U.S. Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow (shown in a 2003 picture) Friday outlined a Bush administration proposal to the members of the G-8 to help combat bioterrorism (AFP photo/Maxim Marmur). U.S. Ambassador to Russia Outlines Proposals to Prevent Bioterrorism, WMD Proliferation By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — U.S. Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow last week outlined Bush administration proposals to help prevent bioterrorist acts and WMD proliferation (see GSN, April 12). In an address before a conference hosted by the PIR Center, Vershbow said that recent outbreaks of diseases such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome demonstrate the damage that “exotic diseases” can cause when they occur solely naturally...Full Story

U.S. Lifts Most Economic Sanctions Against Libya The Bush administration on Friday lifted most of the remaining U.S. economic sanctions against Libya in recognition of Tripoli’s efforts to dismantle its WMD programs (see GSN, April 23)...Full Story

Switzerland to Aid Albanian Chemical Weapons Disposal By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — Switzerland plans to assist Albania in destroying a small stockpile of communist-era chemical weapons, a Swiss Foreign Ministry official told Global Security Newswire on the sidelines of a nonproliferation conference held here last week (see GSN, April 30, 2003)...Full Story

	Monday, April 26, 2004

U.S. Ambassador to Russia Outlines Proposals to Prevent Bioterrorism, WMD Proliferation By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — U.S. Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow last week outlined Bush administration proposals to help prevent bioterrorist acts and WMD proliferation (see GSN, April 12). In an address before a conference hosted by the PIR Center, Vershbow said that recent outbreaks of diseases such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome demonstrate the damage that “exotic diseases” can cause when they occur solely naturally. “If terrorists were able to harness infectious pathogens, the impact of the attack could be felt around the world — on the life and well-being of our citizens, on trade and travel, on national and international security,” he said. To address the threat of bioterrorism, the Bush administration has proposed a “plan of action” to the other members of the Group of Eight global economic powers — Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United Kingdom, Vershbow said. The administration’s proposal calls for greater cooperation among G-8 members in infectious disease surveillance, the creation of a “clearinghouse” of emergency health response assets and improved protection of the food supply chain, he said. Russia, with its “vast reservoir of scientific talent,” has the potential to be an “important partner” in the effort against bioterrorism, Vershbow said. Proliferation Prevention In his speech, Vershbow also addressed the issue of WMD proliferation, saying the United States supports expanding a G-8 effort initiated in 2002 to provide $20 billion over 10 years to fund nonproliferation projects in Russia. While Russia will remain the “priority” of the effort, Vershbow said, the United States also believes that Ukraine “is a natural choice” as the next recipient country for funding (see GSN, April 14). “We believe that a global problem requires an appropriately global approach,” he said. Vershbow also called for the expansion of the Proliferation Security Initiative — a U.S.-led effort to interdict shipments of WMD-related cargo. The United States has had “productive conversations” with Russia on the initiative, Vershbow said, and hopes that Moscow would soon join the effort (see GSN, March 19). While Russia agrees in “principle” with the initiative, there are still concerns as to how the effort relates to international law, Vladimir Novikov of Russia’s Institute for Strategic Studies told Global Security Newswire Wednesday. If the effort is not based in international law, he said, then any intercept operations could be seen as simply acts of piracy by nonmembers. Russia’s close ties to countries such as China, India and Iran and a current lack of financial resources are also behind Russia’s reluctance to join, Novikov said. He said, though, that once Russia’s concerns are addressed, Moscow would likely join the effort. “Russia doesn’t want to be first, but doesn’t want to be last [to join],” Novikov said. In his speech Friday, Vershbow also said that it was important to improve the International Atomic Energy Agency’s ability to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and reiterated several nuclear nonproliferation proposals made by U.S. President George W. Bush in February (see GSN, April 1). For example, Vershbow said that a “flaw” must be corrected in IAEA procedures that enables countries under investigation for alleged safeguards violations to sit on the agency’s Board of Governors, as Iran was allowed to do last year after it acknowledged years of covert nuclear activities. “No state whose conduct of its safeguards commitments has been found deficient by the board and director general should be allowed to sit in judgment of itself in an organization that relies so heavily on decision by consensus,” Vershbow said. He also reiterated Bush’s proposal to close a “loophole” in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that the United States has charged allows countries to develop nuclear weapons program under the guise of seeking civilian nuclear power. The White House proposal would call on the 40 