Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi (right) and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw smile during a press conference today (AFP photo/Jim Watson). Bush Says Iran “Will Be Dealt With;” Europe Hardens Stance; U.K., Iranian Officials to Hold Talks U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday said that “Iran will be dealt with, starting through the United Nations” if it does not comply with international nuclear inspections and cease its suspected development of nuclear weapons, while French President Jacques Chirac criticized Iran for failing to cooperate fully with inspectors, (see GSN, April 20)...Full Story

As Bush Mulls Creation of Intelligence Czar, Related Measures Continue to Spark Opposition By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — As the Bush administration considers creation of an intelligence czar, officials, experts and members of Congress are continuing a torrent of criticism of previous post-9/11 reforms undertaken in the same spirit as the reported new proposal and with many of the same goals (see GSN, April 16)...Full Story

Russia Views U.S. “Mini-Nuke” Research as Threat, Experts Say By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — U.S. efforts to expand research into new, miniature nuclear weapons could lead Russia to begin contemplating similar efforts, Russian nuclear nonproliferation experts told Global Security Newswire here yesterday (see GSN, April 25, 2003)...Full Story

	Thursday, April 22, 2004

As Bush Mulls Creation of Intelligence Czar, Related Measures Continue to Spark Opposition By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — As the Bush administration considers creation of an intelligence czar, officials, experts and members of Congress are continuing a torrent of criticism of previous post-9/11 reforms undertaken in the same spirit as the reported new proposal and with many of the same goals (see GSN, April 16). White House consideration of establishing a single overseer of U.S. intelligence, first reported last week in the New York Times, is an effort to address flaws in the information-gathering system that have come to light in high-profile hearings of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Several related measures have already been taken in a 2-year-old intelligence centralization campaign. “We just happen to be in a cycle ― it looks like a centralization cycle,” said RAND Corp. political scientist William Rosenau. The new agencies created have generated frequent opposition. In creating clearinghouses to eliminate information-sharing barriers, the administration has failed to address some structural problems and to define some fundamental goals ― and has failed to make the country much safer, according to expert and official sources interviewed last week by Global Security Newswire. Rosenau, an author of a recent RAND report on domestic intelligence and counterterrorism agencies in other countries, said the administration should decide what new capabilities it needs to prevent terrorism before tinkering with bureaucratic structure. Completing a national assessment of the terrorist threat ― a task now assigned to the Homeland Security Department (DHS) but progressing slowly, according to Rosenau and many other experts (see GSN, Feb. 13) ― is an essential first step, Rosenau said. “We’ve got to start by saying, ‘Well, what do we want in terms of this assessment? What do we want it to say?  What kinds of information do we need to get out there?’ and basically say ― have the president say ―‘I don’t care what it costs. We’re going to do this,’” he said. Especially harsh criticism has focused on the CIA-based Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC), which, like the less-publicized, FBI-managed Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), was created last year by presidential order. Reagan-era National Security Agency chief William Odom offered a blunt assessment of the integration center in an interview last week with GSN. “TTIC is a total fraud.  I wouldn’t even give it the time of day. … If they want to have that thing out there to get some sharing, and they just want to pay for an inefficient thing, well, that might do a little good, but it’s not going to solve the systemic problems,” said Odom, now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.  The center’s budget comes from several sources and is classified, but spokesman Donald Tighe of the Homeland Security Department’s Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate told Congressional Quarterly in February that his department’s portion for fiscal 2005 will be $24 million, “passed back” to the center from the department via the FBI. New Center’s Role is Clarified as Bush Mulls New Intelligence Czar Post The creation of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center was ― like the launches of the Terrorist Screening Center and the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate ― a bid to streamline operations, so that information could be more widely shared and responsibility less diffuse. Recognizing that poor communication among existing agencies facilitated the Sept. 11 hijackers’ success, the administration sought to help analysts to “connect the dots,” in the current Washington parlance. Confusion followed, however, and after more than a year of pressure by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), who chairs the Governmental Affairs Committee, the heads of the CIA, FBI, Homeland Security Department and Terrorist Threat Integration Center wrote a letter to clarify the respective roles of their agencies. They designated the integration center as the lead agency for analysis of terrorism information (see GSN, April 21). The letter underscores, but does not appear likely to stem, mounting