Iran nuclear plans: Bushehr fuel to be unloaded

The Bushehr nuclear plant has been hit by repeated delays

Iran has confirmed it is having to remove nuclear fuel from the reactor at the Bushehr power plant, the latest in a series of delays to hit the project.

On Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it had new information on "possible military dimensions" to Iran's nuclear plans, which Iran says are purely peaceful.
The IAEA will supervise the unloading of fuel from Bushehr, Iran's nuclear envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh said.
Iran began the Bushehr project in 1976.
Iran's Fars news agency says the fuel is being removed for "technical reasons".
The fuel at Bushehr is being provided by Russia, which built the plant and whose engineers will carry out the unloading, under the supervision of the IAEA.
"Upon a demand from Russia, which is responsible for completing the Bushehr nuclear power plant, fuel assemblies from the core of the reactor will be unloaded for a period of time to carry out tests and take technical measurements," Mr Soltanieh said, according to the semi-official Isna news agency.
Computer virus? The BBC's Tehran correspondent, James Reynolds, says diplomats suggest the entire core of the Bushehr plant is being replaced - potentially a serious problem.
There has been some speculation that the Stuxnet computer virus may be responsible, our correspondent says.
Analysts say Stuxnet - which caused problems at another Iranian enrichment facility last year - has been specially configured to damage motors commonly used in uranium-enrichment centrifuges by sending them spinning out of control.
Some experts believe that the problems at Bushehr call into question the safety and effectiveness of Iran's nuclear facilities as a whole, our correspondent says.
The IAEA report - obtained by the BBC and made available online by the Institute for Science and International Security (Isis) - says Iran is "not implementing a number of its obligations."
These include "clarification of the remaining outstanding issues which give rise to concerns about possible military dimensions to its nuclear programme".
Six world powers are negotiating with Iran over its nuclear programme, and the country is subject to United Nations Security Council sanctions over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment.
Enriched uranium can be used for civilian nuclear purposes, but also to build atomic bombs.

Iran nuclear plans: UN concern over 'military angle'

Iran has always denied its nuclear programme is aiming to develop weapons

The UN's nuclear watchdog says it has received new information on "possible military dimensions" to Iran's nuclear development programme.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the report raised "further concerns" about Iran's activities.
It urged Tehran to co-operate fully with its investigations in alleged weapons experiments, saying it had not done since 2008.
Iran insists its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.
The IAEA report was obtained by the BBC and made available online by the Institute for Science and International Security (Isis).
It says Iran is "not implementing a number of its obligations including clarification of the remaining outstanding issues which give rise to concerns about possible military dimensions to its nuclear programme".
The country was also "not providing the necessary co-operation to enable the Agency to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities".
"Based on the agency's analysis of additional information since August 2008, including new information recently received, there are further concerns which the agency also needs to clarify with Iran," says the report.
Among those concerns were that Iran was not engaging with the IAEA on allegations that it was developing a nuclear payload for its missiles.
Six world powers are negotiating with Iran over its nuclear programme, and the country is subject to United Nations Security Council sanctions over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment.
Enriched uranium can be used for civilian nuclear purposes, but also to build atomic bombs.
The UN has imposed four sets of sanctions on Iran over the years.
While these have made it more difficult for Iran to acquire equipment, technology and finance to support its nuclear activities, they have not stopped trading in oil and gas - the major sources of Iran's income.

Italian Report Details Arms Sales to Libya

ROME - Italy has sold Libya explosives, gun targeting equipment and other military hardware worth tens of millions of euros (dollars) in the past two years, Italian daily Corriere della Sera reported on Feb. 26.
The newspaper quoted an official report from the Italian interior ministry that listed signed contracts as well as ongoing negotiations between Libya and several major Italian defense companies including industry giant Finmeccanica.

Missile systems maker Mbda Italia signed a deal worth 2.5 million euros in May 2009 to supply Libya with "material for bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles," the interior ministry report was quoted as saying.
Helicopter maker Augusta Westland signed two contracts with Libya in October 2010 worth 70 million euros. Also last year, Selex Sistemi Integrati signed a 13-million-euro deal to provide Libya with gun targeting equipment.
Italy and its former colony Libya signed a friendship treaty in 2008 that opened the way for major business deals. Italy is now Libya's top trade partner and Italian energy major ENI is the biggest foreign energy producer in Libya.
Saturday's report said artillery company Oto Melara had also begun talks with Libya in November 2010 for "weapons or weapons systems with a caliber of more than 12.7 mm, as well as material, spare parts, know how and equipment."
This year, military shipmaker Intermarine Spa started negotiations with Libya for contracts worth a total of 600 million euros.
Selex Sistemi Integrati, Augusta-Westland and Oto Melara are also in talks with Libya for contracts totaling 150 million euros.

Russia Vows to Sell Missiles to Syria

MOSCOW - Russia announced Feb. 26 that it intended to fulfill its contract to supply Syria with cruise missiles despite the turmoil shaking the Arab world and Israel's furious condemnation of the deal.
"The contract is in the implementation stage," news agencies quoted Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov as saying.

