Man Charged With Making 200 Anthrax Threats

A New Jersey man was charged Wednesday with sending more than 200 fake anthrax threats through the mail, including one to U.S. President George W. Bush, The Star-Ledger reported (see GSN, Jan. 25).

Federal law enforcement officials charged Derek Brodie, 42, with threatening to use a weapon of mass destruction for sending the letters between May and September of last year.

Twenty of the letters were discovered at post offices in May and June 2005. The letters each contained a single sheet of paper on which “ANTHRAX” was printed in multicolored block letters.

One of the letters reached a New Jersey hospital, forcing the shutdown of the mailroom and the decontamination of several workers. However, none of the letters mailed by Brodie contained the biological agent.

In June, 19 additional letters were taken from an outgoing mailbox in Brodie’s apartment building, according to the federal complaint. The letter to the president was discovered in September in the same mailbox.

A search of Brodie’s apartment in September turned up another 11 letters and the materials used to draft the letters, the Star-Ledger reported. 

When interviewed by the FBI in November, Brodie acknowledged sending the letter to the president and writing the ones found in his apartment. He also said he sent letters to King Abdullah of Jordan and Russia’s interior minister (Maryann Spoto, Star-Ledger, Feb. 3).

Back to top

U.S. Approves Boston Infectious Disease Lab

The U.S. National Institutes of Health yesterday approved a plan to build an infectious disease research laboratory in Boston, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, July 12, 2005).

Boston University will operate the Biosafety Level 4 facility, which would join a group of U.S. laboratories in studying infectious diseases such as West Nile virus, Ebola, and those that might be used by bioterrorists.

Critics have blasted the plan to build the laboratory in a residential neighborhood.

Construction is expected to begin this month and be completed in 2008. Boston University estimates that the laboratory over two decades will produce more than 650 new jobs and nearly $3 billion for the local economy.

“We are proud to be part of the national network of dedicated scientists and researchers who will use this state-of-the-art facility to safely find treatments and cures for some of the most dangerous infectious diseases that threaten Boston, the nation and the world,” said the laboratory’s lead investigator, Mark Klempner (Brandie Jefferson, Associated Press/ABC News, Feb. 3).

Back to top

Iran, North Korea Seek to Deter United States, Official Says

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — North Korea probably has nuclear weapons and Iran is amassing capabilities in part for deterrence against the United States, the top U.S. intelligence official said yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 12).

Appearing before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, National Intelligence Director John Negroponte described the development and production of weapons of mass destruction by those and other states as “the second major threat to the safety of our nation, our deployed troops, and to our allies.”

He called the international terrorist network al-Qaeda the “top concern.”

Negroponte said Iran has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East, and views them as an “integral part of its strategy to deter — and if necessary retaliate against — forces in the region, including United States forces.”

“The danger that it will acquire a nuclear weapon and the ability to integrate it with ballistic missiles Iran already possesses is a reason for immediate concern,” he said.

Iran does not now appear interested in a war with the United States, but its desire for deterrence appears intended to enable Tehran to conduct aggressive activities, Negroponte testified. Iran has sought to increase regional influence through intimidation, while seeking to deter and reduce U.S. and Israeli power in the region, he said.

Negroponte said Iran has sought to undermine U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq, including by providing weapons and training to militant groups. He said, though, its “intentions to inflict pain on the United States in Iraq have been constrained by its caution to avoid giving Washington an excuse to attack it.”

Iran is amassing conventional power and has links to terrorist groups in part to keep U.S. military power at bay, he said.

“Iran is enhancing its ability to project its military power in order to threaten to disrupt the operations and reinforcement of United States forces based in the region, potentially intimidating regional allies into withholding support for United States policy towards Iran, and raising the costs of our regional presence for United States — for us and our allies,” he said.

Iran supports a number of terrorist groups, he said, “viewing this capability as a critical regime safeguard by deterring United States and Israeli attacks, by distracting and weakening Israel, and enhancing Iran’s regional influence through intimidation,” he said. 

He cited the Lebanese Hezbollah as Iran’s main ally and Iranian support for “Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups in the Persian Gulf, Central Asia — Central and South Asia, and elsewhere.”

