International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei (shown in a January photo) addressed the U.N. General Assembly yesterday (AFP/Getty). ElBaradei Calls for International Control of Nuclear Material Production By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Saying “recent events have made it clear that the nonproliferation regime is under growing stress,” Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, yesterday suggested limiting the processing and production of nuclear materials that can be used for bombs and placing facilities under international control...Full Story

Senator Says Intelligence Showed Imminent Iraqi Threat By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A senior Democratic U.S. senator said yesterday that she voted to authorize U.S. military action against Iraq because classified intelligence showed that Iraq posed an imminent threat to U.S. national security at the time. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a senior member of the Senate intelligence committee and prominent critic of the Bush administration’s foreign policies, made the comments following a speech delivered to the Council on Foreign Relations...Full Story

North Korean Nuclear Projects Will Be Suspended, Probably Killed The internationally supported construction of two nuclear power reactors in North Korea will soon be suspended and is unlikely to be resumed, U.S. and Asian officials said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 3). ..Full Story

	Tuesday, November 4, 2003

U.S. Homeland Security Department Allocates More Than $2 Billion For First Responders More than $2 billion in federal funds have been made available to states to better prepare state and local emergency personnel to respond to future terrorist attacks, the U.S. Homeland Security Department announced yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 29). “This funding for the men and women on the front lines of the war on terrorism is essential. We do not underestimate the role that state and local governments play in protecting American citizens against the threat of terrorism,” Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said in a statement. The $2.2 billion in department grants will be allocated to states through three programs, according to a Homeland Security press release. States would then be required to allocate 80 percent of their funding to local communities. The State Homeland Security Program will allocate $1.7 billion to improve first responders’ capabilities by conducting training exercises and by purchasing equipment, the department said.  About $500 million will be provided to states through the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program, which is intended to help law enforcement agencies improve their information-sharing capabilities and reduce the vulnerability of certain high-risk targets. In addition, Homeland Security has also made $35 million available to aid in the development of Citizen Corps Councils, which are intended to help engage citizens in homeland security. To speed the distribution of Homeland Security funding, states will now be able to apply online with one form to all three programs, according to the department press release. “No longer will our state and local partners have to go to different places within the department to apply for terrorism-related funding. It ensures that nationwide, homeland security officials have one place where they can tap into the resources as well as the information they need,” Ridge said (U.S. Homeland Security Department release, Nov. 3). Back to top

Senator Says Intelligence Showed Imminent Iraqi Threat By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A senior Democratic U.S. senator said yesterday that she voted to authorize U.S. military action against Iraq because classified intelligence showed that Iraq posed an imminent threat to U.S. national security at the time. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a senior member of the Senate intelligence committee and prominent critic of the Bush administration’s foreign policies, made the comments following a speech delivered to the Council on Foreign Relations. A former U.S. official moderating the event said Feinstein’s comments vindicated President George W. Bush’s decision to go to war. White House officials, meanwhile, have recently said they never concluded Iraq posed an imminent threat. Feinstein said that at the time of an overwhelming Senate vote last fall to authorize use of force against Iraq, she was convinced after reading numerous classified intelligence reports and other documents that Iraq had WMD capabilities that posed an imminent threat. “I went back, and I read both the classified and unclassified version of the national intelligence estimate and tried to reread some of the intelligence. And I drew from that that there was an imminent threat,” she said. “I voted because I sincerely believed that this man, with his background, with his use of poisonous materials on his own people, with his feudal needs, was a threat, certainly in the Middle East and even quite possibly to us, in terms of being able to smuggle things into this country,” she said. She said she voted in favor of military action because she perceived an imminent threat, which would make the U.S. attack “pre-emptive,” as opposed to a longer-term threat that would make an attack “preventive.” According to legal experts, traditional international law has accepted, the use of force for pre-empting demonstrably imminent threats — not for preventing threats that might emerge in the future. Feinstein said intelligence she has read since the invasion indicates there was no imminent threat. “Based on my review of intelligence, and as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, and