TONIGHT ON COWBOY LOGIC RADIO…
Listen live right from this player:
Don’t miss this show… 9PM (eastern) / 6PM (pacific)
Our Guest will be TREVOR LOUDON!!
We will be discussing his research into the appalling number of Marxists and Communists that are currently in the United States Congress…
Trevor will NAME THEM FOR YOU!
Who says that and why? Misguided transparency perhaps? So, if this protected information has been made public, you should see it as well. The timing of the release of the United States stockpile is suspect however.
Obama Administration Releases New Nuclear Warhead Numbers
By Hans M. Kristensen
In a speech to the Review Conference of the Non-Proliferation Treaty in New York earlier today, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry disclosed new information about the size of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile.
Updated Stockpile Numbers
First, Kerry updated the DOD nuclear stockpile history by declaring that the stockpile as of September 2014 included 4,717 nuclear warheads. That is a reduction of 87 warheads since September 2013, when the DOD stockpile included 4,804 warheads, or a reduction of about 500 warheads retired since President Obama took office in January 2009.
The September 2014 number of 4,717 warheads is 43 warheads off the estimate we made in our latest FAS Nuclear Notebook in March this year.
Disclosure of Dismantlement Queue
Second, Kerry also announced a new number we have never seen in public before: the official number of retired nuclear warheads in line for dismantlement. As of September 2014, the United States had approximately 2,500 additional warheads that have been retired (but are still relatively intact) and awaiting dismantlement.
The number of “approximately 2,500” retired warheads awaiting dismantlement is close to the 2,340 warheads we estimated in the FAS Nuclear Notebook in March 2015.
Increasing Warhead Dismantlements
Kerry also announced that the administration “will seek to accelerate the dismantlement of retired nuclear warheads by 20 percent.”
“Over the last 20 years alone, we have dismantled 10,251 warheads,” Kerry announced.
This updates the count of 9,952 dismantled warheads from the 2014 disclosure, which means that the administration between September 2013 and September 2014 dismantled 299 retired warheads.
Under current plans, of the “approximately 2,500” warheads in the dismantlement queue, the ones that were retired through (September) 2009 will be dismantled by 2022. Additional warheads retired during the past five years will take longer.
How the administration will accelerate dismantlement remains to be seen. The FY2016 budget request for NNSA pretty much flatlines funding for weapons dismantlement and disposition through 2020. In the same period, the administration plans to complete production of the W76-1 warhead, begin production of the B61-12, and carry out refurbishments of four other warheads. If the administration wanted to dismantle all “approximately 2,500″ retired warheads by 2022 (including those warheads retired after 2009), it would have to dismantle about 312 warheads per year – a rate of only 13 more than it dismantled in 2014. So this can probably be done with existing capacity.
Implications
Secretary Kerry’s speech is an important diplomatic gesture that will help the United States make its case at the NPT review conference that it is living up to its obligations under the treaty. Some will agree, others will not. The nuclear-weapon states are in a tough spot at the NPT because there are currently no negotiations underway for additional reductions; because the New START Treaty, although beneficial, is modest; and because the nuclear-weapon states are reaffirming the importance of nuclear weapons and modernizing their nuclear arsenals as if they plan to keep nuclear weapons indefinitely (see here for worldwide status of nuclear arsenals).
And the disclosure is a surprise. As recently as a few weeks ago, White House officials said privately that the United States would not be releasing updated nuclear warhead numbers at the NPT conference. Apparently, the leadership decided last minute to do so anyway.
The roughly 500 warheads cut from the stockpile by the Obama administration is modest and a disappointing performance by a president that has spoken so much about reducing the numbers and role of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, the political reality has been an arms control policy squeezed between a dismissive Russian president and an arms control-hostile U.S. Congress.
In addition to updating the stockpile history, the most important part of the initiative is the disclosure of the number of weapons awaiting dismantlement. This is an important new transparency initiative by the administration that was not included in the 2010 or 2014 stockpile transparency initiatives. Disclosing dismantlement numbers helps dispel rumors that the United States is hiding a secret stash of nuclear warheads and enables the United States to demonstrate actual dismantlement progress.
