Conditions at the Border and the Cost of the Wall

Millions per mile for the border wall and defined by the General Accounting Office.

 BizPacReview

Mexico issuing transit visas to African migrants flocking to U.S.-Mexico border

Mexican immigration authorities say 424 migrants from African countries arrived at the southern state of Chiapas over two days last week.

The National Immigration Institute said Tuesday that it has issued them 20-day transit visas that will allow the migrants to reach the U.S.-Mexico border, where they plan to request asylum.

Officials call it an unusual surge and say most of the migrants first went to Brazil or Ecuador to start their journey through Latin America.

Most of the Africans presented themselves voluntarily to immigration officials in the Chiapas town of Tapachula. They did not specify their nationalities.

Immigration support staff in Tijuana has been aiding migrants from the Congo, Somalia and Ghana to arrive at the U.S. port of entry at San Isidro.

Meanwhile:

Shootouts in Mexico border city kill 11, including bystander

ABCNews: Two highway shootouts between soldiers and suspected drug gang members in a northern border city resulted in 11 dead Saturday, including a bystander caught in the crossfire, Mexican authorities reported.

The violence in Nuevo Laredo, across from Laredo, Texas, prompted the temporary closure of the highway, which is a major artery for travel and commerce between the United States and Mexico.

The Tamaulipas state government said in a statement that the armed confrontations began early Saturday when troops killed eight suspected criminals on the highway. Soldiers seized a truck and high-caliber weapons, it said.

An hour later another shootout broke out nearby in which two suspects were killed, along with a woman who was traveling in her car, authorities said.

Nuevo Laredo Mayor Carlos Canturosas said Saturday night via Facebook that the highway, which handles nearly half of the export-import cargo between Mexico and the United States, had reopened.

Nuevo Laredo has experienced high violence rates as rival factions of the Zetas drug cartel fight for control of the area.

****

In part from KGW:

Every appropriations bill has included money to secure the border. So much so that funding increased from $1.5 billion in 2005 to $2.3 billion in 2007 — eventually increasing to $3.8 billion in the 2015 fiscal year.

In 2013, Congress again tried to pass immigration reform. Again the effort failed. The border security proposals of that so-called “Gang of Eight” bill would have increased dramatically, doubling the number of full-time border patrol agents to more than 38,400. It also would have added to the construction of a physical border, including double fencing. And it would have added to the amount of virtual security like drones and mobile surveillance.

That bill would have set aside a whopping $46.3 billion over ten years to move toward the more militarized border. But with the federal government now spending nearly $4 billion per year on border security, it’s not much less than what the Gang of Eight would have hoped. Read more here.

From DHS:

Border Security Overview

Protecting our borders from the illegal movement of weapons, drugs, contraband, and people, while promoting lawful entry and exit, is essential to homeland security, economic prosperity, and national sovereignty.

Protecting Our Borders

America shares 7,000 miles of land border with Canada and Mexico, as well as rivers, lakes and coastal waters around the country. These borders are vital economic gateways that account for trillions of dollars in trade and travel each year. They are also home to some of our nation’s largest – and safest – cities and communities. Protecting our borders from the illegal movement of weapons, drugs, contraband, and people, while promoting lawful entry and exit, is essential to homeland security, economic prosperity, and national sovereignty.

Creating a Safer Border Environment

DHS works to secure our borders through the deployment of personnel, technology, and infrastructure; as well as working closely with our neighbors in Canada and Mexico, and our many federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners.

CBP Border Patrol agents, agriculture specialists, Air and Marine agents, and officers guard America’s front lines. These men and women prevent terrorists and their weapons from entering the United States while continuing their mission of seizing contraband and apprehending criminals and others who illegally attempt to enter the United States.

Through increases in Border Patrol staffing; construction of new infrastructure and fencing; use of advanced technology—including sensors, radar, and aerial assets –investments to modernize the ports of entry; and stronger partnerships and information sharing, we are creating a safer, more secure, and more efficient border environment.

Making Travel Faster and the Border Safer

 

 

What is this Clinton Teneo Anyway?