a review of both classified and unclassified data, no incontrovertible evidence of an imminent threat has been found in the case of the war in Iraq, with the exception of missiles with ranges in excess of 150 kilometers, in contravention to the United Nations Security Council resolutions,” she said. She said the previous intelligence judgments used to justify the war have not “borne out,” making the war a preventive one rather than pre-emptive, undermining the global standing of the United States, and setting a bad precedent for other countries. “Preventive war targeted against speculative threats is not legitimate under international law,” she said. President Vindicated? Former Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Director Kenneth Adelman, who served as the moderator of the event and a foil for Feinstein’s views, contended her endorsement of force against Iraq effectively vindicated President Bush’s judgment that an invasion was needed. “If you were president of the United States, and as a member of the intelligence committee, you have to go on the basis of what these people [the intelligence community] are saying, right?” he said. “People in the government have to go on the basis of what the information is that they have at their disposal. And obviously, if that’s wrong, it’s a very serious thing. But that doesn’t say that [new information showing that previous intelligence was wrong], in retrospect, should change … the justice of our decisions at the time,” he said. Feinstein said the turn of events raises questions about whether the analysis underlying key judgments on Iraqi capabilities was correct, if the use of the intelligence was correct, or “if it was skewed in any way,” which is the subject of a joint investigation by the House and Senate intelligence committees. She was among 77 senators, including many Democrats, who voted to authorize force in a nonbinding resolution. The resolution alluded to known Iraqi nuclear, chemical and biological weapons capabilities and said force was justified, among other things, to prevent a “surprise attack” from Iraq or a terrorist surrogate. It said “efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated.” An interim report last month from the head of the administration-appointed team searching for unconventional weapons in occupied Iraq said no such weapons had been found and there was no evidence of active chemical or nuclear weapons programs, though some suggesting clandestine biological research (see GSN, Oct. 3). Several Camps Feinstein’s comments, echoing earlier statements, place her in one of several camps of Democrats that include those who voted for force because they believed the intelligence showed an imminent threat and those who opposed force because they believed it did not. Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.), for instance, declared he was in the latter category because he deemed the threat “not imminent” and that implementing new Bush administration national security policies would set a dangerous international precedent. Presidential candidate Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), who stands in a third category, had argued that invading Iraq was justified as a preventive measure as it was unknowable whether a threat was imminent.                   “We don’t know that an [Iraqi] attack is imminent, but we know that he [Saddam Hussein] has violated the United Nations requirements with regard to inspections. We know for a fact that he has chemical and biological weapons, and he is developing very unsettling capacity to deliver those weapons on distant targets,” Lieberman said during a television news interview just prior to the Oct. 2002. No Imminence Asserted Bush administration officials recently have argued that they never concluded Iraq posed an immediate threat, but rather, that the invasion begun last March was preventive, against the possibility Iraqi President Saddam Hussein might one day develop particularly dangerous weapons of mass destruction and share them with terrorists. “Our concern was not the imminence of Saddam’s threat, but the very existence of his regime, given its heinous and undeniable record, capabilities and intentions,” said Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton in a speech in London last week. Bolton said Bush “specifically and unambiguously” made that point in his January 2003 State of the Union address when he said, “Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. … If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.” The administration in a major policy document last year argued that some preventive force should be considered legitimate, arguing that it would be difficult to demonstrate imminence of a terrorist attack using weapons of mass destruction. The September 2002 National Security Strategy said the international community should “adapt the concept of imminent threat to the capabilities and objectives of today’s adversaries.” John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable world arms control lobbying organization, called the administration’s assertions “duplicitous, because they did leave everyone to think that we had to act now, couldn’t give the inspectors time to finish the job because the threat was imminent, and couldn’t delay the invasion anymore because the threat was imminent,” he said. He said statements by various officials characterizing the potential threat encouraged a sense of immediacy, citing national security adviser Condoleezza Rice’s remark, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” Back to top       Kay Criticizes Washington Post Account of Nuclear Search in Iraq Chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq David Kay yesterday criticized a recent Washington Post report