The Nevada Test Site (above) has received increased funding in an effort to reduce the time needed to prepare for a nuclear test (DOE photo). Energy Department Releases Nuclear Policy Critique By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Energy Department recently released an independent committee’s critical review of the department’s nuclear weapons programs two years after it was completed, following pressure by a U.S. congressman and the media (see GSN, Aug. 13, 2003)...Full Story

Iran Set to Announce Work on Heavy Water Reactor; Nuclear Inspections Timetable Set Just after pledging to suspend production of uranium enrichment machinery this week, Iran has moved to begin building a heavy water reactor in June that could be used to produce weapon-grade plutonium, diplomats in Vienna said today (see GSN, April 6)...Full Story

Russian Defense Minister Criticizes NATO Expansion, Warns of Moscow Taking “Self-Defense” Actions By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov yesterday criticized the recent expansion of NATO to include three former Soviet states — a move Russia has warned could lead to a re-evaluation of its nuclear weapons doctrine (see GSN, March 26)...Full Story

	Wednesday, April 7, 2004

White House Implemented “Armageddon” Plan During Sept. 11, 2001 Attacks, Former Adviser Says The Bush administration reportedly implemented during the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks a Cold War-era plan to ensure continuity of government in the event of a nuclear war, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Sept. 12, 2003). In an interview with ABC’s Nightline, scheduled to be broadcast tonight, former White House counterterrorism adviser Richard Clarke said that once the attacks occurred, every federal agency was ordered to activate an alternate headquarters outside of Washington and to staff it “as soon as possible.” President George W. Bush’s decision to fly to Nebraska on the day of the attack instead of returning to Washington, a move criticized by some at the time, was part of the “Armageddon” plan, Clarke said. The Post reported today that Nightline confirmed that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld ordered Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to move to an undisclosed location outside of Washington. In addition, Vice President Dick Cheney, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and several Cabinet secretaries were also removed from Washington, the Post reported (Howard Kurtz, Washington Post, April 7). Back to top

German Intelligence Angry Over CIA Criticism of Poor Iraqi Biological Weapons Information The German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) “is not amused” by the reported allegations of some CIA officials that the German agency helped to contribute to the war in Iraq by providing false information on Iraq’s alleged biological weapons efforts, the DDP news agency reported yesterday (see GSN, March 29). The BND provided the United States information from an Iraqi defector known as “Curveball” that Iraq was developing biological weapons facilities. “Curveball” and the information he provided, however, have since been deemed to have not been credible — leading to criticism from the U.S. intelligence community, according to DDP. German security sources said the issue is “threatening to turn into a solid row” between Germany and the United States (DDP news agency/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, April 6). Meanwhile, German opposition lawmaker Friedbert Pflueger has demanded that tape recordings of meetings held in 2002 and 2003 between BND chief August Hanning and members of the German Parliament’s foreign policy committee to discuss Iraqi weapons of mass destruction be released, according to the German magazine Der Spiegel. While Pflueger has demanded the release of the tapes to determine whether the federal government misled the parliament, Der Spiegel reported that sections of the tapes dealing with the issue of Iraqi biological weapons appear to be missing (Der Spiegel, April 5, BBC Worldwide Monitoring, April 6). Back to top

