The Center for Defense Information
Center for Defense Information
1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW * Washington, DC 20036
(202)332-0600 * Fax (202)462-4559 * www.cdi.org
| January 6, 2000 |
| January 6, 2000 |
Peacekeeping Missions in the 21st Century
Colonel Dan Smith, USA (Ret.), Chief of Research, dsmith@cdi.org
With four new missions created in 1999 and only two ended, the count of UN peacekeeping missions stood at 17 on January 1, 2000. In November and December the U.N. Security Council extended a number of missions, and this month it will have to consider the same action for three more as their mandates are due to expire in January.
Also in December the Security Council created a new inspection regime to oversee dismantling and destruction of Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and biological warfare complexes. Known as UNMOVIC -- Iraq Monitoring, Verification & Inspection Commission -- this organization is not, strictly speaking, a peacekeeping mission in the classic sense although its purpose is to advance peace in the Gulf region. However, until Iraq agrees to admit UNMOVIC inspectors, this mission will remain dormant.
The list of current missions (including UNMOVIC), their start dates, and current expiration dates are presented in Chart Form at: http://www.cdi.org/issues/un/
The Security Case Against Wen Ho Lee Raises More Questions than Answers
Dr. Nicholas Berry
Most espionage cases made public reveal the answers to all the familiar questions about spying -- the motives, methods, evidence, tracking, and apprehension.
The strange case of Wen Ho Lee, the fired and indicted Los Alamos nuclear scientist, does the opposite. It raises question after question without answers.
The 60-year-old, Taiwan-born naturalized American citizen was fired from his Q-clearance job at Los Alamos National Laboratory in March 1999 on grounds that he tampered with classified documents and failed to report meetings with Chinese nuclear scientists during authorized trips to Beijing. In fact, Lee has been under investigation since 1998 over the alleged transfer to China of information on the advanced W-88 nuclear warhead. Weeks after his firing, it was discovered that Lee had downloaded highly classified information to his unauthorized personal computer. Eight months later, on December 10, l999, Lee was indicted on 59 felony counts, 39 for violating the Atomic Energy Act and 20 for mishandling classified information. He could receive life imprisonment. On December 29, a federal judge denied Lee bail.
Mystery surrounds the case. The following questions remain unanswered or have answers that make little sense:
1. Why does the Federal Government make this such a high-profile case when, by its own admission, it lacks sufficient evidence to charge Lee with espionage? After four years of investigation by 60 agents, the FBI presented no evidence at the bail hearing to indicate that Lee had passed information to foreign governments. The FBI could only plead that he might do so if let out on bail!
2. If Lee did not pass information in the eight months between his firing and his indictment, why would he pass on information when out on bail and under heightened, 24-hour FBI surveillance? It is unlikely that Wen Ho Lee is both a master spy and a dumbbell.
3. Why emphasize his ethnicity? His indictment mentions nothing about spying for China, yet China underlies the Federal case. If nearly half of American scientists were not Asian, it might be understandable. Because of the emphasis on ethnicity, Asian-Americans understandably have expressed alienation, bitterness, and anger at the anti-Chinese climate created by the case.
4. Why would Lee pass highly sensitive design data to Mainland China when he is known to be an avid supporter of Taiwanese independence? Lee has legally and openly supported Taiwan's nuclear program since the late 1970s. Taiwan's six reactors provide one-quarter of the island's electrical energy. True, Taiwan has engaged in secret nuclear research, but wouldn't any military use of nuclear energy be used to deter the Mainland?
5. Why would the U.S. want to cut scientific research ties to China when, by most accounts, these ties accrue more information than they reveal? The 1999 congressional Cox Report, which accused China of widespread spying, and the furor over the Lee case, have ended the U.S.-Chinese Technical Arms Control Program and other scientific exchanges. Commenting on this loss, former CIA deputy director Richard Kerr said: "We got more out of those Chinese visits than they got," including data on the Chinese DF-31 missile, its warhead and its telemetry.
6. How can Lee prove that he destroyed, as he said he did, seven of the ten unauthorized tapes on which were recorded the classified information? Lee offered to take a polygraph test to verify his claim that he destroyed the tapes. Obviously, destroyed tapes no longer exist and cannot be produced. If they could be, then they were not destroyed. The seven tapes have not been found.
7. Why hold Lee in solitary confinement, with only one hour per week allowed for family visits and with only constant FBI presence? With his trial still unscheduled and perhaps a year away, the terms of his incarceration seem disproportionate to the charges.
Not all questions cast doubt on the federal investigation and indictment. Very troubling are a series of questions on Lee's behavior. Why did he lie to the Los Alamos computer when he indicated that the material he was downloading was unclassified? Why did he destroy, if he did, seven tapes but not the other three? And most intriguing, why did he download information containing design information on advanced nuclear warheads in the first place, information apparently unrelated to his current tasks?
What Next For the Pentagon?
Christopher Hellman, Senior Analyst, chellman@cdi.org
Although the official release of the White House's budget request for Fiscal Year 2001 is not until February 7, statements by Administration and Pentagon officials, coupled with a little educated guessing, allows one to forecast what the military's priorities will be for next year and over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP).
Overall military spending will continue to rise; the question is, by how much? Both the Administration and Congress seem intent on increasing the Pentagon's topline but have no clear plan on how to pay for it. Expect the Administration to suggest a modest increase, paid for with a slight nominal increase and a reliance on savings from inflation and other projected spending (as it did last year). Congress will work to raise military spending even further, and will likely rely on the same type of budgetary sleight-of-hand it used to add to the FY'00 Pentagon budget.
