Iranian development of a nuclear weapon would not necessarily cause its arch-rival Saudi Arabia to pursue its own, contrary to conventional wisdom, says a new report out today from the Center for New American Security.

Titled “Atomic Kingdom: If Iran Builds the Bomb, Will Saudi Arabia Be Next? [PDF]” the report was drafted by former Obama Pentagon official Colin Kahl, along with Melissa Dalton and Matthew Irvine. Going against the conventional narrative, the researchers determine that the risk of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East following an Iranian nuclear test, while “greater than zero,” is unlikely.

Two of the main regional powers — Egypt and Turkey — would be unlikely to seek nuclear weapons due to lack of a threat from Iran on the part of the former and the guarantee of NATO’s nuclear umbrella on the part of the latter. This leaves the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as the most likely country in the Middle East to try to obtain nuclear weapons should Iran ever choose to build nuclear weapons. Saudi nuke acquisition, according to conventional wisdom, could either be in the form of a reformatting its native civilian nuclear research program to support military aims or a deal with Pakistan to provide a nuclear guarantee against Iran.

Either of those scenarios is far less likely than most would imagine, according to the report. Instead, as shown in the chart below, the authors believe that it’s far more probable that the Kingdom would rely on scaling up its conventional defenses against Iran or relying on a United States’ nuclear guarantee:

In reaching their conclusion, the researchers weighed the possible disincentives Saudi Arabia would face in opting to develop its own nuclear arsenal, including the risk of economic sanctions and a blow to the Saudis’ reputation globally. Possible security risks that follow along with the possession of nuclear weapons would also be a concern the Saudi government, as well as the odds that such weapons could lead to a split with the U.S. — a result that would far outweigh the benefits of owning nuclear weapons.

The “Pakistani option” — Saudi Arabia coming into possession of ready-make nuclear weapons from Pakistan — is likewise dismissed by the report. While Pakistan and Saudi Arabia maintain strong military ties, and the Pakistani Embassy in Riyadh once said “each Pakistani considers (the) security of Saudi Arabia as his personal matter,” Pakistan would be unlikely to provide nuclear weapons to advance any objective not related to countering India. As noted by CNAS, the nuclear club has not grown substantially since China tested weapons fifty years ago, and has in fact seen more states give up nuclear weapons than acquire them.

Iran still has not decided to pursue nuclear weapons, according to intelligence from the United States and Israel. And despite what the CNAS report views as the low chances of a nuclear arms race should Iran acquire a weapon, it also stresses that the United States’ policy should remain one of preventing Iran from doing so, with military force if necessary.

Following months of headlines about the rising threat of Chinese cyber-espionage, a report released today by cybersecurity company Mandiant ties extensive corporate espionage hacking campaigns against English-language companies to the Chinese Army. The report sheds new light on the hacking group commonly referred to in the press as “Comment Crew” and as Advanced Persistent Threat 1 (APT1) by Mandiant:

“Our analysis has led us to conclude that APT1 is likely government-sponsored and one of the most persistent of China’s cyber threat actors. We believe that APT1 is able to wage such a long-running and extensive cyber espionage campaign in large part because it receives direct government support. In seeking to identify the organization behind this activity, our research found that People’s Liberation Army (PLA’s) Unit 61398 is similar to APT1 in its mission, capabilities, and resources. PLA Unit 61398 is also located in precisely the same area from which APT1 activity appears to originate.”

According to the New York Times, this revelation lines up with a recent classified National Intelligence Estimate that “makes a strong case that many of these hacking groups are either run by army officers or are contractors working for commands like Unit 61398.”

Here’s what you need to know about this possible Chinese cyber-army:

APT1 is likely PLA Unit 61398. Mandiant believes APT1 is the same as the 2nd Bureau of the PLA General Staff Department’s 3rd Department, commonly known by its unit distinction 61398. Unit 61398 is classified, but Chinese network security experts have mentioned it as the source of their expertise in published reports, and an internal memo from state-controlled China Telecom obtained by Mandiant details how infrastructure for their headquarters was co-built with the Unit “based on the principle that national defense construction is important.” However, there is one unlikely alternative outlined by Mandiant:

“A secret, resourced organization full of mainland Chinese speakers with direct access to Shanghai-based telecommunications infrastructure is engaged in a multi-year, enterprise scale computer espionage campaign right outside of Unit 61398’s gates, performing tasks similar to Unit 61398’s known mission.”

APT1 victims are mostly in the U.S. and in industries China considers strategically important. Of the 141 breaches Mandiant has studied, 115 were U.S. based companies, and 87 percent of them were headquartered in countries where English is the primary language. English proficiency appears to be a key recruiting factor for Unit 61398. APT1′s victims include companies in four of the seven strategic emerging industries China identified as key in its 12th Five Year Plan.

The resources behind the attacks and amount of data culled are huge. Mandiant “conservatively” estimates 1,000 servers would be needed to support APT1′s current attack infrastructure with potentially hundreds of human operators. While it’s hard to put a figure on how much total data the group has lifted because of how well it covers its tracks, Mandiant witnessed them steal as much as 6.5 terabytes of compressed data from just one organization over a ten-month window.

APT1 attacks are long-term infiltrations. The attacks from the group started as far back as 2006 with an average of 356 days of access to a victim’s networks. Mandiant says APT1 maintained access to one victim’s network for at least 1,764 days — over four years.

China’s denies involvement. According to the New York Times: “Contacted Monday, officials at the Chinese embassy in Washington again insisted that their government does not engage in computer hacking, and that such activity is illegal.”

If Mandiant is correct in its assertions about APT1 and Unit 61398, China wouldn’t be the only country engaged in aggressive cyber actions as international norms in the space are still being shaped: The U.S. has reportedly engaged in malware development targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities and President Obama signed a secret directive in October aimed at reclassifying some cyberactions previously considered offensive as defensive.

Cybersecurity has increasingly been seen as a major national and economic security threat. President Obama recently signed another directive and an executive order aimed at improving the security of privately owned critical infrastructure via information sharing and lawmakers on Capitol Hill reintroduced the controversial cybersecurity proposal from 2012 CISPA the next day.

Israeli President Shimon Peres announced on Monday that he will award President Obama with the Presidential Medal of Distinction during his visit to the Jewish State next month.

In a statement, Peres — who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Obama last year — said the current U.S. president “is a true friend of the State of Israel, and has been since the beginning of his public life”:

As president of the United States of America, he has stood with Israel in times of crisis. During his time as president he has made a unique contribution to the security of the State of Israel, both through further strengthening the strategic cooperation between the countries and through the joint development of technology to defend against rockets and terrorism.

[Obama's presidency exemplifies] an unswerving belief and ongoing fight for equality without any regard for religion, race, sexuality or gender and the strengthening of the weakest in society in the United States; and for the fulfillment of the values of democracy, human rights, solidarity and peace across the world. [...] Through his personal story and his agenda as president of the United States of America, Barack Obama is a symbol of democratic values and he exemplifies the spirit of equality of opportunity in American society.

Israeli officials, including Peres, regularly praise Obama’s commitment to Israel. “I should tell you honestly that this administration under President Obama is doing, in regard to our security, more than anything that I can remember in the past,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak said last October.

The neocons here in the States have spent a lot of time and money unsuccessfully trying to convince us that Obama is anti-Israel. Perhaps then their next ad should tell us how anti-Israel Israeli’s leaders are. (HT: The Hill)