Energy Department Releases Nuclear Policy Critique By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Energy Department recently released an independent committee’s critical review of the department’s nuclear weapons programs two years after it was completed, following pressure by a U.S. congressman and the media (see GSN, Aug. 13, 2003). The report was provided to Global Security Newswire last month in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Commissioned by the previous director of the department’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the March 2002 report levies a number of criticisms about that agency’s nuclear weapons, nonproliferation and counterterrorism programs In particular, it questions, two controversial Bush administration initiatives to shorten the estimated preparation time for conducting a live nuclear weapons test to 18 months and to research and potentially develop additional nuclear weapons capabilities. The report says that the NNSA processes for deciding whether to resume testing and to invest in particular activities required greater rigor, with committee Chairman Henry Chiles, a former commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, calling those issues “worrisome long-standing problems” in a letter accompanying the report. Such reports are required to be made public by law. The NNSA said last year it was withheld from the public pending an internal review because it contained sensitive information. Additional Testing The report questions the Bush administration’s plans to invest in shortening the amount of preparation time needed to conduct a nuclear test from as much as 36 months to as little as 18 months. Reducing that time would require knowing first what kind of test is planned, the report says. It says the United States has the physical capability to perform a test “in as little as three-to-six months” if the purpose were to simply create an explosion. However, the lengthy preparation time results from factors that cannot be addressed without knowing the nature of the test, the report says, citing construction of necessary infrastructure and organizing security. “It is unclear to what degree such work can be performed before one knows in some detail what tests are to be carried out,” it says. Professor Raymond Jeanloz of the University of California, Berkeley, the lead stockpile programs investigator on the committee, said money for reducing the test preparation period is probably being used to upgrade equipment, including some used for subcritical nuclear tests, and to maintain a capability for testing. “There is little evidence that anyone [at the labs] wants to push for resumption of testing,” he added. Deciding Whether to Test The report also criticizes as insufficiently thorough the agency’s process for deciding whether to recommend that testing might be needed because of a problem with the stockpile. It urges a “clear cut” process for deciding the conditions under which a nuclear test might be recommended on technical grounds. “A full analysis of the costs, benefits, scope and schedule, must be performed for both i) prospective underground nuclear tests and ii) the enhancements of current test readiness based on realistic and detailed scenarios,” it says. A decision to test could have significant political ramifications. The United States has signed but not ratified the 171-member Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and has observed a testing moratorium for more than 10 years. The Bush administration has said there are no plans to resume testing, but also received $25 million for fiscal 2004 and has requested $30 million for fiscal 2005 to shorten the preparation time.  The administration said that shortened test readiness would allow the United States to respond more rapidly to any technical problem with a stockpiled nuclear weapon that might require testing for resolution. The report says further the agency’s program for annually certifying the safety and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons is “ill defined and unevenly applied,” and that a more thorough peer review of its conclusions is needed. Advanced Concepts The report also criticizes the Bush administration’s “Advanced Concepts Initiative,” which is studying alternatives for an improved earth-penetrating nuclear weapon and researching and developing low-yield weapons. It says the concepts being pursued are not particularly novel. “What were presented as ‘advanced concepts’” to the committee “did not involve any radical departures from previously considered (or even implemented) systems,” it says. In addition, the programs’ potential costs versus their benefits were not well assessed, according to the report. “Concepts that have been discussed quite forcefully in recent times have yet to be examined in sufficient technical depth to determine that their potential military benefits justify the costs involved,” it says. The administration disclosed this year that its earth-penetrator program, if approved by Congress and the president for full development, could cost as much as $485 million through fiscal 2009 (see GSN, March 10).  