MDA TESTS THE EXOATMOSPHERIC KILL VEHICLE (EKV)

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Right:  The Missile Defense Agency's Flight Test 06b Ground-Based Interceptor launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., June 22, 2014. Missile Defense Agency photo.

Syring: Missile Test Important Step for Missile Defense System

By Cheryl Pellerin

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 23, 2014 – The Missile Defense Agency and its joint partners completed the first intercept using the second-generation exoatmospheric kill vehicle, or EKV, during a test over the Pacific Ocean yesterday afternoon.
All components seemed to perform as designed, MDA officials said in a statement, and program officials will spend the next several months assessing and evaluating system performance based on telemetry and other test data.
The test, called flight test ground-based interceptor-06b, or FTG-06b, will provide the data needed for the assessment and to assess the performance of many Ballistic Missile Defense System elements for homeland defense, officials said.
The MDA, the Air Force’s 30th Space Wing, Joint Functional Component Command, Integrated Missile Defense, U.S. Northern Command and the Navy were involved in the integrated exercise.

"This is a very important step in our continuing efforts to improve and increase the reliability of our homeland ballistic missile defense system,” Missile Defense Agency Director Navy Vice Adm. James D. Syring said in a statement.
“We'll continue efforts to ensure our deployed ground-based interceptors and our overall homeland defensive architecture continue to provide the warfighter an effective and dependable system to defend the country,” he added, after congratulating the government and industry team that conducted the test.
“Their professionalism and dedication made this test a success,” Syring said.
The BMDS is designed to counter ballistic missile threats of all ranges -- short, medium, intermediate and long. The system has many integrated elements and a layered architecture that offers several ways to destroy incoming missiles and warheads before they reach their targets.

The architecture includes networked sensors and ground- and sea-based radars to detect and track targets, and ground- and sea-based interceptor missiles like the EKV to destroy a ballistic missile using the kinetic energy from a direct hit. This is called “hit-to-kill” technology. An explosive blast fragmentation warhead also can destroy a ballistic missile.

Yesterday’s successful test used the second-generation capability enhancement II, or CE-II, EKV. The architecture also includes a command-and-control, battle-management and communications network that gives operational commanders links between sensors and interceptor missiles.

Earlier this month, Syring testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee on the agency’s budget request for fiscal year 2015. “My highest priority remains the successful intercept flight test of the CE-II [variant] exoatmospheric kill vehicle,” he told the senators.

In December 2010, two intercept tests of the EKV failed, but in January 2013 the agency conducted a successful nonintercept flight test of the EKV and confirmed it was on the right path to return the ground-based midcourse defense element of the system to sustained flight testing.

During yesterday’s test, an intermediate-range ballistic missile target representing a threat to the U.S. homeland was launched from the Reagan Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands. The Navy destroyer USS Hopper, with its Aegis weapon system, detected and tracked the target using onboard AN/SPY-1 radar that sent data to the ground-based midcourse defense fire-control system via the command, control, battle management and communication system. The sea-based X-band radar also tracked the target and relayed information to the GMD fire control system to help with target engagement and to collect test data.
About six minutes after target launch, the ground-based interceptor launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. Then an operational crew of soldiers from the Army’s 100th Missile Defense Brigade at Schriever Air Force Base in Colorado remotely launched the interceptor, and a three-stage booster rocket system propelled the interceptor's EKV into the target missile's projected trajectory in space.

The kill vehicle maneuvered to the target, performed discrimination -- or determined the difference between the warhead and a decoy -- and intercepted the threat warhead using only the force of the direct collision to destroy it.
This was the first intercept using the second-generation EKV.

The test was the 65th successful hit-to-kill intercept of 81 attempts since 2001 for the Ballistic Missile Defense System, officials said. The system’s ground-based midcourse defense element has completed four intercepts since 2006 using the operationally configured interceptor.

Operational ground-based interceptors are deployed at Fort Greely in Alaska and at Vandenberg, MDA officials said in a statement, to protect the United States and its allies and friends against a limited long-range ballistic missile attack.

PRESIDNET OBAMA NOTIFIES CONGRESS ON NATIONAL EMERGENCY REGARDING WESTERN BALKANS

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL 

Notice to Congress -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Western Balkans

NOTICE

- - - - - - - 

CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO THE WESTERN BALKANS

On June 26, 2001, by Executive Order (E.O.) 13219, the President declared a national emergency with respect to the Western Balkans, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706), to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions of persons engaged in, or assisting, sponsoring, or supporting (i) extremist violence in the Republic of Macedonia and elsewhere in the Western Balkans region, or (ii) acts obstructing implementation of the Dayton Accords in Bosnia or United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of June 10, 1999, relating to Kosovo.  The President subsequently amended that order in E.O. 13304 of May 28, 2003, to take additional steps with respect to acts obstructing implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement relating to Macedonia.

The actions of persons threatening the peace and international stabilization efforts in the Western Balkans continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.  For this reason, the national emergency declared on June 26, 2001, and the measures adopted on that date and thereafter to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond June 26, 2014.  Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to the Western Balkans declared in E.O. 13219.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

BARACK OBAMA

Orion Spacecraft Is Taking Shape on This Week @NASA

PRESS AVAILABILITY IN BAGHDAD, IRAQ BY SECRETARY KERRY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Press Availability on Syria and Iraq

Remarks

John Kerry

Secretary of State

U.S. Embassy Baghdad

Baghdad, Iraq

June 23, 2014

---

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, good afternoon. I have a quick comment I want to make on a topic other than the visit here to Iraq, and then I’ll proceed to make some comments about the visit here. And then I look forward to taking some questions. Today, the International Maritime Task Force completed the extraordinary mission of removing the final 8 percent of declared chemical weapon precursors from Syria. So I want to congratulate the UN-OPCW Joint Mission and the entire international coalition, which operated under very dangerous conditions to remove more than 1,000 tons of declared chemical weapon materials from Syria. This effort emerged from an agreement reached last year between the United States and Russia. And many of our allies and partners played a very essential role in the removal effort. I want to thank all of those partners for their diligent efforts.

The world will really never forget the loss of more than 1,000 innocent Syrians who were senselessly killed with chemical weapons on the early morning of August 21st, 2013. It’s very important, however, even as we mark this moment of removing 100 percent of the declared weapons, that we understand that our work is not finished to ensure the complete elimination of Syria’s CW program. There are still some serious issues that remain to be addressed, and we are not going to stop until those have been addressed.

We remain deeply concerned about the reports of systematic use of chlorine gas in opposition areas. I want to emphasize: Chlorine gas – chlorine is not among the required declared chemical precursors, but when mixed in a certain way and when used in warfare, it becomes one of those prohibited entities under the chemical weapons treaty. So while all of the chemical weapons as declared weapons are removed, we still need to deal with this issue. And the Syrian regime, in addition to that, has dragged its feet on the destruction of some of the production facilities, which are required.

The international community has questions with regard to some of Syria’s declaration, and those still have to be adequately answered. So we are always going to remain truly appalled at the level of death and destruction that continues to consume Syria, notwithstanding the removal of these weapons. And that is something that is presenting the world with a continued grave humanitarian crisis, and we will continue to remain focused on that.

But I want to underscore and take stock of what has been achieved: the removal of all declared chemical weapons; the verification of the destruction of declared production, mixing, and filling equipment; the verification of the destruction of all declared chemical weapons delivery vehicles, including missile warheads and aerial bombs; and the diminishing of the strategic threat posed by Syrian chemical weapons program to our allies and our partners in the region.
Just yesterday in a conversation with Prime Minister Netanyahu, he brought up the degree to which this removal is vital to the state of Israel and vital to the region. And he congratulated all those involved on this accomplishment. For 100 years, the international community has deemed the use of these weapons to be beyond the bounds of acceptable conduct. And in the coming weeks, the United States stands ready to begin the destruction, which will be our responsibility, of a larger amount of Syria’s chemical weapons precursors. This is an unprecedented mission, and it will ensure that the weapons removed will never again be used against the Syrian people or against us, our allies, or our partners in the region or beyond. So while there is still some work to do, we signal this as a major accomplishment on a strategic level.

