FRANK ROSE MAKES REMARKS ON USING DIPLOMACY TO ADVANCE SECURITY IN OUTER SPACE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Using Diplomacy to Advance the Long-term Sustainability and Security of the Outer Space Environment
Remarks
Frank A. Rose
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance
31st Space Symposium
Colorado Springs, CO
April 16, 2015
As prepared

Introduction

Thank you for your kind introduction and the opportunity to speak to you today.

My name is Frank Rose, and I am the Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance. It’s a pleasure to be back at the Space Symposium, and I’d like to thank Elliot Pulham and all the sponsors for inviting me back again.

By way of introduction, while I am the Assistant Secretary for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance, my work at the State Department is focused on enhancing strategic stability around the world. Arms control, verification and compliance are some of the tools we use to enhance strategic stability and reassure our allies and partners that we will meet our security commitments. Given the importance of outer space to our national security, we also work on efforts to ensure the long term sustainability and security of the outer space environment.

This morning I would like to discuss steps the United States is taking diplomatically, in concert with international partners to address the growing threats to space security.


Threats to the Space Environment

First, the threat to outer space is real and growing. As Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in his recent Congressional testimony,

“Threats to U.S. space systems and services will increase during 2015 and beyond as potential adversaries pursue disruptive and destructive counterspace capabilities. Chinese and Russian military leaders understand the unique information advantages afforded by space systems and services and are developing capabilities to deny access in a conflict.”

In particular, China’s continued development of anti-satellite weapons remains a major challenge to the outer space environment. China’s 2007 anti-satellite test left thousands of pieces of debris in orbit that continues to threaten the space systems of all nations.

The 2010 U.S. National Space Policy makes it clear that it is not in the interest of anyone for armed conflict to extend into space. It states,

“The United States considers the space systems of all nations to have the rights of passage through, and conduct of operations in, space without interference. Purposeful interference with space systems, including supporting infrastructure, will be considered an infringement of a nation’s rights.”

It also states that,

“the United States will employ a variety of measures to help assure the use of space for all responsible parties, and consistent with the inherent right of self-defense, deter others from interference and attack, defend our space systems and contribute to the defense of allies space systems, and if deterrence fails, defeat efforts to attack them.”

It is not in the international community’s interest to engage in a space weapons arms race. Such a race would not bode well for the long-term sustainability of the space environment.

Indeed, protecting U.S. national security by preventing conflict from extending into space in the first place is a major goal of our diplomatic engagements. In that regard, we work to prevent conflict from extending into space via two diplomatic tracks; strengthening our deterrent posture, and encouraging responsible behavior to prevent mishaps, misper­ceptions, and the chances of miscalculation.


Strengthening Our Deterrent Posture

First, we use diplomacy to gain the support of our allies and friends. We have established numerous space security dialogues with our Allies and Partners. These dialogues help them understand the threat, as well as our diplomatic and national security goals, which is critical in persuading them to stand by our side, often in the face of tremendous pressure from our adversaries. Not only have I made numerous trips to meet with our allies in Canada, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific, I have also visited India (where we held our first space security dialogue this March), South Africa, and elsewhere in Africa to raise U.S. concerns about the threats to space systems and to discuss the way forward diplomatically. Furthermore, our Department’s leadership has also carried our message in numerous bilateral and multilateral dialogues.

Diplomacy also prepares the way for closer military-to-military cooperation and allied investment in capabilities compatible with U.S. systems. We work very closely with our interagency colleagues in the Department of Defense to make sure our efforts are synchronized so that investments by our allies and friends contribute to strengthening the resilience of our space architectures and contribute to Space Mission Assurance. The resulting deterrent effect created by such a web of integrated capabilities is greater than the sum of its individual parts.

For example, the Department of State works closely with the Department of Defense on Space Situational Awareness (or SSA) information sharing agreements with foreign partners. The United States has found international cooperation on SSA to be important, as international partnerships bring the resources, capabilities, and geographical advantages. We have also worked to strengthen military-to-military cooperation in satellite communications and space-based maritime domain awareness.


Promoting the Responsible Use of Outer Space

Second, we use diplomacy to promote the responsible use of outer space and especially strategic restraint in the development of anti-satellite weapons.

Diplomacy has an important role in responding to the development of anti-satellite weapons developments that threaten the outer space environment. Responding both privately and publicly to tests of anti-satellite systems is a critical component of our diplomatic strategy.