The report recommends that new nuclear weapons design concepts receive “a thorough, timely vetting” by an independent body with respect to their potential technical, military and nonproliferation values. Other Criticisms The report’s assessments were derived from interviews with NNSA staff and employees of the three principal national nuclear laboratories, and a review of reports concerning the programs. Summarizing its findings, Chiles in his March 1, 2002, letter to then-NNSA Administrator John Gordon praised the agency’s overall strategic plan. He also noted, though, that aspects of the nuclear stockpile were “showing signs of aging,” and said there is a need for a “mature, aggressive nuclear, biological and chemical nonproliferation detection program.” Chiles described as “worrisome and long-standing problems,” issues of prioritizing and allocating resources to agency activities and of “peer review and warhead safety and reliability certification.” Citing previously reported recruitment difficulties, he noted the average age of the laboratory staff continues to increase and said varying annual funding constraints resulted in excessive year-to-year hiring fluctuations. Chiles also called for improving security, accounting and recovery of global inventories of potential nuclear weapons fuel, saying they are “imperatives both to stem nuclear proliferation and to combat the threat to nuclear terrorism.” A report released by the Energy Department’s inspector general’s office in February criticized that effort for making insufficient progress on reclaiming much of that highly enriched uranium, which was supplied to foreign reactors for decades (see GSN, Feb. 18) Committee Terminated Gordon’s successor, Linton Brooks, terminated the committee last summer shortly after taking office, concluding it was no longer needed. That move and the agency’s refusal to release the report prompted Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and some former committee members to criticize the Bush administration. “The Department of Energy has disbanded the one forum for honest, unbiased external review of its nuclear weapons policies,” the congressman said then in a statement. Brooks wrote in a letter to Markey last September that the NNSA was under no requirement to extend the operation of the committee. He said further the final report was being withheld “because sensitive information contained in the report is considered ‘For Official Use Only.’” He wrote though it was being considered for review for partial or complete release by the agency’s Office of General Counsel. A Markey aide said today that the congressman still had not received a copy of the report. Back to top       Iran Set to Announce Work on Heavy Water Reactor; Nuclear Inspections Timetable Set Just after pledging to suspend production of uranium enrichment machinery this week, Iran has moved to begin building a heavy water reactor in June that could be used to produce weapon-grade plutonium, diplomats in Vienna said today (see GSN, April 6). “Iran is to announce soon that it will be beginning work in June on a heavy water research reactor in Arak,” a Vienna diplomat close to the International Atomic Energy Agency told Agence France-Presse. While the reactor would not violate Iran’s safeguards agreement with the agency, according to the diplomat, it could send the wrong signal at a time when suspicions about Iran’s nuclear program have been accumulating. “This is not an accident,” the diplomat said, referring to the timing of the construction planned for June, the same month the agency’s board of governors is scheduled to meet to discuss Iran. Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei returned yesterday from Tehran, where he agreed with Iranian officials on a timetable for nuclear inspections (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, April 7). Under the agreement, agency inspectors would return to Iran on April 12, and Tehran would submit a report on its nuclear program and ambitions by mid-May. Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department reacted with skepticism to Iran’s announcement that it would cooperate with ElBaradei’s agency and temporarily halt nuclear activities. “We’ve heard promises like that before and we’ve also seen them broken before,” said spokesman Adam Ereli. “It’s great if they actually live up to their promise, but so far, they haven’t done that. And really until they do that, this investigation, this process of review by the IAEA has to continue,” he added (U.S. State Department Briefing, April 6). Back to top       Russian Defense Minister Criticizes NATO Expansion, Warns of Moscow Taking “Self-Defense” Actions By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov yesterday criticized the recent expansion of NATO to include three former Soviet states — a move Russia has warned could lead to a re-evaluation of its nuclear weapons doctrine (see GSN, March 26). Late last month, NATO formally admitted seven new members including the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The admission of those nations means that, for the first time, NATO’s reach extends to the Russian border. During a speech last night in Washington hosted by the Center for Defense Information, Ivanov warned that if the alliance establishes a “military infrastructure” in the region, Russia would respond with actions that “conform to the principles of self-defense.” “We entertain no illusions why the Baltic countries have been admitted to NATO and why NATO planes are already being deployed there,” Ivanov was quoted by RIA Novosti as saying, referring to four F-16 fighters recently deployed in Lithuania. “This has nothing to do with the fight against terrorism,” he said. In a commentary in today’s New York Times, Ivanov wrote that NATO’s expansion into the Baltics gives the alliance the ability to “control and monitor Russian territory.” “We cannot turn a blind eye as NATO’s air and military bases get much closer to cities and defense complexes in European Russia,” he wrote. In a move that could lead to further concern in Moscow, the Joint Air Monitoring System of the three Baltic states was formally incorporated into the NATO Integrated Air Defense System today, RIA Novosti reported, citing a Latvian