Now, President Obama asked me to visit Baghdad today to demonstrate America’s support for Iraq and its people during this time of crisis. This is clearly a moment when the stakes for Iraq’s future could not be clearer. ISIL’s campaign of terror, their grotesque acts of violence and repressive ideology pose a grave danger to Iraq’s future. ISIL is not, as it claims, fighting on behalf of Sunnis. ISIL is not fighting for a stronger Iraq; quite the contrary. ISIL is fighting to divide Iraq and to destroy Iraq.

So this is a critical moment for Iraq’s future. It is a moment of decision for Iraq’s leaders, and it’s a moment of great urgency. Iraq faces an existential threat, and Iraq’s leaders have to meet that threat with the incredible urgency that it demands. The very future of Iraq depends on choices that will be made in the next days and weeks. And the future of Iraq depends primarily on the ability of Iraq’s leaders to come together and take a stand united against ISIL – not next week, not next month, but now.

In each of my meetings today, I stressed that urgency and I stressed the responsibility of Iraq’s leaders to act, whether the meeting with Prime Minister Maliki, with speaker Nujaifi, with ISCI leader Hakim, or Foreign Minister Zebari, I emphasize that defending Iraq against ISIL depends largely on their ability – all of them – to form a new government and to do it quickly. It is essential that Iraq’s leaders form a genuinely inclusive government as rapidly as possible within their own constitutional framework.

It’s also crystal-clear that ISIL’s rise puts more than one country at risk. ISIL threatens the stability of the entire region and it is a threat also to the United States and to the West – self-declared. Iraq’s neighbors can bolster Iraq’s security, as well as their own, by supporting the formation of an Iraqi government that represents all Iraqis and also respects Iraq’s territorial integrity.

Now, President Obama has stated repeatedly that he will do what is necessary and what is in our national interest to confront ISIL and the threat that it poses to the security of the region and to our security in the long run. None of us should have to be reminded that a threat left unattended far beyond our shores can have grave, tragic consequences.

The President understands very clearly that supporting Iraq in the struggle at this time is part of meeting our most important responsibility: The security of the American people, fighting terrorism, and standing by our allies. Iraq is a strategic partner of the United States, with shared interests in countering the scourge of terrorism, maintaining stability of the global energy markets, and easing the sectarian polarization that plagues this region. That’s how we have to understand the stakes here in Iraq, and that’s why we have to understand the serious threat that ISIL poses to Iraq and the urgent need for Iraq’s security forces to therefore be well-supplied, well-equipped, and well-trained. That is why President Obama has prepared a range of options for Iraq, including enhanced intelligence, joint operation centers, steady supplies of munitions, and advisors to work with and support some of Iraq’s best units.

With this support, we are living up to our Strategic Framework Agreement. The support will be intense, sustained, and if Iraq’s leaders take the necessary steps to bring the country together, it will be effective. It will allow Iraqi security forces to confront ISIL more effectively and in a way that respects Iraq’s sovereignty while also respecting America’s and the region’s vital interests. The Strategic Framework Agreement also commits the United States to support Iraq’s constitutional process. That is specifically stated, and that is part of why I stressed in today’s meetings the importance of keeping the constitutional timeline and of forming a new government as soon as possible, because forming a new government is critical to the ability of Iraq to be able to make progress and be successful.

It is incumbent on Iraq’s leaders to convene parliament on time, and I might say to you that every single leader today committed that they are dedicated to meeting the July 1st deadline for the meeting of the representatives, the parliament. It is also incumbent on them to choose a speaker immediately, then to choose a president, and finally a prime minister and a cabinet. And to do so, they must effect a unity that rises above the traditional divisions that have torn the government apart.

So I encouraged the leaders today to start this process and to move along a path that is outlined by Iraq’s constitution itself. Nothing that the United States through President Obama sending me here today – nothing that we asked them to do or offered is outside of the constitutional process or without complete respect for the choices of the leaders of Iraq. The United States is not choosing any leader; we are not making any preconditions with respect to who can or can’t take part. That is up to Iraq. It’s up to the people of Iraq to make that decision. And what we asked for today is also very much in line with the message that Grand Ayatollah Sistani offered just a few days ago. As I told Iraqi leaders today, and as I’ve made clear to my counterparts in the region, neither the United States nor any other country has the right to pick who leads Iraq. That is up to the people of Iraq. So it is when all of Iraq’s people can shape Iraq’s future, when the legitimate concerns and aspirations of all of Iraq’s communities – Sunni, Shia, Kurd – are all respected, that is when Iraq is strongest. And that is when Iraq will be the most secure.

We are here today to demonstrate our support for those aspirations and to show our commitment to a stable and sovereign Iraq, which is what so many soldiers and others invested – many of them with their lives – to achieve in the interests of the people of Iraq and of this region. We stand with the people of Iraq as they meet this moment of great challenge in their effort to build a stronger, more viable, more prosperous, more representative Iraq in the days to come. So I’d be delighted to take any questions.

MS. PSAKI: The first question is from Michael Gordon of The New York Times.

QUESTION: Sir, you mentioned your meetings today with Prime Minister Maliki, and you’re meeting Shiite and Sunni politicians and Iraq’s foreign minister. Do you think Prime Minister Maliki has an effective strategy for dealing with Iraq’s security and political crisis, and what is that strategy? You mentioned the importance of forming a government in an expedited manner. Did you make any headway today on the process of government formation? Was any progress made, and what was that progress?

And lastly, ISIS, as you – has been noted, has been erasing the border between Iraq and Syria. They’ve taken the town of Rutba, which sits astride the highway to Jordan. American officials said that ISIS would like to attack the Shia shrine in Samarra, which could lead to an explosion of violence in Iraq. Given these security developments, can the United States really afford to wait until the government formation process in Iraq is complete before taking some form of action, potentially air strikes? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me answer the last part of that question first. President Obama has not declared that he will wait. He has made it very clear in his most recent statement that he is preparing with the increased intelligence and the work that the military is doing at this point in time, and the President is prepared to take action when and if the President decides that is important. Clearly, everyone understands that Samarra is an important line. Historically, an assault on Samarra created enormous problems in Iraq. That is something that we all do not want to see happen again. And so the President and the team, the entire security team, are watching this movement and these events very, very closely.
The key today was to get from each of the government leaders a clarity with respect to the road forward in terms of government formation. And indeed, Prime Minister Maliki firmly, on multiple occasions because it was a great part of the conversation, affirmed his commitment to July 1^st as the date when the representatives will convene and when they must choose a speaker and then a president and then a prime minister. And he committed to try to move that process as expeditiously as possible. And that was emphasized again and again.

With respect to the strategy for going forward, we agreed today that we will work very, very closely with the joint command. The joint command is now being set up. The additional advisors are coming in and dispersing through their various posts and brigades, and they will be making assessments, and that will help define the strategy on the security front. But make no mistake, the President has moved the assets into place and has been gaining each day the assurances he needs with respect to potential targeting, and he has reserved the right to himself, as he should, to make a decision at any point in time if he deems it necessary strategically.

MS. PSAKI: The next question is from Abbas Qassim from Iraqiya TV.

QUESTION: (In Arabic.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, if you have proof of the last statement, we obviously would welcome your giving it to us. We are implementing a strategy now; we’re not waiting. The President has taken steps under the Strategic Framework Agreement – and let me emphasize, the President has taken these steps way back into the last year. There is additional training, there is additional material, there’s been additional support, and it has been building up as the crisis in Iraq has been looming. So this has been an ongoing process. It is not sudden to this moment that ISIL moved across the border. The fact is now it has accelerated because much of the Iraqi army didn’t fight, moved away and allowed the wholesale movement of ISIL into Iraqi territory. Now, that’s something that is being investigated, it’s being looked at. The leadership understands the problem it has created, but the result is that’s why the President wants to make an assessment in order to make a hard determination about the capacity of the military, to understand exactly what the stakes are and what the implications are of any decision he might make.

Now, that’s a very important evaluation. But in the meantime, the President is providing additional material and he has taken the measures to provide the United States with the ability, should he deem it necessary, to make the decision to be able to have a direct impact on ISIL. And today’s meetings were a very important part of the President’s decision-making process. He sent me here to evaluate in my discussions with the leadership what choices they are prepared to make and what will happen in terms of government formation. But clearly, if there is evidence that requires some kind of action prior to that process being completed, the President maintains the prerogative of making that decision.