Teneo Org ChartAccording to Wikipedia, Teneo is an US-based global advisory firm that partners exclusively with the Chief Executive Officers and senior leaders of many of the world’s largest and most complex companies and organizations.[3] The firm works with clients to address a wide range of financial, reputational and transformational challenges and has opportunities by combining the disciplines of strategic communications, investor relations, investment banking, financial analytics, executive recruiting, digital analytics, corporate governance, government affairs, business intelligence, management consulting and corporate restructuring on an integrated basis. Teneo’s clients include the CEOs of many Fortune 100 companies across a diverse range of industry sectors.

 

I N T E G R AT E D  C O U N S E L  F O R  A  B O R D E R L E S S  WO R L D

From Politico, The four businesses of Teneo — which provides integrated counsel to a client list that includes FORTUNE 500 companies, philanthropies, governments and high net worth individuals – are Teneo Capital, Teneo Restructuring, Teneo Strategy and Teneo Intelligence. Ed Rollins recently joined as a public-affairs adviser.

From PRNewswire: New York City Police Commissioner Bill Bratton To Join Teneo

Teneo to launch new operating division advising major global companies and organizations on key risk identification, prevention and response.

From HumanEvents: A former MF Global employee accused former president William J. Clinton of collecting $50,000 per month through his Teneo advisory firm in the months before the brokerage careened towards its Halloween filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Teneo was hired by MF Global’s former CEO Jon S. Corzine to improve his image and to enhance his connections with Clinton’s political family, said the employee, who asked that his name be withheld because he feared retribution.

From PRNewswire: NEW YORK and LONDON, July 9, 2015 /PRNewswire/ — Teneo Holdings today announced that it has completed the acquisition of Blue Rubicon and StockWell, two of the UK’s leading strategic communications and reputation management firms.

The acquisitions of the two businesses, in addition to Teneo’s existing UK operations, will create one of the largest strategic communications practices in the European market. It will also augment Teneo’s operations in other parts of the world. All members of the Blue Rubicon and StockWell senior management team will continue as part of the Teneo leadership team. Terms of the transactions have not been disclosed.

Blue Rubicon, widely regarded as one of the most progressive strategic communications consultancies to have emerged in London in the last 20 years, provides senior counsel to some of the world’s largest companies as they navigate high-stake issues including succession planning, corporate restructuring, re-launches and post-M&A integration. Founded 15 years ago the firm has been led by Senior Partner, Fraser Hardie, CEO, Gordon Tempest-Hay, Partners Chris Jones and Fiona Joyce. Blue Rubicon today employs more than 225 people operating globally from offices in London, Doha, Dubai and Singapore.

StockWell was founded in 2010 and is led by its three Managing Partners: Tim Burt; Philip Gawith and Richard Holloway. The firm is headquartered in London and has 30 staff. StockWell specializes in providing boardroom level strategic communications advice to leading corporations and individuals across the UK, Europe and beyond.

It is intended that the London operations will be combined and co-located in London in the near future. They will report to Charles Watson in his capacity as Chairman of Teneo International.

“The acquisition of Blue Rubicon and StockWell is a transformational moment for Teneo as we continue to grow across the globe, building on our reputation as one of the world’s leading advisory firms,” said Declan Kelly, Chairman and CEO of Teneo.  

****

Then we have Justin Cooper….he was the original person that set up Bill and Hillary’s server(s). Where did he come from? Cooper is a Senior Advisor at  Teneo Holdings LLC and a member of the Clinton Foundation.

Even Chelsea Clinton wanted to be hired at Teneo, but a weird collision course was ahead and the intersection got crowded, including the Clinton Global Initiative.

Teneo has divisions that cover the spectrum of all business, industry and government. For a view of division heads click here.

So is there an underlying objective to Teneo’s business model? Yes, it appears to be called ‘activist investments’. As noted here: Dealing with activist investors

On March 19, 2014, members of the Audit Committee Leadership Network (ACLN) met in New York to discuss investor activism, in particular the activism focused on company performance and shareholder value (as opposed to political or social causes).1 In this session, members were joined by Andy Merrill, senior managing director at Teneo Strategy2.