For example, in 2007, China faced tremendous international pressure following its destructive ASAT test, and this response from the international community appears to have been a factor in China changing its approach. We have not seen a destructive ASAT test since then, although China did conduct a non-destructive test of this system in July 2014. I have not been shy about expressing the U.S. Governments concerns about Chinese anti-satellite tests directly to our Chinese counterparts. We need to continue to call out the disruptive actions of countries like Russia and China both publicly and in cooperation with our allies and partners.

The Department of State is also using diplomacy to reduce the chances for conflict extending into space through the promotion of responsible international norms of behavior, both bilaterally and multilaterally. Norms matter because they help define boundaries and distinguish good behavior from bad behavior.

For example, we have discussed preventing mishaps and reducing potentially destabilizing misperceptions or miscalculations with China.

In addition, and very importantly, through bilateral and multilateral dialogue and diplomatic engagement we seek to identify areas of mutual interest and hopefully reach agreement on how to prevent those interests from being harmed in peacetime, and in conflict.

During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union found many areas of mutual interest in avoiding potentially destabilizing actions. The 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty, which prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons in outer space, started a fifty-plus-year string of bilateral arms control treaties and agreements with the Soviet Union, and later the Russian Federation. We also came to agreement in many other realms, including chemical and biological weapons.

Simply stated, if the United States and the Soviet Union could find areas of mutual interest in the realm of nuclear deterrence and chemical weapons -- with the tensions and stakes as high as they were -- then in today’s climate we should be able to find areas of mutual interest among all space-faring nations regarding space security.

Indeed, I would argue that it is reasonable to assume that most nations, if not all nations, would find it to be in their national interest to prevent conflict from extending into space, knowing that such conflict would degrade the sustainability of the space environment, hinder future space-based scientific activities, and potentially reduce the quality of life for everybody on Earth if the benefits of space-based applications were eroded. Convincing other nations, including China and Russia, of this objective is the role of diplomacy.

The United States and China have already implemented some bilateral transparency and confidence building measures (or TCBMs) to prevent the generation of additional debris in space. As part of the 2014 U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, led by Secretary of State John Kerry, we reached agreement on the establishment of e-mail contact between China and the United States for the transmission of space object conjunction warnings. Not only does this communication help prevent collision between objects in space, it will help to develop trust and understanding between the United States and China.

Over the past few years the United States has also supported a number of multilateral initiatives that should reduce the chances of mishaps, misperceptions and potential miscalculations. Multilateral TCBMs are means by which governments can address challenges and share information with the aim of creating mutual understanding and reducing tensions. Through TCBMs we can increase familiarity and trust and encourage openness among space actors.

One of the key efforts that we have been pursuing is working with the European Union to advance a non-legally binding International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities. The Code would establish guidelines to reduce the risks of debris-generating events and to strengthen the long-term sustainability and security of the space environment. Among the draft Code’s most important provisions is a commitment for the subscribing States to refrain from any action -- unless such action is justified by exceptions spelled out in the draft Code -- that brings about, directly or indirectly, damage or destruction of space objects. We view the draft Code as a potential first step in establishing TCBMs for space.

The State Department is also leading U.S. efforts in the framework of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) to move forward in the development of a draft set of guidelines for sustainable space operations to include ways to prevent the generation of space debris.

Another important recent effort was the United Nations Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) study of outer space transparency and confidence-building measures. That UN group, for which I served as the U.S. expert, published a consensus report in July 2013 endorsing voluntary, non-legally binding TCBMs to strengthen sustainability and security in space. The United States subsequently co-sponsored a resolution with Russia and China referring the GGE report’s recommendations for consideration by the relevant entities and organizations of the United Nations system.

These diplomatic efforts contribute to reducing misperceptions and miscalculations and help lower the chance of conflict extending into space.

I would like to add one more thought for your consideration. If we do not lead with active diplomacy on international space security issues, it is more likely that others will seek to fill the diplomatic vacuum with initiatives that meet their own national interests without regard for the broader interests of the international community.

The United States has focused on TCBMs over the last several years because these can make a real difference in the near term. Such measures can lead to greater mutual understanding and reduce tensions.

In contrast, Russia’s and China’s diplomatic efforts to pursue legally binding treaties and other measures do not reduce the chances for mishaps, misunderstanding or miscalculation and provide little or no verification capability to make sure that everyone is playing by the same rules. Moreover, their diplomatic efforts do not address very real, near-term space security threats such as terrestrial-based anti-satellite weapons like the one China tested in 2007.