MS. PSAKI: The final question is from Andrea Mitchell of NBC News.

QUESTION: To follow up on that and on what Michael asked you, Mr. Secretary, did the other leaders with whom you met today indicate that they have the confidence that Prime Minister Maliki can change, and not only be inclusive, but stop taking direct action against his Sunni rivals, and that he could engender the support of the military? The military fled and took of their uniforms partly because there was no loyalty to a central government because of his own actions. Do you believe that he can lead a fight against this existential threat that ISIS is now posing, wiping out borders?

And to get back to Syria, for all of the success of the chemical weapon declared process, there is still the chlorine, as you mentioned. We don’t know what else is out there. ISIS and Al-Nusrah and other groups now control more and more of the territory. There is still a threat there. To what extent does the creation of ISIS also lay at the feet of the United States and other allies who did not take action sooner on Syria in supporting more moderate rebels?
And if I could also ask you, you were in Cairo yesterday meeting with President al-Sisi. You even suggested that the Apaches might be delivered, that they may have met the standard. Today, the Al-Jazeera journalists were sentenced to seven years in prison. Do we have real assurances that that process can be reversed, that this new leader – newly elected president really is going to stand up against the judicial system with these mass verdicts – mass death sentences, and now the sentencing of journalists?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well Andrea, that’s very, very fair question, and it’s an appropriate one today. When I heard about that verdict today, I was so concerned about it and, frankly, disappointed in it that I immediately picked up the telephone and I talked to the foreign minister of Egypt and I registered our serious displeasure at this kind of verdict under the circumstances of where we find ourselves today. Now, today’s conviction is obviously – it’s a chilling and draconian sentence. And it’s deeply disturbing to see in the midst of Egypt’s transition. It simply cannot stand if Egypt is going to be able to move forward in the way that Egypt needs to move forward, in order to respond to the extraordinary aspirations of those young people who twice came in to Tahrir Square in order to demand a responsive government.

So the success of Egypt going forward will depend on the protection of universal human rights, and it will depend on a real commitment to embracing the hopes of the people there that they’re going to see a judicial system that is responsive and modern and not one trapped in ideology or in this kind of extreme decision.

So today’s verdict flies in the face of the essential ingredients of a civil society and a free press and rule of law. And the president – President al-Sisi and I discussed this yesterday. We discussed these very cases, and I think it is going to be critical in terms of the objectives of his presidency for him to move quickly to try to address the international concerns that exist with respect to this kind of a decision.

Now with respect to Iraq and Prime Minister Maliki, I’m not going to comment on – it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the private conversations that I had with other leaders about their judgments or where they’re heading. But I will say this: All of the leaders that I talked with today, including Prime Minister Maliki, profess their commitment to meeting the date and their understanding that they need to move rapidly to form a government and that only by forming a government quickly will they be able to open up Iraq to the kind of embrace and support from the international community that it will need in order to fight ISIL going forward.
Now, you ask about ISIL and its movement across the border in Syria. ISIL was in Syria because of Assad, not for any other reason – one of many international groups and foreign fighters groups that have assembled in Syria in order to get rid of Bashar al-Assad. And the fact is, they have been funded by individuals and people from various parts of the world who are jihadists; they are more extreme than al-Qaida. Al-Qaida itself expelled them after they had a brief unity moment, and al-Qaida found them too troubling, but they are essentially al-Qaida in Iraq.

And the fact is that they do pose a threat. They cannot be given safe haven anywhere. Because given safe haven, they will continue to plot against governments locally, regionally, and abroad. And that is clear from their own communications and from our knowledge of them. So that’s why they pose a serious threat. They are destabilizing. There isn’t one country – not Iran, not Iraq, not Jordan, not Israel, not Turkey, not anybody in the region – who believes that ISIL is something that can be tolerated in this region. That’s why it is important to focus now on ISIL, and that’s why again I reiterate the President will not be hampered if he deems it necessary if the formation is not complete.

One thing I want to emphasize: If the President of the United States makes a decision that he has to do something with respect to ISIL because of the urgency, it has nothing to do with support for a specific government, or for – let me rephrase that. It’s not specifically support for the existing prime minister or for one sect or another. It will be against ISIL, because ISIL is a terrorist organization, and I think everybody today that we talked to understood the urgency and the ability to separate what the United States might do from their government formation process itself.

MS. PSAKI: Thanks, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all very much.

U.S. STATEMENT ON SUDAN'S COURT DECISION TO FREE MERIAM YAHYA IBRAHIM ISHAG

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

U.S. Welcomes Court Ruling to Free Meriam Yahya Ibrahim Ishag

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 23, 2014

---

We obviously welcome the decision by the Sudanese Appeals Court to order the release of Ms. Meriam Yahya Ibrahim Ishag. Her case has rightly drawn the attention of the world and has been of deep concern to the United States Government and many of our citizens and their representatives in Congress.

Nothing can bring the lost moments back to a mother and her children, but today we celebrate the reunification of this family. From this step, we would hope that the Government of Sudan could take further strides toward a different and more hopeful future for the people of Sudan.
We continue to urge Sudan to repeal its laws that are inconsistent with its 2005 Interim Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These actions would help demonstrate to the Sudanese people that their government intends to respect their fundamental freedoms and universal human rights.

U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS FOR JUNE 23, 2014

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

CONTRACTS

ARMY

SENTEL Corp., Alexandria, Virginia, was awarded a $53,514,853 modification (P00009) to contract W52P1J-12-C-0077 to exercise an option year for integrated logistics support services for property accountability in the 401st Army Field Support Brigade in Afghanistan. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $13,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. Estimated completion date is Dec. 23, 2014. Work will be performed in Afghanistan. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity.

NIITEK, Dulles, Virginia, was awarded a $26,122,231 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with options in support of the Husky Mounted Detection System which will provide ground penetrating radar, deep buried detection, and marking capabilities, installed on the Husky, thereby enabling the detection of underbelly-attack explosive hazards during route clearance missions. The contract includes a 21 -month engineering and manufacturing development base period with a 15-month low rate initial production option. Work will be performed in Dulles, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of June 22, 2017. One bid was solicited and one received. Fiscal 2014 research, development, testing and evaluation funds in the amount of $18,900,000 are being obligated at the time of the award. Army Contracting Command, Alexandria, Virginia, is the contracting activity (W909MY-14-C-0025).

Goodfellow Bros., Inc., Wenatchee, Washing
ton, was awarded a $27,345,000 firm-fixed-price contract for an infantry platoon battle course. Work will be performed in the Pohakuloa Training Area on the island of Hawaii, Hawaii, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2016. Bids were solicited via the internet with five received. Military construction funds in the amount of $25,345,000 (fiscal 2013); $682,000 (fiscal 2013); and $1,318,000 (fiscal 2010) are being obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Shafter, Hawaii, is the contracting activity (W9128A-14-C-0005).

NAVY

Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC, Greenville, South Carolina, is being awarded a $45,100,173 modification under a previously awarded firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to exercise option two for regional base operations support services at Naval Air Station, Jacksonville; Naval Station Mayport; Bureau of Medicine and Surgery; and Blount Island Command. The work to be performed provides for regional base operating support services including, but not limited to, the following functions: port operations, facilities support services, facility investment, base support vehicles and equipment, and environmental. The total contract amount after exercise of this option will be $132,140,027. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, Florida, and is expected to be completed June 2015. Fiscal 2014 operation and maintenance (Navy and Marine Corps); fiscal 2014 working capital funds (Navy); fiscal 2014 defense health program funds; and fiscal 2014 family housing operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $15,934,916 are being obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast, Jacksonville, Florida, is the contracting activity (N69450-12-D-7582).

Lockheed Martin, Moorestown, New Jersey, is being awarded a $12,171,921 cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-11-C-2300 CLIN 0012) to provide procurement and engineering efforts in support of the TRS-3D Radar installation for the Port Hueneme Test Ship. Work will be performed in San Diego, California (68 percent); Clearwater, Florida (12 percent); Moorestown, New Jersey (10 percent); Washington, District of Columbia (10 percent), and is expected to be completed by December 2018. Fiscal 2014 research, development, test and evaluation funding in the amount of $12,171,921 will be obligated at time of award. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair, Bath, Maine, is the contracting activity.