air force spokesman. Ivanov also wrote today that Russia’s “fears” were compounded by the fact that the three Baltic states, as well as Slovenia, are not signatories to the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty. A modified version of the treaty reached after the end of the Warsaw Pact, but not yet ratified, governs the number of conventional forces each member may possess and that each member may allow within its borders, according to a U.S. State Department fact sheet. According to Ivanov, the fact that the Baltic states are not CFE Treaty members creates a “‘gray zone’ in Europe’s conventional arms control system that could allow the alliance to deploy any amount of heavy weaponry within them.” Noting that Russia had reduced its military forces in the eastern part of the country, Ivanov criticized in his Times article today both NATO and the governments of the new members for failing to address Moscow’s concerns. He said last night that while there is still a “window of opportunity” to improve Russian-NATO relations, it was up to the United States and the alliance to do so, adding that any improved relations had to be based on mutual concessions. Last week, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell sought to reduce Russia’s concerns over the NATO expansion. “We are not putting more troops in to surround Russia. We’re moving troops out of Europe even more than we’ve moved over the last 10 or 12 years. So, if they look at what we’re doing they know, as an analytic manner, that this is not something they really should be worrying about,” Powell said April 2. The issue of the NATO expansion was also one of several discussed yesterday during a meeting between Powell and Ivanov held in Washington, State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said. “It was a very broad and free-flowing exchange,” he said. Nuclear, Terrorism Concerns In his remarks last night, Ivanov also addressed several nuclear weapons- and terrorism-related issues. He praised the roles of strategic deterrence and the doctrine of mutually assured destruction in helping to foster the environment for the current state of U.S.-Russian relations (see GSN, April 1). “Let us guard this heritage,” Ivanov said. He also said, though, that Russia is concerned with U.S. plans to research new “bunker-busting” nuclear weapons, adding that it is “quite enough” to attack terrorists using conventional weapons. The use of such miniature nuclear weapons could be an example of “letting the genie out of the bottle” and could ultimately lower the nuclear threshold, he said (see GSN, Jan. 29). Ivanov also addressed the issue of securing Russian nuclear materials from terrorists seeking to develop nuclear or radiological weapons. He said that he was confident that there had been no leakage of Russian weapon-grade materials and that not even “1 gram” had been left unaccounted for (see GSN, March 23). Ivanov suggested that terrorists would not need to acquire Russian nuclear materials to be able to conduct large-scale attacks, or even attacks involving weapons of mass destruction. He noted that Chechen militants had obtained information on the development of “poisons” through the Internet (see GSN, March 31). In addition, Ivanov said last night that the fact that Russia accepts U.S. and international aid to help dispose of nuclear reactors removed from decommissioned Russian nuclear submarines does not indicate security problems. Russia “bears the burden of the Cold War” and therefore has a large number of submarines and reactors to dispose of, he said (see related GSN story, today). Back to top       U.K. Plans $3.9 Billion Contribution for Dismantling Russian Nuclear Submarines The United Kingdom plans to provide Russia with $3.9 billion to support efforts to safely dismantle nuclear submarines, Interfax reported yesterday (see GSN, March 24). During talks held April 1 in Moscow, British and Russian officials discussed a proposal for the United Kingdom to help fund the recycling of a decommissioned Victor-class attack submarine and for environmental projects in the Andreyev Firth, the site of a former naval base, said Viktor Akhunov, head of the nuclear facilities disposal department of the Russian Atomic Energy Ministry.  British funds would be part of the United Kingdom’s contribution to the Group of Eight Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Akhunov said. The money does not include British aid for disposal of Russian chemical weapons and waste, he said (Interfax, April 6). Back to top       Russian Nuclear Weapons Expert Receives 15 Years in Prison for Spying for United States The Moscow City Court today sentenced Russian nuclear weapons expert Igor Sutyagin to 15 years in prison for providing nuclear weapons-related information to the United States (see GSN, April 6). The court ordered that Sutyagin serve his term in a prison camp with a special tough regime, Agence France-Presse reported.  Sutyagin was charged with collecting information on Russia’s nuclear submarines and missile warning systems and passing it to U.S. intelligence while working for the Alternative Futures consulting firm, an alleged CIA front. Sutyagin, however, argued that the information was from open sources and that he submitted the information to the firm while working under a legal freelance contract, AFP reported. Sutyagin’s defense attorneys plan to appeal the verdict to the Russian Supreme Court, and failing there, the European Court of Human Rights, AFP reported. The U.S. State Department yesterday criticized Sutyagin’s closed trial, noting its “lack of transparency and due process.” (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, April 7). Back to top