European negotiations with Tehran since 2004 have so far failed to produce an agreement constraining Iranian nuclear activities (see related GSN story, today).

Negroponte said the U.S. intelligence community suspects Iran has an active nuclear weapons program that cannot yet produce weapons.

“We judge that Tehran probably does not yet have a nuclear weapon and probably has not yet produced or acquired the necessary fissile material.”

Iran denies having any nuclear weapon ambitions.

North Korea has probably sought nuclear weapons for deterrence, as well as for other reasons, according to Negroponte.

The country probably has nuclear weapons and sees them “as the best way to deter superior United States and South Korean forces, to ensure regime security, as a lever for economic gain, and as a source of prestige,” he said.

North Korea has threatened to spread its nuclear weapons abroad, he also said.

“Thus, like Iran, North Korea threatens international security and is located in a historically volatile region. Its aggressive deployment posture threatens our allies in South Korea and U.S. troops on the peninsula,” he said.

The United States and four other countries for several years have sought to negotiate an end to North Korea’s nuclear capabilities without success.

“We do not know the conditions under which North Korea might be willing to fully relinquish its nuclear weapons and its weapons program,” Negroponte said.

He said Iran and North Korea “have the highest collection priority throughout the intelligence community.”

Negroponte called al-Qaeda the foremost U.S. security concern, said the group is still actively planning attacks, and that it desires unconventional weapons capabilities. 

“Core elements still plot and make preparations for terrorist strikes against the homeland and other targets, from bases in [the] Pakistan-Afghanistan border area. They also have gained added reach through their merger with the Iraq-based network of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,” he said.

Al-Qaeda remains interested in acquiring chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons to attack the United States, he said, and added terrorist groups would more likely be the source of any such attack than another country.

“In fact, intelligence reporting indicates that nearly 40 terrorist organizations, insurgencies or cults have used, possessed, or expressed an interest in chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents or weapons,” he said. 

He said, though, the prospect of such a terrorist attack is less probable than one using conventional explosives, and would probably produce more limited destruction than if it were conducted by a state.

“Many [terrorist groups, insurgencies or cults] are capable of conducting simple, small-scale attacks, such as poisonings, or using improvised chemical devices,” he said.

Back to top

U.S. Lawmaker Launches New Iraq WMD Probe

The chairman of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has initiated a new inquiry into prewar Iraq’s suspected WMD arsenal, the New York Sun reported today (see GSN, Jan. 26).

Representative Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich) believes it is premature to conclude that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein did not have active WMD programs or stockpiles prior to the U.S.-led invasion of the country, according to the Sun.

“The chairman very much believes the issue of weapons of mass destruction is not settled yet and there are sufficient questions of organized looting, transfer to another country or party or things that may have been missed by the [Iraq] Survey Group,” Hoekstra spokesman Jamal Ware said yesterday.

Hoekstra is concerned that Iraq’s WMD-related materials could have been transferred to another country or acquired by terrorists, Ware said. Along with his own inquiry, the congressman is asking National Intelligence Director John Negroponte to look into the matter, the Sun reported.

Two U.S.-appointed weapons inspectors have found no evidence of the weapons, while Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and former Iraqi air force Gen. Georges Sada have said Iraq’s unconventional weapons were probably transferred to Syria before the war.

Former U.S. Defense Undersecretary Douglas Feith has said the question remains open.

“People talk about the former Soviet loose nukes problem. The question is whether this is a loose WMD problem,” he said. “We have not found evidence of stockpiles. But there remain lots of open questions because we have not found evidence to confirm what (Hussein) did with all the stockpiles he had.”

However, if the weapons were removed, one of the Bush administration’s justifications for war — to disarm a tyrant who could transfer weapons of mass destruction to terrorists — might have backfired and instead facilitated just such a scenario, some critics have said (Eli Lake, New York Sun, Feb. 3).

Meanwhile, a newly released edition of “Lawless World” by Philippe Sands claims that British Prime Minister Tony Blair told U.S. President George W. Bush he would support military action against Iraq while a U.N. resolution authorizing an invasion was still pending, the London Evening Standard reported today.

