is also available online from the Roger Williams University Library.
The available facts about the power of the atomic bomb as a military weapon lie in the story of what it did at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many of these facts have been published, in official and unofficial form, but mingled with distortions or errors. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, therefore, in partial fulfillment of the mission for which it was established, has put together in these pages a fairly full account of just what the atomic bombs did at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Together with an explanation of how the bomb achieved these effects, this report states the extent and nature of the damage, the casualties, and the political repercussions from the two attacks. The basis is the observation, measurement, and analysis of the Survey’s investigators. The conjecture that is necessary for understanding of complex phenomena and for applying the findings to the problems of defense of the U.S. is clearly labeled.
When the atomic bombs fell, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey was completing a study of the effects of strategic bombing on Germany’s ability and will to resist. A similar study of the effects of strategic bombing on Japan was being planned. The news of the dropping of the atomic bomb gave a new urgency to this project, for a study of the air war against Japan clearly involved new weapons and new possibilities of concentration of attack that might qualify the effectiveness of air power. The directors of the Survey, therefore, decided to examine exhaustively the effects of the atomic bombs, in order that the full impact on Japan and the implications of their results could be confidently analyzed. Teams of experts were selected to study the scenes of the bombings from the special points of emphasis of physical damage, civilian defense, morale, casualties, community life, utilities and transportation, various industries, and the general economic and political repercussions. In all, more than 110 men – engineers, architects, fire experts, economists, doctors, photographers, draftsmen – participated in the field study at each city, over a period of ten weeks from October to December, 1945. Their detailed studies, now being published, are listed in an appendix to this summary report.
In addition, close liaison was maintained with other investigating units. Cooperation was received from, and extended to, the following groups:
– The Joint Commission for the Investigation of the Atomic Bomb in Japan
– The British Mission to Japan
– The Naval Technical Mission to Japan
Special acknowledgement is due to the medical groups of the Joint Commission, whose data and findings have been generously made available to the Survey. On medical aspects of the bombings, the Joint Commission was the chief fact-finding group; it will present its definitive report in the near future. In other fields, however — particularly the study of physical damage and the impact on community life — the Survey collected its own data and is the primary source.
II. The Effects of the Atomic Bombings
A. The Attacks and Damage
1. The Attacks
A single atomic bomb, the first weapon of its type ever used against a target, exploded over the city of Hiroshima at 0815 on the morning of 6 August 1945. Most of the industrial workers had already reported to work, but many workers were enroute and nearly all the school children and some industrial employees were at work in the open on the program of building removal to provide firebreaks and disperse valuables to the country. The attack came 45 minutes after the “all clear” had been sounded from a previous alert. Because of the lack of warning and the populace’s indifference to small groups of planes, the explosion came as an almost complete surprise, and the people had not taken shelter. Many were caught in the open, and most of the rest in flimsily constructed homes or commercial establishments.
The bomb exploded slightly northwest of the center of the city. Because of this accuracy and the flat terrain and circular shape of the city, Hiroshima was uniformly and extensively devastated. Practically the entire densely or moderately built-up portion of the city was leveled by blast and swept by fire. A “fire-storm”, a phenomenon which has occurred infrequently in other conflagrations, developed in Hiroshima: fires springing up almost simultaneously over the wide flat area around the center of the city drew in air from all directions. The inrush of air easily overcame the natural ground wind, which had a maximum velocity of 30 to 40 miles per hour two to three hours after the explosion. The “fire-wind” and the symmetry of the built-up center of the city gave a roughly circular shape to the 4.4 square miles which were almost completely burned out.
The surprise, the collapse of many buildings, and the conflagration contributed to an unprecedented casualty rate. Seventy to eighty thousand people were killed, or missing and presumed dead, and an equal number were injured. The magnitude of casualties is set in relief by a comparison with the Tokyo fire raid of 9/10 March 1945, in which, though nearly 16 square miles were destroyed, the number killed was no larger and fewer people were injured.
At Nagasaki, three days later, the city was scarcely more prepared, though vague references to the Hiroshima disaster had appeared in the newspaper of 8 August. From the Nagasaki Prefectural Report on the bombing, something of the shock of the explosion can be inferred:
“The day was clear with not very much wind — an ordinary midsummer’s Day. The strain of continuous air attack on the city’s population and the severity of the summer had vitiated enthusiastic air raid precautions. Previously, a general alert had been sounded at 0748, with a raid alert at 0750; this was cancelled at 0830, and the alertness of the people was dissipated by a great feeling of relief.”