In 2014, Teneo published a lengthy document titled “Where is the World Going”, a comprehensive look at global conditions and submissions for what leaders of industry should and can do. In short, they cannot do what respective and distant government wont allow them to do unless there is ‘activism’ in global governance and of course diplomatic objectives can influence government certainly when it comes to money, power and recognition.

Teneo distinguishes itself in from its competitors in large part through the all-encompassing approach its takes to its services. The latest aspect to the business, Teneo Intelligence, is headed up by a former an ex-CIA and Department of Defense figure and aims to identify trouble spots around the world and analyse their potential effect on global markets.

So, about all those business and industry deals across the globe? Here are but 3 examples:

Digicell,  Haiti

Uranium One, Russia

Ericsson, Iran

Hat tip to this site for packaging it all quite nicely and going the long keyboard work. Our friends at Judicial Watch have through legal proceedings provided the documents proving the crowded intersection.

In summary this Fox documentary is a good refresher that remains quite useful especially in light of the FBI releasing the server investigation documents.

 

In 2010: Hillary Clinton ordered American officials to spy on high ranking UN diplomats, including British representatives.

Top secret cables revealed that Mrs Clinton, the Secretary of State, even ordered diplomats to obtain DNA data – including iris scans and fingerprints – as well as credit card and frequent flier numbers.

All permanent members of the security council – including Russia, China, France and the UK – were targeted by the secret spying mission, as well as the Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki-Moon.

Sigh….

 

 

 

 

Russia Deploys a Military Division Within 50 Miles of U.S.

Russia will deploy a division of troops about 50 miles from the US

Chukotka kuril islands Google Maps

BusinessInsider: At a recent event, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said that a division of troops would be stationed in Chukotka, Russia’s far-east region, just slightly more than 50 miles from Alaska.

“There are plans to form a coastal defense division in 2018 on the Chukotka operational direction,” said Shoigu.

He said that the deployment was “to ensure control of the closed sea zones of the Kuril Islands and the Bering Strait, cover the routes of Pacific Fleet forces’ deployment in the Far Eastern and Northern sea zones, and increase the combat viability of naval strategic nuclear forces.”

Japan and Russia dispute ownership of the northern Kuril Islands, where Russia plans to deploy missile-defense batteries. The Bering Strait is the narrow waterway that separates Alaska from Russia.

Broadly, Russia has taken the lead in militarizing and exploring the Arctic region, as melting ice caps open up new shipping lanes between the East and West. In that context, the deployment of a division to the sparsely populated Chukotka region makes sense.

In the past, Russia has bemoaned NATO and US troop deployments near to its borders. How the US will respond to this deployment remains to be seen.

****

 IBTimes

Has Putin stolen the Kuril Islands from Japan in the same manner he took over Crimea? You be the judge.

****

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a new interview with Bloomberg News, was asked about the issue of the long-standing dispute between his country and Japan over the Kuril Islands–a series of small islets off the northern coast of Hokkaido, running up to the southern tip of the Kamchatka peninsula. Putin seemingly opened the door to a compromise with Tokyo on the dispute. “We’re not talking about some exchange or some sale,” he said. “We are talking about finding a solution where neither of the parties would feel defeated or a loser.”

Putin began by saying that there will be no trading of territories with Japan, but that Russia “would very much like to find a solution to this problem with our Japanese friends.” The Russian president also cautioned that compromise would likely have to be built on the back of trust; if Moscow “can reach a similarly high level of trust” with Tokyo “then we can find some sort of compromise.”

Are Putin’s latest comments a serious expression of diplomatic interest or a fleeting moment of optimism? After all, in the past two years, the prospects of a resolution to the long-standing Kuril Islands dispute–and Russia-Japan relations more generally–have ebbed and flowed. Shinzo Abe, the Japanese prime minister, expressed an interest in pursuing closer relations with Moscow after returning to office in 2012. However, his early overtures, while reciprocated by Russia, were derailed by Tokyo’s alignment with the West in the aftermath of Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and ensuing support for separatists in Ukraine. Tokyo, somewhat reluctantly, stood lockstep with the G7 powers against Russia and backed international sanctions.