A significant increase in military spending would require either draconian cuts in domestic programs, a difficult move politically, especially in an election year, or a renegotiation of the spending limits set by the 1997 Balanced Budget Act. This too, could be a political liability.
The Administration has already agreed to pay for peacekeeping operations in Kosovo "off-budget" through an emergency supplemental spending package. And while on-going operations in Bosnia and Iraq were included in last year's budget, they may end up off-budget as well in FY'01.
The Air Force's highest priority will remain the F-22 fighter which became a target of increased Congressional criticism last summer. The Air Force will push for a production decision in FY'01, and it will be up to Congress to decide whether to let the program move ahead or delay it further. In addition, "Operation Allied Force" in Kosovo demonstrated shortcomings in the service's airlift, in-flight refueling and electronic warfare capabilities which will receive additional funding. The C-5 transport upgrade program will likely benefit. Other programs receiving higher priorities will be precision "smart" munitions and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs).
The Navy will continue its efforts to increase the size of its nuclear attack submarine fleet. Although the "Bottom-Up Review" calls for a fleet of 45-55 submarines and the Quadrennial Defense Review recommends 50, a recent report by the Pentagon's Joint Staff indicates a requirement for 68 boats by 2015. The Navy may also be looking to increase the number of carrier battle groups by one, to 13.
The Army, which currently receives about 25% of the Pentagon budget, will be looking to raise its share of the budgetary pie. The new Army Chief of Staff, General Eric Shinseki, recently announced an ambitious modernization plan for the service which will integrate current efforts to improve battlefield communications, and make units more mobile and easier to deploy. The "Medium Force" will require the purchase of new lighter equipment and vehicles and increase electronic digitization. Like the F-22, the Army's Crusader self-propelled artillery system will likely receive close congressional scrutiny because of its cost and weight.
Funding for development of a "Star Wars" National Missile Defense (NMD) system, which has hovered at about $1 billion for the past few years, will likely see a slight increase in FY'01. If the deployment decision currently planned for June, 2000 occurs on schedule and results in the program receiving a "go-ahead," then funding will increase, likely by $1-2 billion in the near future, and by as much as $4-5 billion in the out years.
Other things to look for include another call this year by the Pentagon for additional base closures, although Congress will remain as intransigent on the issue as they have been in recent years. "Quality of Life" issues for military personnel will receive continued attention. Additional funds will be made to address problems with housing. The FY'00 budget request included a 3.9% projected payraise for military personnel in FY'01, and the final figure will likely be in that range, depending on inflation.
Putin Lays Out his Government Priorities -- Designated acting President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, issues his political manifesto on the Russian government web site. Among other things, Putin tells his countrymen that the "might of a country as a great power is manifested more in its ability to be the leader in creating and using advanced technologies, ensuring a high level of people's well being, reliably protecting its security and upholding its national interests in the international arena, than in its military strength." Putin has replaced Boris Yeltsin, who resigned on January 1. He will hold the post until presidential elections are held sometime before April 1.
Russians Optimistic but Struggling in Chechnya -- Former Russian President Boris Yeltsin promised that the war in Chechnya would be over in two months. However, reports from the front suggest that Chechen defenses stalled Russian advance on the republic's capital Grozny (Djohar). Approaches to the city have been mined and several thousand defenders have held the Russians at bay since the offensive began in late December. The New York Times reports that Russian casualties have climbed 20 to 50 percent since the offensive against Grozny began.
Study: Brits Averted a Potential Disaster in Kosovo -- A confidential British Army report concluded that equipment and communication failures during the advance into Kosovo in June would have made a land campaign unworkable if the Serbs had put up stiff opposition. The internal report was leaked to the BBC last week. British Lieutenant-General Sir Mike Jackson, former commander of the NATO-led peacekeeping force, rejected the conclusions saying "those reports were the perception of those subordinate commanders who wrote them, frankly it's not my own judgment."
Bomb Threat at U.S. Base a Hoax -- Reports that a bomb had been planted at a U.S. Army base in South Korea this week are being treated as a hoax. The reports were made by an unnamed former U.S. soldier currently under arrest in the United States on undisclosed charges. The incident, which occurred at Camp Edwards, forced the temporary evacuation of over 3,000 South Korean civilians and 130 soldiers while the base was searched.
Growing Threats to U.S. Satellites -- U.S. military satellites face growing threats from blinding lasers and electronic jammers, according to Gen. Richard B. Myers, Commander in Chief of U.S. Space Command. So-called "laser dazzlers" could be used to blind satellite optic systems, while jammers could interfere with data transfers along system uplinks. According to Gen. Myers, the threat is real. "There have been countries that have used jamming of uplinks already."
This week on America's Defense Monitor: "Welfare for Weapons Dealers"
Exports of American weapons are often praised for creating corporate profits and sustaining high-tech jobs. But, in truth, export deals cost American taxpayers billions of dollars per year. Sales to foreign governments are heavily subsidized by U.S. taxpayers, and at the same time they are used to rationalize expensive "next-generation" weapons for the U.S. military.
Airs in Washington, DC on Sunday, January 9 at 10:30 a.m. on Channel 32.
Airs in NYC on Friday, January 14 on Channel 25 at 7:30 p.m., and on
Saturday, January 15 at 7:00 a.m. on Channel 13.
Visit our website for transcripts, CDI resources, RealVideo, and related
links.
E-mail adminfo@cdi.org with "subscribe" in the subject line for updates on new
videos.
Regular Price: $39 each
INTERNET PRICE: $29
Order at 800-CDI-3334, or on the web.