U.S. forces captured former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein Saturday (AFP/Getty). U.S. Forces Capture Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein U.S. forces in Iraq captured former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein during a raid Saturday, according to CNN.com (see GSN, Dec. 9). Hussein was captured during a U.S. raid on the Iraqi village of Ad Dawr, where U.S. soldiers found Hussein inside a six-foot-deep hole beneath a hut inside a small, walled compound, said Maj. Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of the 4th Infantry Division forces involved in the operation. In addition, U.S. forces also found several weapons and about $750,000 in U.S. currency with the former Iraqi leader, said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, head of U.S. forces in Iraq (CNN.com I, Dec. 15)...Full Story

Russian Council Approves Multilateral Nuclear Cleanup Agreement By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The upper house of the Russian Federal Assembly last week approved the Framework Agreement on a Multilateral Nuclear Program in the Russian Federation, a measure that will govern international efforts to clean up dangerous nuclear materials in northwestern Russia (see GSN, Dec. 1)...Full Story

Bush Signs Syria Sanctions Bill Into Law, But Hints at Waiver By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush signed legislation Friday that calls for imposing economic sanctions against Syria if Damascus does not end its alleged WMD activities, but Bush said his signature should not be construed as accepting the law’s language as new U.S. policy, raising the possibility that he would quickly waive the sanctions (see GSN, Nov. 10)...Full Story

	Monday, December 15, 2003

U.S. Terrorism Commission Pushes Risk Assessment as Key to Spending By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A special U.S. advisory panel on combating terrorism today said efforts to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States are lagging and called for a more coordinated approach to antiterrorism policy. In one key recommendation, the panel of emergency responders and former government and military officials endorsed the views of congressional Republicans, calling for federal assessments of the terrorist risk to be the major basis for distributing funds through the Homeland Security Department (see GSN, Aug. 8). In general, the Gilmore Commission said, “Momentum appears to have waned as people, businesses and governments react to the uncertainties in combating terrorism and to the challenge of creating a unified enterprise.” Weighing in on one of the most divisive questions to have arisen in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, the commission criticized the Homeland Security Department’s system for doling out federal antiterrorism grants. In a system designed to ensure a minimum level of preparedness around the country, each U.S. state currently receives .75 percent of the program funds, with the rest distributed according to population. “We must resist the urge to seek total security ― it is not achievable and drains our attention from those things that can be accomplished,” commission head and former Virginia Governor James Gilmore wrote in the panel’s final report to Congress and President George W. Bush. The commission added, “The system does not have to be built on the premise that every community in America must have the same type and the same level, based almost exclusively on population considerations, of response capabilities. The panel firmly believes that one size does not fit all.” The recommendations come as U.S. legislators consider measures to reform the grant system. Although the Homeland Security Department has said it will have no significant capacity for national threat assessment for several years, Republican-driven bills in both houses of Congress would increase the importance of such assessments in distributing response funds. In the House of Representatives, however, a key Republican bill stressing risk assessment has absorbed much in a parallel Democratic measure focusing on universal baseline readiness. The commission said the creation of new department has improved planning and readiness but that the Homeland Security Council, an existing panel made up of federal agency heads, should be empowered to develop homeland security strategy, which the Homeland Security Department would then implement. The panel also called on Bush to create an independent board to oversee the civil liberties implications of homeland security policy; recommended the department alter its color-coded advisory system, as lawmakers are contemplating doing, by including geographically specific information and instituting related training programs; and said the department should have a greater role in defining training and equipment standards for emergency response. The group said Bush should bolster intelligence-sharing efforts by designating a federal authority to expedite security clearances; by instituting training for state, local and private officials on how to use intelligence; and by revising the current classification system to the end of better disseminating information. The commission’s formal title is the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction. It was created in 1999 and is expected to disband within months. Back to top