Raytheon Co., El Segundo, California, is being awarded $14,899,999 for firm-fixed-price delivery order 0054 against a previously issued basic ordering agreement (N00019-10-G-0006) to complete an engineering change proposal to retrofit an infrared marker into the existing Advanced Targeting Forward Looking Infrared pods for the F/A-18 E/F aircraft. Work will be performed in El Segundo, California (80 percent), and McKinney, Texas (20 percent), and is expected to be completed in January 2016. Fiscal 2014 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $14,899,999 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity.

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

TK&K Services, LLC,** Alpharetta, Georgia, has been awarded a maximum $18,915,900 firm-fixed-price contract for fuel management services to include personnel, equipment, vehicles, tools, materials, supplies, and supervision to manage all aspects of petroleum and cryogenic products. This contract was a competitive acquisition, and eight offers were received. This is a five-year base contract with one five-year option period. Locations of performance are Georgia and Oklahoma, with a Sept. 30, 2019, performance completion date. Using military service is Air Force. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (SP0600-14-C-5415).

Lord Corporation, doing business as Aerospace Division, Erie, Pennsylvania, has been awarded a maximum $12,404,463 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-quantity contract for unique weapon system components and/or components for specific uses on multiple aircraft. This contract was a sole-source acquisition. This is a one-year base contract with four one-year option periods. Locations of performance are Pennsylvania and Illinois with a June 10, 2015 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Richmond, Virginia (SPE4A2-14-D-0004). (Awarded June 11, 2014).

**Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned Small Business

SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON REMOVAL OF CHEMICAL MATERIALS FROM SYRIA

FROM:  THE STATE DEPARTMENT 

Removal of Declared Chemical Materials from Syria

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 23, 2014

---

Today, the international maritime task force completed the critical mission of removing the last 8 percent of declared chemical weapons precursors from Syria. With this step, 100 percent of the declared chemicals are out of war-torn Syria. We congratulate the OPCW-UN Joint Mission and the entire international coalition, which operated under dangerous conditions to remove more than 1,000 tons of declared chemical weapons materials, a daunting undertaking that grew out of the agreement we reached last year between the United States and Russia. Many of our allies and partners, particularly Denmark, Norway, Finland, Italy, and the United Kingdom, are playing an essential role in the removal and destruction effort. In the coming weeks, the United States stands ready to begin destruction of a large amount of Syria’s chemical weapons precursors. This unprecedented mission, deploying unique American capabilities, will ensure that they will not be used against the Syrian people or against us, our allies, or our partners, in the region or beyond.

However, it should not be lost on anyone that our work is not finished. Very serious issues remain and must be resolved. We remain deeply concerned by the reports of systematic use of chlorine gas in opposition areas; the Syrian regime has dragged their feet on destroying production facilities; the international community has questions with regard to Syria’s declaration that must be adequately answered; and we are appalled at the death toll from the regime's continued attacks on its own people, as well the grave humanitarian crisis.
But, this is also an important moment to take stock of what has been achieved: the removal of all declared chemicals; verification of the destruction of declared production, mixing, and filling equipment; verification of the destruction of all declared chemical weapon delivery vehicles, including missile warheads and aerial bombs; and diminishing the strategic threat posed by the Syrian chemical weapons program to our allies and partners in the region.

The world will never forget the loss of the more than 1,400 innocent Syrians senselessly killed with chemical weapons on August 21, 2013. For 100 years, the international community has deemed the use of these weapons far beyond the bounds of acceptable conduct. The worst of the weapons are gone, but the despicable regime and the crisis it has created remain and require our collective focus.

SECRETARY KERRY SAYS CONVICTION OF AL JAZERRA JOURNALISTS IN EGYPT IS DISTURBING

FROM:  THE STATE DEPARTMENT 

Conviction of Al Jazeera Journalists

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 23, 2014

---

Today's conviction and chilling, draconian sentences by the Cairo Criminal Court of three Al Jazeera journalists and fifteen others in a trial that lacked many fundamental norms of due process, is a deeply disturbing set-back to Egypt's transition. Injustices like these simply cannot stand if Egypt is to move forward in the way that President al-Sisi and Foreign Minister Shoukry told me just yesterday that they aspire to see their country advance.

As I shared with President al-Sisi during my visit to Cairo, the long term success of Egypt and its people depends on the protection of universal human rights, and a real commitment to embracing the aspirations of the Egyptians for a responsive government. Egyptian society is stronger and sustainable when all of its citizens have a say and a stake in its success. Today's verdicts fly in the face of the essential role of civil society, a free press, and the real rule of law. I spoke with Foreign Minister Shoukry again today to make very clear our deep concerns about these convictions and sentences.

Yesterday, President al-Sisi and I frankly discussed these issues and his objectives at the start of his term as President. I call on him to make clear, publicly, his government’s intention to observe Egypt’s commitment to the essential role of civil society, a free press, and the rule of law. The Egyptian government should review all of the political sentences and verdicts pronounced during the last few years and consider all available remedies, including pardons.

SPECIAL BRIEFING ON IRAQ BY STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Background Briefing in Amman, Jordan

Special Briefing

Senior State Department Officials

Amman, Jordan

June 22, 2014

---

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: So this is a background briefing previewing Secretary Kerry’s trip to Baghdad tomorrow. We have on the phone with us [Senior State Department Official One], who will be known here forward as senior State Department official number one. He’ll go do a quick overview of the trip and then we will take some questions.

With that, [Senior State Department Official One], go ahead.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Okay. Thanks, [Senior State Department Official Two]. I’ll just give a quick – just a quick preview of the trip, starting with tomorrow. And the Secretary will see here in Baghdad – he will see Prime Minister Maliki; he will see foreign minister Zebari; Ammar Hakim, who is the head of a Shia party called the Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq; he will speak to (inaudible), who’s one of the prominent Sunni leaders here; and also Deputy Prime Minister Salih Mutlaq, who also has a bloc of primarily Sunnis and won a number of seats in the most recent election.

So the stop in Baghdad has a couple of key themes. First of all, to emphasize our highest-level commitment to Iraq during this time of crisis. And that’s a commitment that is bedrock commitment under our Strategic Framework Agreement, and we’ll be discussing in more detail with the Iraqis the elements of our package, which the President announced the other day, some of the support we’ll be providing. And it’s also an opportunity for the Secretary to do person-to-person diplomacy with the key leaders and the key blocs as they work towards forming a new government along the constitutional timeline that they’re on.

And just a word on that. It’s important to kind of step back about where we are in terms of the political process as we approach the security challenges in parallel with the political process. And considering that Iraq had an election, and it was a very successful election with about 14 million voters, the election was certified about a week ago, which started a formal timeline of a process for forming a new government. That timeline requires the new parliament – there are 328 members who are elected to be in the new parliament on the 30^th of this month. In that session, they should choose the speaker. That is what the constitution requires. And 30 days after that – within 30 days after that, they name a new president, and then within 15 days after that, a new prime minister. These timelines can be accelerated, but those are the deadlines. And we are encouraging them to act as swiftly as possible. So that’ll be obviously a key theme of the visit.

In all the meetings, obviously the Secretary will brief them on the conversations in Washington and what has transpired over the last two weeks as we’ve been managing the crisis from here, and again, just go into a little bit more detail about some of the assistance that we will be providing, and emphasizing – as he will have to, because the Iraqis emphasize this to us all the time – that they are united against ISIL, which is really an existential threat to all three communities here, all the three communities here, five principal communities here in Iraq, but also the (inaudible) minority communities including the Christian (inaudible) and others who are under a really mortal threat from ISIL.

So that’s a quick preview of the trip, and then I’m happy to address any questions.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Great. Want to kick it off, Michael?

QUESTION: [Senior State Department Official One], since you’re on a background basis, if there’s going to be a government formation process, obviously it has to come from within. Can you please explain to us who are the potential candidates or alternatives to Maliki from within this Shia bloc or community or parties? And how you see the Iraqi players lining up at this point in time, recognizing that it’s a bit early?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah, thanks, Michael. I’m not going to go into names. And again, as the President said, it’s not up to us to choose who’s going to rule Iraq. This is a sovereign country and it’s up to them. We are encouraging them to form a new government as soon as possible that’s an inclusive government. That’s not only us saying that; most of the leaders here are saying that. Grand Ayatollah Sistani said that just the other day. And so that is what we are looking for.