members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which establishes export control regulations for nuclear trade, to refuse to sell enrichment and reprocessing technologies to any country that does not already possess full-scale enrichment and reprocessing plants. The U.S. proposal preserves the “central bargain” implicit in the treaty that allows any country that renounces nuclear weapons to obtain nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, Vershbow said. Under the Bush proposal, nuclear exporters would be “committed” to ensuring that countries had “reliable access, at reasonable cost” to civilian nuclear power plant fuel as long as they renounced possessing their own enrichment and reprocessing capabilities, he said. “Let us avoid getting tangled in unhelpful distinctions between the nuclear ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots.’ For such distinctions miss the larger and more important point — that we all share an overriding common interest in halting the spread of weapons of mass destruction,” Vershbow said. Back to top       U.S. Lifts Most Economic Sanctions Against Libya The Bush administration on Friday lifted most of the remaining U.S. economic sanctions against Libya in recognition of Tripoli’s efforts to dismantle its WMD programs (see GSN, April 23). President George W. Bush formally terminated the application of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act with regard to Tripoli, according to a White House press release. The move will allow the resumption of most U.S. commercial and financial activities in Libya, such as allowing U.S. companies to purchase or invest in Libyan oil and products. In addition, Libyan students will now be eligible to study in the United States and the U.S. State Department plans to open a liaison office in Tripoli, allowing for “direct diplomatic dealings with Libya.” “Through its actions, Libya has set a standard that we hope other nations will emulate in rejecting weapons of mass destruction and in working constructively with international organizations to halt the proliferation of the world’s most dangerous systems,” the White House said. For its part, Libya plans to open a liaison office of its own in Washington, Libyan Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalqam said Saturday (Orlando Sentinel, April 25). The Bush administration has not removed Libya from the U.S. list of terrorism-sponsoring nations. That means restrictions on dual-use exports to Libya will remain in place, exports to Libya of articles listed on the U.S. Munitions List will remain prohibited and direct air service between the United States and Libya will not yet be established (U.S. State Department release, April 23). The Bush administration’s decision to lift many of the sanctions was praised by business officials. “It’s huge,” said William Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, which represents most of the multinational firms lobbying for the lifting of sanctions. “It demonstrates for the first time in a real way that you can get off the bad guy list, that if you shape up on proliferation you can get rid of the sanctions,” he said (David Sanger, New York Times, April 24). Meanwhile, the Libyan state-owned National Oil Corp. announced Friday that it had confirmed its first oil shipment to the United States for loading in May, according to Reuters. The agreement was made with a U.S. oil company for 1 million barrels of crude oil and the shipment is set to arrive in the United States by early June, said NOC General Manager for International Marketing Abdullah Gheblawi (Edmund Blair, Reuters/Yahoo!News April 24). Back to top       U.S. Sanctions of Russian Firms Criticized in Moscow By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — A former Russian arms control official Saturday criticized as unfair a recent U.S. decision to impose sanctions against Russian entities for allegedly aiding Iran’s WMD and ballistic missile efforts (see GSN, April 5). Earlier this month, the United States issued sanctions against the Baranov Engine Building Association Overhaul Facility and Russian national Vadim Vorobey for violating the Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2002. The two were among 13 entities sanctioned for violating the act because there was “credible information indicating that these companies had transferred to Iran, since Jan. 1, 1999,” equipment and technologies “with the potential of making a material contribution to proscribed programs,” a U.S. State Department spokesman said April 2.  In remarks Saturday before a nonproliferation conference held here by the PIR Center, Lt. Gen. Gennady Evstafiev said that the United States has not imposed sanctions on Pakistan for the activities of top nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who confessed to transferring Pakistani nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea through a vast international network.  Agence France-Presse reported earlier this month that U.S. officials said that much of the activities of the sanctioned entities were discovered through the investigation into the nuclear network headed by Khan. The United States has argued that Khan acted on his own without government approval (see GSN, March 31). Evstafiev also complained Saturday that there has yet been no action to bring Khan before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, adding that Khan’s activities would constitute a major contribution to allowing terrorists to potentially obtain nuclear weapons. Back to top