U.S. Forces Capture Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein U.S. forces in Iraq captured former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein during a raid Saturday, according to CNN.com (see GSN, Dec. 9). Hussein was captured during a U.S. raid on the Iraqi village of Ad Dawr, where U.S. soldiers found Hussein inside a six-foot-deep hole beneath a hut inside a small, walled compound, said Maj. Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of the 4th Infantry Division forces involved in the operation. In addition, U.S. forces also found several weapons and about $750,000 in U.S. currency with the former Iraqi leader, said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, head of U.S. forces in Iraq (CNN.com I, Dec. 15). U.S. authorities first plan to interrogate Hussein about the continuing insurgency attacks against U.S. forces, according to the Miami Herald. “Always first is force protection,” a senior U.S. official said. “We want to know what he knows about anyone wanting to do anything bad to us,” the senior official said. Once that line of questioning is completed, U.S. authorities will then interrogate Hussein about alleged Iraq WMD efforts and possible ties to al-Qaeda, U.S. officials and intelligence experts said yesterday. They also said that Hussein will probably be questioned about the use of chemical weapons against Iraqi civilians and about which foreign companies supported Iraq’s WMD programs (Jonathan Landy, Miami Herald, Dec. 15). Already, however, Hussein has denied that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, according to a U.S. intelligence official in Iraq. When asked if Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, Hussein replied, “No, of course not. … The U.S. dreamed them up itself to have a reason to go to war with us,” the intelligence official said.  Hussein also explained why Iraq did not fully cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors, according to the U.S. intelligence official. The official quoted Hussein as having said, “We didn’t want them to go into the presidential areas and intrude on our privacy.” The intelligence official said he doubted the United States would obtain much valuable information from Hussein, noting the lack of cooperation by other captured senior Iraqi officials, such as former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz.  “I would be surprised if he [Hussein] gave any info,” the intelligence official said (Brian Bennett, Time, Dec. 14). British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said today that he too believed Hussein would not provide any useful information on alleged Iraqi WMD efforts. “Frankly I’m not holding my breath for any confessional statement from Saddam Hussein,” Straw said. “I think that his history of mendacity is so intense and so long-lasting that he wouldn’t understand the truth if he fell over it,” he added (CNN.com II, Dec. 15). U.S. Has “Clear Evidence” of WMD Programs, White House Says Meanwhile, the Bush administration said in a report released Saturday that the invasion of Iraq had produced “clear evidence of Saddam’s illegal weapon program,” according to the Washington Post. The report, 2003: A Year of Accomplishment for the American People, also notes new intelligence linking Iraq to terrorist organizations, the Post reported. A senior Bush administration official said that the new information connecting Hussein to terrorism came from Iraqi intelligence files recovered by the CIA (Mike Allen, Washington Post, Dec. 14). The acting head of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission has said, though, that much of the evidence of Iraqi WMD activities found by coalition forces was known to the United Nations before the war, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, Dec. 4). In an interview with the Post and in a report to the U.N. Security Council, Demetrius Perricos said that the only significant find made public by the Iraq Survey Group, which is conducting the hunt for Iraqi WMD evidence, was that Iraq paid North Korea $10 million for missile technology that was never delivered (see GSN, Dec. 1). A senior U.S. intelligence official said that the Iraq Survey Group stood by its report and that Perricos had only seen the unclassified version. The unit’s search is still not complete, the official said (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, Dec. 14). Back to top       Bush Signs Syria Sanctions Bill Into Law, But Hints at Waiver By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush signed legislation Friday that calls for imposing economic sanctions against Syria if Damascus does not end its alleged WMD activities, but Bush said his signature should not be construed as accepting the law’s language as new U.S. policy, raising the possibility that he would quickly waive the sanctions (see GSN, Nov. 10). The Syria Accountability Act imposes a ban on U.S. exports of military and dual-use items to Syria and it requires the president to impose at least two more sanctions from a list of six specified in the law, including a complete ban of exports to Syria, a prohibition of U.S. businesses operating in Syria, restrictions on Syrian diplomats in the United States, limits on Syrian airline flights, a downgrading of U.S. diplomatic representation or a freeze on Syrian economic assets. The sanctions have been seen as likely to have more of a political effect because of relatively low value of U.S.-Syrian trade — about $300 million annually.  