To be more specific, Russia and China continue to press for a “Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects,” known as the PPWT. Russia also is making concerted diplomatic efforts to gain adherents to its pledge of “No First Placement” of weapons in outer space. These two documents are fundamentally flawed. They do not address the threat of terrestrially-based ASAT capabilities, and they contain no verification provisions. Yet, at the same time, these proposals may gain some support internationally because many countries are attracted, naturally, to the idea of preventing the weaponization of space. As a diplomat, it is my job to explain why support for these Russian and Chinese proposals is misplaced and may even be counterproductive, while offering pragmatic alternatives, such as TCBMs, which demonstrate U.S. leadership and help shape the international space security agenda.


Conclusion

If conflict extends into space, the right to explore and use space for peaceful purposes would be threatened.

If diplomacy fails, and the use of force does extend to space, the United States must be prepared to protect our space capabilities and prevail in conflict. That is absolutely clear.

The goal of our diplomacy, however, is to prevent conflict from extending into space in the first place.

Diplomacy can help strengthen U.S. and allied deterrent posture and help prevent mishaps, misperceptions, and mistrust among nations.

These two diplomatic tracks, supported by other instruments of U.S. national power and the support of our allies and friends, will hopefully persuade any potential adversary that attacking the United States in space would not be in its best interests.

Thank you for your time and attention.

NATO SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG SAYS ALLIANCE WILL "ADAPT TO NEW THREATS"

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
NATO Prepares for Challenges From East, South
By Jim Garamone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, March 12, 2015 – NATO commanders are putting in place the infrastructure that will allow the alliance to adapt to new threats, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told the press yesterday at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium.

Stoltenberg spoke alongside Air Force Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, NATO’s supreme allied commander, after NATO commanders briefed the secretary general on progress toward meeting the goals of the Wales Summit.

Both men noted the security environment in Europe has grown complicated and that the alliance must change to deal with these new threats. While the alliance continues the train, advise and equip mission in Afghanistan and the peacekeeping operation in Kosovo, it is changing to confront new issues.

Threats From East, South

“We see threats both from the East with the more aggressive actions of Russia in Ukraine, [and] also from the South with violence and turmoil spreading to the Middle East and North Africa,” Stoltenberg said.

The answer to both challengers is a boost to collective security, he added.
The alliance is more than doubling the size of the NATO Response Force from 13,000 to 30,000 troops.

“We are setting up a new 5,000-strong quick reaction Spearhead Force, with some units ready to move within as little as 48 hours,” Stoltenberg said. “And we are also creating six command-and-control centers in the Baltic states and three other eastern allied states.”

‘Deliberative and Unified’ Changes

Breedlove said those moves are on track. “We’re in full swing moving forward with our assurance and our adaptation measures and these will make our alliance even more ready and responsive in the future,” the general said.

“The United States is sending 3,000 troops and equipment to the Baltic region for training,” Stoltenberg said. “And in the south, we are preparing to hold this autumn our biggest exercise for many years, expected to include over 25,000 troops in this exercise.” NATO also has ships exercising in the Black and Baltic seas, he added.

The measures are defensive, proportionate and in line with international commitments, the secretary general said.

Changing the alliance posture is tough, involved work, Breedlove said. “We are tackling these changes in a deliberative and unified fashion,” he said. “I’ve spent many years serving among our European allies and I’m pleased to say that I’ve never seen a greater degree of cohesion, resolve and determination to ensure that NATO is ready to meet our future challenges, and I’m confident this will continue as we secure our future together.”

FTC SAYS IT'S WORKING WITH NEW YORK ATTORNEY TO STOP ABUSIVE DEBT COLLECTION

FROM:  U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FTC, New York Attorney General Crack Down on Abusive Debt Collectors
Charges Cite Harassing Conduct, False and Deceptive Claims Made to Consumers

The Federal Trade Commission, jointly with the New York State Office of the Attorney General, has filed complaints aimed at shutting down two particularly egregious and abusive debt collection operations centered in Buffalo, New York that target consumers nationwide. According to the complaints, the separate enterprises used threats and abusive language, including false threats that consumers would be arrested, to collect more than $45 million in supposed debts.

“The Federal Trade Commission is pleased to work with the New York State Attorney General to stop abusive debt collectors,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The cases announced today will help protect consumers from debt collectors that disregard the law in an attempt to make a buck.”