The city remained on the warning alert, but when two B-29’s were again sighted coming in the raid signal was not given immediately; the bomb was dropped at 1102 and the raid signal was given a few minutes later, at 1109. Thus only about 400 people were in the city’s tunnel shelters, which were adequate for about 30 per cent of the population.
“When the atomic bomb exploded, an intense flash was observed first as though a large amount of magnesium had been ignited, and the scene grew hazy with white smoke. At the same time at the center of the explosion, and a short while later in other areas, a tremendous roaring sound was heard and a crushing blast wave and intense heat were felt. The people of Nagasaki, even those who lived on the outer edge of the blast, all felt as though they had sustained a direct hit, and the whole city suffered damage such as would have resulted from direct hits everywhere by ordinary bombs.”
“The Zero area where the damage was most severe was almost completely wiped out and for a short while after the explosion no reports came out of that area. People who were in comparatively damaged areas reported their condition under the impression that they had received a direct hit. If such a great amount of damage could be wreaked by a near miss, then the power of the atomic bomb is unbelievably great.”
In Nagasaki, no fire storm arose, and the uneven terrain of the city confined the maximum intensity of damage to the valley over which the bomb exploded. The area of nearly complete devastation was thus much smaller: only about 1.8 square miles. Casualties were lower also; between 35,000 and 40,000 were killed, and about the same number injured. People in the tunnel shelters escaped injury, unless exposed in the entrance shaft.
The difference in the totals of destruction to lives and property at the two cities suggests the importance of the special circumstances of layout and construction of the cities, which affect the results of the bombings and must be considered in evaluating the effectiveness of the atomic bombs. An account of the nature and history of each city will give meaning to the details of the damage and disorganization at each.
2. HIROSHIMA
The city of Hiroshima is located on the broad fan-shaped delta of the Ota River, whose seven mouths divide the city into six islands which project finger-like into Hiroshima Bay of the Inland Sea. These mouths of the river furnished excellent firebreaks in a city that is otherwise flat and only slightly above sea level. A highly developed bridge system with 81 important bridges, joined the islands. A single kidney shaped hill in the eastern part of the city, about one-half mile long and rising to an elevation of 221 feet, offered some blast protection to structures on the eastern side opposite the point of fall of the bomb. Otherwise, the city was uniformly exposed to the spreading energy from the bomb.
The city boundary extends to some low hills to the west and northeast and embraces 26.36 square miles, only thirteen of which were built up. Seven square miles were densely or moderately built up, the remainder being occupied by sparsely built-up residential, storage, hilly sections. In the central area, no systematic separation of commercial, industrial, and residential zones existed, though there were rough functional sections. The main commercial district was located in the center of the city, and with the adjoining Chugoku Regional Army Headquarters occupied the greater portion of the central island. Residential areas and military barracks overlapped and surrounded this central area. The bulk of the industries were located on the perimeter of the city, either on the southern ends of the islands (where the Hiroshima airport was also situated) or to the east of the city. The residential, commercial, and military — contained 75 percent of the total population. If there were, as seems probable, about 245,000 people in the city at the time of the attack, the density in the congested area must have been about 46,000 per square mile. Five completed evacuation programs and a sixth then in progress had reduced the population from its wartime peak of 380,000.
In Hiroshima (and in Nagasaki also) the dwellings were of wood construction; about one-half were one story and the remainder either one and one-half or two stories. The roof coverings were mostly either hard- burnt black tile. There were no masonry division walls, and large groups of dwellings clustered together. The type of construction, coupled with antiquated fire-fighting equipment and inadequately trained personnel, afforded even in peacetime a high possibility of conflagration. Many
wood framed industrial buildings were of poor construction by American standards. The principal points of weakness were the extremely small tendons, the inadequate tension joints, and the inadequate or poorly designed lateral bracings. Reinforced concrete framed buildings showed a striking lack of uniformity in design and in quality of materials. Some of the construction details (reinforcing rod splices, for example) were often poor, and much of the concrete was definitely weak; thus some reinforced concrete buildings collapsed and suffered structural damage when within 2,000 feet of ground zero, and some internal wall paneling was demolished even up to 3,800 feet. (For convenience, the term “ground zero” will be used to designate the point on the ground directly beneath the point of detonation, or “air zero”.)