More Inspectors Arrive in Iran; Tehran Claims to Give U.N. ‘Complete Story’ on Uranium A new team of inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency arrived Saturday in Tehran, as Iran said it had offered the previous group of inspectors the “complete story” on the country’s uranium enrichment program, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 23). “We offered them the complete story about traces of highly enriched uranium, mainly all movements of contaminated equipment inside Iran,” Mohammad Saeedi, a senior Iranian nuclear official, said of the agency team that left Iran Friday. “I think they were convinced with our explanations,” he added. Saeedi also said Iran has produced P-1 centrifuges for low-grade uranium enrichment but has not yet decided whether to produce P-2 centrifuges, which could be used to produce highly enriched uranium for use in a nuclear weapon (Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press/Boston.com, April 25). Back to top       NPT Parties Criticized on Disarmament, Nonproliferation Compliance By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — A meeting of the parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty began this morning with some of the most forceful advocates of nuclear disarmament criticizing countries for failing to meet both the nonproliferation and disarmament obligations of the treaty (see GSN, April 23). “The achievement of nuclear disarmament is not an option, but a legal obligation” under the treaty, said Mexican Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba. New Zealand’s Minister for Disarmament, Marian Hobbs, said, “There is no scope for selective or deferred compliance” with the disarmament obligations. Speaking for the New Agenda, a coalition of seven countries that is promoting a nuclear disarmament agenda within the NPT framework, de Alba said, “We remain convinced that nuclear nonproliferation and nuclear disarmament are mutually reinforcing processes that require continuous and irreversible progress on both fronts.” The New Agenda countries are Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden. In an obvious reference to the U.S. strategic doctrine, he said plans to develop new nuclear weapons or “rationalizations for their use contradict the spirit of the NPT.” In addition, modernizing weapons would “raise concern that nuclear testing might resume,” which would be “a retrograde step,” said de Alba. On the nonproliferation side of the issue, de Alba said the New Agenda welcomed steps by Iran and Libya concerning their nuclear programs and called on North Korea to reverse its decision to leave the treaty. The New Agenda also called on India, Pakistan and Israel — the nuclear weapon states outside of the NPT — to join the treaty and open their nuclear sites to international inspection. Hobbs said “concern with nuclear proliferation is entirely proper” but “the cause of nonproliferation will be given its greatest multilateral boost through nuclear disarmament.” Nuclear weapon states’ refusal to pursue disarmament creates “a permissive attitude for proliferators,” she added. The five nuclear weapons states parties to the treaty — the United States, United Kingdom, China, France and Russia — are scheduled to address the meeting later during the two-day general debate. This annual two-week session is meant to lay the groundwork for next year’s review conference, which is held every five years to examine how well the parties are meeting their treaty obligations.   Back to top       North Korea Plans to Move Ahead With Nuclear Program North Korea vowed to push ahead with development of its nuclear deterrent in the midst of efforts to resolve the atomic standoff on the Korean peninsula, a U.S. researcher said Saturday after meeting with officials in Pyongyang (see GSN, April 23). “[President George W. Bush] may be trying to gain time, but time is not on his side,” Selig Harrison of the Center for International Policy in Washington quoted Kim Yong-nam, president of the presidium of the Supreme People’s Assembly and North Korea’s second in command, as saying. “We are going to use this time 100 percent effectively to strengthen our nuclear deterrent, quantitatively and qualitatively,” Kim reportedly said. In response to allegations by U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney that North Korea could transfer nuclear technology to terrorists, Kim said North Korean policy supports missile sales but stops short of allowing nuclear sales. “There can be trade in missiles but in regard to nuclear material our policy, past, present and future, is that we would never allow such a transfer to al-Qaeda or anyone else,” Harrison quoted Kim as saying (Reuters/Yahoo!News, April 24). Meanwhile China said North Korea is opening up and that it wants to be a nuclear-free country, the Associated Press reported. Wang Guangya, China’s United Nations ambassador, said Saturday that he hopes the North “will move in the right direction.” Of the six-party nuclear talks, Wang said, “We tried to convince them that this is the best way to find a solution for this issue.” “I think that they are being convinced, and they agreed that they will continue,” said Wang. “And they also pronounced that their final objective is to be a nuclear-free country. They don’t like to have nuclear weapons,” he added (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Charlotte Observer, April 24). Back to top       Former Pakistani PM Warns That Khan May Be in Danger Former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has said that top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan might be killed to prevent him from confessing that he acted on government orders in organizing the network that spread nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, April 22). “There is a concern amongst many of us that Dr. Khan may be killed to silence him, and that it will be shown as a heart attack or something else,” Bhutto said in an interview with Australian Broadcasting Corp. Television. Bhutto also said that she believed that Khan would never have acted without government orders, according to the AP. “I just know that wherever he went, he went under orders,” she said (Associated Press/Hindustan Times, April 26). Meanwhile, the European Union Parliament last week unanimously passed an amendment calling for Pakistan to explain whether a 1998 nuclear weapons test was held jointly with North Korea, according to the Press Trust of India (see GSN, April 13). The amendment also calls on Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to recognize that the proliferation of Pakistani nuclear technology occurred because Pakistan’s nuclear program “was under the totally unaccountable control of the army” (Press Trust of India/Outlook India, April 25). Back to top       Chinese Diplomats Zoom Past Los Alamos Guards Two Chinese diplomats drove past a guard station at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, but were stopped before they reached any buildings being used for nuclear weapons research, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, March 17). Diplomats Hua Yu and Bo Lai, who work at the Chinese Consulate in Los Angeles, were on an intelligence-gathering mission on Feb. 26 at the New Mexico facility, U.S. officials told the Times. The two men drove past a guard station “at a high rate of speed” at 2:30 p.m., according to an incident report. Security police quickly stopped and searched the rented Ford Escort. “They were asked for identification. They were briefly questioned as to what they were up to. Their vehicle was searched, and after that, they were promptly escorted off the road,” said Los Alamos spokesman Kevin Roark. Pajarito Road, where the diplomats were stopped, is the site of two facilities for classified nuclear weapons activities, the Times said. A spokeswoman for the Chinese Consulate said the two men might have been heading to a museum at Los Alamos. “We know this is a sensitive area,” she said. “But the museum is public,” the spokeswoman added (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, April 26). Back to top       Testing of Mobile Russian ICBM Nears End Russia plans to conduct one more test of its mobile Topol-M ICBM, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said today (see GSN, April 21). After the next test, “it will be possible to make a decision to add this complex to the arsenal,” Ivanov reportedly told Russian President Vladimir Putin. Russia tested a Topol-M last week (Mosnews.com, April 26). Back to top

Weak Security Found at U.S. University Biological Laboratories Eleven U.S. universities conducting research on dangerous substances such as anthrax failed to control access to laboratories and maintained insufficient inventories of materials, according to a report released last month by the Health and Human Services Department inspector general. “Physical security weaknesses at all 11 universities left several agents vulnerable to theft or loss, thus elevating the risk of public exposure,” the report states. The universities were not identified for security reasons, the Associated Press said. Inspections in 2002 and 2003 found that intruders could enter laboratory buildings through unlocked doors or by forcing open doors that had no alarm systems. Buildings at all 11 universities allowed “unobstructed access to the floors” once a person was inside, the report states. Inspectors also found that laboratory keys were easily accessible, interior doors were often not locked, security cameras were not operating and identification badges were not required, AP reported. The report states that universities are working to correct the problems, but that the inspector general has not verified the improvements (Mark Sherman, Associated Press/Arizona Daily Sun, April 22). Back to top

Switzerland to Aid Albanian Chemical Weapons Disposal By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — Switzerland plans to assist Albania in destroying a small stockpile of communist-era chemical weapons, a Swiss Foreign Ministry official told Global Security Newswire on the sidelines of a nonproliferation conference held here last week (see GSN, April 30, 2003). Last year, Albania declared a small stockpile of chemical weapons to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, according to Andreas Friedrich, deputy director of the Swiss Foreign Affairs Ministry’s Center for International Security Policy. The weapons containing “very old” mustard agent were found in some of the thousands of scattered bunkers built during Albania’s communist past, Friedrich said. Friedrich also said that prior to Libya’s heralded declaration of its own chemical weapons arsenal last month, Albania was the last country to declare a chemical weapons stockpile to the organization that oversees the Chemical Weapons Convention. Friedrich said that Switzerland would cover the costs of OPCW inspections in Albania, which could amount to as much as $60,000. Switzerland three weeks ago dispatched a team of experts to Albania to assess the condition of the weapons, he said, adding that his country might aid in the actual destruction process, which is likely to be conducted within Albania. Switzerland previously assisted Albania in disposing of other types of nonweaponized toxic chemicals, and therefore has established good working relations with the country, Friedrich said. Emphasizing the need to dispose of the weapons as quickly as possible, Friedrich noted the unstable nature of Albania and said that it was in the international community’s interest to prevent the weapons there from falling into the hands of terrorist groups.  