The party of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh plans to press ahead with a nuclear cooperation deal with the United States, a move that would alienate political allies (Raveendran/Getty Images). Indian Government to Pursue Nuclear Energy Deal The ruling party in India intends to move to finalize a civilian nuclear energy deal with the United States despite the potential loss of support from key allies that could force an early election this year, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, July 2). Leftist parties that have backed the Congress party of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh argue that the agreement gives Washington undue influence over Indian affairs.  ..Full Story

Russian Legislators Back U.S. WMD Disposal Aid The lower house of Russia’s parliament yesterday endorsed arrangements that would permit the United States to further finance the disposal of stockpiled Russian chemical and nuclear weapons, among others, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, June 25)...Full Story

U.S., Poland Set Tentative Missile Defense Deal U.S. and Polish negotiators yesterday came to a tentative agreement on the Bush administration’s proposal to deploy 10 missile interceptors in the European nation, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, July 2)...Full Story

	Thursday, July 3, 2008

Russian Legislators Back U.S. WMD Disposal Aid The lower house of Russia’s parliament yesterday endorsed arrangements that would permit the United States to further finance the disposal of stockpiled Russian chemical and nuclear weapons, among others, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, June 25). The State Duma overwhelmingly supported the addition of two new protocols to a bilateral 1992 pact addressing safe transportation, storage and destruction of weapons. The United States has provided more than $2 billion in disposal aid to Russia under the agreement since the early 1990s, when foreign aid was critical in helping Moscow to secure and eliminate large weapons stockpiles after the end of the Cold War.  Russia has continued to rely on international WMD disposal aid despite its improving economy.  Moscow expects to receive an additional $1 billion in U.S. aid by the end of 2013, according to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak. "The agreement is in the interests of the Russian Federation," Kislyak said.  "It allows us to save significant budget funds." (Associated Press/Google News, July 2). The Russian parliament yesterday also passed an amendment to the U.N. Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, RIA Novosti reported. The U.N. pact, signed by Russia in 1980, requires signatories to properly secure nuclear material in their territory, in international transit and on ships and aircraft within their authority. The signatories in 2005 made revisions intended to augment the agreement.  They include the legally binding requirement that member states protect nuclear sites and civilian material that is being used, stored or moved, and expanded international cooperation in tracking down stolen and smuggled nuclear materials A high-level diplomat has said the amendment would not affect Moscow’s nuclear assistance to Iran (RIA Novosti, July 2). Back to top

Indian Government to Pursue Nuclear Energy Deal The ruling party in India intends to move to finalize a civilian nuclear energy deal with the United States despite the potential loss of support from key allies that could force an early election this year, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, July 2). Leftist parties that have backed the Congress party of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh argue that the agreement gives Washington undue influence over Indian affairs.  The Congress party stands to lose its majority in the 545-member parliament if the four parties pull their support from the ruling coalition, the United Progressive Alliance.  To offset that threat, the Congress party has been seeking support from other political parties in order to retain its majority. “We are talking to a number of parties including the Samajwadi Party to secure support,” one high-level Congress official said today.  “The meeting between SP leaders and the national security adviser yesterday was part of this.  We are going ahead with the (nuclear) deal” (Elizabeth Roche, Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, July 3). Should the leftist parties withdraw their support, Congress would require 44 seats to keep its majority in parliament, the Wall Street Journal reported.  The Samajwadi Party — a regional socialist group led by a former wrestler — has 39 members in parliament.  Smaller parties are expected to supply the remaining seats to keep the Congress party in power (Niraj Sheth, Wall Street Journal, July 3). A senior Samajwadi official, though, said today that the party was not yet ready to throw its support behind Singh’s party and the nuclear deal, Reuters reported. “We need to clear all doubts on the nuclear deal,” said general secretary Amar Singh.  “We need to identify and consult nuclear experts” (Krittivas Mukherjee, Reuters/Yahoo!News, July 3). Indian media reported later that former Indian President Abdul Kalam, an aeronautical engineer who has supported the nuclear agreement, met with Samajwadi Party officials, according to AFP.  He argued during the hourlong session that the nuclear deal was in the "national interest,” according to the Press Trust of India (Roche, AFP). While no decision is expected before Sunday, observers said the Samajwadi Party is likely to sign onto a deal to save the Congress party’s majority and allow it to move ahead with the nuclear pact. The nuclear agreement would require New Delhi to open its civilian nuclear plants to international inspectors in exchange for access to U.S. nuclear technology and material. U.S. lawmakers and officials have suggested that it might be too late to push the deal through in Washington this year.  India also must secure a safeguards deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency and approval from the Nuclear Suppliers Group before it can conduct atomic trade with the United States or other nations. “The moment we come to know that they are going to the Board of Governors (of the IAEA), we withdraw,” said Communist Party of India chief A.B. Bardhan (Mukherjee, Reuters). Back to top       Bush Holds Firm to Policy on Iranian Nuclear Work U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to negotiating a suspension of Iran’s disputed nuclear activities without ruling out military action, the New York Times reported (see GSN, July 2). The United States and other Western powers worry that Iran intends to use its developing uranium enrichment capability to produce material for a nuclear weapon.  Tehran maintains that the process would only produce nuclear power plant fuel while steadfastly refusing to halt the effort. Bush’s remarks came amid rising speculation that Israel is planning to attack Iranian nuclear sites and recent hints that Tehran is seriously considering an offer of incentives it would receive from the five U.N. Security Council member nations and Germany for halting its uranium enrichment program. “I have always said that all options are on table, but the first option for the United States is to solve this problem diplomatically,” Bush told reporters.  “That is why we’ve been pursuing multilateral diplomacy” to help address the stalemate over Iran’s nuclear program. When questioned about the possibility of an Israeli strike on Iran, he said he had always been “very clear to all parties that the first option” should be diplomacy, adding that the international community would isolate Iran further if it continues refusing to halt uranium enrichment. Following Bush’s remarks, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told reporters at the Pentagon that U.S. military action against Iran would be “extremely stressful” for U.S. forces.  “Just about every move in that part of the world is a high-risk move,” he said (Brian Knowlton, New York Times, July 3). "My position with regard to the Iranian regime hasn't changed.  They remain a destabilizing factor in the region," Mullen said, according to Reuters.  "But I'm convinced that the solution still lies in using other elements of national power to change Iranian behavior, including diplomatic, financial and international pressure." "There is a need for better clarity, even dialogue at some level," he said (Andrew Gray, Reuters I/Washington Post, July 2). Iranian Oil Minister Gholam Hossein Nozari yesterday said Iran would launch a strong retaliation against an attack and that oil prices would spike, Agence France-Presse reported. "Iran, if there were any kind of activity of any sort, is not going to be quiet and would react fiercely," he said when asked about Tehran’s possible response to a strike. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki continued to hint at a possible compromise over Iran’s nuclear program. "We see the possibility of arriving at a multifaceted solution," he said in reference to the incentives offer by the six world powers, adding that Iran’s consideration of the proposal would soon enter “the final stage” (Agence France-Presse/Google News, July 2). "Very soon I will respond to the letter given to me by the six foreign ministers," he said yesterday, according to Reuters. Speaking to reporters, Mottaki said that “constructive statements and approaches” and an exchange of proposals for multilateral negotiations “paved the way for creating a new sort of atmosphere” (Andrew Gray, Reuters II, July 2). EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who handles nuclear negotiations with Iran for the West, called the sudden softening of Tehran’s nuclear rhetoric “interesting” (AFP, July 2). However, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said it is too early to judge the significance of Iran’s new tone. "There needs to be some actual follow-through," McCormack said.  "Whether their public statements from the foreign minister are positive or not is really not terribly important at this point" (Gray, Reuters II, July 2). In Israel, officials and analysts are debating whether the benefits from attacking Iranian nuclear facilities would outweigh the international and domestic repercussions, the Financial Times reported. “It’s possible to have an effective strike,” although an attack could only delay Iran’s nuclear progress and not stop it permanently, said Shmuel Bar, director of studies at Israel’s Institute of Policy and Strategy. An attack on Iran “is not a technical problem,” said retired Israeli air force Maj. Gen. Isaac Ben-Israel.  “The reason why we haven’t done it is not that we lack the capability.  The reason is that there is still time for the international community to convince Iran to change its mind.  We don’t use military force unless we are forced to do so.” Due to the distance between the countries, Israeli military aircraft would have to refuel in the air using cumbersome tanker jets that would face greater risk of being hit by Iranian air-defenses. Iranian nuclear hubs such as the country’s Natanz uranium enrichment complex are in less vulnerable underground locations.  The sheer number of potential targets is another issue — Iran might have up to 100 known nuclear sites and an unknown number of additional facilities. “I often read that Israel is not capable of doing it because the number of targets is very large.  That is a mistake,” said retired Israeli Brig. Gen. Shlomo Brom.  “When you attack a system such as a nuclear program to delay it you don’t have to attack every element.  You just have to find the critical notes of this system and hit them.” According to one analysis, Israel could effectively delay Iran’s nuclear progress by striking the Natanz site, the Isfahan uranium conversion facility and the Arak heavy-water reactor.  Israel would also have the option of using submarine-fired cruise missiles to inflict great damage on Iran’s Bushehr light-water reactor. According to some Israeli analysts, Israel’s Arrow missile defenses could minimize possible damage by Iranian missiles fired in retaliation. In an interview with Iranian state media, Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari said Iran’s defense capability is in an “acceptable situation” but “not ideal” (Financial Times, July 3). Back to top       Khan’s Wife to Challenge House Arrest in Court The wife of former top Pakistani nuclear scientist and proliferator Abdul Qadeer Khan today said she would go to court to contest her husband’s 4-year-old period of confinement and isolation, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, July 3). "We have finally made it known to the government that we are no longer willing to sit back and do nothing," Hendrina Khan said, adding that the Pakistani government would prefer that Khan died without providing his account of the smuggling operation that transferred nuclear material to Iran, Libya and North Korea. The scientist, who has mostly remained under house arrested since 2004, has given his side, sometimes profanely, in several recent interviews.  Khan has denied providing sensitive nuclear technology to the three nations, tagging other countries instead as the culprits (see GSN, June 4). His wife said she had hired a lawyer this week to press the Islamabad High Court to consider nullifying her husband’s house arrest.  She said the government has failed to follow through on its pledge to eventually release Khan and that there have been insinuations of “dire consequences” for making public statements. It is "high time we told our side of the story," she said in a telephone interview with AP.  "We have told the government that on a number of occasions and we have said, 'Look, our patience is up.  We've given you four and a half years.  You've not come up with the promises made.’” A court hearing has been scheduled for July 15, she said. “My husband is not getting any younger — nor am I for that matter — but he is of course under more stress," she said.  "I'm sure they would love to keep him here until he passes away, but we are not willing to wait for that" (Stephen Graham, Associated Press/International Herald Tribune, July 3). Back to top       U.S. Halts Nuclear Work at Laboratory The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission yesterday ordered a halt to all work involving radioactive material at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colo., following a plutonium powder spill at the facility last month, the Boulder Daily Camera reported (see GSN, June 30). “It’s fairly unusual for us to issue an order to any licensee to stop using the material,” said NRC spokesman Roger Hannah.  “It’s more a function of us wanting to understand completely which workers may have been exposed and the extent of the contamination.” The institute stated that it had “stopped work with radiation sources at our Boulder site” and had selected a contractor to handle decontamination of the affected laboratory. Only a “small portion” of the laboratory’s work involves radioactive material, NIST spokesman Ben Stein said. Five NRC inspectors traveled to Boulder this week to continue an investigation into the spill.  