Other buildings, however, were constructed far more strongly than is required by normal building codes in America, to resist earthquakes. Furthermore, construction regulations in Japan have specified since the 1923 earthquake that the roof must safely carry a minimum load of 70 pounds per square foot whereas American requirements do not normally exceed 40 pounds per square foot for similar types. Though the regulation was not always followed, this extra strong construction was encountered in some of the buildings near ground zero at Hiroshima, and undoubtedly accounts for their ability to withstand atomic bomb pressures without structural failures. Nearly 7 percent of the residential units had been torn down to make firebreaks.
Hiroshima before the war was the seventh largest city in Japan, with a population of over 340,000, and was the principal administrative and commercial center of the southwestern part of the country. As the headquarters of the Second Army and of the Chugoku Regional Army, it was one of the most important military command stations in Japan, the site of one of the largest military supply depots, and the foremost military shipping point for both troops and supplies. Its shipping activities had virtually ceased by the time of the attack, however, because of sinkings and the mining of the Inland Sea. It had been relatively unimportant industrially before the war, ranking only significance. These factories were not concentrated, but spread over the outskirts of the city; this location, we shall see, accounts for the slight industrial damage.
The impact of the atomic bomb shattered the normal fabric of community life and disrupted the organizations for handling the disaster. In the 30 percent of the population killed and the additional 30 percent seriously injured were included corresponding proportions of the civic authorities and rescue groups. A mass flight from the city took place, as persons sought safety from the conflagration and a place for shelter and food. Within 24 hours, however, people were streaming back by the thousands in search of relatives and friends and to determine the extent of their property loss. Road blocks had to be set up along all routes leading into the city, to keep curious and unauthorized people out. The bulk of the dehoused population found refuge in the surrounding countryside; within the city the food supply was short and shelter virtually non-existent.
On August 7, the commander of the Second Army assumed general command of the counter-measures, and all military units and facilities in the area were mobilized for relief purposes. Army buildings on the periphery of the city provided shelter and emergency hospital space, and dispersed Army supplies supplemented the slight amounts of food and clothing that had escaped destruction. The need far exceeded what could be made available. Surviving civilians assisted; although casualties in both groups had been heavy, 190 policemen and over 2000 members of the Civilian Defense Corps reported for duty on 7 August.
The status of medical facilities and personnel dramatically illustrates the difficulties facing authorities. Of more than 200 doctors in Hiroshima before the attack, over 90 percent were casualties and only about 30 physicians were able to perform their normal duties a month after the raid. Out of 1,780 nurses, 1,654 were killed or injured. Though some stocks of supplies had been dispersed, many were destroyed. Only three out of 45 civilian hospitals could be used, and two large
Army hospitals were rendered unusable. Those within 3,000 feet of ground zero were totally destroyed, and the mortality rate of the occupants was practically 100 percent. Two large hospitals of reinforced concrete construction were located 4,900 feet from ground zero. The basic structures remained erect but there was such severe interior damage that neither was able to resume operation as a hospital for sometime and the casualty rate was approximately 90 percent, due primarily to falling plaster, flying glass, and fire. Hospitals and clinics beyond 7,000 feet, though often remaining standing, were badly damaged and contained many casualties from flying glass or other missiles.
With such elimination of facilities and personnel, the lack of care and rescue activities at the time of the disaster is understandable; still, the eyewitness account of Father Siemes* shows how this lack of first aid contributed to the seriousness of casualties. At the improvised first aid stations, he reports:
“…Iodine is applied to the wounds but they are left uncleansed. Neither ointment nor other therapeutic agents are available. Those that have been brought in are laid on the floor and no one can give them any further care. What could one do when all means are lacking? Among the passersby, there are many who are uninjured. In a purposeless, insensate manner, distraught by the magnitude of the disaster, most of them rush
by and none conceives the thought of organizing help on his own initiative. They are concerned only with the welfare of their own families–in the official aid stations and hospitals, a good third or half of those that had been brought in died. They lay about there almost without care, and a very high percentage succumbed. Everything was lacking, doctors, assistants, dressings, drugs, etc…”
Effective medical help had to be sent in from the outside, and arrived only after a considerable delay. Fire fighting and rescue units were equally stripped of men and equipment. Father Siemes reports that 30 hours elapsed before any organized rescue parties were observed. In Hiroshima, only 16 pieces of fire-fighting equipment were available for fighting the conflagration, three of them borrowed. However, it is unlikely that any public fire department in the world, even without damage to equipment or casualties to personnel, could have prevented development of a conflagration in Hiroshima, or combatted it with success at more than a few locations along its perimeter. The total fire damage would not have been much different.