Russia initially agreed to send a large shipment of anti-ship Yakhont cruise missiles to Syria in 2007 under the terms of a controversial deal that was only disclosed by Serdyukov in September 2010.
The revelation infuriated Israel and the United States and there had been speculation that Russia would decide to tear up the contract amid the current turmoil plaguing North Africa and the Middle East.
Israel - which is still technically in a state of war with Syria and fears its close ties with Iran - suspects that the shipment is ultimately aimed at supplying Hezbollah militants in neighboring Lebanon.
The disputed sale is believed to be worth at least $300 million and is meant to see Syria receive 72 cruise missiles in all.
Russia has not officially confirmed making any Yakhont deliveries to date.
But Interfax cited one unnamed military source as saying that Russia had already sent Syria two Bastion coastal defense systems that can include up to 36 Yakhont missiles each.
The feared systems can only operate when equipped with radar and target detection helicopters and it was not clear from Serdyukov's comments which supplies - if any - had already been received by Syria.
Serdyukov's comments come amid Russian efforts to keep its military supply lines open to the Middle East despite the wave of revolutions and social unrest currently sweeping the region.
A source in the Russian arms exports industry said this week that the fall of the region's regimes may see the country lose about $10 billion dollars in contracts.
Serdyukov himself confirmed that the unrest may force Russia to give up some of its Soviet-era clients in the Arab world.
"There is a chance we might lose something," the defense minister said on a visit on visit to Russia's Pacific port city of Vladivostok.
"But I hope that the main weapons and military equipment agreements will be fulfilled," Serdyukov said.
Russia's sales to Syria have come under particularly close scrutiny because of fears that Moscow may be also covertly assisting Damascus' nascent nuclear program.
The head of the country's arms export corporation in October denied that Russia had also signed an agreement to supply Syria with its latest range of MiG-31 fighter jets.
But the same agency confirmed in May that Russia was in the process of supplying Syria with a less advanced fighter jet version - the Mig-29 - along with short-range air defense systems and various armored vehicles.
Russia is the world's second-largest arms exporter behind the United States and its sales are crucial to the country's efforts to keep alive a creaking defense industry whose reforms have dragged on for years.
The military this week announced with some fanfare the start of a $650 billion rearmament drive that will add eight nuclear submarines and hundreds of warplanes to the under-equipped force by 2020.
Serdyukov said Feb. 26 that Russia intended to arm its nuclear submarines with the high-tech Bulava long-range missiles whose deployment is being delayed by a series of embarrassing test failures.
But Russia's last two Bulava launches were successful and Serdyukov said Feb. 26 that the first new missiles would be dispatched to the country's Pacific Fleet.

Gates Warns Against Iraq, Afghanistan-Style Wars

WEST POINT MILITARY ACADEMY, New York - U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned Feb. 25 against committing the military to big land wars in Asia or the Middle East, saying anyone proposing otherwise "should have his head examined."
Gates offered the blunt advice - hard won after a decade of bitter conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq - in what he said would be his last speech to cadets at the U.S. Army's premier school for training future officers.

"The odds of repeating another Afghanistan or Iraq - invading, pacifying, and administering a large third world country - may be low," Gates said.
"In my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should 'have his head examined,' as General MacArthur so delicately put it," Gates said.
Douglas MacArthur, the World War II hero of the Pacific campaign, made the comment at a meeting with then-president John F. Kennedy in 1961 regarding U.S. military intervention in mainland Asia.
Gates, a former CIA director, replaced Donald Rumsfeld in the defense job in 2006 as Iraq was spiraling into civil war and the U.S. military appeared to be facing a historic failure.
The change in leadership and a new strategy executed by Gen. David Petraeus helped salvage the situation, and U.S. forces now appear on schedule to leave the country at the end of this year.
But nearly 100,000 U.S. troops are still deeply engaged in another difficult conflict in Afghanistan, once again under Petraeus' command, with no exit seen before 2014.
Gates said he was not suggesting that the U.S. Army "will - or should - turn into a Victorian nation-building constabulary designed to chase guerrillas, build schools or sip tea.
"But as the prospects for another head-on clash of large mechanized land armies seem less likely, the Army will be increasingly challenged to justify the number, size, and cost of its heavy formations," he said.
Future U.S. military interventions abroad will likely take the form of "swift-moving expeditionary forces, be they Army or Marines, airborne infantry or special operations," which Gates said "is self-evident given the likelihood of counterterrorism, rapid reaction, disaster response, or stability or security force assistance missions."
Gates is set to leave his job this year, and his presentation was a farewell speech to the West Point students.
"We can't know with absolute certainty what the future of warfare will hold," Gates said, "but we do know it will be exceedingly complex, unpredictable, and - as they say in the staff colleges - unstructured."
The United States also has a poor track record at predicting the next conflict, Gates said.
"We have never once gotten it right, from the Mayaguez to Grenada, Panama, Somalia, the Balkans, Haiti, Kuwait, Iraq, and more - we had no idea a year before any of these missions that we would be so engaged," he said.
Gates praised the Army's "ability to learn and adapt," which in recent years "allowed us to pull Iraq back from the brink of chaos in 2007 and, over the past year, to roll back the Taliban from their strongholds in Afghanistan."