A senior commission official stated that the institute must assess the radiation doses of any personnel exposed to the plutonium, determine how much of the material might have entered the Boulder sewer system through a sink, and ensure that workers receive proper training. “Prior to personnel working with licensed material, you will ensure that procedures are appropriate to circumstances, your personnel have received the requisite training and you have assessed the effectiveness of their training,” NRC Regional Administrator Elmo Collins wrote in a letter to NIST deputy chief James Turner. It was not known when the facility would resume nuclear work, Hannah said (John Aguilar, Boulder Daily Camera, July 2). Back to top       Next U.S. President Likely to Maintain Bush Policy on North Korea, Experts Say The next U.S. president is not likely to make significant changes to the Bush administration’s current policy on North Korea’s nuclear program, experts told the Yonhap News Agency for an article today (see GSN, July 2). After including Pyongyang in his “axis of evil,” President George W. Bush backed U.S. participation in six-nation negotiations intended to persuade North Korea to end its nuclear activities. Years of talks produced a 2007 agreement under which Pyongyang would dismantle its nuclear infrastructure in exchange for economic, diplomatic and security benefits from China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States.  The regime to date has made several moves, including largely disabling three key plants at the Yongbyon nuclear complex, issuing a long-overdue declaration of its nuclear activities, and demolishing the cooling tower for its sole plutonium-producing reactor.  The other nations have supplied North Korea with heavy fuel oil and Washington recently moved to lift some trade sanctions and remove the regime from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism.  Further talks are planned aimed at pushing Pyongyang toward full nuclear dismantlement. “If the negotiations appear to be making reasonable progress, either [Republican President John McCain or Democratic President Barack Obama] would likely continue the general parameters of the current Bush policy,” Korea specialist Bruce Klingner, of the Heritage Foundation, told Yonhap by e-mail.  “On the other hand, if the talks are experiencing difficulties or North Korea is being confrontational, then either candidate would be compelled to take stronger action.” Both candidates basically support continued engagement with Pyongyang, though they “will affirm the need for resolve in confronting Pyongyang over any shortfalls in its compliance,” according to Klingner. “That’s because Senator McCain is highly skeptical of North Korea and Senator Obama of the traditional Democratic Party concern of appearing soft on foreign policy,” he said. Added Gary Samore, vice president of the Council on Foreign Relations:  “As long as the incremental quid pro quo strategy is making progress in terms of limiting North Korea’s nuclear program and at least moving in the direction of disarmament, I think the next administration will keep moving in that direction” (Yonhap News Agency, July 3). Meanwhile, Bush said yesterday that his administration did not intend to stop pushing North Korea to fully address the issue of its abduction of Japanese citizens in past decades, Kyodo News reported. Tokyo has dismissed Pyongyang’s claims that it returned all surviving abductees, who were taken in order to help teach North Korean spies.  Japan has refuse to provide aid to North Korea until the matter is resolved and expressed concern that taking the regime off the U.S. terrorism list might remove pressure for the Stalinist state to deal with the issue. North Korea has recently said it would again look into the abductions issue. “I view the six-party talks as a framework to convince the North Korean government to deal with these serious issues,” Bush said. Pyongyang could face additional sanctions should it fail to resolve the nuclear and abduction issues, Bush indicated.  “These won’t be unilateral sanctions.  These will be multiparty sanctions” involving the other nations in the negotiations, he said (Kyodo News, July 2). Tokyo plans to raise the abduction issue during the next week’s meeting in Japan of the Group of Eight nations, Agence France-Presse reported. “I would like to ask the G-8 leaders to understand the issue and cooperate with us,” Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda said today.  “This is an issue between Japan and North Korea, but public opinion in the international community is also very important” (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, July 3). Back to top       U.S., Japan to Deploy Radiation Scanners at Port The United States and Japan today announced plans to begin scanning cargo for nuclear and radiological materials at a port southwest of Tokyo, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 27). The countries plan to place radiation detection equipment at the Port of Yokohama to scan U.S.