All utilities and transportation services were disrupted over varying lengths of time. In most cases, however, the demand fell off even more precipitously than the available supply, and where the service was needed it could be restored at a minimal level. Thus, through railroad service was possible on 8 August, only two days after the attack, when fire trucks still had to be used to pump water into the locomotives because of insufficient water pressure. Electric power from the general network was available in most of the surviving parts of the city on 7 August, and only one plant, the Engineering Division of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, was hampered in its recovery by the inability to obtain sufficient power for several weeks.
The water reservoir, which was of reinforced concrete and earthcovered, was undamaged; it was nearly two miles from the blast center. However, 70,000 breaks of pipe connections in buildings and dwellings were caused by blast and fire effects. No subsurface pipes were crushed and no leaks resulted from blast as a direct cause, though several leaks in underground mains resulted from falling debris. Pressure in the city center dropped to zero because of the connection breaks and the damage to a 16-inch and a 14- inch water main where they crossed damaged bridges. Six sewer pumping stations were rendered inoperable by fire and blast within a radius of one mile. The remaining eight stations were only slightly damaged, but no effort was made to repair or operate them. Water tables rose at flood periods and lands behind revetments were inundated.
Trolley cars, trucks, and railroad rolling stock suffered extensive damage. Transportation buildings (offices, stations, living quarters, and a few warehouses) were damaged by fire in the passenger station area, but damage was slight to the roundhouses, transit sheds, warehouses, and repair units in the classification and repair area. About 200 railroad employees were killed, but by 20 August, 14 days after the attack, 80 percent of the employees were at work.
The electric power transmission and distribution system was wrecked; only power equipment of rugged construction, such as transformers, resisted the blast and heat within the devastated areas. Instruments were damaged beyond repair, and switches, switchyard insulators, cables, and copper bus work were rendered unusable. The telephone system was approximately 80 percent damaged, and no service was restored until 15 August 1945.
Industry in the center of the city was effectively wiped out. Though small workshops numbered several thousand, they represented only one- fourth of the total industrial production of Hiroshima, since many of them had only one or two workers. The bulk of the city’s output came from large plants located on the outskirts of the city: one-half of the industrial production came from only five firms. Of these larger companies, only one suffered more than superficial damage. Of their working force, 94 percent were uninjured. Since electric power was available, and materials and working force were not destroyed, plants ordinarily responsible for nearly three-fourths of Hiroshima’s industrial production could have resumed normal operation within 30 days of the attack had the war continued.
Immediately after the attack, the presence of these nearly intact industries spurred counter-measures in an effort to retain for the nation’s war effort the potential output of the city. The prefectural governor issued a proclamation on 7 August, calling for “a rehabilitation of the stricken city and an aroused fighting spirit to exterminate the devilish Americans”. To prevent the spread of rumors and brace morale, 210,000 out-of-town newspapers were brought in daily to replace the destroyed local paper. On 16 August, regular rationing was resumed. Care of the injured and disposal of corpses remained urgent, but other steps were few.
By 1 November, the population of Hiroshima was back to 137,000. The city required complete rebuilding. The entire heart, the main administrative and commercial as well as residential section, was gone. In this area only about fifty buildings, all of reinforced concrete, remained standing. All of these suffered blast damage and all save about a dozen were almost completely gutted by fire; only five could be used without major repairs. These burnt-out structural frames rose impressively from the ashes of the burned over section where occasional piles of rubble or twisted steel skeletons marked the location of brick or steel frame structures. At greater distances light steel frame and brick structures remained undamaged. Blast damage to wood frame buildings and to residences extended well beyond the burned over area, gradually becoming more erratic and spotty as distances were reached where only the weakest buildings were damaged, until in the outer portions of the city only minor disturbances of the tile roofs or breakage of glass were visible. The official Japanese figures summed up the building destruction at
62,000 out of a total of 90,000 buildings in the urban area, or 69%. An additional 6,000 or 6.6% were severely damaged, and most of the others showed glass breakage or disturbance of roof tile. These figures show the magnitude of the problem facing the survivors.