The sanctions in the bill can only be lifted if the president can certify that four conditions are met, including an end to state support for terrorist groups, the withdrawal of all Syrian military and intelligence personnel from neighboring Lebanon and an end to Syrian development of biological and chemical weapons and medium- and long-range ballistic missiles. Last month, both houses of Congress voted overwhelmingly to approve the bill. At the White House’s insistence, however, Congress approved a provision in the final bill that gives the president the authority to waive both sets of sanctions — the dual-use export ban and the additional measures — if such a waiver were determined to be in U.S. security interests.  In a terse statement Friday, Bush suggested that he would use his waiver authority. “My approval of the act does not constitute my adoption of the various statements of policy in the act as U.S. foreign policy. Given the Constitution’s commitment to the presidency of the authority to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs, the executive branch shall construe such policy statements as advisory, giving them the due weight that comity between the legislative and executive branches should require, to the extent consistent with U.S. foreign policy,” Bush said. Supporters of the bill in both houses of Congress have praised Bush’s decision to sign the legislation into law. “This is positive news for the international community. By signing this legislation, the president has addressed our concerns about the role Syria is playing in the Middle East. Syria is one of the most flagrant violators of international law, and for sponsoring terrorism. This law will now help the United States and its allies on holding Syria accountable for its illegal deeds,” Senator Rick Santorum (R-Penn.) said today in a statement. Representative Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), one of the authors of the bill, called on Bush Saturday to not waive the sanctions. “It remains to be seen exactly how and which sanctions the President will choose to enforce,” Engel said in a statement. “President Bush needs to impose sanctions on Damascus immediately because Syria continues to destabilize the Middle East and support some of the deadliest terrorist groups in the world,” he added. On Saturday, Damascus criticized Bush for signing the bill, saying the measure would only serve as an obstacle to improved U.S.-Syrian relations. The bill will “increase tensions instead of searching for common denominators to achieve stability based on cooperation and joint interests,” the Associated Press quoted a commentary on the state-run Damascus Radio as saying. “The U.S. president’s signing of the ... act on the pretext that (Syria) supports terrorism, which it strongly condemns and is seriously cooperating to fight, adds a new obstacle in the way of improving Syrian-U.S. relations,” the commentary said. Back to top       Chemical Warfare Could Challenge U.S. Success in a Possible War With North Korea By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Senior U.S. military officials and independent experts are concerned North Korea would use chemical or biological weapons tactically to devastate U.S. and South Korean forces in the event of war, potentially producing a dilemma of U.S. retreat or nuclear retaliation. The concern is that North Korea would aggressively use such banned weapons in a war while keeping its nuclear weapons in reserve to deter a U.S. nuclear response. Since the 1991 Gulf War, Washington has maintained an ambiguous policy of hinting that the United States might retaliate to a chemical or biological weapons attack by using nuclear weapons. The use of chemical weapons early in a conflict could be particularly devastating to U.S. forces, by causing significant troop and civilian casualties, reducing battle effectiveness, and closing down operations at major ports and bases, experts and officials say. The U.S. military has sought to bolster its chemical and biological weapons defense capabilities but officials admit that technical and procedural improvements are still needed (see GSN, Dec. 9). War with North Korea under such circumstances could be “more like World War I or World War II” than any of the recent conflicts the United States has been engaged in, according to Brig. Gen. David Clary, director of the U.S. Air Force Homeland Security Directorate. “If the next conflict were to take place on the Korean Peninsula, the U.S.-ROK casualty rate likely would be very high, and the degree of difficulty in confronting a formidable asymmetric adversary like North Korea would be daunting, even for the world’s only superpower,” wrote Air Force Counterproliferation Center Director Barry Schneider in a Center-published article last month. Potential ‘Show-Stopper’ U.S. military officials tend not to publicly highlight U.S. weaknesses regarding potential foes, but in the past year, as U.S.-North Korean tensions have heightened over the Pyongyang’s nuclear activities, there have been rare and candid acknowledgements. Referring to the perceived chemical threat, Navy Admiral Thomas Fargo, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, told Congress in June that he believed the likelihood of war is low, but added, “the stakes would be very high if war occurred, and even higher if North Korea continues to pursue a nuclear capability.” The demilitarized zone between North and South Korea, he said, “borders the most heavily-armed strip of territory on Earth. And as a result, many South Koreans live within range of North Korea’s artillery, some of which we know to be armed with chemical warheads.” Fargo was even more candid about the concern in little noticed prepared testimony in March, saying that WMD use could become “a potential show-stopper for the U.S. military operations, causing significant operational risk” to U.S. war plans. “CBRNE [Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosives] is