On the Japanese side, interest in cooperation with Russia has far from evaporated. In fact, a day before Putin’s comments to Bloomberg became public, Abe established a new cabinet-level post for Hiroshige Seko, the minister of economy, trade, and industry, focused on economic cooperation with Russia. The post is meant to carry forward momentum from a brief and informal meeting between Abe and Putin earlier this year in Sochi, on Russia’s Black Sea coast. Abe’s current play with Putin is to position Japan as an enabler for Russian economic dynamism in the country’s far east. Tokyo appears to be betting that economic cooperation can build the sort of trust that Putin alluded to in his comments to Bloomberg.

There’ll be some indicators on whether we’re due for another period of bilateral warmth between Tokyo and Moscow. First of all, keep an eye out for the upcoming Abe-Putin meeting at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, which kicked off on Friday. The two leaders will be able to follow up on their deliberations in Vladivostok a few months down the line at the 2016 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, which will be held in Peru this year.

Finally, Russian military behavior in Japan’s airspace and nearby waters is a good indicator of Moscow’s feelings toward Tokyo. Russia regularly flies Tu-95 Bear strategic bombers around Japanese airspace, causing Japan’s Air Self Defense Force to scramble in response. (Moscow kicked off the year by having two Tu-95s circumnavigate Japan’s main islands.) Similarly, with tensions high in the East China Sea, any Russian involvement alongside Chinese Navy or Coast Guard vessels could be telling. (When a Chinese Navy frigate sailed into the contiguous zone around the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands earlier this summer for the first time, it was flanked by Russian naval vessels.)

Overall, the bilateral situation between the two countries remains precarious, but could be turning around. Putin’s comments and Abe’s determination to operationalize an “Eastern” strategy of sorts to build trust with Moscow might just restore the bonhomie that seemed to exist between the two countries in 2013, when the prospects for a resolution of the 71-year old Kuril Islands dispute appeared bright.

 

 

Secret Side Iran Deals Revealed and Confirmed

Note: Further side deals may occur and hat tip to Reuters. Expect immediate hearings when Congress returns. There is no shame with this administration including Barack Obama, John Kerry and Ben Rhodes.

JCPOA Exemptions Revealed

INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

REPORT

By David Albright and Andrea Stricker

September 1, 2016

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) placed detailed limitations on facets of Iran’s nuclear program that needed to be met by Implementation Day, which took place on January 16, 2016.1 Most of the conditions were met by Iran. However, we have learned that some nuclear stocks and facilities were not in accordance with JCPOA limits on Implementation Day, but in anticipation the Joint Commission had earlier and secretly exempted them from the JCPOA limits. The exemptions and in one case, a loophole, involved the low enriched uranium (LEU) cap of 300 kilograms (kg), some of the near 20 percent LEU, the heavy water cap, and the number of large hot cells allowed to remain in Iran. One senior knowledgeable official stated that if the Joint Commission had not acted to create these exemptions, some of Iran’s nuclear facilities would not have been in compliance with the JCPOA by Implementation Day.

1 The Institute for Science and International Security was neutral on whether or not the JCPOA should be implemented.

Recently the Joint Commission created a Technical Working Group to consider further exemptions to Iran’s stock of 3.5 percent low enriched uranium. This cap is set at 300 kg of LEU hexafluoride but Iran apparently has or could exceed the cap if no further exemptions are granted by the Joint Commission.

The decisions of the Joint Commission have not been announced publicly. The Obama administration informed Congress of key Joint Commission decisions on Implementation Day but in a confidential manner. These decisions, which are written down, amount to additional secret or confidential documents linked to the JCPOA. Since the JCPOA is public, any rationale for keeping these exemptions secret appears unjustified. Moreover, the Joint Commission’s secretive decision making process risks advantaging Iran by allowing it to try to systematically weaken the JCPOA. It appears to be succeeding in several key areas.