that coalition forces searching for evidence of alleged Iraqi WMD efforts have found no evidence that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein attempted to rebuild a nuclear weapons program (see GSN, Oct. 27). “We have much work left to do before any conclusions can be reached on the state of possible Iraqi nuclear weapons program efforts. Sunday’s Washington Post story gives the false impression that conclusions can already be drawn,” Kay said in a press statement. In his statement, Kay criticized the Post for indicating that the Iraq Survey Group, which is conducting the search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, was uninterested in collecting thousands of aluminum tubes that were suspected prior to the war of being intended for use in enriching uranium. Kay said the group was interested in learning if similar tubes with higher specifications might have been intended for use in uranium-enrichment centrifuges, and that the group was not interested in aluminum tubes that had already been determined were meant to be used in artillery rockets. “It is unclear why anyone would think that we should want to pick up the thousands of aluminum tubes of the lower specification that were clearly being used for rocket motor bodies,” Kay said. He also disputed the Post’s account that few resources had been allocated to the nuclear search team and that many of its members had become inactive. “Nowhere in this description is the reader told that these activities predate the standing-up of the ISG or that frustration with the pace of this pre-existing group is what led President [George W.] Bush to shift the responsibility for the WMD search to the DCI [director of Central Intelligence] and my own dispatch to Baghdad,” Kay said (CIA release, Nov. 2). Back to top       FBI Director to Visit Athens to Inspect 2004 Olympics Security FBI Director Robert Mueller is scheduled to travel to Athens Thursday to inspect security planning for the 2004 Olympics amid concerns that Greece is unprepared to respond to a biological or chemical attack, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Oct. 29). During his visit, Mueller is expected to meet with Olympic planners and Greek officials and review the status of antiterrorism measures, a federal law enforcement official said yesterday. The United States believes that adequate security measures will be in place by the time the Olympics begin, but that such measures will be ready “at the last minute. Not the way we would do business, obviously,” a senior U.S. counterterrorism official said (Curt Anderson, Associated Press/Salon.com, Nov. 4). Back to top

ElBaradei Calls for International Control of Nuclear Material Production By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Saying “recent events have made it clear that the nonproliferation regime is under growing stress,” Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, yesterday suggested limiting the processing and production of nuclear materials that can be used for bombs and placing facilities under international control. In presenting his annual report to the General Assembly, ElBaradei said, “In light of the increasing threat of proliferation, both by states and terrorists, one idea that may now be worth serious consideration is the advisability of limiting the processing of weapon-usable material in civilian nuclear programs, as well as the production of new material through reprocessing and enrichment, by agreeing to restrict these operations exclusively to facilities under multilateral control.” “Weapon-usable material” is plutonium and highly enriched uranium. Countries seeking nuclear weapons, most famously Iraq, have historically called their nuclear programs peaceful while developing a weapons capacity. ElBaradei’s proposal would build on recent initiatives to make it harder to disguise a weapons program as a source of energy for a country. One of those initiatives is the Additional Protocol to the IAEA safeguards agreements nations sign as part of their Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty commitment. The protocol allows the agency to conduct inspections of undeclared as well as declared nuclear sites. After it became clear in the early 1990s that Iraq had pursued a secret nuclear weapon development program while deceiving the IAEA inspectors working in the country under the NPT, “the international community committed itself to provide the agency the authority to strengthen its verification capability” by expanding inspections to include undeclared facilities, ElBaradei said. The authority is contained in a protocol which, he said, more than 150 countries have not yet signed. “The broader authority,” he said, “is still far from universal.” This drive for more intrusive inspections has played a part in the current debate over Iran’s nuclear program. Iran, which has announced its intention to sign the Additional Protocol, has received “considerable attention” this year, said ElBaradei (see related GSN story, today). “Recently we have received what the Iranian authorities have said is a full and accurate declaration of its past and current nuclear activities and are in the process of verifying this declaration, which is key to our ability to provide comprehensive assurances,” he said. The United States says Iran is working on nuclear weapons and the IAEA hopes the data will lead to some conclusions. The United States is scheduled to address the assembly today. ElBaradei will report to his agency’s Board of Governors later this month on his findings. Iranian Ambassador Javad Zarif told the General Assembly yesterday that the documents would show “that all Iranian nuclear activities are in the peaceful domain.” “Arbitrary and often politically motivated limitations and restrictions