Despite the absence of sanitation measures, no epidemics are reported to have broken out. In view of the lack of medical facilities, supplies and personnel, and the disruption of the sanitary system, the escape from epidemics may seem surprising. The experience of other bombed cities in Germany and Japan shows that this is not an isolated case. A possible explanation may lie in the disinfecting action of the extensive fires.
In later weeks, disease rates rose, but not sharply.
3. Nagasaki
Nagasaki is located on the best natural harbor of western Kyushu, a spacious inlet in the mountainous coast. The city is a highly congested urban pattern extending for several miles along the narrow shores and up the valleys opening out from the harbor. Two rivers, divided by a mountain spur, form the two main valleys in whose basins the city lies: the Urakami River, in whose basin the atomic bomb fell, running into the harbor from a NNW direction, and the Nakashima River, running from the NE. This mountain spur and the irregular lay-out of the city effectively reduced the area of destruction.
The main residential and commercial districts are intermingled in these two river basins. The large industrial plants stretch up the west shore of the bay and up the Urakami Valley. Though the metropolitan area of the city is officially about 35 square miles and stretches far into the countryside, the heavily built-up area is confined by the terrain to less than four square miles. The greatest population density thus approximated 65,000 per square mile even after the evacuations.
Despite its excellent harbor, Nagasaki’s commercial importance, though great in previous centuries, had declined in recent years because of the city’s isolated peninsular position and the difficulties of transportation through the mountains by inadequate roads and railroad facilities. As a naval base it had been supplanted by Sasebo. Industry gradually increased in importance, primarily under Mitsubishi influence. The four largest companies in the city were the Mitsubishi Shipyards, Electrical Equipment Works, Arms Plant, and Steel Works, employing nearly 90 percent of the city’s labor force. Administratively, Nagasaki was by 1941 of merely local importance despite being the seat of the prefectural government.
Before the atomic bombing on 9 August, Nagasaki had experienced five small-scale air attacks in the previous twelve months, by an aggregate of 136 planes which dropped a total of 270 tons of high explosive, 53 tons of incendiary, and 20 tons of fragmentation bombs.
Of these, a raid of 1 August 1945 was most effective, with several bombs falling in the Mitsubishi Shipyards and Steel Works. The scale of effect can be roughly measured, however, by comparing the toll of building damage with that from the atomic bomb; in all these raids 276 residential buildings and 21 industrial buildings were destroyed or badly damaged. When the atomic bomb fell, Nagasaki was comparatively intact.
Because the most intense destruction was confined to the Urakami Valley, the impact of the bomb on the city as a whole was less shattering than at Hiroshima. In addition, no fire storm occurred; indeed, a shift in wind direction helped control the fires. Medical personnel and facilities were hard-hit, however. Over 80 percent of the city’s hospital beds and the Medical College were located within 3,000 feet of the center of the explosion, and were completely destroyed. Reinforced concrete buildings within this range, though standing, were completely gutted by fire; buildings of wooden construction were destroyed by fire and blast. The mortality rate in this group of buildings was between 75 and 80 percent. Exact casualty figures for medical personnel are unknown, but the city seems to have fared better than Hiroshima: 120 doctors were at work on 1 November, about one-half of the pre-raid roster. Casualties were undoubtedly high: 600 out of 850 medical students at the Nagasaki Medical College were killed and most of the others injured; and of the 20 faculty members 12 were killed and four others injured.
Utilities and services were again disrupted. Both gas plants were destroyed, and the replacement time was estimated at several months. Though the basic water supply was not affected, thousands of residential feeder-line breaks were supplemented by eight breaks on a fourteen-inch main line and four breaks where another main line crossed a bridge. Electric power distribution and transmission systems were effectively destroyed in the area of heaviest destruction, but power could be supplied to the other parts of the city almost immediately.
Shipping was virtually unaffected. Trolley service was halted both by the interruption in power supply and by damage to street cars. Nagasaki is at the end of a railroad spur line. The major damage was sustained by track and railroad bridges. The rails buckled intermittently for a distance of 5,000 to 7,500 feet from ground zero, at points where burning debris set fire to wooden cross ties. Three bridges were displaced; rails were distorted and the tracks had to be completely rebuilt. The railroad stations were completely destroyed by blast and fire and the electric signal system was severely damaged. Rolling stock was slightly damaged, primarily by fire. Although the damage to equipment was not extensive, it was severe enough to curtail traffic for 48 hours, during which time sufficient emergency repair work was performed to permit resumption of limited traffic.