Given the technical complexity and public importance of the various JCPOA exemptions and loopholes, the administration’s policy to maintain secrecy interferes in the process of establishing adequate Congressional and public oversight of the JCPOA. This is particularly true concerning potentially agreement-weakening decisions by the Joint Commission. As a matter 2 | P a g e

of policy, the United States should agree to any exemptions or loopholes in the JCPOA only if the decisions are simultaneously made public.

Exemptions

The exemptions in effect on Implementation Day include:

1) Allowing more than 300 kg of about 3.5 percent low enriched uranium hexafluoride or equivalent mass if the LEU was in the following forms:

 Low level solid waste;

 Low level liquid waste; and

 Sludge waste.

The amount of LEU hexafluoride equivalent involved in this exemption is unknown, although these amounts if not exempted would have placed Iran over the 300 kg cap, according to one knowledgeable senior official.

2) Near 20 percent LEU in “lab contaminant” that was judged as unrecoverable. Iran had agreed in the JCPOA that all near 20 percent LEU would be in fuel elements; subsequently modified to irradiated fuel elements, albeit in many cases only lightly irradiated. The amount of LEU in the lab contaminant is unknown. The basis for judging the near 20 percent LEU unrecoverable is not known.

3) A number of large hot cells. Under the JCPOA, Iran committed for 15 years to only develop, acquire, build, or operate hot cells (containing a cell or interconnected cells), shielded cells or shielded glove boxes with dimensions less than 6 cubic meters.2 The reason is that hot cells with these dimensions could not in practical terms be used in plutonium separation efforts involving irradiated fuel. The JCPOA also stated that larger hot cells could be operated with the approval of the Joint Commission. However, prior to Implementation Day, the Joint Commission agreed to allow Iran to continue operating 19 large hot cells in three Tehran locations and one Karaj location which are in excess of the six cubic meter limitation. Although the hot cells are used in the production of medical radionuclides they can be misused for secret, mostly small-scale plutonium separation efforts and raise serious questions over the rigorousness of this JCPOA exemption on hot cells. A related question is whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regularly inspects all these exempted hot cells. Moreover, Iran is

2 According to the JCPOA, “For 15 years, Iran will only develop, acquire, build, or operate hot cells (containing a cell or interconnected cells), shielded cells or shielded glove boxes with dimensions less than 6 cubic meters in volume compatible with the specifications set out in Annex I of the Additional Protocol. These will be co-located with the modernised Arak research reactor, the Tehran Research Reactor, and radio-medicine production complexes, and only capable of the separation and processing of industrial or medical isotopes and non-destructive PIE. The needed equipment will be acquired through the procurement mechanism established by this JCPOA. For 15 years, Iran will develop, acquire, build, or operate hot cells (containing a cell or interconnected cells), shielded cells or shielded glove boxes with dimensions beyond 6 cubic meters in volume and specifications set out in Annex I of the Additional Protocol, only after approval by the Joint Commission.” 3 | P a g e

 

believed to be seeking to exploit this exemption as a precedent to further increase its number of hot cells with volumes greater than six cubic meters.

Heavy Water Loophole

The Joint Commission also decided on or prior to Implementation Day that Iran would be allowed to export heavy water in excess of the JCPOA’s 130 tonnes cap for sale on the open market even though Iran did not have a buyer for this heavy water. The Joint Commission allowed Iran to store large amounts of heavy water in Oman that remained under Iran’s control, effectively allowing Iran to exceed its cap of 130 tonnes of heavy water as it continues to produce heavy water at its Arak facility.3 As discussed in an earlier Institute report, this heavy water loophole in the JCPOA was poorly considered.4 As discussed in the report, the Institute learned that the Department of Energy’s purchase of 32 tonnes of this heavy water unfairly disrupted and negatively affected a nascent, needed North American supply chain of heavy water. The Institute warned that the loophole also risked legitimizing Iran as a nuclear supplier when it had done nothing yet to prove it would abide by international norms relating to nuclear trade or halt illicit nuclear procurements. Moreover, the deal will only encourage Iran to continue exceeding the JCPOA heavy water cap for financial gain. One surprising development is that the Arak heavy water production plant produced significantly more heavy water than expected during several months following Implementation Day. Arak produced at a rate exceeding 25 tonnes per year, compared to the expected rate of 16 tonnes per year expected prior to Implementation Day.