a critical operating condition and potentially the greatest threat I face,” he said. “That’s about the strongest statement I’ve seen from a combatant commander to date. His war plans could fail against these threats,” said Bruce Bennett, research leader for strategy, force planning and counterproliferation at RAND. Schneider wrote last month that North Korea might use chemical and biological attacks to weaken U.S. and South Korean border defenses. Furthermore, with its suspected nuclear weapons reserved to deter a U.S. nuclear response, Pyongyang could also use longer-range weapons to contaminate South Korean and Japanese ports and airfields, he wrote. Fargo warned in March that the closure of a few strategic choke points in South Korea, Guam and Japan “could stop U.S. forces flows and other critical support operations.” Potentially Catastrophic Dilemma According to a recent U.S. intelligence community report, North Korea possesses a stockpile of an unknown size of nerve, blister, choking and blood agents, and a variety of means for delivery.  An aggressive chemical weapons campaign could present the U.S. president with several bad options, said Brad Roberts, a researcher with the Institute for Defense Analyses, which provides analytical studies for the U.S. defense secretary and the joint military staff. The president could be faced with choosing between fighting a high-casualty war, throwing in the towel or resorting to nuclear force to try to end the war quickly, Roberts said. “We’re left with the unhappy choice between not safeguarding some interest and backing down, and engaging in nuclear retaliation which would be unhappy from all sorts of perspectives,” he said. The United States eliminated the option of responding in kind to chemical or biological weapons when President Richard Nixon signed the Biological Weapons Convention in 1972 and President Bill Clinton signed the chemical weapons ban in 1993. As part of its counterproliferation strategy, the U.S. Defense Department during the Bush administration has been pursuing a range of conventional and nuclear weapons capabilities for better targeting and neutralizing deeply buried facilities and chemical and biological weapons. Bush recently received congressional support for researching such weapons, including low-yield nuclear weapons that officials argue are more credible for deterrence because they would cause less collateral destruction than higher-yield weapons. Beginning with the Gulf War and continuing up to the most recent Iraq war, U.S. officials have on occasion publicly implied they might respond to a chemical or biological attack on U.S. forces with nuclear weapons, as well as possibly overwhelming conventional force. But aside from perhaps triggering a North Korean nuclear response by ordering a U.S. nuclear attack, a U.S. president could also face international condemnation of such an action and the potential that the U.S. action would ignite a new era of nuclear proliferation, according to an article by Harry Conley, also published by the Air Force Counterproliferation Center last month. Some deterrence strategists, he wrote, argue that “the goal of nuclear nonproliferation will be irreparably damaged if America continues to maintain a policy that allows nuclear first use. The United States should renounce nuclear retaliation [to chemical or biological attacks], they argue, and instead threaten a massive conventional response.” Others, he wrote, have argued a nuclear response might be internationally palatable if the damage is proportional to that caused by the initial chemical or biological weapons. Air Force Lt. Col. Carl Baker, a professor at the Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies, said he agrees with assessments by senior military officials of U.S. vulnerability to North Korean chemical weapons. He said, though, that such a scenario would be unlikely because it would lead to massive casualties. “The only way that that vulnerability exists is in some sort of apocalyptic scenario. … I understand that’s their job [to make and act on such assessments], but in the end I think it’s difficult for me to envision that sort of scenario coming out in play,” he said. North Korea appears to understand well U.S. concerns over its potential WMD use and has been emboldened in its negotiating strategy with the United States, said RAND’s Bennett. “They’ve used it already strategically. … Think of the South Korean reaction over the past few months relative the North Korean threats … and their willingness to be aggressive on many negotiation issues,” he said. Better Counterproliferation Capabilities Said Needed There appears to be a consensus among officials and experts that a prospective U.S. solution to the situation is better chemical and biological defenses for U.S. and South Korean forces, in addition to other counterproliferation tools for neutralizing North Korean capabilities such as better intelligence and theater missile defenses. “If CBW defense equipment can mitigate the effects of a CBW attack, the adversary may see no advantage in using weapons of mass destruction,” Conley wrote. Concern that the unmatched U.S. conventional military might be “equalized” by the “asymmetric” weapons of mass destruction of a lesser power, Roberts said, was behind the seminal 1993 speech by then-Defense Secretary Les Aspin that initiated the military’s effort to bolster chemical and biological defenses and other counterproliferation capabilities.  