And, besides, why would the administration not want to disclose to the NPT conference how many warheads it is actually working on dismantling? This can only help the United States at the NPT review conference.
There will be a few opponents of the transparency initiative. Since they can’t really say this harms U.S. national security, their primary argument will be that other nuclear-armed states have so far not response in kind.
Russia and China have not made public disclosures of their nuclear warhead inventories. Britain and France has said a little on a few occasions about their total inventories and (in the case of Britain) how many warheads are operationally available or deployed, but not disclosed the histories of stockpiles or dismantlement. And the other nuclear-armed states that are outside the NPT (India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan) have not said anything at all.
But this is a work in progress. It will take a long time to persuade other nuclear-armed states to become more transparent with basic information about nuclear arsenals. But seeing that it can be done without damaging national security and at the same time helping the NPT process is important to cut through old-fashioned excessive nuclear secrecy and increase nuclear transparency. Hat tip to the Obama administration.
This publication was made possible by a grant from the New Land Foundation and Ploughshares Fund. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.
Democrats Want to Ban Islamophobic Lawmaker From the U.S.
In a letter obtained by Foreign Policy, two Democratic members of Congress are urging the Obama administration to ban a Dutch lawmaker from entry into the United States due to his controversial views on Islam.
The Dutch lawmaker, Geert Wilders, is scheduled to speak at reception on Capitol Hill this month at the invitation of Tea Party firebrand Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). In recent years, Wilders has become internationally famous for his bombastic broadsides against Islam, which include calls to ban the Koran in the Netherlands and to arrange for the removal of Moroccan immigrants from his country. In 2010 and 2011, Wilders was formally charged with inciting hatred and discrimination and is currently facing charges for hate speech.
“We respectfully request that the U.S. government deny Mr. Wilders entry due to his participation in inciting anti-Muslim aggression and violence,” wrote Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and André Carson (D-In.) in the April 23 letter. “Mr. Wilders’ policy agenda is centered on the principle that Christian culture is superior to other cultures.”
The letter, addressed to Secretary of State John Kerry and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, calls on the officials to deny Wilders entry under the authority of the International Religious Freedom Act, which empowers the State Department to ban the entry of a foreign leader responsible for severe violations of religious freedom.
The somewhat obscure 1998 law has only been used to deny the entry of a foreign official once when Narendra Modi, the current prime minister of India and former chief minister of Gujarat, was accused of failing to protect Muslims during communal rioting in 2002.
Wilders has called Islam the “ideology of a retarded culture” and his writings were favorably cited by Anders Breivik, the Norwegian white supremacist responsible for murdering 77 people in Oslo in 2012. He was most recently in the news for recording a 2-minute video titled “No Way,” in which he tells migrants not to come to the Netherlands
While foreign policy hands on Capitol Hill widely view Wilders as a loathsome and obscene bloviator, some aides questioned whether banning him from entering the country violated basic principles of free speech.
“It’s a pretty heavy handed use of that law,” said a congressional aide who oversees foreign relations issues. “And if you’re going to start banning people for saying offensive things against Islam, you’re going to have to deport half the Republican caucus.”
The letter anticipates such criticisms and attempts to justify banning Wilders on account of his alleged incitement to violence.
“In the U.S., freedom of speech is a bedrock principle that distinguishes free societies from ones living under oppressive regimes,” wrote Ellison and Carson. “Freedom of speech, however, is not absolute. It is limited by the legal and moral understanding that speech that causes the incitement of violence or prejudicial action against protected groups is wrong.”
Gohmert’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
The letter signed by Ellison and Carson is available here. Wilders’s latest video appears below:
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) – A Russian man charged with leading a Taliban attack against U.S. forces in Afghanistan repeated his pleas of not guilty to terrorism-related charges Tuesday.
Irek Hamidullin was arraigned on a new 15-count indictment in U.S. District Court in Richmond. He previously pleaded not guilty to 12 charges. Three additional counts of trying to kill or injure an American were added in a new indictment last week.
Hamidullin is being held in federal custody until his five-day jury trial, which is set for July 27.