Prime Minister Maliki’s bloc won 92 seats in the election. He did get the most votes of anyone, but he will need 165 seats to form a government, and it remains to be seen whether or not that can happen.

So first of all, it’s a step-by-step process and it’s very important for all three of the major communities to remain a part of that process, because that is how they can both form a new political foundation, build an inclusive structure, as difficult as that is. And also the constitution requires them to develop a political program as part of forming the government, and as part of that program, a lot of work has been done over the last six months in terms of some critical issues such as an amnesty, such as reform to the accountability and justice system. Some other key things which happened underway will likely be part of that program, as will discussion of devolution of authorities, which was also – before this crisis was a very serious discussion about federalism and how that should work in the country.

So all of this will be discussed through the crucible of the constitutional formation process. Again, I want to emphasize how difficult this is, particularly in the security environment. But all the leaders – and I think the Secretary, when here, what he will emphasize to them is the importance of moving rapidly down this track, and by moving rapidly then, the options for who might be the president, who might be the speaker and everything else will come to a head as the timelines come upon them.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Andrea?

QUESTION: Hi, it’s Andrea Mitchell. We were told by a backgrounder last night flying over that there were three key factors right now: the Sistani statement; what Iran might do, whether Iran would echo the U.S. position as to the need for more inclusiveness; and whatever influence – the influence that the U.S. has. Can you give me – give us your sense, now that the Ayatollah has spoken, as to how --

QUESTION: Khamenei has spoken.

QUESTION: Khamenei spoke, yeah.

QUESTION: Not Sistani.

QUESTION: No, I’m sorry, Khamenei. I’m talking about what happened today. We’re just all clarifying. We’re all talking about the same thing. The Khamenei statements today seemed very definitive. What is your impression? Does that mean that at least he, within Iran, is embracing Maliki and is not moving off of him?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Well, I’ll let the Supreme Leader speak for himself and the statement speak for itself. But the key decision is to be made by the Iraqis. Every time they’ve been through a government formation process, there’s always rumors about (inaudible) and all sorts of things, but it often comes down to the math and how they can actually put together a governing coalition.

What makes this one particularly complicated and difficult for anyone from the outside to kind of direct is that it is so fractured. So that is at best morally an unhealthy thing. The first election here years ago, there were only three choices: there was a big Shia bloc, a big Kurdish bloc, a big Sunni block. In 2010, there was two Shia blocs, one Kurdish bloc, and all the Sunnis were under the same grouping together with Allawi, kind of a nationalist-type bloc. This time, it’s totally different. There’s three main Shia blocs; the Kurds ran on four lists so that they are together for purposes of forming government; and then the Sunnis ran on three or four different lists; and then the Allawi’s, kind of a more secular oriented list, ran on its own, itself.

So the configurations for forming a government are almost endless. What we’re trying to do is encourage them to come together in coalitions where they can have some traction and try to make some progress. But again, if the prime minister can’t get 165 seats, he won’t be able to form a government. So that’s kind of a key – that’s the key variable. And – but what Grand Ayatollah Sistani said was a couple of things. He called for a new government as soon as possible, on the constitutional timeline, and that’s inclusive. And so a lot of folks here are reading kind of into that and what that means, and again, this is going to play out over the coming – really over the coming days.

QUESTION: And as to Tehran?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Excuse me?

QUESTION: And what role do you think Tehran is playing right now vis-a-vis Maliki?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Well, Iran has many different power centers and different elements of Iran are sending different messages and doing different things. They are definitely extremely interested in what’s happening here, to say the least. They consider the (inaudible) in the crisis really started to metastasize and the dominos were falling in the first 72 hours. We know that they were extremely concerned, as were we, about Samarra. We know that ISIL wants to attack the Samarra shrine. That’s the shrine that was hit in February 2006, which started the civil war back then. We know that that is an objective of theirs, and we know that from multiple information channels. And Samarra is right in the middle of Saladin province.

So we know the Iranians were deeply concerned about that for a number of reasons, because if something were to happen to that shrine, really it would lead to potentially irreversible consequences. So that is a real concern. And they’re also just concerned about given the fragility on the border. So there’s no question that they have real interests here and they definitely have real influence here.

And in this region, which is so complicated, there’s all sorts of overlapping interests, and so we are very focused on finding and pursuing our own vital interests and important interests (inaudible) in this country, and that’s kind of what the President laid out the other night in terms of how we’re doing that.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Lara or (inaudible).

QUESTION: I’ve got one.

QUESTION: I’ve got one too.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Yeah.

QUESTION: So, [Senior State Department Official One], it’s Lara Jakes. I have a couple of questions. One, when I walked in, you were talking about how all the sects and the ethnic groups were united in opposing ISIL. And I’m just wondering if you can talk a little bit about what evidence you’re seeing of that and how outside groups or even inside groups might help people resist joining ISIL. I mean, you see the Naqshabandis and other groups that are gaining some power, and they’re not necessarily joining ISIL but they’re joining the larger fight, right? So if you could talk a little bit about why you think most people are united against ISIL.

And then also I just wanted to clarify. You said that – just now about Samarra, that you know that it is an objective of theirs in terms of attacking the al-Askariya Mosque. And I’m just wondering: How do you know that – is it just based on social media? Or how do you know, what have you seen that makes you think that ISIL for sure wants to attack the mosque again?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: First, with Naqshabandi, certainly when this thing started moving, all the kind of – the Naqshabandis, the Baath party, the Baath insurgency that’s led by (inaudible), they’ve been around for a long time. And when this thing really started moving, all the groups like that started kind of jumping on the bandwagon. There’s no question. And people are reaching out to us through all sorts of various channels.
However, as ISIL is wont to do, I mean, if you go back and read stories from when (inaudible) fell, and it says, “Oh, they’re treating everyone well and the women can show their hair,” and everything, fast-forward to now, and there’s a public crucifixion in the town square. That’s just what ISIL does. I was with a prominent leader from Mosul today. Ask him who’s in charge of Mosul – it’s ISIL. There’s an ISIL flag flying on the provincial council building. They are increasingly enforcing their brand of seventh century Islamic law. And so tensions are already starting to build. We have seen reports that you may have seen of ISIL kidnapping prominent Naqshabandi leaders from Kirkuk over the last 48 hours and executing them.

So there’s no question that there’s a tendency in some groups to kind of jump on the bandwagon and even use ISIL for other ends. That’s just a very dangerous game because once ISIL gets rooted in territory, in towns, it’s even harder to root them out. I mean, we have seen this repeatedly and we know these guys. It’s not – they’re not new. It’s Zarqawi and al-Qaida in Iraq, who we know extremely well. It’s the same (inaudible). They kill anybody that doesn’t agree with them. So (inaudible) fighting over the last 72 hours, the (inaudible) tribe was fighting them because they are kind of very strongly anti-AQI, and they now are ISIL, and frankly, they lost because of the firepower that ISIL is able to bear really overwhelmed them.

So we’re hearing from Sunni leaders across the board that they really want to do something about ISIL. They’re figuring out how to do it. A lot of them say – a lot of them keep saying, “Well be stronger if there’s a new prime minister.” Our answer to that is, “Look, you’ve got to pursue this in parallel. Political change comes through the government formation process, but it is not really responsible to let ISIL take over half the country, because once they do that you’re not going to be able to fight back.”

So this is an ongoing conversation, but an example of how we’re hearing that Sunnis are definitely not onboard with ISIL writ large, especially hear from local communities where they are, and also what they’re doing to a lot of the properties of some of the key leaders who we know have roots in the local community based upon just the election results. And there was over a million votes in Nineveh province on April 30th, one of the highest turnouts they’ve ever had. You can look at that and see who did well and who didn’t do well. And the prominent leaders that did well that had that popular support, now what’s happening? Their farms are being razed, their houses are being burned and their cattle is being stolen and slaughtered, and even worse.
So that’s just the kind of reality in some of these areas and it’s quite troubling. So Sunnis in particular are under threat from this group.

