War Makes ‘Nuclear 9/11’ More Likely, Kennedy Says

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S.-led war in Iraq and other Bush administration policies have harmed international nonproliferation efforts and increased the risk of nuclear terrorism against the United States, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) said in a speech yesterday.

“By encouraging new arms races, neglecting arms control, and ignoring the truly threatening nuclear weapons developments in North Korea and Iran and the loose materials that could be readily available to terrorists, President Bush’s unilateralism and irresponsibility in nuclear policy imperils America,” Kennedy said.

Speaking at a conference sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Kennedy reiterated his support for Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) in this year’s presidential election. “We can’t afford four more years of a president who avoids international cooperation and accepts it only when his back is against the wall,” he said.

A senior U.S. official, earlier at the conference, said the United States faces difficulties in using international institutions such as the U.N. Security Council to compel countries such as Iran to comply with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

He said the United States and associate countries nevertheless have developed alternative means for stemming proliferation and one in particular is showing signs of bearing fruit.

Kennedy said the administration’s decision to invade Iraq diverted U.S. attention and resources from combating proliferation.

“While the administration has focused its attention on Iraq — a country without nuclear weapons — North Korea and Iran have continued their pursuit of these weapons, and untold amounts of nuclear materials have remained under little or no security in the nations of the former Soviet Union,” he said.

The war, he added, may have made the potential for a “nuclear 9/11,” apparently meaning nuclear terrorism against the United States, “more likely, not less likely.”

The administration’s nuclear weapons research and development activities also may encourage proliferation, he said.

Work exploring low- and high-yield nuclear weapons capabilities “don’t strengthen our military options, they send precisely the wrong signal to the world about America’s nuclear intentions.”

Kennedy criticized the administration’s negotiating approach to eliminating North Korean nuclear weapons capabilities as sporadic and “a policy failure.”

He charged the administration has “not done enough to address” suspected Iranian nuclear development and “gave Pakistan a free pass” by not insisting on punishment of that country’s nuclear weapons program founder Abdul Qadeer Khan for admitted proliferation activities.

A senior Bush administration official, appearing on a panel at the conference earlier in the day, said the United States and other countries have made progress in combating proliferation, citing in particular the multilateral Proliferation Security Initiative for blocking WMD-related transfers at sea.

“I believe we are already seeing concrete fruits of efforts undertaken to date, in that proliferators, I believe, are demonstrably finding it more difficult and considering it riskier and adjusting their behaviors,” said Christopher Ford, principal deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of Verification and Compliance.

Ford and other earlier panelists said countries face difficulties in using traditional mechanisms such as the U.N. Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency to compel suspected proliferators such as Iran to comply in full with international arms control requirements.

Ford cited in particular the challenge of preventing nations from pursuing nuclear weapons programs when they are permitted to have extensive nuclear energy facilities.

Others agreed. “It is very hard to prove” a state’s intention to acquire nuclear weapons, and the international community “has had a difficult time trying to figure out what is appropriate punishment” for apparent violations by countries such as North Korea and Iran, said Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.

In light of such challenges, David Landsman, who heads the British Foreign Office counterproliferation department, said, “We need to look across the range of international fora and mechanisms for ways to strengthen the essential structure of the NPT” in anticipation of the treaty’s review conference next year.

“There appears to be a growing willingness, a growing readiness to strengthen the rules for nuclear supply in order to strengthen the nonproliferation regime,” he said.

Martin Briens, a counselor for politico-military affairs at the French Embassy here, proposed measures for improving the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but said the international community would be unable to amend the pact to address alleged “loopholes” that allow weapons development under guise of civilian programs.

“We have to find ways to complement it from the outside,” he said, saying for instance major nuclear materials suppliers should make the existence of an energy need a requirement for transferring civilian nuclear power assistance to other countries.

In that vein, Ford said the United States has pursued new nonproliferation approaches to bolster traditional international mechanisms. He cited efforts to “define” proliferation-related sanctions laws, the Proliferation Security Initiative and the U.S.-proposed U.N. Security Council Resolution 1540 requiring government restrictions and regulations on weapons of mass destruction proliferation and enforcement.

He said further the United States has pressed the view that the international community “should not and cannot wait for inarguable proof of weaponization” and should “act to stop illicit efforts when clouds of suspicion begin to swirl.”

The United States has been helping to lead efforts through the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors to “hold Iran accountable for its violations” and “to pressure it to come clean,” Ford said.

“The bottom line from the perspective of our own policy is that we aim to make it ever more costly and ever more risky to be a proliferator,” he said.

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.