The Moscow-Tehran Axis

Russians supplying missile goods to Iran, U.S. intelligence says
BY: Bill Gertz - The Washington Free Beacon June 8, 2012 5:00 am
http://freebeacon.com/the-moscow-tehran-axis/

Russian missile manufacturers provided goods to Iran’s ballistic missile
program, but U.S. intelligence agencies claim the proliferation is not part
of an official Moscow policy of backing Tehran weapons programs.

The unclassified assessment by the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence was sent in April to Congress following a request from Capitol
Hill to explain the current state of Moscow-Tehran missile trade. The new
intelligence on the missile trade could trigger sanctions under the Iran,
North Korea, and Syria sanctions law or limit U.S. government interaction
with Moscow.

“We assess that individual entities have provided assistance to Iran’s
ballistic missile programs,” the DNI statement by legislative director
Kathleen Turner said.

The new assessment differs from an earlier intelligence statement supplied
to Congress that was more categorical on the transfers and did not contain
legalistic references included in an apparent effort to avoid linking the
Russian government to recent missile-related transfers.

The assessment could affect a requested presidential waiver sought by the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration that is needed prior to the
next U.S. payment to Russia for the International Space Station.

A State Department official said the Russia-Iran missile trade has not been
raised in recent meetings between U.S. and Russian officials.

Current law requires the president to certify that it is Russia’s policy to
prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear and missile technology and systems.

“NASA wants another waiver to allow us to make payments to Moscow for the
International Space Station, but the president cannot certify that Russia
has a policy to prevent their own assistance to Iran’s missiles, to say
nothing of the nuclear program, and what’s going on in Syria,” said a
congressional aide close to the issue.

The waiver is required under the nonproliferation law before any payments
can be made.

Additionally, the administration is pressing Congress to pass permanent
normal trade relations legislation for Russia, raising further questions
that the administration is ignoring Russian arms proliferation to Tehran.

“What message will all this send to Putin,” the aide said. “I think we know:
The Obama administration reset cancer is now metastatic to all U.S. policy.”

The statement concludes that, while it is not official Russian policy to
assist Iran’s missile programs, Moscow is incapable of implementing a policy
to halt such exports or prevent state-owned arms manufacturers from
assisting Iran, the aide said.

The assessment appears to be in line with President Obama’s conciliatory
policies toward Russia. The president was overheard during a conversation
with then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in March as telling the Russians
not to pressure him during the current election campaign. Obama promised
“more flexibility” in stalled talks on missile defenses after his presumed
reelection, according to the conversation that was recorded by television
cameras.

According to the DNI, currently headed by James Clapper, the U.S.
intelligence community “assesses that Moscow almost certainly is not
pursuing an official policy of providing support to Iran’s ballistic missile
program,” although it did not explain why, since all Russian weapons exports
are under the control of the state-run arm exporter Rosoboronexport.

The assessment went on to state that Moscow has “taken steps to improve
controls on ballistic missile technology and its record of export
enforcement—though still mixed—has improved over the last decade.”

“Russian space entities have entered into agreements with Iran but Moscow
almost certainly views commercial space-related ventures with Iran as
consistent with its obligations under the Missile Technology Control Regime
(MTCR).”

The MTCR is a loose-knit arms control accord that limits states that adhere
to its provisions from exporting missiles with ranges greater than 300
kilometers and the capability of carrying warheads heavier than 500
kilograms.

The congressional aide said the DNI statement is related to the Iran, North
Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act that is designed to punish arms
proliferators that supply nuclear and missile goods to those states.

An initial 2005 version of the law outlined Russian support for Iran’s
nuclear and strategic missile programs.

A CIA-drafted report to Congress made public earlier this year said Iran’s
missile arsenal is “one of the largest in the Middle East” and includes an
array of short- and medium-range missiles. Iran continues work on long-range
missiles.

“Entities in China and Russia along with North Korea are among likely
suppliers,” the report said, noting that Tehran remains “dependent on
foreign suppliers for some key missile components.”

Classified cables made public by Wikileaks reveal extensive efforts by Iran
to obtain missile technology from Russia, as well as other European and
Asian states.

In one case in February 2009, the Russian firm Crystaltechno Ltd. worked to
buy a German-origin, single-axis turntable for Iran’s defense
industry-related Malek-Ashtar University of Technology. The machine can be
used to test gyroscopes and micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) sensors
used in missile guidance and navigation systems.

In 2008, U.S. sanctions were imposed on Rosoboronexport, the state arms
exporter, for sales of TOR-M1 air defense missiles to Iran. Four Russian
arms makers were sanctioned in 2007 for weapons transfers to Iran.

A December 2006 cable said Russian arms broker Aleksey Safonov transferred a
shipment of Russian-origin VG-951 fiber optic and MG-4 dynamically tuned
gyroscopes, A-16 accelerometers, and other guidance, navigation, and control
equipment to the Iranian missile entity Fadjr Industries Group in 2005.

Meanwhile, a senior House Republican is calling on the president to explain
efforts by the administration to reach an agreement with Moscow on missile
defenses.

“There is still a great deal of concern about what you meant when you were
overheard during a recent meeting in Seoul with Russia’s former President
Dmitri Medvedev, that after this election, your ‘last election,’ you ‘would
have greater flexibility’ to make a deal with Russia concerning U.S. missile
defenses,” said Rep. Michael R. Turner, chairman of the House Armed Services
subcommittee on strategic forces, which oversees missile defense programs.

“What is it you and your administration are concerned the American people
would object to in such a deal with Russia?” Turner asked. “Would it be
limitations, unilateral or bilateral, with Russia on the speed, range, or
geographical deployment of U.S. missile defense interceptors?”

Turner also asked the president in a May 23 letter to explain plans for up
to an 80 percent cut in deployed U.S. nuclear warheads as part of the nearly
completed Nuclear Posture Review implementation study.

“Many in Congress, me included, are deeply troubled that you may be willing
to further trade or give away U.S. missile defenses to get closer to your
goal of a world without nuclear weapons,” Turner said.

Turner called on the president to make public several draft missile defense
agreements with the Russians that have been reported in news accounts but
which remain secret.

“Such transparency would be the best way to resolve concerns in the Congress
about your statement to President Medvedev … about your intentions for
missile defense,” Turner said.

Ellen Tauscher, the administration’s special envoy for missile defense, has
denied any secret agreements with Russia—draft or otherwise—exist.

However, U.S. officials said Tauscher drafted an agreement meant to be
signed by Obama and Medvedev at the 2011 summit meeting in Deauville,
France, that was withdrawn from consideration by White House lawyers amid
concerns that the draft contained legally binding constraints on U.S.
missile defenses.

Russia is demanding the U.S. government provide written legal assurances
that U.S. missile defenses planned for Europe are not intended for use
against Russian missiles, something the Pentagon has refused over concerns
that it would limit U.S. sovereign rights of defense.