In terms of the shrine, just look at (inaudible). They (inaudible). They want to destroy any sign of Shia symbolism or anything else. Everywhere they go, they destroy tombs, they destroy mosques. When this offensive of dominance really started, the statements from ISIL and their public spokesman, who we think is credible in terms of actually being their spokesman, said, “We’re coming to Arbil, we’re coming to Najaf.” I don’t think they can actually get to Arbil and Najaf, obviously, but that’s the threat.

But they’re on the same playbook that they were in 2006. So the Samarra Mosque attack in 2006 came two months after a national election. It was timed directly to a point at which there was extreme political fragility. And we think this was very similar. So there’s no – this is no question that if they could get into Samarra and attack the mosque, they would do so. They have aspirations, they have plans, and then they have capabilities, and the question is their capabilities to get into that part of Samarra.

But just given where Samarra is if you look on a map, it’s right in the middle of Saladin, and therefore at least ISIL thinks that it is a more prominent and more possible target than some of the shrines down in the south.

QUESTION: Great, thanks.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Jay? Oh, sorry. Margaret, (inaudible).

QUESTION: There had been a sense that sort of the blitzkrieg that ISIL had launched had sort of slowed in recent days. Can you give us an assessment of what’s happening on the ground right now? Who’s in control of supply routes and borders? Has Iraq made – the Iraqi Government made any headway?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: I’m sorry, Margaret, can you just – can you speak up just a little bit so I can – I’m hearing you a little bit but in and out.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: You want me to repeat it?

QUESTION: Yeah, can you.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: She just asked if there’s been some sense that maybe ISIL’s progress has slowed a bit, and is there any sense that there’s been progress from the --

QUESTION: On the supply routes and the borders.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: -- on the supply routes and borders?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Here’s what is happening. Some have described it to me this way, and I don’t know if this is accurate, but – and I don’t know because I’m not a historian, but if you read histories of the crusades, they kind of came through, and armies collapsed, and then they, like, kind of were surprised and just kept going. And that’s what kind of happened on the first 72 hours here. And Saladin was the one who got organized and beat the crusades, so this is all – there’s some historic parallels maybe, but I’m not a historian.

So that’s kind of what happened. So Mosul collapsed and they just kind of kept moving, and then there was this mass collective panic and psychological dam that broke, which led to collapses of security forces even in areas where there wasn’t a heavy either ISIL or other insurgent presence, and the thing just really started to collapse.

So we immediately faced some things we had to do. We wanted to look for a circuit breaker to try to break that kind of domino from on and on. We had to ensure our own people were safe, which we did, and we did a number of things for that. We had to make sure that Americans that were in Balad were taken out of Balad safely. We did that. And then we had to work very closely with the Iraqis for an immediate and longer-term plan to reconstitute their security forces and also keep the political process on track and try to just stem this collective panic.

Since then, for a number of reasons, I think the progress towards Baghdad has definitely slowed. So the threat to Baghdad is not nearly as immediate as there was some concern in those early days about just how far this could go. And so what’s happening now is there’s kind of a static situation as you approach Baghdad – I don’t mean just the outskirts, but like far north of Baghdad, that there’s kind of a static situation there.

But ISIL, given their resources in Syria, has made a major push over the last 72 hours at the border. And the Iraqis, given their just lack of force density and having to move forces elsewhere, were very thin on the border. And so what we’ve seen in the last 72 hours are some key border crossings, such as al-Qaim, fall to ISIL. And that is pure ISIL. So it’s really important to understand that it’s an army, this group. So there are political grievances in this country and that’s a serious problem and we need to address them in order to mobilize the population to really stand up to these guys. But it’s an army. The al-Qaim battle lasted three days and started with artillery barrages every morning and then kind of three-pronged, very military proficient attacks. And they eventually overtook that border crossing. And then today they turned south and took a small – few of those small dusty towns that don’t have much security presence. And that’s what happens if 30 trucks with 50 caliber machineguns show up.

They took a small town called Rutba, and that is where the regional significance of this problem really comes into play and why the Secretary’s visit is so important both here and in the region. Rutba has this open highway to Jordan and to Saudi Arabia. So, I mean, this is a threat to everybody in the region, and it’s one reason why the Secretary in particular has been on the phone constantly emphasizing the regional nature of this threat and the need for a real collective focus and response.

So that’s the long answer to your question, but just in sum, kind of relatively static approaching Baghdad, but border region coming from Syria remains extremely serious.

QUESTION: Can I come back on that --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Sure, Kim.

QUESTION: -- since we’re talking about holding ground. This is Kim Ghattas with the BBC. I’m not going to go into the history of the crusades, but they did hold territory for a long time, and ISIS now does hold territory and they, as far as we understand from the reports coming from Iraq, is they hold all the border crossings with Syria and they hold now one border crossing with Jordan. How do you even begin to reverse that?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: It’s a very good question, and from Rabiaa south, the border is – it’s controlled by ISIL. So again, extremely serious situation. One thing we’re doing, particularly since this crisis started, is a major increase, as the President announced, of our intelligence collection, so we have a better picture in these border regions than we’ve ever had before, and determinedly helping to enable the Iraqis in particular to be able to do some things out there which right now they can’t do. We’ll be delivering some additional supplies and things as early as Wednesday for them.

But first of all, those borders are incredibly remote. We used to be out there. They’re very hard to defend. And ISIL from Syria can mass – they can mass force. So they can mass hundreds of people and come over the border. And so they’re able to do this and then it’s a real problem. But their ability to then kind of mass force and hold territory in and then move on forward and (inaudible) is much more limited. But definitely, like I said, the situation in the border region is very serious.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Jay?

QUESTION: Hey, [Senior State Department Official One], this is Jay Solomon from The Wall Street Journal. How do you look at kind of the historical dynamic between what Sistani looks at or what he is saying and what the Iranians say? Because they’re traditionally kind of in competition, or they’re definitely not in alliance. And we see Sistani kind of suggesting Maliki can go and then Khamenei today suggesting he should say. Is there a way you look at that kind of intra-Shia politic?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: A really great question, and there’s a huge historical difference between Najaf, where Sistani is, and Qom, where the – for Iranian tradition and where Khamenei came from. And so Khamenei, Zetour jurisprudence and the foundation of the whole Iranian system is the notion of clerical rule, that there’s a supreme leader that basically gives guidance in every sphere of life from politics to foreign policy to personal life, everything. And that is a total anathema to Sistani and Najaf. The school in Najaf is, as some of you are very familiar with, it’s quietism, which is people who follow Shia Islam, look to Najaf and Sistani for guidance in their personal lives and how to live a religious life. But when it comes to politics, generally speaking, Sistani and Najaf stay out of politics.

However, when the situation is quite acute, we have seen Sistani jump into the fray. It is rare, and therefore his statements since this crisis began are all the more significant. Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, issues edicts all the time on everything, and that is because that is the kind of Khamenei-based system in which you have one supreme leader. So in that regard, Sistani and Najaf are kind of – are a bit of a threat to the Iranian system because they undermine it; they actually call into question the very religious foundation of the Iranian – of the religious legitimacy of the entire Iranian regime. They would never put it that way, but that’s just kind of true. They don’t believe that one supreme leader can give total guidance in matters of policy and foreign affairs.

So therefore, if you read Sistani’s statements very closely, they are subtle. They’re never totally directive. But at least for the people we talk to here, the statement on Friday about a new government, inclusive government as soon as possible, correct the mistakes of the past was pretty as clear as Sistani usually is, that at the very least it’s incumbent upon the leaders to move the constitutional process forward and to work diligently to form a new government that includes all component parts of Iraq.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: And let’s just do a few more.

QUESTION: Can I go?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Sure
.
QUESTION: This is Lesley Wrouhgton from Reuters. I was wondering what you – we’ve heard quite a bit from the Secretary what he is going over to tell Maliki, to govern more as an inclusive government and stuff like that. But what is the actual message he’s going to send them as far as what he – the movements? Or is there a plan or a strategy that he’s seeking from him in how he’s going to move forward on this? And what – is he seeking an assurance from Maliki that he’s going to move quickly on this? I mean, beyond the message that he’s going to send, I’m just trying to figure out what he’s hoping to get back from it.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah, no. Again, very good question, and you can (inaudible) the current situation very difficult, because it’s not as though – all the Iraqi leaders got together last week, last Wednesday I think. They all met for the first time in some time and they put out a very strong statement about the (inaudible) ISIL and their commitment on various issues, which was significant just given the current situation. But there’s no mechanism right now for any significant reforms, for example, to get through because there isn’t a government in place because it’s that constitutional vacuum period.