Handcuffed and wearing leg irons, Hamidullin listened to the proceedings Tuesday with the help of an Arabic translator and answered “not guilty” in English when asked for his plea.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Gill said many of charges, including providing material support to terrorism and trying to destroy U.S. military aircraft, are punishable by up to life in prison. Attorney General Eric Holder chose not to seek the death penalty for a charge of using a weapon of mass destruction.
Hamidullin is the first military detainee from Afghanistan to be brought to the U.S. for trial. The Obama administration is trying to show that it can use the criminal court system to deal with terror suspects – a move criticized by some Republican lawmakers who believe such cases should be handled by military tribunals.
According to U.S. officials, Hamidullin is a Russian veteran of the Soviet war in Afghanistan who stayed in the country and joined the Taliban. He was captured in 2009 after an attack on Afghan border police and U.S. soldiers in Khowst province. He had been held at the U.S. Parwan detention facility at Bagram airfield before being brought to the U.S.
*** While we have not been paying much attention on November 4, 2014:
WASHINGTON—Irek Ilgiz Hamidullin made his first appearance today in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on federal terrorism offenses arising from his alleged participation in an attack on U.S. troops and Afghan Border Police in the Khost Province of Afghanistan in November 2009.
Hamidullin was indicted by a federal grand jury on twelve counts, including conspiring to provide and providing material support to terrorists; conspiring and attempting to destroy an aircraft of the armed forces of the United States; conspiring and attempting to murder a national of the United States; and other offenses.
The charges carry a potential maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Hamidullin, a Russian national approximately 55 years of age, was taken into custody in November 2009 and held by the Department of Defense in Afghanistan until being turned over to the FBI on Nov. 3 and brought to the United States to face charges.
The defendant was indicted on Oct. 8, 2014, and the charging document was unsealed today.
Arraignment is set for Friday at 10:00 a.m. in front of U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson at the federal courthouse in Richmond, Virginia.
An indictment is merely a formal allegation that a defendant has committed a violation of criminal laws and every defendant is presumed innocent until, and unless, proven guilty.
The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office with substantial assistance from various other government agencies. The case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Counterterrorism Section of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.
While all media is reporting on the mayhem in Baltimore, the P5+1 is still in talks with Iran on the nuclear program. Each time these talks re-commence, Iran has a side-line operation that otherwise would terminate the talks, but in Obama’s world with John Kerry in the lead….not so much.
Update with more details:
WASHINGTON — Iranian vessels fired upon a cargo ship flagged to the Marshall Islands Tuesday morning, forcing the ship to travel deeper into Iranian waters — and setting off another round of tensions between Iran and the US.
Col. Steven Warren, Pentagon spokesman, confirmed that Iranian patrol vessels intercepted the shipping vessel Maersk Tigris around 5 a.m. Washington time. At that time, the vessels ordered the ship to travel deeper into Iranian waters. It is not clear if the Maersk had inadvertently traveled into Iranian territory.
When the Maersk did not respond immediately, the Iranian vessels fired shots across the bow of the cargo ship, which then complied with the order. The Iranian forces then boarded the vessel.
Warren said the ship is now located in the “vicinity” of Larak Island, in the Strait of Hormuz. According to VesselFinder.com, the ship was traveling from Jeddah in Saudi Arabia to Jebel Ali in the UAE.
Although the Marshall Islands are a sovereign nation, the US has “full authority and responsibility for security and defense” of the islands, according to a State Department fact sheet. That puts a US response in play in what represents an escalation of the standoff between Iran and the US.
After receiving a distress signal from the cargo ship, Naval Forces Central Command dispatched the destroyer Farragut to proceed at best speed to the location of the Maersk and has sent a single maritime patrol and reconnaissance aircraft to observe the situation, Warren said. He did not clarify what that aircraft was, but the Navy counts both the P-3 and P-8 under that designation.
Warren said that it is “unlikely” Farragut would enter Iranian territory.
He added that there were no American citizens onboard the vessel, which has a crew of about 30.
Warren said that at first glance the situation “seems to be provocative” on the part of the Iranian ships, but noted that there are still gaps of information about the initial incident.
“It is inappropriate” on the part of the Iranian forces, he added.
The past week has seen a spike in tensions between the two countries after US Navy ships began shadowing a convoy of Iranian cargo ships that the Pentagon believed may be carrying weapons to aid militant forces in Yemen.