A memo from a January 2003 meeting between the leaders quotes Bush as saying that if diplomats did not approve the resolution, “military action would follow anyway.” Blair reportedly replied that he was “ready to do whatever it took to disarm Saddam,” the Evening Standard reported.

The Security Council resolution “would provide an insurance policy against the unexpected, and international cover, including with the Arabs,” Blair reportedly told Bush (Joe Murphy, Evening Standard/This Is London, Feb. 3).

Back to top

IAEA Meeting on Iran to Enter Third Day

The governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency has postponed resuming its emergency meeting on Iran’s nuclear activities, Reuters reported today (see GSN, Feb. 2).

The conference is expected to reconvene tomorrow, giving the European Union time to discuss with developing states the text of a draft resolution to report Iran to the U.N. Security Council, diplomats in Vienna said (Reuters, Feb. 3).

U.S. and European delegates to the agency today worked to boost support for the resolution, the Associated Press reported.

Diplomats said the text was almost certain to be adopted. However, because sponsors wanted to gain as much support as possible among board members, diplomats said the meeting would continue into the weekend.

After China and Russia agreed Monday to join the other three permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — France, the Unites Kingdom and the United States — in supporting referral, opposition to the move has dwindled to a few nations. Opponents include Cuba, Spain and Venezuela, while India is expected to support the resolution, the Associated Press reported.

“There’s a solid majority in favor of reporting,” chief U.S. delegate to the agency Gregory Schulte told AP on Wednesday (George Jahn, Associated Press I/ABCNews.com, Feb. 3).

Russia’s top envoy to the agency, Grigory Berdennikov, said his country now backs sending a “serious signal” to Tehran and supported the draft resolution as written, Knight Ridder reported today.

China’s vote in favor of the draft also remained likely, according to Knight Ridder, though its delegate reiterated Beijing’s position that diplomacy remains the best tactic.

“China hopes Iran resumes suspension of all nuclear research and development and resumes talks with the European Union as soon as possible,” Ambassador Wu Hailong said. “In the meantime, we also hope the other side keeps calm and demonstrates patience and flexibility so as to avoid complicating the situation” (Hannah Allam, Knight Ridder, Feb. 3).

The votes of the 16 board members from the Nonaligned Movement remained in question after yesterday’s debate, the Washington Post reported today.

The bloc said in a statement read by Malaysian Ambassador Rajmah Hussain that a second IAEA on referral in March would be legally necessary. That could indicate the nations are prepared to support the resolution this week as a first step on sending the case to the Security Council (John Ward Anderson, Washington Post, Feb. 3).

Iran warned today it might end its consideration of Moscow’s compromise proposal to enrich Iran’s uranium in Russia if it is reported to the Security Council, AP reported.

In case of referral, “there will be no way we can continue with the Russian proposal,” said Javad Vaidi, deputy head of Iran’s National Security Council.

“It means that the U.S. and the EU-3 are intending to kill two issues: first to stop diplomacy and second to kill the Russian proposal,” he said, referring to European powers France, Germany and the United Kingdom.

“I advise them not to make a historical mistake,” he said.

Meanwhile in Tehran, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani said a Security Council referral would be a “black page” in history.

“There can’t be cruelty clearer than this,” said Rafsanjani (George Jahn, Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, Feb. 3).

In Washington, a U.S. State Department official said yesterday that diplomatic efforts to resolve the issue were far from over.

“We have seen encouraging signs over the past several weeks, and in particular over the past few days, of the growing determination of the international community to prevent Iran from succeeding in its quest to produce nuclear weapons,” Acting Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation Stephen Rademaker told the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

Rademaker reiterated the Bush administration’s view that Tehran concealed its nuclear activities for almost 20 years because they are not, as Iranian leaders have claimed, strictly peaceful.

“An Iranian regime with nuclear weapons is simply unacceptable,” he added.

U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), speaking at the same meeting, said that with or without nuclear weapons, the Iranian government “is still the world’s foremost sponsor of terror and a vicious tyrant to its own people.” 