criticism from those who say such measures, although meant to streamline operations, have created new bureaucracies while undermining previous efforts. Despite this criticism, administration officials told the New York Times last week that President Bush could create a director of national intelligence post to oversee all U.S. intelligence operations. Such a move has wide support and has also been advocated in bills from Representative Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.). The agency heads, however, gently warned in their letter against too much structural tinkering. “Regardless of the particular analytic roles of any USG [U.S. government] counterterrorism element under our control,” they wrote, “we have committed all such elements, consistent with the president’s policies, to share terrorism information with one another to ensure a seamless integration of such information. … The president and Congress have not directed and, as a matter of effective government and common sense, should not direct that all USG functions related to terrorism … be carried out by a single department or agency.” Homeland Security Department “Chipped Away At” Bush’s reported consideration of the new post comes 16 months after the first major event in the “centralization cycle” identified by Rosenau: the November 2002 passage of the Homeland Security Act. Under the act, the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate was to “access, receive and analyze law enforcement information, intelligence information and other information from agencies of the federal government, state and local government agencies and private sector entities and to integrate such information” to identify and analyze terrorist threats. The Homeland Security Department “has been chipped away at since then,” according to University of Maryland intelligence expert William Lahneman, who coordinates the National Intelligence Council Project at the Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland. Before the department was even up and running, the administration created the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, a separate operation in which the Homeland Security Department was only one participant. The administration promised that the center would “merge and analyze terrorist-related information collected domestically and abroad in order to form the most comprehensive possible threat picture.” The center “will continue to close the seam between analysis of foreign and domestic intelligence on terrorism,” the White House said at the time. The center’s establishment as what some saw as a competitor for the new department generated a great deal of controversy, as reflected in the yearlong effort by Collins and Levin to obtain clarification from the agency heads. In a report last month, Homeland Security Inspector General Clark Kent Ervin paraphrased at length the Homeland Security Act’s provision for the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate, noting that “the TTIC and TSC were created after IAIP was established” and citing “confusion” among officials about the respective roles of the three agencies. Collins’ office said this week in a press release that the Terrorist Threat Integration Center’s dominant analysis role and ability to commission analysis from other agencies “are substantially different from what was originally envisioned when TTIC was created last year and represent a significant expansion of TTIC’s mission.” Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), the senior Democrat on Collins’ committee, has gone significantly further in criticizing the center. “In the case of TTIC, the president has simply ignored the law,” Lieberman said on Feb. 27. “The Homeland Security Act provides for an intelligence fusion center within DHS to receive and analyze information on terrorist threats from all sources. … DHS’ fusion center was supposed to have access to all necessary information while serving as a crucial bridge to local law enforcement, yet President Bush has continued to oppose both the letter and spirit of the law he signed on this issue. The newly created TTIC … lacks the structure and support to be the pre-eminent fusion center envisioned by the Homeland Security Act,” Lieberman said. Maryland’s Lahneman said that, with the creation of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, the CIA appeared to have “won the battle” for control of terrorism threat information. He criticized the CIA’s apparent decision to provide the Homeland Security Department information directorate with only summary reports from the integration center ― not raw intelligence ― and expressed concern that “the FBI is not talking enough, harming the homeland security effort.” “That all smacks of turf battles to me,” Lahneman said. In congressional testimony on April 1, Homeland Security Undersecretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Frank Libutti defended the decision to establish the center, but in terms that seemed unlikely to end the confusion. “I believe that the decision to stand up [establish] TTIC, to charge TTIC with the mission principally of integrating foreign overseas intelligence and domestic intelligence, was done for the right reasons, at the right time, at the right place, with the right leadership,” Libutti told the House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee. “We are TTIC. The FBI is TTIC.  CIA is TTIC. The composition of TTIC represents the intelligence community overall. We are customers of TTIC.  