After 10 years of specific attention to the issue, however, U.S. capabilities remain distant, experts say. “Significant differences exist between what we would like to achieve against CBRNE threats and our actual capabilities,” Admiral Fargo testified in March. He cited shortages of troop protective equipment and early detection capabilities, “inadequate decontamination standards, and significant shortcomings in detailed and actionable intelligence on adversary WMD processes and facilities.” The Air Force recently has begun implementing a new “concepts of operations” plan for dealing with chemical attacks, and is working on updating its biological, radiological and nuclear plans as well. The chemical defense changes resulted in part from Gen. Clary’s direction. Changes such as storing aircraft in bunkers, dispersing base activities, and making post-attack assessments to identify uncontaminated areas, have been made that might now allow U.S. planes to operate after WMD attacks. It might allow for a restoration of operations “within hours, as opposed to never,” Clary said. Another prospective change is the introduction of new technologies under evaluation at the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Among 11 technologies currently approaching deployment is a special body bag for transporting fatally contaminated soldiers. Lt. Col. Baker said attaining full protection against a chemical campaign is ultimately unnecessary and unrealistic. “Do you put a plastic bubble over Osan Air Base? … When you start trying to deal with defending yourselves against things like nuclear and biological and chemical weapons, you end up chasing your tail.”  Some Optimism Pessimism about U.S. prospects against a WMD-using North Korea is by no means universal. Maj. Gen. Robert Smolen, director of nuclear and counterproliferation for the Air Force chief of staff, said at a conference last week that “scientific and technical advances that we’ve made have enabled us to develop operational procedures we now put into the capability enhancements that are making us far more able to survive, and beyond the survival, taking the operations back out and producing operational capability that we thought we had lost before.” Also speaking, Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald Keys, responsible to the secretary of the Air Force and chief of staff for nuclear and counterproliferation policy, said the United States would prevail despite chemical and biological defense shortcomings. The Air Force is “prepared to fight and win” against a WMD-armed adversary, he said in a slide presentation. Such optimism is under challenge, though. “How does he know that? I haven’t seen any metric that shows the difference between slogging away and winning,” Roberts later told the conference. “We need to have the ability of the [armed] services to sustain operations under attack and the combatant commands’ war plans have to have sufficient flexibility to protect our hosts, protect ourselves and to get the job done,” he said. “And in my view those capabilities haven’t come together yet,” he said. Back to top       Sweden to Fund Independent Nonproliferation Commission Sweden announced last week that it would fund a new international nonproliferation commission to be led by former chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, according to Reuters (see GSN, July 3). Sweden has agreed to provide the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission with almost $2 million until it releases its findings in 2005, Reuters reported. Blix, who retired earlier this year from his position as head of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, is expected tomorrow to name the other commission members and outline its program of work at a press conference tomorrow. “I am convinced that the commission, under the capable leadership of Hans Blix, can help inject new energy into the global efforts aimed against weapons of mass destruction,” Swedish Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds said. “The existence of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons represent a serious threat to international peace and security and new initiatives are needed in the efforts for disarmament and nonproliferation,” she added (Patrick McLoughlin, Reuters/Yahoo!News, Dec. 11). Back to top

Russian Council Approves Multilateral Nuclear Cleanup Agreement By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The upper house of the Russian Federal Assembly last week approved the Framework Agreement on a Multilateral Nuclear Program in the Russian Federation, a measure that will govern international efforts to clean up dangerous nuclear materials in northwestern Russia (see GSN, Dec. 1). The Federal Council’s approval of the agreement follows a similar action late last month by the assembly’s lower house, the State Duma, and leaves President Vladimir Putin’s signature as the last step required before Russia can bring MNEPR into force by depositing its instrument of ratification with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Patrick Reyners, head of legal affairs at the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency, said the “formality” of the president’s signature is expected to come quickly. He called Russian ratification of the agreement “a very strong encouragement for the other countries.” “The Russians have acted remarkably quickly. Truly, this has been almost a record for speed in ratifying an international agreement,” said Reyners by telephone from Paris. Meanwhile, the donors and Russia are working out the details of a side letter to the accord that would provide for tax exemption for MNEPR parties engaged in cleanup projects in Russia (see GSN, Oct. 27). There is some disagreement, however, over how much progress has been made on the letter. Reyners said talks are “in the absolute home stretch” and that a solution acceptable to all parties could come this week, while U.S. State Department negotiator Jeff Miller was more cautious. “We’ve been discussing this issue, and we’d like to resolve it ― we being the donors and, I’m quite sure, the Russians. If that can happen this week, that would be great. It just depends on the outcome of all donor reviews and then communicating our response to the Russians,” said Miller, a senior negotiator on nuclear safety in the department’s Nonproliferation Bureau. “The NEA is obviously being optimistic, and I’m not going to say I share their optimism,” he added. U.S.