“Today’s action should make it clear that nobody is above the law, and when shady debt collectors engage in illegal and abusive business practices, they will be held accountable,” said Attorney General Schneiderman. “The use of threats, including the threat of arrest, to collect debts is unconscionable, and I am pleased to partner with the FTC to stand up for consumers against these bad actors.”

The federal court has temporarily halted defendants’ practices in both cases at the FTC’s and New York Attorney General’s request.

4 Star Resolution LLC

On February 9, 2015, the FTC and New York Attorney General’s Office filed a complaint against 4 Star Resolution LLC, six other corporate entities, and three individuals (collectively, 4 Star), alleging that 4 Star used abusive and deceptive tactics to pressure consumers into making payments on supposed debts.

According to the complaint, 4 Star regularly called consumers using fictitious addresses, bogus company names, and spoofed phone numbers. After misrepresenting their names and locations, 4 Star’s collectors falsely identified themselves to consumers, claiming that they were attorneys, process servers, government agents, or criminal law enforcement officials.

In addition, 4 Star’s collectors allegedly falsely claimed that the consumers had committed an illegal or criminal act such as bank or check fraud. 4 Star’s collectors then falsely threatened consumers with dire consequences, including arrest, imprisonment, and civil lawsuits, unless the consumers made an immediate payment on the supposed debts.

The complaint cites several examples that illustrate the defendants’ alleged abusive and deceptive conduct. During one call to collect on a supposed debt, a 4 Star collector used the pseudonym “Detective Jeff Ramsay,” and left a message where he falsely asserted that he was seeking to serve a bench warrant on the consumer for check fraud.

In another instance, 4 Star’s collectors falsely told a consumer that her husband had committed check and money fraud and that legal action would be taken against the husband if the debt was not paid in two days. One of 4 Star’s collectors falsely identified himself to the consumer as “Investigator Kearns” and claimed that he worked for a government agency located in Washington, DC.

The complaint also alleges that when consumers asked for proof of the supposed debt, 4 Star’s representatives refused to provide it, and instead often told consumers they would only receive proof in court or after the debt was paid. The defendants often allegedly failed to provide written notice of the debt as required by law and failed to make required disclosures to consumers.

Finally, the complaint alleges that 4 Star unlawfully disclosed information about supposed debtors to third parties, including friends, family members, and employers, and illegally used abusive and profane language, including routinely calling consumers such names as “idiot,” “dummy,” “piece of scum,” “thief,” or “loser.”

Vantage Point Services, LLC

According to the second complaint, filed against Vantage Point Services, LLC, and related corporate and individual defendants, the organization, used deceptive, unfair, and abusive tactics to pressure consumers into making payments on supposed debts.

The complaint alleges that in collection calls to consumers the defendants often falsely claimed to be a law firm, process server, unrelated debt collection company, or entity affiliated with the government. In some instances, the defendants even posed as government agents, including FBI agents and district attorneys. In others instances, the defendants falsely told consumers they were working as an intermediary with the state, or that the state had placed the consumers’ account with them to give them a chance to pay the debt before criminal charges were filed.

With this deceptive backdrop, the defendants falsely claimed that consumers had committed a crime and that an arrest warrant would be issued unless they made a payment. Often, the defendants told consumers that they would spend 90 or 120 days in jail, or that that would need to pay thousands of dollars in bail if they didn’t pay.

The defendants’ conduct was not limited to people that supposedly owed the debt, however. Vantage Point made similar representations to third parties, including supposed debtors’ friends, family members, and co-workers. In some cases, the defendants falsely told third parties that the supposed debtors had committed a crime and that a warrant had been issued for their arrest.

Finally, the complaint states that the defendants failed to provide consumers with basic information about their identity during calls, did not provided consumers with information about the supposed debt within five days of the call, as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and illegally charged them a “processing fee.”

Both complaints charge the respective defendants with violating the FTC Act and the FDCPA, as well as several New York State laws prohibiting deceptive acts and practices. In filing the complaints, the FTC and the New York Attorney General’s Office are seeking to permanently stop the defendants’ illegal conduct and to obtain money to provide refunds to consumers.