Back to top       Two U.S. Soldiers Killed While Investigating Suspect Iraqi Chemical Site Two U.S. soldiers were killed today in an explosion while inspecting a suspected Iraqi “chemical munitions” storage site, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, March 30). A team of U.S. soldiers was inspecting a building in the Waziriya district of Baghdad on the basis of information that it might have contained “chemical munitions” when the explosion occurred, said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt. He also said that the owner of the building had been suspected of providing “chemical agents” to Iraqi insurgents. In addition to the two killed in the blast, five other soldiers were injured. Following the blast, there were no indications in the area of special measures taken to protect against chemicals, AP reported. “Chemical munitions could mean any number of things,” including smoke grenades, Kimmitt said (Bassem Mroue, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, April 26). Back to top       Iraq had Chemical Weapons, Israeli General Says Iraq had chemical weapons before the U.S.-led invasion, but might have shipped them to Syria or buried the munitions before the war, the Israeli military chief of staff said in an interview published today (see GSN, March 29). Russian Tupolev-16 and Sukhoi aircraft, along with unmanned drones, were being fitted to carry up to hundreds of kilograms of chemical agents, Lt. Gen. Moshe Yaalon told the Yediot Ahronot newspaper, according to the Associated Press. “There is no doubt that in the eight months leading up to the war, the Iraqis prepared an ability to deliver by air chemical weapons, at least at us,” Yaalon said. The planes were destroyed in the opening days of the war, Yaalon said, but the weapons were better hidden. “Perhaps they transferred them to another country, such as Syria,” he said. “We very clearly saw that something crossed into Syria. Perhaps they (the Iraqis) buried them,” Yaalon added (Laurie Copans, Associated Press/Ireland Online, April 26). Back to top

Current and Former Russian Officials Criticize Efforts to Prevent Missile Proliferation By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire MOSCOW — Current and former senior Russian officials last week criticized two international agreements that seek to prevent the spread of ballistic missiles, and they called for expanded and more binding measures (see GSN, Feb. 26).  While there are international treaties to prevent the proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, there are only two lesser agreements that deal with ballistic missile proliferation. The Missile Technology Control Regime is an informal 33-nation group that agrees to implement similar export controls on missile technology. The 2002 Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation calls on more than 100 participating nations to exercise “maximum possible restraint” in developing and deploying ballistic missiles and to avoid aiding the ballistic missile programs of any countries that might be developing weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, July 2, 2003). In remarks before a two-day nonproliferation conference held in Moscow last week by the PIR Center, former Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev criticized the MTCR for failing to prevent what he called the growing spread of ballistic missiles. Addressing the conference Friday, Sergeyev said the regime did not have enough members and lacked adequate verification measures to be effective in preventing missile proliferation. While praising the Code of Conduct as an important “first step,” a legally binding international treaty to prevent missile proliferation is still needed to help close remaining “loopholes,” Oleg Skabara, head of the Russian Defense Ministry’s Main Directorate for International Military Cooperation, said during the conference Saturday. Skabara criticized the code for failing to offer incentives to encourage countries to give up missile proliferation activities. Such a lack of incentives has resulted in a number of countries of concern, such as China, India, Israel and North Korea, refusing to join the code, he said. When Russia joined the code in 2002, it viewed the agreement as a “first step” toward the creation of an international missile treaty, Skabara said. A U.S. State Department official in Washington told Global Security Newswire today, though, that instituting a missile proliferation treaty would require developing a negotiable, verifiable treaty to stem missile proliferation while allowing legitimate activities. “That’s a pretty tall order,” the official said, adding that the Hague Code of Conduct was created, in part, because it was achievable. Some U.S. experts in Washington today agreed with some of the Russian criticisms. Arms Control Association Research Director Wade Boese told GSN that the United States has been opposed to an outright missile ban on the view that such weapons are indeed legitimate. In addition, Bush administration officials have typically shied away from any international agreement seen as “tying their hands,” he said. He also agreed with Sergeyev’s criticisms that the MTCR lacks enough members to be truly effective. More and more countries such as India and Pakistan, Boese said, are developing the capability to become ballistic missile producers and therefore a need exists to bring these countries into the supplier-based system of the regime. Some of Russia’s criticisms of the regime, though, may also be “market driven,” Boese said, noting that Russia also likely wants to prevent non-MTCR countries from engaging in the types of missile sales it is prohibited from dealing as a regime member. Back to top