-Russian Liability Dispute Continues Experts have said Russian ratification of MNEPR could signal a hard line by Moscow on a broad U.S.-Russian dispute over how to assign liability for damages and injuries resulting from activities carried out under such agreements. At issue is whether Russia should be shielded from liability in case of a premeditated attack causing damages or injuries. The United States has been seeking to impose the language of the 1992 Cooperative Threat Reduction umbrella agreement, which could leave Russia liable in such an attack, as a standard for all such texts. MNEPR liability provisions include the exemption and were drawn up in a separate protocol that was signed by all parties except the United States. The dispute has led to the termination of two U.S.-Russian threat reduction accords. Back to top       Iran Will Sign Additional Protocol in “Next Few Days” Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi said Saturday that Tehran will soon sign an agreement to allow more intrusive international monitoring of its nuclear activities, China Daily reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 12). Iran will sign the Additional Protocol to its nuclear safeguards agreement “in the next few days,” according to Kharazi. “It had to be approved by the Supreme National Security Council, then the government, and now it is under way,” he added. After Iran signs the document, it must still pass through the parliament and the Guardian Council, a 12-member group that ensures pending legislation is compliant with Islamic law (China Daily, Dec. 14). Spent-Fuel Agreement Delayed Again Moscow, meanwhile, will not press Iran to sign an agreement on the return of spent nuclear fuel from the Russian-built Bushehr nuclear power plant. Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev said that Russia will give Iran time to focus on signing the Additional Protocol. “For the time being there was no need” to rush the spent-fuel agreement, Rumyantsev said. “It could wait several months,” he added (ITAR-Tass/BBC Monitoring, Dec. 15). An anti-aircraft exercise at the Bushehr site accidentally killed as many as seven civilians, a local official said today. “Two people were killed and 13 were injured, but there are reports that the number of dead could be as high as seven. We are investigating it,” said Asghar Zareii, a public relations officer for Bushehr’s governor general. Anti-aircraft shells failed to explode in the air during an exercise and instead struck a bus and a residential area, Zareii said. Iran is concerned that Israel or the United States might try to attack the nuclear plant (Agence France-Presse/IranMania.com, Dec. 15). Back to top       North Korea Rejects Latest Washington Proposal North Korea today rejected a U.S.-backed proposal to defuse the nuclear standoff on the Korean Peninsula and restart six-nation talks (see GSN, Dec. 12). “If the United States wants a ‘complete, verifiable and irrevocable’ dismantling of our nuclear program, we also have the right to demand a ‘complete, verifiable and irrevocable’ security assurance from the United States,” said a commentary by the state-run Rodong Sinmun newspaper. “The United States’ strategy of delaying talks will only lead us to continue to strengthen our nuclear deterrent force,” the commentary added. Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing called U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and urged the United States to take a more flexible stance toward the standoff (Sang-hun Choe, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 15). North Korea also criticized Washington for refusing to address its own proposal. “But the U.S. in its proposal sent through a channel did not mention the D.P.R.K.-proposed simultaneous package solution at all but only asserted that the D.P.R.K. should scrap nuclear weapons program first,’” the Rodong Sinmun commentary said (Sang-hun Choe, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Dec. 15). Back to top       Workers Removing Peacekeeper ICBMs From Silos Workers at the F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming are removing Cold War-era Peacekeeper ICBMs from their silos at the rate of one per month, Denver’s 9News.com reported Friday (see GSN, Sept. 3). After being removed from their silos, the 50 Peacekeeper missiles are set to be dismantled, according to 9News.com. “The magnitude of what we’re doing ... taking the most powerful weapon that we’ve ever developed ... and removing it from our arsenal, is significant,” Col. John Faulkner said (Paul Johnson, 9News.com (Denver), Dec. 12). Back to top