Control of relief measures was in the hands of the Prefecture. The sequence of clearance and repair activities illustrates the activities that were carried on.
The city’s repair facilities were completely disorganized by the atomic bomb, so that with the single exception of shutting off water to the affected areas no repairs were made to roads, bridges, water mains, or transportation installations by city forces. The prefecture took full responsibility for such restoration as was accomplished, delegating to the scattered city help the task of assisting in relief of victims. There were only three survivors of 115 employees of the street car company, and late as the middle of November 1945 no cars were running. A week after the explosion, the water works officials made an effort to supply water to persons attempting to live in the bombed out areas, but the leakage was so great that the effort was abandoned. It fell to the prefecture, therefore, to institute recovery measures even in those streets normally the responsibility of the city. Of the entire public works construction group covering the Nagasaki City area, only three members appeared for work and a week was required to locate and notify other survivors. On the morning of 10 August, police rescue units and workers from the Kawaminami shipbuilding works began the imperative task of clearing the Omura-Nagasaki pike, which was impassable for 8,000 feet. A path 6 1/2 feet wide was cleared despite the intense heat from smouldering fires, and by August 15 had been widened to permit two-way traffic. No trucks, only rakes and shovels, were available for clearing the streets, which were filled with tile, bricks, stone, corrugated iron, machinery, plaster, and stucco. Street areas affected by blast and not by fire were littered with wood. Throughout the devastated area, all wounded had to be carried by stretcher, since no motor vehicles were able to proceed through the cluttered streets for several days. The plan for debris removal required clearance of a few streets leading to the main highway; but there were frequent delays caused by the heat of smoldering fires and by calls for relief work. The debris was simply raked and shoveled off the streets. By 20 August the job was considered complete. The streets were not materially damaged by the bomb nor were the surface or the abutments of the concrete bridges, but many of the wooden bridges were totally or partially destroyed by fire.
Under the circumstances — fire, flight of entire families, destruction of official records, mass cremation — identification of dead and the accurate count of casualties was impossible. As at Hiroshima, the season of the year made rapid disposal of bodies imperative, and mass cremation and mass burial were resorted to in the days immediately after attack. Despite the absence of sanitary measures, no epidemics broke out here. The dysentery rate rose from 25/100,000 to 125/100,000. A census taken on 1 November 1945 found a population of 142,700 in the city.
At Nagasaki, the scale of destruction was greater than at Hiroshima, though the actual area destroyed was smaller because of the terrain and the point of fall of the bomb. The Nagasaki Prefectural Report describes vividly the impress of the bomb on the city and its inhabitants:
“Within a radius of one kilometer from ground zero, men and animals died almost instantaneously from the tremendous blast pressure and heat; houses and other structures were smashed, crushed and scattered; and fires broke out. The strong complex steel members of the structures of the Mitsubishi Steel Works were bent and twisted like jelly and the roofs of the reinforced concrete National Schools were crumpled and collapsed, indicating a force beyond imagination. Trees of all sizes lost their branches or were uprooted or broken off at the trunk.
“Outside a radius of one kilometer and within a radius of two kilometers from ground zero, some men and animals died instantly from the great majority were seriously or superficially injured. Houses and other structures were completely destroyed while fires broke out everywhere. Trees were uprooted and withered by the heat.
“Outside a radius of two kilometers and within a radius of four kilometers from ground zero men and animals suffered various degrees of injury from window glass and other fragments scattered about by the blast and many were burned by the intense heat. Dwelling and other structures were half or only partially damaged.”
While the conflagration with its uniformly burnt out area caught the attention at Hiroshima, the blast effects, with their resemblance to the aftermath of a hurricane, were most striking at Nagasaki. Concrete buildings had their sides facing the blast stove in like boxes. Long lines of steel framed factory sheds, over a mile from ground zero, leaned their skeletons away from the explosion. Blast resistant objects like telephone poles leaned away from the center of the explosion; on the surrounding hills trees were blown down within considerable areas. Although there was no general conflagration, fires contributed to the total damage in nearly all concrete structures. Evidence of primary fire is more frequent than at Hiroshima.