will only impede the ability of the IAEA to conduct its verification responsibilities,” Zarif added. Such restrictions will not lead a country to renounce nuclear power, he said, but rather, “In all likelihood, it will lead, as it has, to acquisition of the same peaceful technology from unofficial channels in a less than transparent fashion, thus exacerbating mutual suspicions.” Zarif said NPT membership should not be an impediment to peaceful uses of nuclear technology “while nonmembership is rewarded by acquiescence, as is the case in the development of one of the largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons in the Middle East” — a reference to Israel. ElBaradei said he is continuing to consult with Middle East governments “on the application of full-scope safeguards to all nuclear activities in the Middle East, and on the development of model agreements.” However, he regretted that “the prevailing situation” has prevented progress. He said any comprehensive settlement in the region would need to include “the establishment of the Middle East as a zone free from weapons of mass destruction.” ElBaradei also said it would be “prudent” for the United Nations and the IAEA to return to Iraq to “bring the weapons file to a closure.” He repeated the agency’s conclusion from earlier this year that “we found no evidence of the revival of nuclear activities prohibited” by the Security Council. The IAEA has two mandates concerning Iraq — the inspections imposed by the council and those mandated by the NPT. The agency has not been in Iraq under either mandate since the U.S. invasion in March. The council mandate “still stands,” ElBaradei said. The General Assembly is debating a draft resolution accepting the IAEA’s report. The draft acknowledges the agency’s annual report and “takes note” of various resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors, including on the application of safeguards, progress on the Additional Protocol and of the dealings with North Korea. No date has been set for voting on the draft. In previous years, North Korea has introduced amendments altering the references to its nuclear programs. Such proposals have been defeated. ElBaradei said the agency has not been in North Korea since December 2002 thus “cannot provide any level of assurance about the nondiversion of nuclear material” since Pyongyang demanded IAEA inspectors leave the country last year. He also called for “comprehensive settlement of the Korean crisis through dialogue.” The IAEA Board of Governors referred the issue to the Security Council in February, but the council has not yet taken any action. South Korean Ambassador Kim Sam-hoon said the North’s program “cannot be tolerated under any circumstance and ... there is no substitute for North Korea’s complete, irreversible and verifiable dismantlement of its nuclear weapons program.” Seoul “is committed to a diplomatic and peaceful resolution,” he added. North Korea is scheduled to speak today. Despite increased attention to the threat of nuclear material being diverted to terrorists, “deficiencies remain” in the security of nuclear and radiological materials, said ElBaradei. “Information in the agency database of illicit trafficking, combined with reports of discoveries of plans for radiological dispersal devices [“dirty bombs”], make it clear that a market continues to exist for obtaining and using radioactive sources for malevolent purposes.” Another sign of increased awareness of the potential diversion of nuclear material is the fact that the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material has gained 20 new parties in two years, he said. “States are now working on a much-needed amendment to broaden the scope of the convention, that I hope will be adopted soon,” ElBaradei said. Back to top       North Korean Nuclear Projects Will Be Suspended, Probably Killed The internationally supported construction of two nuclear power reactors in North Korea will soon be suspended and is unlikely to be resumed, U.S. and Asian officials said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 3).  The reactors were the centerpiece of a 1994 U.S.-North Korean agreement in which Pyongyang agreed to abandon all other nuclear activities in exchange for receiving the nuclear power station. Beginning about a year ago, however, reports emerged of renewed North Korean nuclear activity, Pyongyang announced its withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and North Korean officials declared their nation was nuclear armed. Partners to the agreement’s implementation institution, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, met in New York yesterday and today and were expected to suspend construction for one year, the Washington Post reported. A formal decision is expected later this year, according to the Post. To lift the suspension, however would require a unanimous vote from KEDO’s board — consisting of the European Union, Japan, South Korea and the United States — and U.S. officials said Washington would not allow the project to resume. “This ought to kill it,” said Henry Sokolski, director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. “The heart may still be beating but there is no brain function,” he added (Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, Nov. 4). The U.S. ambassador to Seoul, meanwhile, told South Korean lawmakers that Washington is still prepared to offer North Korea a nonaggression pact. “Washington will guarantee North Korea’s safety if Pyongyang publicize[s] clearly its intention of discarding nuclear ambitions through a written security proposal in the frame of the six-party talks,” Thomas Hubbard said. The ambassador also said that he sees apparent anti-U.S. sentiment in South Korea as opposition to the policies of