So the things that the Iraqis need to do to kind of pull their country together are really things that the next government needs to do. It’s a little late for the outgoing government, when there’s no parliament, to do things to kind of pull the country together. And so therefore, the focus is keeping the constitutional government formation process on track and making it clear that all the component parts, all the winners of the last election, those who won a substantial amount of seats will have a full say in that process and in choosing their own leaders.

It remains the view of most of the leaders here that the positions will be sorted out. This isn’t like Lebanon, where nobody says by edict that the prime minister has to be Shia, the president Kurdish, and the speaker Sunni here, but that has become the tradition. And we continue to hear from all groups that the Kurds do want to retain the presidency; the Sunnis do, at least (inaudible) last year, retain the speakership; and it’s recognized that the Shia, just given that they’re 60 percent of the country and just given the outcome of the election, will retain the prime ministership.

So – and it’s incumbent upon, therefore, each group and the Secretary will press upon them – because a lot of them, they’ll look to us to kind of direct the course of events or to choose somebody. And even if we tried to do that, we can’t. It’s not going to work. It’s really upon them. So the Kurds, for example, want the presidency. Well, they need to name a candidate. Once they name a candidate, most folks will accept the Kurdish candidate for president, whoever that might be, and it will be somebody who – the speaker – the Sunnis need to decide on a speaker candidate, and then they will have a speaker and also a vice president, because there’ll be a Sunni vice president. And then the Shia, amongst themselves, need to determine the best prime minister candidate who can actually rally the country and pull together a government.
So a lot of decisions really have to be made by Iraqis and they have to be made soon. And we recognize how difficult it is for them, but sometimes you hear, “Well, we’re not – we can’t make a decision until there’s a whole package in front of us.” And our answer is, “Guys, you just – you don’t really have time. I mean, you got to move on this.” So again, the Secretary, in kind of person-to-person diplomacy here and talking through these issues that myself and Ambassador Beecroft have been speaking with everybody here for the last 10 days or so on all of this, and having the Secretary here to not only echo what we’ve been saying but kind of bring it up to the next level, and having very serious conversations and a demonstration of the U.S. commitment, I think will be quite important and I hope influential.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Jo.

QUESTION: Yeah. Just following up on that, [Senior State Department Official One] – this is Jo Biddle from AFP. Given that it’s so difficult to form a government and the results of the election were so inconclusive, is there any constitutional mechanism or is there any way that there could be a plan for an interim government to take over, given that they’re faced with this threat from ISIL?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Not really. There’s a – I mean, right now there’s a caretaker government, which is not the most stable mechanism to have. So I mean this is why they keep the process on track. When this crisis really started moving, the election wasn’t certified yet. And to get the election certified, the court here, the federal court, had to meet and certify the book, and it was – they got 1,000 challenges and all this work had been done at the UN and they had like just finished – all the work had just finished when Mosul fell. And the court was going to collect itself and come back and it had a few other things to do. And our message to them, because their judges were all over the place, including other countries and one, his wife was sick – and so our message was that you guys have to get back and certify the election like now. And it wasn’t just coming from us; it was coming from everybody, including the leaders here. So they did. All the judges (inaudible). And I mean, it sounds like just a formality, but it’s a critical formality because otherwise you have no traction. And so I forget what they – maybe six days ago or so they came back; they did meet, had a quorum, which they need, and they certified the election.

That then started this clock – so you had a clock to formally move through the process to form a government, which pressurizes the system because just the tendency here is not to make any decisions until the last very possible moment, and that’s not really the best tendency when you’re in a situation like this. So they came back, certified the election. That kicked off a 15-day clock to form the parliament, and then they have to pick a speaker, president, everything else. So that’s kind of the process. There isn’t an alternative process for kind of forming an interim government or something.

There has been talk that, “Look, if we can’t choose a president or (inaudible) right away, we have like an interim president while we choose on the prime minister,” or something like that. I mean, it sounds a little weird to us, but so there’s talk about things like that, because everybody knows that the big position is the prime minister, and until there’s agreement on that it might be hard to agree on everything else.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Let’s do one more. We don’t have one more? Are we done?

QUESTION: I can throw one in.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Okay. One more.

QUESTION: [Senior State Department Official One], is there any indication that Maliki is not prepared to cooperate in good faith with the government formation process? By that I mean honor the timelines that have been outlined and perhaps declare a state of emergency or take some action in which he perpetuates his role as prime minister and there is not, in fact, a new government formed. Is that a concern?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah, so far – so far, no. So there are rumors when this crisis started how to do a state of emergency; the parliament then couldn’t pass it. There were rumors that he was going to declare one. We went to see him, and he said, “No, I’m not going to do that, not going to do that.” Rumors that there would be some monkey business with the court not to certify the vote – that didn’t happen. Sistani – we had Sistani’s statement very clear about the constitutional timeline and sticking to it.

The hard part right now in a constitutional timeline is that they need to choose a speaker first. The speaker is likely to be one of the Sunni candidates, and the Sunnis are divided in terms of their candidate, who it might be. So that’s where we’re trying to work with them. Okay, well, if you have two or three people, who’s speaker, who’s vice president, you guys got to come sort it out. That’s a potential, at least in the immediate term about the next steps, that’s a potential wrench. But that’s something that the Secretary being here will be very helpful to kind of talk them through where they are and what the options are and emphasizing the need to move and recognizing when you only have one position to go around, not everybody’s going to be happy, but given where you are, the system has to move.

So I mean so far, Michael, no, we have not seen that. And whether there’s some concerns about, I think, again, if you look at Sistani’s statement pretty closely, he was – not that he gives instructions or anything, but the clear emphasis is to keep the thing on track. And just to make a point I made earlier, because he very rarely intervenes or gets involved in things like this, I think that should resonate very loudly.

QUESTION: And just a quick follow-up. Sunnis are divided between whom?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: I’m not going to name the names. It’s just – all the parties are divided between who should go where. So there’s just – there isn’t a – the Kurds don’t have a consensus, for example, on who the president should be. The Sunnis don’t yet have a consensus on who the speaker should be. And the Shia are talking amongst themselves about prime minister candidates.

QUESTION: Let me ask one quick question.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: So our message is we can’t figure this out for you. Because I guarantee you, if we said Mr. X should be speaker, there would then be Mr. Y and Mr. Z who would say, “Ah, The Americans are trying to interfere.” And then – so our message is there’s urgency. There’s now a timeline. You guys really need to figure this out. If you want us to help be a neutral broker between you and somebody else, there’s nothing – we can do that, but we need to know the trade space and kind of what’s going on. And so that’s what we’re trying to do as we speak.

QUESTION: [Senior State Department Official One], let me – it’s Lara. Let me ask one very quick question for a very quick answer. I mean, you talk to Maliki all the time. What’s his public posture right now? I mean, how does he kind of carry himself? Is he defiant? Is he tired or exhausted? Is he depressed? Is he kind of contrite? I mean, is he trying to – how would you – you’ve seen him in all sorts of different ways. What’s his – where’s his head right now?
QUESTION: And is he angry at America?

QUESTION: Yeah. Is he angry? I mean, where is he?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: All of them look to us for answers and solutions and like a magic wand. So there’s a lot of that. And they’re also very fearful of their situation. And a lot of people they’ve known, on the Sunni and the Shia side, over the last 10 days have been killed. So – and again, like I said, prominent leaders, their houses are gone. I mean, that’s just what’s happening, particularly on the Sunni side. Maliki – one day it’s Baiji refinery, one day it’s (inaudible), one day it’s Qaim. And the limitations of the Iraqi security forces is very apparent. Their lack of – and there are things that I’ve talked about before, but they’re very limited in the air. They have two Cessna planes that can fire Hellfire missiles. That’s it, and they can’t be everywhere at once. They have a limited number of helicopters. So their ability to respond to events when they are getting frantic calls from people who might be stranded or might be – it definitely takes a toll.