Because parts of the city were protected by hills, more than one-half of the residential units escaped serious damage. Of the 52,000 residential units in the city on 1 August, 14,146 or 27.2 percent were completely destroyed (by Japanese count) (11,494 of these were burned) ; 5,441 or 10.5 percent were half-burned or destroyed; many of the remaining units suffered superficial or minor damage. In 558 non-residential buildings in the built-up area of Nagasaki which the Survey studied, almost 60 percent of the usable floor area was destroyed or structurally damaged.
Only 12 percent was undamaged, the rest suffering superficial or minor damage.
The survival of a higher percentage of the buildings, then, distinguishes Nagasaki from Hiroshima; so also, on the other hand, does the damage to factories. In Nagasaki, only the Mitsubishi Dockyards among the major industries was remote enough from the explosion to escape serious damage. The other three Mitsubishi firms, which were responsible together with the dockyards for over 90 percent of the industrial output of the city, were seriously damaged. The Arms Plant and the Steel Works were in the main area of damage. Plant officials estimated that 58 percent of the value of the former and 78 percent of the value of the latter were destroyed: Survey investigators considered the two plants to be 50 percent destroyed. The Mitsubishi Electric Works were on the edge of the main area of destruction, but suffered 10 percent structural damage.
One or two paragraphs from the report of the commanding officer of Sasebo Naval District will illustrate the sort of damage done to industrial installations. Of two plants of the Mitsubishi Arms Works, he reports:
“With the exception of the tunnel workshops and the half-underground workshops, the Ohashi and Mori Machi Plants were completely destroyed by collapse. Reinforced concrete structures in these plants were severely damaged internally – ceilings collapsed, fittings of all sorts were destroyed, and equipment was damaged. Casting and forging shops in the Ohashi Plant were destroyed by fire, which broke out in those structures. The Mori Machi Plant was nearly completely destroyed by fire. Taking both plants together, 60% of the machinery installations was damaged. In the Ohashi Plant, from 80 to 90% of the machinery can be used again; in the Mori Machi Plant only 40 to 50% of the machinery can be used in the future.”
Or of the Mitsubishi Steel Works:
“Plant structures here (some north-light steel framed structures) suffered extensive damage to roofs and walls as steel plates were blown off. The frames themselves were bent, twisted, or toppled over, and several buildings caught fire. Hardly any of the machinery in the plant can be used again in its present condition. However, nearly 70% of the machinery can be repaired.”
In general, (as has proved true with high explosive or incendiary bombs also), the damage to machinery and other contents of a factory was less than damage to the buildings. In addition, the air burst of the atomic bomb meant that it acted indirectly on machine tools and other building contents. Though a few tools were blown over by blast, almost all the serious damage was caused by debris from damaged buildings, overturning through mass movement of buildings, or burning of buildings.
Thus the extent and sort of damage to machinery depended on the construction of the buildings housing them. In wood frame buildings, 95 percent of the machines were seriously damaged, but in reinforced concrete or steel framed buildings only one-third or one-fourth of the machines were affected seriously. As would be expected, fire caused much damage to machines in timber framed shops (practically all of which were destroyed up to 7,000 feet from ground zero) and some damage in other types of structure. Debris was a major cause of damage only in certain reinforced concrete buildings, where walls and roofs collapsed.
Shortage of raw materials had reduced operations at these four Mitsubishi plants to a fraction of their capacity. Had the raw material situation been normal and had the war continued, it is estimated that restoration of production would have been possible though slow. The dockyard, which was affected mainly by the 1 August attack rather than by the atomic bomb, would have been able to produce at 80 percent of full capacity within three or four months. The steel works would have required a year to get into substantial production, the electric works could have resumed production at a reduced rate within two months and been back at capacity within six months, and the arms plants would have required 15 months to reach two-thirds of their former capacity.