U.S. President George W. Bush. “Even in the United States, 45 to 50 [percent] of the people are against the policies of the Bush government,” he added (Joo Sang-min, Korea Herald, Nov. 4). The top-ranking North Korean defector yesterday said that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il wants to rule over a united Korea. Kim’s “priority in life is to become the supreme ruler of the unified Chosun, or, as you call it, Korea,” said Hwang Jang Yop. “Before Kim Jong Il came to power, there was his father, Kim Il Sung. No one starved to death under Kim Il Sung. However, after Kim Jong Il came to power, millions of people starved to death. The economy has been destroyed, and the whole government and the country became one big prison. As a politician, he is a failure,” Hwang added (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Nov. 4). Back to top       United States Concerned Over Iranian Cooperation The United States said yesterday that if Iran backs off recently made commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency, it would appear that the Islamic republic has “something to hide” (see GSN, Nov. 3). Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has praised an agreement to suspend Tehran’s uranium enrichment and allow international inspectors broad access to Iran’s nuclear facilities. He said recently, however, that Iran would not honor these commitments if the international community was too demanding. Iran “has an obligation to cooperate fully with the IAEA to ensure verification of compliance with Iran’s safeguards agreement,” State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said. “Threats from Iran to end such cooperation, rather than give the IAEA full access to and answers about its nuclear activities, would be gravely troubling and would further deepen the international community’s concerns that Iran continues to have something to hide from the IAEA,” he added. Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Javad Zarif, said that Tehran is cooperating fully and had submitted a complete report on its nuclear activities to the IAEA. The international nuclear agency has said that the report appears comprehensive, but more Iranian cooperation is expected in the future. “Whether it takes the IAEA one day or two days or two weeks to verify that, it’s up to the IAEA,” Zarif said Sunday on CNN’s Late Edition. “We have agreed to suspend our uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities and we will send a notification to the IAEA that we are ready to sign the Additional Protocol [to Iran’s nuclear safeguards agreement] and start implementing it,” Zarif added. The protocol would allow IAEA inspectors to conduct more intrusive monitoring of Iran’s nuclear activities (Elise Labott, CNN.com, Nov. 3). Back to top

Pine Bluff Incinerator Conducts Test Burns Officials at the Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Arkansas yesterday conducted test burns of two surrogate chemical compounds in preparation for incinerating actual chemical weapons beginning next year (see GSN, Oct. 31). The Washington Demilitarization Company began burning monochlorobenzene and hexachloroethane to determine if the incinerator is operating properly. These chemicals are more difficult to destroy than the chemical weapons agents that officials hope to begin burning in April 2004. “These tests are based on guidance developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which calls for removal of a minimum of 99.9999 percent of all toxic materials from air emissions … prior to release into the environment,” said Ron Garner, project manager for Washington Demilitarization (Pine Bluff Commercial, Nov. 4). The burn, which fed 912 pounds of surrogate compound into the incinerator, was designed to test the second of three furnaces at the Pine Bluff facility. The test will be repeated three more times, the Associated Press reported (Associated Press, Nov. 4). Back to top       British Teenager Sentenced for Chemical Weapons Hoax A British court yesterday sentenced 17-year-old Andrew Bean to two years in a youth institution for conducting a chemical weapons hoax, according to the London Independent (see GSN, Sept. 8). Prosecutors said that Bean, who pleaded guilty, had called an antiterrorism hotline last year and said that he was a member of terrorist group that was planning to release hydrogen cyanide in the London subway system. Bean’s defense attorney, Graham Pressley, argued that his client had not been aware of the consequences of his hoax. “My client has come to court with an equal measure of stupidity and intelligence,” Pressley said (Alistair Keely, London Independent, Nov. 4). Back to top

U.S. Creates New Task Force to Address Radiological Threats The U.S. Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration has created a new task force to lead efforts to improve the security of radioactive materials in the United States and elsewhere, Energy Daily reported today (see GSN, Sept. 9). The Nuclear Radiological Threat Reductions Task Force will assume control of the department’s Off-Site Source Recovery Program, which oversees the security of radioactive materials in the United States, and the International Radiological Threat Reduction Program. The task force will also work to identify and help secure the most vulnerable research reactors worldwide, according to Energy Daily (see GSN, Sept. 22). “This threat reduction task force will bring together under one organization, all of the Department of Energy’s radiological threat reduction efforts both domestically and abroad to ensure much greater effectiveness in meeting radiological threats,” NNSA Administrator Linton Brooks said yesterday in a statement (Energy Daily, Nov. 4)   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.