We’re also contributors to TTIC. We also work directly with the CIA in terms of their CTC [Counterterrorism Center] and the FBI in terms of their CTD [Counterterrorism Division], as well as other intelligence organizations in the federal government,” Libutti said. In the view of Lieberman and others in Congress, the Terrorist Threat Integration Center has usurped a role initially staked out for the Homeland Security Department. “What TTIC does is what DHS was supposed to do. … It was supposed to be essentially a clearinghouse. You’ll have to ask the administration why they created TTIC,” a congressional aide said last week. FBI Reform Takes Center Stage With the Terrorist Threat Integration Center apparently firmly in place, officials and legislators have turned their attention to new reforms, such as the proposed director of national intelligence post and measures to address the shortcomings of the FBI, which has come under especially harsh criticism at hearings of the Sept. 11 commission. The Congressional Research Service early this month issued a report listing five possible approaches to reforming the FBI’s intelligence operation, including creation of a new stand-alone domestic intelligence agency that would “fuse all intelligence from all sources, domestic and foreign, on potential terrorist attacks within the United States and disseminate it to appropriately cleared federal, state, local and private-sector customers.” The description echoes the language used to tout both the Homeland Security Department and the Terrorist Threat Integration Center when they were created, and it is unclear what relationship the proposed new service would have to the two recently established entities. Senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) prepared legislation that would create an agency like the one mentioned by the research service, and one congressional source said the agency as proposed by Edwards would “plug very nicely into TTIC,” not replace it. Former National Security Agency chief Odom, who is calling for a new agency dedicated to counterintelligence, said the Sept. 11 panel has opened an unprecedented window of opportunity for addressing the FBI’s flaws in the intelligence area. “It’s the first time I’ve ever heard anybody with any political clout talk about taking on the FBI on this,” he said. “I never thought it was possible before because of the political clout of the FBI. The FBI’s ability to let the enemy get into this country and screw us up and not take the hit for it is hard to overstate,” Odom said. “Centralizing Impulse” Opposed Whether or not the FBI is stripped of some responsibilities, it seems clear that the intelligence “centralization cycle” cited by Rosenau will continue, paradoxically, to spawn new government agencies. According to the RAND expert, a variety of agencies can improve intelligence by creating healthy competition. “We believe in competing centers of information. … It’s not any surprise, given our belief in capitalism, that we believe that competition produces better results. … Are we really comfortable having DHS be solely responsible?” Rosenau said. Rosenau criticized officials for even discussing “which box” activities should be placed in before taking up more fundamental questions about intelligence reform. “The right question,” he said, “is, ‘What do we need to be doing? What are the capabilities that we need to have and nurture?’ and depending on those answers, then you can decide what it is we need to do about it.” “Rather than saying, ‘What does DHS need to be doing?’” Rosenau said, “we need to go back to the first-order questions and say, ‘What do we need to prevent terrorist attacks from happening in the United States?’ and that’s what we haven’t really done. It was just latched onto as part of this centralizing impulse. They said, ‘We’re going to bring everybody together under one roof, OK? So that will make things easier, and we’ll have sort of one person in charge. We’ll be able to point to this person and say, “You’re responsible.”’ That’s not how the U.S. government actually works.” Rosenau said that what the U.S. intelligence community needs is a better understanding of the terrorist threats it faces, as well as more analysts, better language skills and more funds. Perhaps demonstrating the difficulty of separating “first-order” from bureaucratic matters as he recommends, he continued, “We’ve probably got to designate one organization to be in charge of doing that.” Back to top

Libyan Leader Set for Meetings With EU Officials Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qadhafi is scheduled to visit Belgium on Tuesday for meetings with Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt and Foreign Minister Louis Michel, according to the Belgian Foreign Ministry (see GSN, April 20). “They will be discussing the new path Libya has chosen, notably nonproliferation,” ministry spokesman Rudy Huygelen said yesterday. A European Union official added that Qadhafi would meet with European Commission President Romano Prodi for discussions on “a whole range of issues,” such as terrorism and immigration (Associated Press/USA Today, April 22). Back to top       U.S. Participates in WMD Interdiction Exercise The United States joined four other nations this week in sending Navy personnel and ships to the Mediterranean Sea for training on blocking trafficking of weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, March 19). Clever Sentinel 04 began Monday and ended today, according to Stars and Stripes. It involved 350 Americans, the destroyer USS Gonzalez, container ship Pfc. Eugene A. Obregon and a P-3C surveillance airplane. Italy led the exercise, and France, Spain and the Netherlands each sent a ship. Observers were present from about 12 nations. “The basic scenario is participating naval forces will intercept, escort and perform a compliant boarding of a vessel at sea,” said Lt. j.g. Dave Luckett, a 6th Fleet spokesman. “The overall objective is working on communications and techniques with the other countries involved,” he added. This exercise is one of 10 that began last year under the Proliferation Security Initiative, which now includes 16 nations (Kendra Helmer, Stars and Stripes April 21). Back to top