-bound cargo as well as goods entering Japan for materials that could be used in nuclear or radiological weapons. Tokyo and Washington “share a common concern for the need to increase our individual and joint efforts to detect, deter and interdict illicit trafficking in nuclear and other radioactive material, including terrorist attempts to disrupt global trade and to abuse commercial shipping to further terrorist schemes," the governments said in a joint statement (Associated Press/BreitBart, July 3). Deployment of the technology is being carried out under the U.S. Energy Department’s Megaports Initiative.  The plan calls for Japan to install the equipment and “associated infrastructure,” while the U.S. agency’s semiautonomous National Nuclear Security Administration will provide technical assistance on installation and training on using the technology (U.S.. National Nuclear Security Administration release, July 3). The United States has reached comparable agreements with 27 nations and regions through the Megaports Initiative.  As of May, radiation detection equipment was scanning cargo in Greece, the Philippines, Singapore and six of the other participating entities, the Japanese government said (AP). Back to top

U.S. Medical Intel Center Increases Scope of Work A Defense Department unit that for nearly three decades has monitored possible medical threats to U.S. troops deployed abroad is now looking out for civilians in the United States, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 2, 2005). The Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center at Fort Detrick, Md., will now be known as the National Center for Medical Intelligence.  It is set to receive a 15,000-square-foot addition to its headquarters to go along with the new name and responsibilities. Since its inception in 1982, the center has collected medical information on threats to the health of military personnel working in other nations. “That was our historic mission and it remains a very significant part of our mission, but we are also evolving to look at threats to the homeland,” said lead scientist Joy Miller.  The center now intends to study “what particular diseases and other health threats might be imported or might cause illness or injury to U.S. citizens and forces here in the homeland,” she added. The revamped unit, with fewer than 200 employees, will be the “premier producer and coordinator of all-source medical intelligence,” according to the Defense Intelligence Agency.  Its work will address both naturally occurring diseases and possible acts of bioterrorism. The center’s partners are not restricted to the Pentagon.  They include intelligence agencies, the White House, the Homeland Security and State departments, other domestic civilian agencies and foreign entities.  Such collaboration enables consideration of a greater number of health threats such as avian influenza or an anthrax outbreak, according to the Defense Intelligence Agency. “If there were something unusual in the presentation of the cases, or in how many individuals were affected, that would be something that would raise our level of suspicion,” Miller said.  “And we would be working with other analysts within the intelligence community who have responsibility to follow state weapons programs and terrorist use of those weapons” (Associated Press/Examiner, July 2). Back to top

CW Transport a Hard Sell, Army Acknowledges A U.S. Army official acknowledged yesterday that state authorities appear certain to reject any attempt to ship additional chemical weapons into their jurisdictions in order to expedite destruction of the nation’s arsenal of banned warfare materials, the Salt Lake Tribune reported (see GSN, July 2). The Pentagon issued a report last month outlining three options for meeting the congressional demand that it eliminate all U.S. chemical weapons by the end of 2017.  The options are:  making no changes to the existing plan, increasing funding at sites in Colorado and Kentucky that have yet to begin disposal operations, or shipping weapons from those storage depots to facilities in other states where weapons destruction is already under way. That last idea “is next to impossible in the current political climate,” said Greg Mahall, spokesman for the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency. Officials in Utah, one of the states that would receive additional weapons under the relocation option, rushed to confirm the validity of Mahall’s statement. “Under no circumstances would I ever allow this to take place in our state,” said Governor Jon Huntsman Jr. (R). “Federal law says that transporting chemical weapons across state lines is prohibited,” said Representative Jim Matheson (D).  “The aging weapons have been known to leak, and transporting them poses a safety risk to communities along the route as well as to the workers who would handle them at either end.” The Pentagon might have anticipated that reaction and hoped that it would spur lawmakers to approve additional funding to increase the pace of weapons disposal at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky and the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado, the Tribune suggested.  