Brownback yesterday proposed $100 million in U.S. spending in fiscal 2006 for pro-democracy efforts in Iran and an end to World Bank lending to the country. 

Brownback, co-chairman of the U.S. Helsinki Commission on human rights, said the diplomatic effort on Iran’s nuclear program is one part of what should be a two-pronged U.S. strategy on Iran, with promoting democracy being the second. 

However, given the continued high level of U.S. military commitment in neighboring Iraq, he said militarily imposed “regime change” in Iran should not be on any U.S. agenda.

“Regime change can happen from within. … I don’t see any viable military options here,” he said.

“What I’m talking here is democracy-building, civil society-building and civil disobedience-building ... where people take the power to the streets,” he said.

Brownback said Iranian citizens have been imprisoned and killed for challenging their leadership, but “we shouldn’t back away from ... encouraging them” (Marina Malenic, Global Security Newswire, Feb. 3).

Back to top

U.S. Energy Department Radiation-Detection Center to Respond to DHS Needs, Chief Says

By Joe Fiorill
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — A new Energy Department unit billed as the main U.S. radiation-detection laboratory will take some cues from a Homeland Security Department office set up last year, the director of the DOE project said this week (see GSN, Jan. 11).

The Center for Radiation Detection Materials and Systems, part of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, will seek to build on existing Oak Ridge strengths, Director Lynn Boatner said in an interview. The Tennessee center will develop new detection technology and will work to make new technology quickly deployable, he said, by agencies such as Homeland Security’s year-old Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.

“We’re going to be an organization that hopefully does work for … and with” the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, Boatner said. “We’re responding directly to their needs and their requirements.”

The Oak Ridge center has already responded to several calls for proposals for new detection projects from the Homeland Security unit, Boatner said. He said the center would focus heavily on making new technology usable quickly.

“One of the things that we’re emphasizing in this work is the rapid movement and transfer of new developments and new technology into systems — fieldable systems for application in the field, for monitoring radiation in the areas in which [the center’s consumers are] interested,” he said.

Post-Sept. 11 worries about a radiological “dirty bomb” attack spurred the creation last year of the Homeland Security detection unit, which the agency describes as “a single accountable organization … to develop the global nuclear detection architecture and acquire and support the deployment of the domestic detection system.”

Last month, Oak Ridge announced the creation of its detection center, which it said would “establish ORNL as the nation’s central national laboratory for innovation and development in the field of radiation detection materials and systems.”

“By virtue of a very long history going back almost to the foundation of the laboratory during World War II,” Boatner said this week, “Oak Ridge National Laboratory has built up a really very, very strong component of capabilities, expertise, experience, equipment and so on in the area of materials synthesis and single-crystal growth.”

The director said the new center would seek to build on those strengths, which can be avenues to improved detector sensitivity, and to bring into a single unit research and development activities that are now scattered around the Oak Ridge campus. The center now exists as an organizational structure but does not have its own building, a state of affairs Boatner said he would like to change.

“Our ultimate goal, of course, is to have a separate laboratory facility where people are brought together sort of geographically,” he said.

“The reason that we decided to do this was to really try to centralize and focus our activities,” he said.   “This grew out of an increased need for an emphasis on the development of new and improved systems. … Certainly the events of the last few years, I think, have emphasized the need to really have systems that look for and interdict potentially dangerous materials, of which radioactive materials are just one category.”

Back to top

Chemical Weapons Suspected on Oahu Army Base

Nearly 150 possible chemical munitions have been found at the Schofield Barracks on the Hawaiian island of Oahu, KHON2 News reported yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 31, 2005).

Witnesses and disposal experts said the rounds and mortars contain phosgene, mustard agent and the tear gas chloropicrin.

Up to 70 private contract workers have been clearing land at Range 5 of the base since 2004. One employee’s eyes were reportedly burned while examining a projectile.

“I think the Army should have taken out an entire list of everything that was recovered, and all the health problems associated with each one of those items, for every single person who has worked on that site,” said a worker exposed to the weapons.

The Army has denied such requests while an investigation is under way of what it calls “suspect” rounds. In December, commanding Gen. Benjamin Mixon said he was unaware of any chemical weapons on the base.

