The Iraqis have chemical weapons and have used them both inside their country and against Iran. Iran claimed to be victim to 253 chemical attacks during its war with Iraq. The United Nations investigated the Iranian claims and found evidence to confirm Iraq’s widespread use of mustard gas and nerve agent GA (Tabun). The Iraqis possess a stockpile of SS-1 (Scud-B) and Frog 7 missiles. They may also have the SS-12 missile, capable of carrying both nuclear and chemical warheads. The addition of the SS-12 missile has allowed Iraq to carry out long-range missile attacks against its enemies, including Israel. Iraq has developed two surface-to-surface missiles: the al-Husayn (650-kilometer range) and the al-Abos (900-kilometer range). Libya Libya openly sponsored terrorist attacks against U.S. military personnel in Europe. After the United States attacked Libya in response to a terrorist attack, terrorist attacks worldwide have decreased. Libya has not recently challenged the United States; however, it remains a threat because of its large chemical weapon capability. Libya may have used chemical weapons against Chad in 1986. Libya has also drawn inter- national attention over its efforts to secure nerve gas technology. German companies supplying Libya with technology unknowingly helped Libya develop its present chemical warfare capability. Syria Syria may be the United States’ most formida- ble opponent in the Middle East because of its offensive chemical weapons capabilities. Syria is thought to own a wide range of chemical weapons including the nerve agent GB (Sarin). The Syrian arsenal includes the Soviet SS-1, SS-12 (with warheads for chemical agents including nerve agent VX), and possibly the Chinese M-9 missiles. SUMMARY Over the last 200 years, the Navy has progressed from a small force of two ships to one of the largest navies in the world. The mission of the Navy includes naval presence, sea control, and power projection. The Navy’s traditional theaters of operations include Europe, the Middle East, Africa, the Far East, and the Americas. These areas are changing, and the outcome of the changes could have an impact on the Navy’s mission and goals. The United States, NATO, and the Soviet Union have been negotiating treaties to reduce the amount of nuclear weapons they own. In contrast, many newly emerging Third World countries are trying to obtain the technology to produce chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. REFERENCES Cheney, Dick,  “The Heart of the Soviet Threat,” Defense, Volume 90, January/February 1990, pp. 2-7. Harristy, Admiral Huntington, “Pacific Watch- word is Change,”   Defense, Volume 90, May/June 1990, pp. 16-23. Miller, A. J.,   “Towards Armageddon: The Proliferation of Unconventional Weapons and Ballistic Missiles in the Middle East, ” The Journal of Strategic Studies, December 1989, pp. 387-401. Powell, General Colin L., “Changes and Chal- lenges: An Overview,” Defense, Volume 90, May/June 1990, pp. 8-15. —, “Is the Future What It Used to Be?”, Defense, Volume 90, January/February 1990, pp. 3-7. —, “U.S. Military Doctrine: The Way We Were—and  Are,”  Defense,  Volume  90, March/April 1990, pp. 16-20. —, “The Middle East and Southwest Asia,” Defense, Volume 90, January/February 1990, pp. 17-22. Schwarzkopf, General H. Norman, ‘‘Turmoil- Middle East Business as Usual,” Defense, Volume 90, May/June 1990, pp. 24-30. Soviet Military Power: Prospects for Changes 1989, Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1989. Welch, Thomas J.,  “The Growing Global Menace of  Chemical  and  Biological  Warfare,” Defense, Volume 90, July/August 1989, pp. 19-27. Wolfowitz, Paul D.,   “Strategic Thinking in Today’s Dynamic Times,” Defense, Volume 90, January/February 1990, pp. 9-11. 1-19