GAO Report Faults Missile Defense Agency for Insufficient Testing, Providing Incomplete Cost Estimates The U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System may not have undergone sufficient testing to ensure it would function adequately during an actual missile attack, according to a congressional study released Friday (see GSN, April 23). The report, prepared by the General Accounting Office, calls for realistic testing of the system prior to deployment, as well as more thorough long-term cost estimates. “In exercising their oversight and funding responsibilities, decision makers in Congress and [the Defense Department] would benefit from having more information about the expected performance and costs of the BMDS,” a summary of the report says. The report states that the program would cost $53 billion between 2004 and 2009, based on Missile Defense Agency estimates. The report also says several programs are over budget or delayed. It criticizes the military’s development strategy, saying the program lacks milestones and estimates of total costs over the lifetime of the initiative (GAO report, April 23). Back to top       MIT Professor Offers Theory on Patriot Friendly Fire Patriot missile systems might have shot down two allied planes last year during Operation Iraqi Freedom after targeting “ghost” ballistic missiles, according to a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (see GSN, July 29, 2003). The Defense Department has not yet released results of its investigation of a March 23, 2003, downing of a British warplane or the April 2, 2003, missile hit on an U.S. F-18 Hornet, according to Inside the Army. Theodore Postol said, though, that the large number of radar systems deployed in Iraq and Kuwait might have contributed to the accidents. With numerous systems operating in the same airspace, “multiple radio signals … can be simultaneously bouncing off a tracked aircraft,” Postol wrote in a report. Delays of signal pulses by “roughly tenths of milliseconds” could cause the radar systems to see a “ghost ballistic missile” and warn Patriot operators, said Postol, an MIT professor of science, technology and national security policy. Postol speculated that after the Patriot missiles were launched, they searched for the object creating the false signals, but when they failed to find the object, they honed in on the aircraft that spurred the ghost radar images. Postol acknowledged that his theory is an “informed guess,” according to Inside the Army, and critics questioned the report given that there were only two Patriot-related accidents during the thousands of military flights during Operation Iraqi Freedom (Emily Hsu, Inside the Army, April 26). Back to top

Disarmament Commission Ends 2004 Session Without Agreeing on What to Discuss By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. Disarmament Commission concluded its annual session Friday, failing even to agree to an agenda. During several public meetings in its three-week session, the delegates made proposals and counterproposals on nuclear and conventional disarmament agenda items, but no compromise language was ever reached (see GSN, April 8). In the past, the commission has decided by consensus each year to deal with two substantive items — one on nuclear and one on conventional disarmament — in the months leading up to the annual spring session. This year, however, the commission started without an agreement. During the deliberations, a third item was added on “improving the effectiveness of the United Nations disarmament machinery.” The European Union, Nonaligned Movement and the United States all had variations on how to phrase the nuclear and conventional themes. On April 16, the chairman of the commission, Ambassador Revaz Adamia of Georgia, presented his compromise language on the three issues. The compromise on the conventional disarmament and disarmament machinery language were generally acceptable, but the stalemate persisted on the nuclear item. Adamia suggested “guidelines for nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects, including, in particular, strategies for dealing with illicit activities that undermine nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation objectives.” The debate centered on variations of this theme, for example, whether or not to include the phrase “in all its aspects.” Unlike the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament, which can negotiate treaties (see GSN, Jan. 21), the commission’s mandate is to devise guidelines or norms that carry no legal weight. All commission decisions must be by consensus. The last time the commission agreed to guidelines was 1999. At the commission’s opening meeting April 5, Undersecretary General for Disarmament Affairs Nobuyasu Abe asked the commission to agree to a “good, relevant agenda,” adding, “The world is waiting for you to come out with correct answers to urgent questions we are facing.” He said the response to threats posed by weapons of mass destruction “lies not in discarding the multilateral system or collective international efforts, but in the increased joint efforts to strengthen the multilateral system of international peace and security.”   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.