“We’re doing some cleaning in the impact area now of basic ordnance,” Mixon said. “It’s a basic part of the process for improving for Stryker [Brigade], and we haven’t found anything to date that concerns us” (Gina Mangieri, KHON2 News, Feb. 2).

Back to top

VX Processing Costs at Newport Set at $1.2 Billion

Cost estimates for destruction of VX nerve agent at the U.S. Army’s Newport Chemical Depot in Indiana have reached $1.2 billion, the Terre Haute Tribune-Star reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 19).

Contractor Parsons Technologies is due to receive $782 million as the designer and operator of the neutralization facility. Of this amount, $196 million is for a recent extension of Parson’s work from seven months to 30 months, according to Col. Jesse Barber, project manager for the Army’s Alternative Technologies and Approaches Project.

This contract does not cover the destruction of hydrolysate wastewater produced during weapons processing. More than 2 million gallons of the substance is expected to be created.

Hydrolysate produced to date is being stored at Newport. Barber said he hopes the waste will eventually be shipped to a hazardous wastewater treatment facility for disposal. “We are waiting for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report on DuPont’s new technologies,” he said. “The CDC report is expected within a few months” (see GSN, Oct. 25, 2005).

“Our goal is to neutralize four one-ton containers of VX per day. The CDC has already approved transporting the hydrolysate,” he continued. “I expect it to approve DuPont’s new technology for final treatment of the hydrolysate. If I can destroy the hydrolysate within the next 12 months, we will meet our 2007 deadline.”

Current plans have the waste product headed to New Jersey for disposal at the DuPont plant. If this falls through, it would cost $360,000 per day to keep the waste at Newport, Barber said. 

Barber added that he would review alternative proposals for destruction of the byproduct if the Centers for Disease Control fails to approve DuPont’s technology (Patricia Pastore, Tribune-Star, Feb. 2)

Back to top

Djibouti Joins the Chemical Weapons Convention

Djibouti has joined the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons announced Tuesday (see GSN, Oct. 20, 2005).

The African nation deposited its instrument of ratification with the United Nations on Jan. 25, and will become a state party to the treaty on Feb. 24.  It is the 176th nation to ratify the pact, according to an OPCW release.

In addition, the treaty-implementing organization signed a memorandum of understanding with the African Union on Jan. 24 in an effort to persuade eight remaining African countries to join the convention (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons release, Jan. 31).

Back to top

Capitol Hill Missile Defense War Game Questioned

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — A U.S. congressman and some nongovernmental analysts have questioned the suggested realism of a missile defense war game played on Capitol Hill last week, challenging the computer-programmed assumptions about the key Ground-based Midcourse Defense system’s interception ability and the quality of the threat it faced (see GSN, Jan. 25).

The ground-based system’s effectiveness has not yet been demonstrated through operationally realistic testing, said Representative Rush Holt (D-N.Y.) in a letter sent to colleagues last week.

“The values used in the simulation are not based on real data — yet they determine what comes out of the simulation.   This should give you considerable skepticism about what these simulations may be showing about actual defense capabilities,” he wrote.

Furthermore, the game’s assumption that the attacking country would not field simple countermeasures to conceal its warheads simplified the challenge of interception unrealistically, according to David Wright, a missile defense analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“It seems to me they’re emphasizing all of these great things they can do, all these high-tech components, how they can tie these components together, and they’re sort of consciously ignoring the elephant in the room, which is that none of this does any good if you can’t find the target,” he said.

The game produced by the Missile Defense Agency was played some 30 times last week by about 170 people, mostly legislative staff, but also journalists and two lawmakers. 

The unclassified computer-programmed games, played using interconnected computers and communications devices, were intended to give players a “realistic” illustration of the disputed capabilities of U.S. ballistic missile defense systems being put into place, according to organizers.

“Our objective here is simply to increase the understanding of the system,” said retired Navy Vice Adm. David Frost, president of Frost & Associates, a private consulting firm in Colorado Springs. 

“The weapons you’re going to see are close to real, we’re not actually putting the exact classified parameters for these weapons into this computer, but its close enough to give you a feel for what’s going on,” he said.