Tanker Victory Spells Risks For Boeing

NEW YORK - Boeing's triumph over European rival EADS for a major U.S. Air Force tanker contract poses risks amid defense spending cutbacks and multiple delays to its commercial projects.
On Feb. 24, the Defense Department declared Boeing the "clear winner" of a $30-plus billion contract to supply up to 179 refueling tankers to the Air Force.

It is undoubtedly a major prize for the firm, but industry analysts highlighted the challenges that come with submitting what the Chicago-based firm itself called an "aggressive" bid.
"Since the KC-46A is a very competitively bid fixed-price contract for both development and production phases, it carries some execution risks for Boeing," Standard & Poor's analysts said in a client note.
Particularly, they said, "given the company's substantial cost overruns on some of its commercial and military programs in recent years."
Moody's Investors Service said that the difficulties could start early for Boeing, in the initial development phase.
"The development could distract engineering resources from other key programs including the near-term ramp-up of the B-787 Dreamliner," said Robert Jankowitz, senior vice president at Moody's.
The tanker contract comes as Boeing is under pressure from its new 787 Dreamliner program that is now running three years behind the original schedule.
"Given Boeing's headaches getting its new passenger planes out the door, there should be concern about the company's ability to deliver the new tanker on time and on budget," said Paul Ausick of 24/7WallSt.com.
And budget will be at the forefront of policymakers' minds, as the Pentagon, like other U.S. government bodies, struggles to cut the country's massive budget deficit.
"If Boeing misses deadlines and busts budgets, it's reasonable to expect that the Congress and the Pentagon will be reluctant to go ahead with the full complement of tankers," he said.
But there are definite rewards for the company, despite the risks.
Jefferies analysts said the contract spells benefits of "a few pennies per share" in the short term, and in the long-term a healthier business.
"Tomorrow's benefit is that the award adds balance to Boeing's business base, and continues a successful product line into the foreseeable future," they said, referring to the 767 commercial aircraft that will serve as the basis for the KC-46A tanker.
The 767 production line "would have closed within five years without this win," according to Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at aerospace consultancy Teal Group.
Orders for the long-haul, wide-body plane, which entered service in 1982, have dwindled in recent years. Only three 767s were manufactured last year.
But whatever the drawbacks and advantages, the contract may not yet be in the bag.
Feb. 24 was the second time Boeing bested Airbus parent EADS for the contract in the world's largest defense market.
The contract was awarded in 2008 to EADS and U.S. partner Northrop Grumman, but the deal was canceled after the government upheld Boeing protests of a flawed process.
EADS has 10 days after the award to protest the Pentagon decision.
"The battle could go into overtime if EADS decides to appeal, and it's not out of the question given the outlook for defense spending in the years ahead," said Ausick of 24/7WallSt.com.
"Given the budget environment and increasingly high fuel costs, the (EADS) KC-30 was at a disadvantage. But there are a few Southern Republican politicians who may decide to hold up funding," Aboulafia told AFP.

IAF lost 40 planes, 16 pilots since 2008

New Delhi, Feb 23 (IANS) The Indian Air Force (IAF) lost 40 planes and 16 of its pilots in air crashes in the past three years, the Rajya Sabha was told Wednesday.
'During the last three years, from Feb 1, 2008, to Feb 17, 2011, 40 accidents of IAF aircrafts have taken place. In these accidents, 16 pilots, 24 service personnel and five civilians have lost their lives,' Defence Minister A.K. Antony said in a written reply to the upper house during question hour.

Antony said every IAF aircraft accident was thoroughly investigated by a court of inquiry to ascertain the cause and remedial measures were taken accordingly to check their recurrence.

Apart from this, the IAF had taken various measures relating to strengthening the aviation safety organisation, streamlining of accident and incident reporting procedure, analytical studies and quality audits of the aircraft fleets to identify vulnerable areas and institute remedial measures to reduce aircraft accidents, he said.

'Visit of all flying bases by senior aerospace safety functionaries of the IAF is undertaken to enhance aviation safety. Measures like Operational Risk Management and Crew Resource Management have been implemented to generate a safe flying culture,' he added.

He said the accident prevention programmes had given an added thrust to identify risk-prone and hazardous areas specific to the aircraft fleets and operational environment to ensure safe practices and procedures.

To another question, he said that in 2010, the IAF reported 12 air crashes and in these five pilots, 11 armed forces personnel and four civilians were killed.

From Jan 1 to Feb 18 this year, there was one air crash, but no pilot, service personnel or civilian was killed, he added.

A MiG-21 fighter jet had crashed Feb 4 this year, 140 km off Gwalior airfield while enroute to Jamnagar. No casualty was reported in the accident.