3 One reviewer raised the question of whether this precedent could be applied to LEU, where it would be located outside of Iran even though no buyer had been found.

4 Albright and Stricker, “U.S. Purchase of Iran’s Heavy Water: Discouraging a Dangerous Nuclear Supplier,” Institute Report, May 23, 2016. http://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/Heavy_Water_Purchase_23May2016_final.pdf

5 David Albright, “Update on Iran’s Stocks of 3.5 Percent Low Enriched Uranium: Blocking unjustified exemptions to the 300 kilogram cap,” Institute Report, May 23, 2016, Rev. May 27, 2016. http://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/Update_on_Irans_Stocks_of_35_Percent_LEU_May_23_2016_Final_rev_may_27_2016.pdf

Newly Formed LEU Exemption Working Group

In July 2016 the Joint Commission established a Technical Working Group to evaluate, apparently among other stocks, the fate of approximately 100-200 kg of less than 3.67 percent LEU in the Enriched UO2 Powder Plant (EUPP).5 This plant converted LEU hexafluoride into uranium oxide and has been mothballed under the JCPOA. Although almost all of the LEU oxide produced at this plant was shipped out of Iran, a fraction was left in the process lines and tanks on Implementation Day. This LEU was not exempted on Implementation Day and was counted as part of the 300 kg LEU cap.

Russian Permanent Representative to the International Organizations in Vienna Vladimir Voronkov told TASS in July 2016 prior to an impending Joint Commission meeting: “There are two issues that need to be addressed. These are the difficulties with enriched uranium 4 | P a g e

accumulated during the enrichment in the pipes and other devices. What has been discovered exceeds the allowed limit of 300 kilograms. And the second issue is heavy water.”6

6 “Meeting of Iran-P5+1 commission on nuclear deal to be held in Vienna July 19,” TASS Russian News Agency, July 14, 2016. http://tass.ru/en/world/888165

7 With regard to domestic fuel fabrication, the JCPOA states: “Enriched uranium in fabricated fuel assemblies and its intermediate products manufactured in Iran and certified to meet international standards, including those for the modernised Arak research reactor, will not count against the 300 kg UF6 stockpile limit provided the Technical Working Group of the Joint Commission approves that such fuel assemblies and their intermediate products cannot be readily reconverted into UF6. This could for instance be achieved through impurities (e.g. burnable poisons or otherwise) contained in fuels or through the fuel being in a chemical form such that direct conversion back to UF6 would be technically difficult without dissolution and purification. The objective technical criteria will guide the approval process of the Technical Working Group. The IAEA will monitor the fuel fabrication process for any fuel produced in Iran to verify that the fuel and intermediate products comport with the fuel fabrication process that was approved by the Technical Working Group.”

It is unknown if the Joint Commission has decided to allow Iran to exceed the 300 kg cap while the Technical Working Group evaluates this issue. However, the pattern that appears to have emerged is that Iran will likely move to violate the cap if it is not granted an exemption.

The JCPOA is silent on the issue of exempting from the 300 kg cap already existing LEU that had been produced in Iran. In fact, US officials told Institute staff in the summer of 2015 that Iran was fully expected to empty the EUPP of LEU and send it all out of the country or dilute it to natural uranium.

Although the JCPOA explicitly created exemptions to the 300 kg cap, such as Russian designed, fabricated and licensed fuel assemblies for use in Russian-supplied reactors in Iran, these exemptions do not appear to cover the exemption of any remaining LEU in the EUPP. According to the JCPOA, “All enriched uranium hexafluoride in excess of 300 kg of up to 3.67% enriched UF6 (or the equivalent in different chemical forms) will be down blended to natural uranium level or be sold on the international market and delivered to the international buyer in return for natural uranium delivered to Iran.”