Bush Says Iran “Will Be Dealt With;” Europe Hardens Stance; U.K., Iranian Officials to Hold Talks U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday said that “Iran will be dealt with, starting through the United Nations” if it does not comply with international nuclear inspections and cease its suspected development of nuclear weapons, while French President Jacques Chirac criticized Iran for failing to cooperate fully with inspectors, (see GSN, April 20). “The Iranians need to feel the pressure from the world that any nuclear weapons program will be uniformly condemned — it’s essential that they hear that message,” Bush said. He added that he would encourage allies to insist that Iran comply with its nuclear agreements (Mike Allen, Washington Post, April 22). Chirac told Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi yesterday during a meeting in Paris that Iran must meet the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency before its June meeting, the New York Times reported.  Chirac went on to say that Iran must implement an Additional Protocol to its nuclear safeguards agreement and explain why it failed to report its program for development of uranium enrichment centrifuge technology. Suspicions continue to mount in Europe that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon capability and cheating on an agreement it struck with France, Germany and the United Kingdom in October to suspend uranium enrichment, the Times said. “We are seeing a pattern of Iran making promises and then trying to find ways around them,” said one senior French official. “The Iranians are fighting us trench by trench. They are clever cheaters,” the official added (Elaine Sciolino, New York Times, April 22). Meanwhile, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is set discuss Iran’s nuclear programs and other issues with Kharazi today in London, Deutsche Welle reported (Deutsche Welle, April 22). Sanctions Suspension Extended The United States will extend for 90 days the suspension of some sanctions against Iran, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty announced today. The temporary extension began March 25 (see GSN, Jan. 2). There was no immediate explanation for the move. Sanctions were first eased to speed aid efforts following an earthquake in Iran at the end of last year, RFE/RL said. The decision was likely made as a goodwill gesture and a political signal, said Houshang Amirahmadi, a Rutgers University professor and head of the American-Iranian Council. “Given the U.S.-Iran relations, even humanitarian gestures are political — so I think this is a significant gesture,” he said. “It is at least partly political, if not totally. U.S.-Iran relations need small openings like this to move forward” (Golnaz Esfandiari, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, April 22). Back to top       Russia Views U.S. “Mini-Nuke” Research as Threat, Experts Say By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — U.S. efforts to expand research into new, miniature nuclear weapons could lead Russia to begin contemplating similar efforts, Russian nuclear nonproliferation experts told Global Security Newswire here yesterday (see GSN, April 25, 2003). Last year, the Bush administration persuaded Congress to overturn a U.S. ban on the research of miniature nuclear weapons, which are defined as having a yield of less than five kilotons. The administration indicated that such weapons, if developed, would be used against terrorists and stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in hardened bunkers. Russia, however, views the efforts to research and develop new nuclear weapons as a threat, said Vladimir Novikov of Russia’s Institute for Strategic Studies. New nuclear arms could lower the overall threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, Novikov said, echoing the concerns of opponents of new nuclear weapons research in the United States. He also said that the question of who would control the use of miniature nuclear weapons — be it the president, the National Security Council, or high-ranking generals in the field — was still unresolved. In addition, Novikov said that the Bush administration’s rationale of potentially using miniature nuclear weapons against terrorists was “not understandable.” The international community would see such an action, for example against terrorists in the mountains of Afghanistan, more as an attack against another country and the beginning of a nuclear war, he said. Sergei Mikhaliov of the institute questioned how the United States would have reacted if the Soviet Union had decided to use nuclear weapons during its own conflict in Afghanistan during the 1980s. While Russia currently lacks the economic capability to begin similar nuclear weapons research, the experts said, the situation could change as the country’s economy continues to grow. If U.S. efforts move beyond the “theoretical” into “practical research,” then Russia might be forced to act, Mikhaliov said, adding that any actual U.S. tests of miniature nuclear weapons would be seen in Russia as a “signal” to begin serious consideration of its own nuclear weapons research. The research of miniature nuclear weapons, Novikov said, “is not a difficult question” for Russian scientists (see GSN, Aug. 18, 2003). Back to top       South Korea Says Progress Possible at Nuclear Talks; North Threatens to Reject South’s Participation South Korea said today that there is a high likelihood of progress at the next round of multilateral negotiations on North Korea’s nuclear programs, while North Korea threatened to bar Seoul from the talks if it continues supporting U.S. demands for a “complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement” of those programs, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 21). “I think the possibility of progress at next … round of six-party talks is high,” said South Korean Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun today. North Korea’s official news agency today warned Seoul against “dancing to the tune of outside forces.” “If the South Korean authorities want to take part in the negotiation as a member of the six-way talks in the future, too, and remain a partner of inter-Korean dialogue and cooperation, they should … take the independent stand for achieving peace and reunification of the country,” it said (Jae-Suk Yoo, Associated Press, April 22). North Korea also threatened to reject Japan’s participation in discussions if it does not drop the issue of Japanese citizens abducted by Pyongyang. The North admits it kidnapped at least 13 people in the 1970s and 1980s, the Voice of America reported. Meanwhile, China said today that it offered North Korean leader Kim Jong Il aid during his visit this week. China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Kong Quan, said the unspecified aid for North Korea’s ailing economy is unconditional and was granted because of the two countries’ historic friendship (Kurt Achin, Voice of America, April 22). Back to top       Musharraf: Pakistan Will Not Give Up Nuclear Weapons Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf used a visit Wednesday to the Khan Research Laboratories to renew his commitment to nuclear weapons and praise employees at the facility once headed by the scientist believed to be behind the international nuclear black market (see GSN, April 19). Nuclear weapons are needed as a military deterrent, and Pakistan would not tolerate any pressures to disarm, Musharraf told scientists, engineers and other staff at the nuclear facility, according to the Xinhua News Agency. The personnel at Khan Research Laboratories have Pakistan’s gratitude for helping strengthen the nation’s security, Musharraf said. Founder Abdul Qadeer Khan is known as the father of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. Despite Khan’s apparent involvement in the international nuclear network, Pakistan remains on the front line of the fight against nuclear proliferation, Musharraf said (Xinhua, April 22). Back to top       Japan, Singapore Sign Nuclear Nonproliferation Pact Japanese and Singapore today signed a bilateral agreement designed to stop nuclear weapons-related materials from being transferred from those nations to “countries of concern,” the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 19). “Procurement activities by countries of concern have not lessened and indeed are becoming more and more cunning,” said Atsuo Shibota, an official from Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, speaking in Singapore. While Shibota declined to name any suspect countries, North Korea’s nuclear programs and allegations that Pyongyang is trafficking heroin and other illegal drugs to fund those efforts are a major issue for Japan, AP reported. Japan and Singapore pledged to inform one another of suspicious companies that could be involved in the nuclear trade and to share information on “specifications of controlled items and technologies,” according to a joint statement. Shibota said Japan is interested in signing a similar agreement with Hong Kong (Yeoh En-Lai, Associated Press/NineMSN, April 22). Back to top       Iran Denies Arrests of Nuclear Experts Iran yesterday denied a report it had arrested two nuclear experts for passing classified nuclear information to foreigners, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 21). Iranian Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi told reporters in Tehran that no one has been arrested for transferring classified information (Associated Press/Voice of America, April 21). Back to top       Trident Submarines Could Be Undersea Command Centers Four Trident ballistic missile submarines set to be converted to carry conventional weapons could also be used as underwater command centers, according to the head of the Navy’s submarine research, New London Day reported Saturday (see GSN, Feb. 4). In areas where the enemy still controls the surface of the sea, submarines could enter stealthily and use intelligence to help make deployment decisions, said Rear Adm. William Timme, commander of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center Command (Robert Hamilton, Connecticut New London Day, April 18). Back to top

Anthrax Postal Cleanup Cost $800 Million, Experts Say Decontaminating 20 U.S. Post Office sorting centers after the 2001 anthrax attacks cost $800 million, and many buildings remain quarantined due to fears of remaining spores, British bioterrorism experts said yesterday (see GSN, March 5). “Of the 23 [affected] post offices only 20 have been decontaminated,” said Herbert Huppert, a chemical gas attack expert, during a Royal Society presentation yesterday in the United Kingdom (see GSN, April 21). “It cost $800 million and created 3,000 tons of contaminated waste,” he added. U.S. officials estimated the cost at about $762 million and said all 23 postal facilities were cleaned (David Firn, Financial Times, April 22). Back to top

SBIRS-High Cost Creeps Toward $10 billion The Space-Based Infrared System High program needs another $1 billion to carry it through fiscal 2013, bringing its expanding budget to nearly $10 billion, the U.S. Air Force said yesterday (see GSN, April 1). SBIRS-High had previously been budgeted at $8.6 billion. The U.S. Air Force would include a precise cost estimate in its “replan” for the program, which is expected in June (Amy Butler, Defense Daily, April 22). 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.