So it’s a sense of extreme anxiousness, also extreme focus on the situation, not just (inaudible) of everybody. And of course they see it through different prisms and they hear different things. And really looking to us to help. And so, again, just to repeat kind of what we’re doing, why it’s significant: If you combine the intel we’re doing with the operations center we’re going to set up, which is already starting, which will allow us to collect all that information in one place and share it, combined with making sure good Iraqi units are well supplied and equipped, making sure that the planes that I mentioned have the right munitions, the right – very accurate laser-guided munitions that they’re able to deploy very effectively, that, at least on the security side, can begin to make a little bit of a difference and restore a little bit of confidence, in addition to some of the advising we can do with some of the better units.

So that – again, and there’s no quick fix here. There’s no magic airstrike that’s going to change the entire situation. But they want to know that we see the threat, that’s a threat that we all share, and that we’re committed to helping them fight it.

On the Sunni side, they want to know that we’re not committed to helping them fight it in support just of the prime minister, which we’re not. I mean, we see this – as I said earlier, this is about our own interest here and the shared threat against this very dangerous terrorist group.
On the Shia side, there’s this extreme anxiety that these – ISIL wants to kill any Shia they find. And they’re looking around the world for support, quite literally, and they feel (inaudible) from that. Not just Maliki but also Hakim and others who the Secretary will see, they tell us they feel really alone and isolated, because the message they get from some quarters are don’t help them until Maliki’s gone. And so that – they hear that and they think we face an existential threat here. So there’s just a lot of anxiety, a lot of looking to the U.S. for help.

And that’s why one of the messages of the Secretary’s trip is our commitment and our engagement. And I just – it will be good to see the Secretary here in personal, because we – myself and Ambassador Beecroft – have been on screen with him over the last however long now, 12 days or so since this started, a number of times, in national security meetings and principal committee meetings, where we have gone through every possible option and the best way to respond in a strategic, deliberate, methodical and effective way.

So again, a long answer to your question, but incredibly focused on the situation. They’re getting reports from all over the country, many of which are extremely serious. And so they want to let us know what they know, ask how we can help. And we’re telling them, “Look, we’re going to help. And it’s also, though, incumbent upon you to try to take advantage of this moment, given where you are in the constitutional process to reset some foundation to pull the country together, recognizing how difficult that is.” But that will be a key message that the Secretary gives to everybody.

GLOBAL WARMING ACCELERATES DEOUGHT-INDUCED FOREST DEATH

TEXAS MAN CHARGED FOR ROLE IN BIOFUELS FRAUD SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Thursday, June 19, 2014

Houston Man Charged with Biofuels Fraud Scheme

A federal grand jury in Houston, Texas, today indicted Philip Joseph Rivkin, a/k/a Felipe Poitan Arriaga, for offenses involving a federal renewable fuel program that allegedly netted him more than $29 million, the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division announced.   The 68-count indictment against Rivkin, 49, of Houston and most recently, Guatemala City, Guatemala, includes allegations of wire fraud, mail fraud, Clean Air Act false statements, and money laundering.

The indictment was unsealed late Thursday following Rivkin’s initial appearance in federal court in Houston.   He was arrested on Wednesday evening when he arrived in Houston from Guatemala, which had deported him earlier in the day after learning that he had fraudulently secured Guatemalan citizenship.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 created or extended several federally-funded programs that created monetary incentives for the production of renewable fuels, including biodiesel, and to encourage the use of such fuels in the United States.   Authorized biodiesel producers and importers could generate and attach credits—known as “renewable identification numbers” or “RINs”—to biodiesel they produced or imported.    Because certain companies need RINs to comply with regulatory obligations, RINs have significant market value.

The indictment alleges that beginning around February of 2009, Rivkin operated and controlled several companies in the fuel and biodiesel industries, including Green Diesel LLC, Fuel Streamers Inc., and Petro Constructors LLC, all based in Houston.  It is alleged that Rivkin claimed to produce millions of gallons of biodiesel at the Green Diesel’s Houston facility and then generated and sold RINs based upon this claim. In reality, no biodiesel was ever produced at the Green Diesel facility.  The indictment alleges that this scheme allowed the defendant to generate approximately 45 million RINs that were fraudulent, which were then sold to companies that needed to obtain them and resulted in millions of dollars in sales.   Rivkin is also alleged to have caused fraudulent tax credit claims based on fictitious biodiesel production.

The indictment goes on to allege that the defendant created false records and made false statements to conceal his fraudulent claims of biodiesel production, importation and RIN generation.   Finally, the indictment alleges that the defendant laundered the proceeds of his crimes, using banking institutions and complex financial transactions to benefit from the illegal funds he received, and to attempt to protect these funds from government enforcement.  The indictment includes a notice of forfeiture to include: cash in excess of $29 million; three vehicles including a Lamborghini, Maserati, and a Bentley; a Canadair LTD airplane; and millions of dollars worth of artwork that was previously seized from Rivkin in 2012 and is now included in  a civil action for forfeiture.

An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt.   All defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The collaborative investigation that led to today’s indictment and yesterday’s arrest was the result of work by EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division, the United States Secret Service, Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation, and Homeland Security Investigations.  The Guatemalan Special Investigations Unit worked with federal investigators to uncover the fraudulent nature of Rivkin’s Guatemalan citizenship, which led to his deportation back to the United States.

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Leslie E. Lehnert of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

MICROSCOPE TAKES IMAGES USING PROTONS

FROM:  LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY 

Taking pictures with protons

U.S., German, Russian collaboration conducts first experiments in Germany

LOS ALAMOS, N.M., June 17, 2014—A new facility for using protons to take microscopic images has been commissioned at the ring accelerator of the GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH (Helmholtz Centre for Heavy Ion Research) in Darmstadt, Germany.

The proton microscope was developed by an international collaboration consisting of Los Alamos National Laboratory, GSI, the Technical University Darmstadt, and the Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Russia.

Protons, like neutrons, are the building blocks of atomic nuclei. Similar to x-rays, they can be used to radiograph objects, generating images of them. Protons are able to penetrate hot dense matter that can't be examined with light or x-rays. This technology, also known as "proton radiography," was originally invented at Los Alamos National Laboratory in the 1990s, but has been adopted around the world. In the future, the technique will be used at an accelerator currently under construction in Darmstadt called the Facility for Antiproton and Ion Research (FAIR) and at the proposed Matter and Radiation In Extremes (MaRIE) facility at Los Alamos.

In their first experiments, researchers used a proton beam accelerated to an energy of 4.5 gigaelectronvolts (more than 98 percent of the speed of light) by the GSI accelerator facility. A special setup of four quadrupole magnets served as optics to magnify objects with the beam. Initially, they radiographed different items like sets of wires with varying sizes and a wristwatch.

Scientists have succeeded in resolving objects and structures down to a size of 30 micrometers or one thousandth of an inch. The GSI facility, called the Proton Microscope for FAIR, or PRIOR, achieved resolutions comparable to existing facilities in the U.S. or Russia. Scientists plan to improve this to a value of up to 10 micrometers in experiments this year. Another goal is the recording of image sequences of moving objects. In experiments scheduled for July 2014 thin wires will be explosively evaporated by a strong electrical discharge, and this "plasma explosion" will be examined with the proton beam.

The study of plasma is of particular interest to scientists because plasma is found in stars or gas planets like Jupiter. This state of matter can be generated in the laboratory with lasers or strong electrical discharges for short intervals of time. Because protons can penetrate plasmas, they offer unique possibilities to measure the properties of plasma with instruments like PRIOR.

"Combining the experience of this international collaboration has proven to be very productive," said Frank Merrill of the Laboratory's Neutron Science and Technology group and a collaborator on the project. "By joining the enhancements gained from increased proton energy with the gains from proton microscope imaging lenses, a new and remarkable proton radiography capability has been developed."

"Next to the research on events in space, the technique also has very practical applications", said Dmitry Varentsov from GSI's department Plasma Physics and Detectors. "For example one could radiograph running engines or diagnose and treat tumors with it. We want to explore all these opportunities."

The proton microscope will also play an important role at the FAIR accelerator facility. GSI will serve as injector for FAIR. The new FAIR accelerators will provide protons with even higher energies improving the possibilities for experiments. After the completion of FAIR the PRIOR setup will be moved to the new facility. The development of this technique is being extended to the use of electrons and will be utilized for applications at MaRIE.