“Having participated last year in a missile defense war game, I can attest to the realism and complexity of the interactive simulations,” said Senator Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) in a statement distributed at a game played by reporters on Jan. 24.

The game postulated a medium- and long-range missile attack against the United States, Japan and South Korea, by a fictional country located near and apparently representing North Korea.

The game’s scenario used systems currently in place, or expected soon to be fielded for use by the U.S. military as part of the developmental, multisystem missile defense system. They included long-range Ground-based Midcourse Defense interceptors, short-to-medium-range Patriot Advanced Capability 2 interceptors and Aegis Standard Missile 3 interceptors.

The Missile Defense Agency has fielded 10 long-range interceptors so far to operate as part of the system and has received congressional funding to buy 40 more.

A key unrealistic element, according to Holt and others, was the programmed assumption about the probability of each GMD interceptor hitting an enemy warhead streaking through space.

The game presumed each interceptor would have a 70-percent chance of knocking out a warhead. As the game played by reporters played out, nine of 10 interceptors were fired, striking six warheads and missing one. One interceptor failed to leave its silo — as did two in flight tests in late 2004 and early 2005.

A “takeaway” lesson from the exercise, Frost said, was that “it would have been nicer to start with 20 defensive missiles instead of 10. Then you could have shot two at everything and see what happens.”

Holt in his letter questioned whether the chosen kill probability necessarily reflected reality, since the interceptors have never been subjected to operational testing to demonstrate how they would perform against a real threat.

“Because of the extremely limited testing program of U.S. missile defense systems, little or nothing is known about the value of key parameters [reflecting capability assumptions] that need to be put into such simulations,” he wrote.

He cited the recent conclusion by the Pentagon’s acting director of operational, test and evaluation, David Duma, who last year wrote that “there is
insufficient evidence to support a confident assessment” that the U.S. ground-based system provides even limited defense” (see GSN, Jan. 20).

“This is a garbage-in, garbage-out situation,” Philip Coyle, a former senior Pentagon testing director, said in an interview. “If you program your systems with high-performance capability and high reliability in the war game, that’s how they’re going to perform. But that’s not related to reality, where they haven’t achieved yet these kinds of performance reliabilities, even in the scripted tests they’ve done.”

Another criticism has been the game’s assumptions about the threat. It assumed the attacking country could field ICBMs capable of reliably launching warheads at U.S. mainland and Hawaiian Island targets.

North Korea has not demonstrated such a capability, having refrained from flight-testing longer-range ballistic missiles since a suspected satellite launch failed in 1998. There has been speculation, though, that Pyongyang has tried to advance its program by having its technology tested by Iran.

The war game also assumed that the attacking country launching ICBMs would not field countermeasures such as chaff or Mylar balloons to confuse the missile defense systems, according to its organizers.

“We don’t anticipate that the current threat would have countermeasures,” Frost told Global Security Newswire after the game. He was the deputy commander of the U.S. Space Command and earlier the vice commander of NORAD and currently is a member of the advisory boards at U.S. Strategic Command, Northern Command, Air Force Space Command.

Critics said it is unrealistic that a country deploying ICBMs and nuclear warheads would not want and be able to field countermeasures to make the attack more effective.

“The scenario just isn’t consistent it seems to me,” said Union of Concerned Scientists analyst Wright.

He co-authored a report in 2000 that argued that even simple countermeasures would drop the effectiveness of missile defense down toward zero.

“Instead of having eight interceptors against seven targets, suppose each of the missiles released 30 decoys. Now you’ve got eight interceptors against over 200 targets. You can pretty easily confuse the defense by having them see a lot of things they don’t know the signatures of because they haven’t seen them before,” he said.

Frost, speaking at the war game for reporters, suggested countermeasures were a concern of the future.

“You’ve always got to worry about discrimination as things get more sophisticated and there are several programs that are dealing with that,” he said.

He cited research to improve discrimination of warheads from decoys, to enable missiles to fire multiple miniature kill vehicles from a single warhead, and to develop boost-phase defenses for intercepting ICBMs before warheads and countermeasures can separate from the boosting rockets.

Back to top