Construction of disposal facilities at both locations remains in the early stages and their collective operations could stretch as far as 2023, military officials have said. “The only option being pursued is Option 3,” which is the funding increase, said Kevin Flamm, program manager for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program, which manages disposal efforts at Blue Grass and Pueblo. Option 3 would enable the program to hire additional personnel for construction and operations, which theoretically could continue 24 hours a day, seven days a week.  The Pentagon report indicates that continuous operations would enable Pueblo to meet the 2017 deadline but that Blue Grass would still probably not finish by the end date. The relocation option “was not there to be inflammatory,” Flamm said.  If the Pentagon pursued that strategy, some munitions from Kentucky would be shipped to incineration sites in Alabama and Arkansas, while installations in Oregon and Utah would receive some weapons from Colorado. It would be “conjecture” to say that such shipments were sure to be safe, said Pentagon spokesman Chris Isleib.  “But the thing to bear in mind is that we’ve been doing this destruction since 1990, and we’ve been doing it safely” (Matthew LaPlante, Salt Lake Tribune, July 3). Back to top

U.S., Poland Set Tentative Missile Defense Deal U.S. and Polish negotiators yesterday came to a tentative agreement on the Bush administration’s proposal to deploy 10 missile interceptors in the European nation, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, July 2). The possible deal follows 18 months of negotiations that became more difficult for Washington when Prime Minister Donald Tusk took office in late 2007 and sought to secure more benefits for his nation.  The Tusk administration has requested billions of dollars worth of U.S. aid for Polish military modernization, AP reported. Tusk and Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski “now have to make a political decision:  yes or no” on the agreement, said Deputy Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski following his final round of negotiations with U.S. envoy John Rood (Anne Gearan, Associated Press I/San Luis Obispo Tribune, July 2). Tusk was scheduled to meet today with U.S. Ambassador Victor Ashe to discuss the agreement, AP reported (Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, July 3). However, Polish Defense Minister Bogdan Klich today indicated that the talks were not through, Deutsche Welle reported. “The negotiations have not ended — another round of talks was concluded — for the time being we are not at the finish line," Klich said on Polish radio.  “We completed an important, a significant, round of talks two days ago but the finish line of talks is still ahead of us,” he said, adding that “July is a long month” (Deutsche Welle, July 3). If the Polish leaders sign off on the agreement, the next step would involve determining the legal status of the interceptor installation and the U.S. personnel posted there, AP reported. U.S. President George W. Bush’s missile defense plan for Europe also includes an early warning radar in the Czech Republic.  Agreements on that site are expected to be signed this month. Whether the plan survives past the end of the Bush presidency is an open question.  The United States is likely to have to spend billions of dollars and face a host of technical issues that could take years to resolve, AP reported. The U.S. military has spent more than $100 billion and decades to produce the existing system, which includes land- and ship-based defenses, radar technology and systems that remain in development.  Debate persists on the system’s capability to counter an actual missile barrage from a nation such as North Korea or Iran. Senator John McCain (Ariz.), the Republican nominee for president, has expressed strong support for the program.  His Democratic opponent, Senator Barack Obama (Ill.), has been more skeptical. Russia continues to oppose U.S. missile defenses as a threat to its security.  The Bush administration plan will “bring risk rather than security,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said yesterday. Washington again dismissed Moscow’s claim. “We keep repeating for the Russians’ benefit, as well as anybody else’s who is listening, this isn’t about Russia,” said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.  “As a matter of fact … we would like Russia to cooperate on the issue of missile defense” (Gearan, AP I). Lawmakers in Moscow also took aim yesterday at Lithuania, which has been identified as a possible fallback site should missile defense talks with Poland fail, AP reported. The lower house of parliament unanimously approved a statement threatening to send additional troops to the Kaliningrad Oblast, the Russian enclave between Lithuania and Poland (Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press III/USA Today, July 3). Back to top       Notice to Readers Global Security Newswire will not be published on Friday.  Please look for our next edition on Monday, July 7.   Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

© Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.