The JCPOA envisions that Iran may make LEU fuel domestically in the future and contains a mechanism to exempt that LEU from the cap as long as Iran meets stringent conditions. To that end, the JCPOA states: “The Joint Commission will establish a Technical Working Group with the goal of enabling fuel to be fabricated in Iran while adhering to the agreed stockpile parameters (300 kg of up to 3.67 % enriched UF6 or the equivalent in different chemical forms).” However, the exemptions specified in the JCPOA are intended for future fuel fabrication, and do not appear applicable to LEU processed in the EUPP prior to Implementation Day.7 The JCPOA intended that existing, domestically produced LEU enriched up to 3.67 percent would be subject to the 300 kg cap and not exempted.

However, the Joint Commission has taken a different approach and has already exempted existing LEU as part of bringing Iran into compliance with the JCPOA on Implementation Day. Moreover, it did so without relying on the Technical Working Group as called for in the JCPOA. 5 | P a g e

Now, there is concern that the newly formed Technical Working Group will lay the basis to exempt more LEU from the cap. Moreover, the intention appears to be to conduct these discussions and the associated decision making about LEU exemptions in secret, without any public scrutiny.

These exemptions matter because the LEU may be recoverable by Iran in a breakout to produce highly enriched uranium, thereby lowering breakout times. Separating LEU from its chemical constituents in such products is typically straightforward.

While Iran and its allies may today view the LEU as non-recoverable, that view does not appear to be a sufficient standard to meet the JCPOA conditions or prevent the LEU’s use in a breakout. A country intent on breaking out and making highly enriched uranium as national priorities may make an entirely different calculation about the LEU’s worth and devote considerable effort to recovering the LEU, such as during a push to acquire nuclear weapons in a crisis.

Any discussion of such an important issue as exempting LEU from the 300 kilogram cap or from export should be public and subject to more rigorous oversight. The exemption process and the Joint Commission decisions should be transparent; the current arrangement has been overly secret and amounts to the generation of additional secret or confidential arrangements directly linked to the JCPOA that do not have adequate oversight and scrutiny. Moreover, the process in general raises the question of whether Iran is exploiting the exemption mechanism, outside of any public oversight, to systematically weaken as many JCPOA limitations as possible. The US administration should insist that the exemption process and decisions be public and transparent.

 

State Dept: Country Reports on Terrorism 2015

Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, all in our hemisphere get major passes from the State Department.

Related reading: The 50 most violent cities in the world

Related reading: The world’s most dangerous and safest countries revealed  Interactive map for rankings is found here.

 

Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 is submitted in compliance with Title 22 of the United States Code, Section 2656f (the “Act”), which requires the Department of State to provide to Congress a full and complete annual report on terrorism for those countries and groups meeting the criteria of the Act.

Beginning with the report for 2004, it replaced the previously published Patterns of Global Terrorism.

 

Chapters

Chapter 1. Strategic Assessment
Chapter 2. Country Reports: Africa Overview
Chapter 2. Country Reports: East Asia and Pacific Overview
Chapter 2. Country Reports: Europe Overview
Chapter 2. Country Reports: Middle East and North Africa Overview
Chapter 2. Country Reports: South and Central Asia Overview
Chapter 2. Country Reports: Western Hemisphere Overview
Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism Overview
Chapter 4: The Global Challenge of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, or Nuclear (CBRN) Terrorism
Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report)
Chapter 6. Foreign Terrorist Organizations
Chapter 7. Legislative Requirements and Key Terms

Annexes

National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism: Annex of Statistical Information [Get Acrobat Reader PDF version   ]
Terrorism Deaths, Injuries and Kidnappings of Private U.S. Citizens Overseas in 2015

Full Report

Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 (PDF)

Related reading: SUMMARY: Wilayat Sinai, an organization identified with the Islamic State, has recently suffered a series of serious blows from the Egyptian army.