That situation dispersed last week when the Iranian convoy turned away from Yemen, but no doubt remains fresh in the minds of both nations.
Asked if the seizure of the Maersk was retaliation for last week’s standoff, Warren said there was “no way to know” at this time.
Craig Allen, a professor at the University of Washington with an expertise in maritime law, called Iran’s actions “highly unusual.”
“Iran often beats its chest about shutting down this strait as a countermeasure to Western aggression, but it’s all been talk up to this point,” Allen said. “Actually pulling a commercial vessel out and pulling it into an Iranian port, I’m shocked.”
Allen explained that the Strait of Hormuz operates under the law of transit passage as laid out by a 1982 UN convention on the law of the sea. Although neither the US nor Iran signed that convention, the nations have treated the rules of navigation transit as legally binding.
The rules of transit passage guarantees any vessel the right to use the strait with only “very limited” restrictions, Allen said. Those restrictions include if the ship is not proceeding without delay through the strait or is excessively polluting.
Those rules seem to be broad enough that Iran could claim a violation — it would be easy to claim the shipping vessel was moving too slowly through its waters or dumped trash overboard — yet Allen said such actions are extremely rare.
While acknowledging Iran could have been responding to the US actions last week, Allen brought up a slightly different possibility, one that could set the naval status quo of the region on its side.
“Obviously, the Iranians and Saudis aren’t getting along right now,” Allen said, before noting that the ship came from a Saudi port. “Maybe Iran believes the rules are shifting to the law of naval warfare with Saudi Arabia… The fact it’s coming out of Saudi Arabia, I have to think the Iranians somehow are connecting this to the Saudi action on behalf of the government.”
It was just a handful of days ago, that the Pentagon re-positioned naval assets in the region to ensure the free access to shipping lanes as told to us by State Department spokesperson, Marie Harf. That does not appear to be working well.
As reported by NAVCENT, which is Naval Central Command officials:
BREAKING: Iran Seizes Marshall Island Ship; U.S. Destroyer En Route
This is a breaking news story and will be updated as the situation develops.
Iranian navy vessels shot at a Marshall Island-flagged cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz and directed it further into Iranian territorial waters, the Pentagon confirmed. U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) has sent aircraft to observe and directed USS Farragut (DDG-99) to proceed to the area.
After the cargo ship was surrounded by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) patrol craft, “the master was contacted and directed to proceed further into Iranian territorial waters,” according to a statement from Pentagon spokesman Steve Warren.
“He declined and one of the IRGCN craft fired shots across the bridge of the Maersk Tigris. The master complied with the Iranian demand and proceeded into Iranian waters in the vicinity of Larak Island.”
Warren said that NAVCENT is in touch with the shipping company and continues to monitor the situation. The shipping company told NAVCENT there are no Americans onboard, he added.
According to Vessel Finder, the container ship made its last port stop in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, after several stops earlier in the month throughout Turkey, and was headed to Jebel Ali, United Arab Emirates. The ship was expected to reach its destination at 21:30 UTC/Zulu time. Instead, the ship was last reported at 14:20 Zulu off the coast of Bandar Abbas, Iran, near the narrowest part of the Strait of Hormuz. Warren said the IRGCN vessels surrounded the cargo ship at 0905 Zulu.
The following is the complete statement from the Pentagon:
“At approximately 0905 Zulu, April 28, M/V Maersk Tigris, a Marshall Islands-flagged cargo vessel, was approached by several Iranian IRGCN patrol vessels while in Iranian territorial waters transiting inbound in the Strait of Hormuz. The master was contacted and directed to proceed further into Iranian territorial waters. He declined and one of the IRGCN craft fired shots across the bridge of the Maersk Tigris. The master complied with the Iranian demand and proceeded into Iranian waters in the vicinity of Larak Island. NAVCENT directed a DDG (USS Farragut) to proceed at best speed to the nearest location of Maersk Tigris, and directed aircraft to observe the interaction between the Maersk vessel and the IRGCN craft. NAVCENT is communicating with representatives of the shipping company and we continue to monitor the situation. According to information received from the vessel’s operators, there are no Americans aboard.”