The combination of two photos shows the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power station in Fukushima Prefecture before, top, and nearly one year after a devastating earthquake and tsunami hit Japan’s northeast on March 11, 2011 and sent three of its reactors into meltdown. The top photo was taken in October, 2008 while the bottom photo was taken on Feb. 26, 2012. (Kyodo News)
Tsunami-crippled four reactors, from left, Unit 1 to Unit 4, are seen at Fukushima Dadi-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan Sunday, March 11, 2012. Japan on Sunday was remembering the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck the nation a year ago, killing just over 19,000 people and unleashing the world’s worst nuclear crisis in a quarter century. The photo was taken about three kilometers (1.9 miles) away from the plant. (Kyodo News)
Cranes stand around tsunami-crippled four reactors, from left, Unit 1 to Unit 4, at Fukushima Dadi-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan Sunday, March 11, 2012. Japan on Sunday was remembering the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck the nation a year ago, killing just over 19,000 people and unleashing the world’s worst nuclear crisis in a quarter century. The photo was taken about three kilometers (1.9 miles) away from the plant. (Kyodo News)
Severely damaged reactor Unit 3 is seen at the tsunami-crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, Sunday, March 11, 2012. Japan on Sunday was remembering the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck the nation a year ago, killing just over 19,000 people and unleashing the world’s worst nuclear crisis in a quarter century. (Kyodo News)
Reactor Unit 2 stands at the tsunami-crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, Sunday, March 11, 2012. Japan on Sunday was remembering the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck the nation a year ago, killing just over 19,000 people and unleashing the world’s worst nuclear crisis in a quarter century. (Kyodo News)
Severely damaged ducts, fences and buildings are seen in the seaside compound of the tsunami-crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, Sunday, March 11, 2012. Japan on Sunday was remembering the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck the nation a year ago, killing just over 19,000 people and unleashing the world’s worst nuclear crisis in a quarter century. (Kyodo News)
In this aerial photo taken from the Asahi Shimbun helicopter, cranes surround the tsunami-damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant reactors, from right, Unit 2, covered by light blue walls, Unit 3, center, and Unit 4, in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, northeastern Japan, Monday, May 28, 2012. The prime minister during Japan’s nuclear crisis last year said Monday he had to use an emergency law that never anticipated major radiation leaks and lacked experts capable of giving him guidance. (Tom Curley)
In this aerial photo taken from the Asahi Shimbun helicopter, reactors of the tsunami-damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant stand in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, northeastern Japan, Monday, May 28, 2012. Reactors are, from right, Unit 1, covered with a beige cover, Unit 2, covered with a square white cover, Unit 3 and Unit 4, showing their damaged frames at the bottom of cranes. (Tom Curley)
In this aerial photo taken from the Asahi Shimbun helicopter, the tsunami-damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant is seen in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, northeastern Japan, Monday, May 28, 2012. The prime minister during Japan’s nuclear crisis last year said Monday he had to use an emergency law that never anticipated major radiation leaks and lacked experts capable of giving him guidance. (Tom Curley)
Soviet paratroopers drop into Alaska to sabotage the oil pipeline in retaliation against a United States grain embargo. A skirmish occurs at a pumping station, lightly defended by Col. Jake Caffey and a National Guard reckon unit. A stalemate ensues while the possibility of World War III hangs in the balance. The danger escalates as the Russian leaders and the American President play a cat-and-mouse game
This and the three other photographs of the construction site near Dinoma in the Negev desert for Israel’s then-secret nuclear reactor were taken during the last months of 1960. According to the U.S. Intelligence Board post-mortem (See 
President Eisenhower and Israel Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion during the latter’s visit in March 1960 to the United States. (Source: 
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict26.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict25.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict24.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict23.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict22.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict20.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict1.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict0.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict2.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict3.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict4.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict5.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict6.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict7.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict8.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict9.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict10.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict11.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict12.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict13.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict14.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict15.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict16.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict17.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict18.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2016-info/nk-nuclear-test/pict19.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2015/09/nnsa-iranian-target-01.jpg)
![[Image]](https://cryptome.org/2015/09/nnsa-iranian-target-02.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/qom-site-r/qom.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/qom-site-r/site-r.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/pu-pits/pict82.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/pu-pits/pict81.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/pu-pits/pict83.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/pu-pits/pict84.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2014-info/daiichi-14-0323/pict62.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2013/02/daiichi-unit3-debris-01.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2013/02/daiichi-unit3-debris-02.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict10.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict5.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict2.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict3.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict9.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict4.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict6.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict7.jpg)
![[Image]](https://i0.wp.com/cryptome.org/2012-info/daiichi-12-02-05/pict8.jpg)
Bernd Pulch 
You must be logged in to post a comment.