Health Officials Will Allow Smallpox Compensation Claims By David McGlinchey Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Health and Human Services Department is expected to publish an interim document tomorrow to allow civilian smallpox vaccine recipients to receive compensation if they were made ill by the vaccine (see GSN, April 14). In April, U.S. lawmakers passed a bill to provide compensation for those who fell ill or died as a result of the immunization but claims and payments are not allowed until the interim final rule is published in the Federal Register, according to Kevin Ropp, a spokesman for the department’s Health Resources and Services Administration. U.S. President George W. Bush launched the smallpox immunization program last December in an attempt to shield the United States from a bioterrorist attack. U.S. health officials hoped to immunize millions of medical and emergency workers this year, but fewer than 40,000 health care workers have received the vaccination and the program has essentially stopped. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported 49 adverse events through the end of November, including 22 cases of inflammation in the heart muscle or the sac surrounding the heart. The CDC has reported six cases of vaccinia, in which the vaccine spreads beyond the immunization site. Health officials have also recorded 20 cases of inadvertent inoculation, where the vaccine is spread by the recipient. Because the final rule has not been in place there are no pending compensation claims, Ropp said. There have been no civilian deaths directly linked to the smallpox vaccine and several experts have said that the CDC and other health officials overstated the dangers of the vaccine and kept volunteers from participating in the program (see GSN, June 24). Sickened volunteers who want to file a claim can do so at the HRSA Web site. Earlier this year, health officials also published a table that explains the injuries and criteria needed to receive compensation. Back to top       U.S. Approves New Laboratory Anthrax Test The U.S. Food and Drug Administration last week approved a new laboratory test to help determine if a person has been infected with anthrax (see GSN, Oct. 22). The new Redline Alert test, produced by Tetracore Inc., is designed to be used on cells cultured from samples taken from a person suspected of being infected with anthrax, according to an FDA release. The new test does not need to be performed by specially trained laboratory personnel and can be conducted in about 15 minutes, as opposed to identification tests currently in use that require overnight testing and special equipment, the FDA said. If the Redline Alert test produces a positive result, it is likely that the tested person is infected with anthrax. A negative result from the new test, however, would still need further testing to conclusively rule out anthrax infection, the FDA said. “Today’s approval of a lab test for anthrax infection is another first step forward in our urgent mission to protect Americans from biological weapons,” said FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan. “Working with industry, the academic community, and our fellow public health agencies, we are doing more than ever to bring better protections against terrorism to the public,” he said (U.S. Food and Drug Administration release, Dec. 9). Back to top       Washington Funds Bioterror Defenses on Mexican Border The United States will put $5.4 million toward an effort to enhance disease detection capabilities on the border with Mexico, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said Friday (see GSN, Dec. 11). An improved early warning system could help detect both naturally occurring outbreaks and bioterrorism attacks, according to the department. The money will be sent to six Mexican border states and the Mexican Secretariat of Health. Thompson made the announcement during the United States-Mexico Border Health Commission’s annual meeting. “Disease and illness recognize no political boundaries and that’s why it’s imperative that our countries continue to work together to safeguard the health of those along both sides of the border,” Thompson said. “Early warning surveillance and prompt sharing of findings is a public health and national security imperative for both of our nations,” he added (Health and Human Services Department release, Dec. 12). Back to top

Indian Police Discover Possible Chemical Pistol Indian police in the Jammu and Kashmir region have discovered a small pistol with 25 bullets that may have been coated in a lethal chemical agent, police officials said Saturday (see GSN, Dec. 2). “We recovered a pen-pistol and 25 cartridges. When one of our men tried to remove the cartridge inside, it emitted fumes and he felt dizzy and became unconscious,” said K. Rajendra, inspector general of police in the region. “We have sent the pistol and bullets for forensic examination. Initial tests reveal the bullets are laced with a neurotoxic substance,” Rajendra added. The weapon was found last week in a house near the border with Pakistan, according to Rajendra. The owner of the house is currently being held (Reuters, Dec. 13). The cartridges were reportedly marked “Neuroxin” and “BA,” according to police (India News, Dec 12). Back to top

Missile Defense Booster Test Delayed The U.S. Missile Defense Agency has postponed a booster rocket test scheduled for today because of technical problems, the Lompoc Record reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 4). Lockheed Martin was scheduled to launch its long-delayed booster rocket candidate for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, but the test is now scheduled for Thursday morning. Technicians must replace faulty electronics before the launch can take place, according to MDA spokesman Rick Lehner (Janene Scully, Lompoc Record, Dec. 14).   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.