The 4 Star defendants are: 1) 4 Star Resolution LLC; 2) Profile Management, Inc.; 3) International Recovery Service LLC; 4) Check Solutions Services Inc.; 5) Check Fraud Service LLC; 6) Merchant Recovery Service, Inc.; 7) Fourstar Revenue Management LLC; 8) Travell Thomas, individually and as a principal, manager, and/or officer of several of the corporate defendants; 9) Maurice Sessum, individually and as a principal, manager, and/or officer of several of the corporate defendants; and 10) Charles Blakely III, individually and as principal, manager, and/or officer of Merchant Recovery Service, Inc. The complaint also alleges that the corporate defendants conducted business through approximately two dozen fictitious names.

The Vantage defendants are: 1) Vantage Point Services, LLC; 2) Payment Management Solutions, Inc.; and 3) Gregory MacKinnon; 4) Megan Vandeviver; and 5) Angela Burdorf, each individually and as an officer of one or more of the corporate defendants.

The Commission vote authorizing the filing of each complaint was 5-0. The complaints against 4 Star and Vantage Point Services were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.

SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON ELECTIONS IN AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Afghanistan Elections

Press Statement

John Kerry
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

April 5, 2014

---

Millions of Afghan men and women took to the polls today with courage and commitment. This is their moment. The Afghan people secured this election. They ran this election, and most importantly, they voted in this election.

Today’s vote demonstrates how committed the Afghan people are to protecting and advancing their democracy. The fierce determination of the millions of voters undeterred by violence and threats of violence has been remarkable.

Now, we need to give the Afghan electoral bodies the time they need to do their work in processing the outcome of these elections.

The United States remains ready to work with the next president of Afghanistan. We will continue to stand with the people of Afghanistan as they work to build a democratic future.

GUARDING AGAINST COMPLACENCY IN KOREA

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
U.S.-South Korean Leaders Guard Against Complacency
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

SEOUL, South Korea, Oct. 1, 2013 - The state of the U.S.-South Korea alliance is strong, but the allies cannot become complacent in face of changes in North Korea, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said here today.

While the North Korean conventional military threat is deteriorating, the regime's asymmetric threats are growing, Dempsey said during an interview with reporters traveling with him.

The United States is concerned about the demonstrated North Korean nuclear capability, Dempsey said. The North Koreans have not demonstrated that they can weaponize a nuclear weapon, "but we can't be complacent about the possibility."

North Korea has launched a primitive satellite into orbit. They are developing cyber capabilities and they have the largest special operations force in the region. "When you add all that up and their stated attempt to drive the United States off the peninsula and re-unify it under their terms, yeah we're very concerned," he said.

The U.S.-South Korea alliance has been an incredible success story, Dempsey said. In the 60 years of the pact, South Korea has risen from a war devastated Third World country to the 12th largest economy on the globe. The bulwark of the security shield has made this possible.

"Our discussions about rebalancing to the Pacific generally start with our relationship with the [Republic of Korea] in mind," Dempsey said. "Is there room for improvement? As the threat changes the ballistic missile threat from the North has increased, cyber threats have increased and so as a good ally what we're discussing is how we adapt to those changing threats."

In thinking of the alliance, military leaders assessed the changing threats, he said. They also look at the evolution, maturity and development of the South Korean forces as they exist today. Then, they look at what capabilities South Korea needs and to integrate them into their capabilities.

"We are very well postured not just on the peninsula, but we have forces in the region that also have the capability to bring national military power to bear," Dempsey said.

During a town hall meeting earlier in Yongsan, Dempsey told American service members that the Pacific strategy is becoming increasingly important to the United States.

South Korea America's oldest ally in the region remains important. "It would be in our interests to maintain the partnership and continue enhancing it," he said. "I find a pretty significant commitment on their part to maintain our presence in the Republic of Korea. I think that will remain true certainly until the issue with North Korea is resolved."

But he suspects the alliance will continue after any resolution of the problems with North Korea. There is a certain appreciation for the stabilizing influence the United States has in the region, he said. "This is a long-term commitment, it's not one-way," Dempsey said.

SECRETARY OF STATE AND ISRAELI PRESIDENT PERES MAKE REMARKS BEFORE MEETING

Map:  Israel.  Credit:  CIA World Factbook.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Remarks With Israeli President Shimon Peres Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
President's Residence
Jerusalem
April 8, 2013

Well, Mr. President, thank you very, very much for an extraordinarily generous and warm welcome. It’s really such an honor to be here today to share in Yom HaShoah and to be there at Yad Vashem to lay a wreath on behalf of the American people, but most importantly to simply share in the uniqueness of that expression of sorrow and honor for this remarkable moment in history that we marked.

I was standing there listening to the siren wail and thinking of the stories people have told me of everybody in Israel stopping. If you’re in a car, you get out and you stand at attention. The whole country freezes. And I know it’s one of only two moments when that happens, for Yom HaShoah and for the fallen in battle in struggles. So that wailing had a profound impact on me. It was impressive. And I think the lesson of today is underscored in your comments about the possibilities for peace, the possibilities for people to live together without hatred, and finding the common ground. I believe in that, and I know you believe in that.

You are correct; we have known each other, I think, more than 30 years now. And I’ve had the privilege of watching you lead as a statesman. I’ve had the privilege of working with you in the different hats you have worn in government. And it’s a great privilege for me to be able to be here now representing President Obama and the American people in this effort to try to get us across the line.

We all know it’s not easy. But as you said yourself, it can be done. And it has been expressed by your leaders and others through years that people believe in the possibility of a two-state solution. I am convinced there is a road forward, and I look forward to the discussions with your leaders and yourself regarding how that road could be sort of reignited, if you will, once again setting out on that path.

I would say to everybody I have no illusions about difficulties. We’ve seen them. But you have to believe in the possibilities to be able to get there, and you and I believe in them, and I am convinced that there is a road ahead.

With respect to Iran and other threats, I am very pleased to confirm to you what I know you know, and what I hope the people of Israel know after the historic visit of President Obama here: You have a friend in President Obama. You have friends in this Administration, in the Congress, and in America. We understand the nature of the threat of Iran. And as the President has said many times – he doesn’t bluff; he is serious – we will stand with Israel against this threat and with the rest of the world, who have underscored that all we are looking for is Iran to live up to its international obligations.

No option is off the table. No option will be taken off the table. And I confirm to you, Mr. President, that we will continue to seek a diplomatic solution. But our eyes are open, and we understand that the clock is moving. And no one will allow the diplomatic process to stand in the way of whatever choices need to be made to protect the world from yet another nuclear weapon in the wrong hands.

So I look forward to our conversation, and I’ll look forward to my subsequent conversations while I’m here. And I’m confident, Mr. President, that we will be working together and seeing more of each other over the course of these next months. And thank you again for a very, very generous welcome.

PENTAGON SAYS THREATS FROM NORTH KOREA NOT HELPFUL

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
North Korean Threats Help No One, Pentagon Official Says
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 26, 2013 - The newest threats by North Korea follow a well-worn pattern designed to raise tensions and intimidate others, Pentagon Press Secretary George E. Little said today.

According to news reports out of North Korea this week, long-range artillery and strategic rocket units have been ordered to prepare to deploy.

The United States is concerned by any activities on the Korean Peninsula that could raise tensions, Little said in a meeting with reporters. "It's not just artillery," he noted. "North Korea has nuclear capabilities, so the full range of their arsenal is of concern to the United States and to our South Korean allies."

North Korea's threats help no one, Little said, and serve only to further isolate North Korea and undermine international efforts to ensure peace and stability in the region.

The decision earlier this month to place 14 additional ground-based interceptors at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., was based in large part on growing threats from North Korea, Little said.

In addition to the recent mobilization order, in recent months North Korea has conducted nuclear testing, placed a satellite into orbit and continued development of its intercontinental missile program. "The facts are that the North Koreans are developing their missile capabilities in violation of international law and norms of international behavior," Little said, "and they need to stop."

The chairman of South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff and the U.S. general who commands the U.S.-Republic of Korea Combined Forces Command announced March 24 that they had signed a combined plan to counter threats from North Korea. The classified agreement is led by the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff and supported by U.S. Forces Korea, Little said. The agreement is part of a robust architecture supporting a larger joint planning effort that has been under way for some time, he added.

"We are moving forward to take new steps on a combined command and control structure for the [U.S.-South Korea] alliance," Little said. The counter-provocation plan serves as a representation of the continued development of strategic, operational and tactical cooperation, he said.

"It improves our combined readiness posture and allows immediate and decisive response to any North Korean provocation," Little added.

"It's very important that we do everything we can to stabilize the peninsula and not take rhetoric to where it shouldn't go," he said, "and that's what the North Koreans are doing right now, and that should cease."

The United States takes everything the North Korean government says and does seriously, Little said.

"We continue to urge North Korean leadership to heed the president's call to choose a path of peace and to come into compliance with North Korea's international obligations," he added