Scientists in Russia Develop Modified Smallpox Vaccine Russian scientists have developed a modified version of the smallpox vaccine that causes fewer side effects that the current vaccine, RIA Novosti reported last week (see GSN, March 10). While Russia has enough vaccine to protect people in case of an outbreak, the present version can cause “unhealthy reactions” or even death, said Sergei Netesov, deputy director of the Vektor Center of Virology and Biotechnology.  “What we have developed is not a radically new antismallpox vaccine, but it is less dangerous and causes much less side-effects on the body,” Netesov said. He added that the new vaccine protects against both smallpox and hepatitis B. Scientists in Germany and the United States are working on the next generation of smallpox vaccines, research that is more time- and cost-intensive than the effort that led to the modified vaccine developed by the Russian scientists, according to Netesov (RIA Novosti, April 1). Back to top

Army Chemical Weapons Incinerator Has More “Near Misses” of Agent Exposure The company destroying U.S. chemical munitions at the Deseret Chemical Depot in Utah is “regressing back towards pre-July 15, 2002 operational discipline” that forced the facility to shut down for eight months after two workers were exposed to the nerve agent sarin, according to an internal U.S. Army memo reported today by the Salt Lake Tribune (see GSN, March 30). Dale Ormond, site project manager at the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, said his rebuke by memo of contractor EG&G Defense Materials indicated low tolerance for unsafe conditions at the facility. Ormond said in a letter to the Salt Lake Tribune that his memo lists “a number of operational safety issues and events, none of which posed a significant safety hazard to the workers, the public or the environment.” Among the problems noted were a 30-gallon agent spill, pumping of 100 gallons of agent to a sump rather than the furnace and facility modifications made without following proper procedures. “The contractor was not as focused on continued improvement as I had expected,” Ormond said. “I simply sent a strongly worded message, and the contractor has responded appropriately,” he added. Craig Williams, a member of the Kentucky-based Chemical Weapons Working Group, was critical of the facility’s operations. “It’s disturbing that after more than seven years of operations in Utah, these kinds of incidents continue to occur,” Williams said. “Perhaps more troubling is that it appears no one understands why they occur or how to fix them,” he added (Dawn House, Salt Lake Tribune, April 7). Back to top       Colorado Senator Calls for Hearings on Chemical Stockpile Destruction Delay U.S. Senator Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) yesterday called for a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee to examine delays in chemical weapons destruction by the U.S. Army, the Pueblo Chieftain reported (see GSN, Feb. 3). In a letter to committee Chairman John Warner (R-Va.), Allard wrote that the 2005 White House budget request for the destruction project “provides insufficient funding for the programs and will most likely result in the United States failing to meet its treaty obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, which calls for the complete destruction of the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile by 2012” (see GSN, Oct. 31, 2003). The Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado houses a mustard agent stockpile that must be destroyed under the terms of the convention, which the United States ratified in 1997. The White House budget request cut the fiscal 2005 allocation for the depot from more than $150 million to less than $5 million. The Army claims the estimated cost for the project, primarily organized by contractor Bechtel, was too high and has reportedly rejected Bechtel’s suggestions on how the project might be scaled back. Bechtel defended the high cost estimate by citing the Army’s own priorities for faster stockpile destruction in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks (John Norton, Pueblo Chieftain, April 7). Back to top       Telephone Intercepts Led to Officials Foiling London Chemical Weapons Plot U.S. and British intelligence intercepts of telephone conversations helped to derail a planned chemical weapons attack in London, the London Independent reported today (see GSN, April 6). The plan allegedly involved the use of bombs consisting of conventional explosives and the chemical osmium tetroxide. Potential targets included the London Underground subway system and London’s Gatwick and Heathrow airports, according to the Independent. The plan was foiled, in part, after U.S. and British intelligence agencies intercepted telephone calls among eight suspected terrorists within the United Kingdom and calls made to Pakistan, the Independent reported. The eight suspects have were arrested last week. Steve Simpson, a senior chemistry lecturer at the University of Salford, warned of the effects of osmium tetroxide. “If you get the vapor in your eyes, even a small amount, it can turn them brown or black and you could be permanently blinded. It is so volatile that one could be in appreciable danger just opening a bottle,” Simpson said (Kim Sengupta, London Independent, April 7). The chemical, which costs about $30 per gram, would be easy for terrorists to disperse in a confined space, said John Henry, a toxicology professor at St. Mary’s Hospital in London. “It vaporizes at room temperature and, if you breathe in the fumes, they cause severe lung edema,” which would lead to severe loss of breath, he said. Osmium tetroxide would probably not cause as much harm as a chemical agent such as sarin, said Andrea Sella, an inorganic chemist at University College London (Clive Cookson, Financial Times, April 6). British Home Secretary David Blunkett said today that the foiled chemical weapons plot validates the government’s decision to implement antiterrorism measures. The public should be “praising and being very grateful that we have the security and counterterrorism services we do because they are doing a first-class job,” Blunkett said. “They have got my whole-hearted backing because this is the only protection we really have,” he added (James Lyons, Press Association, April 7). Back to top

U.S. to Supply Radiation Detectors for Olympics The U.S. Energy Department is providing radiation detectors worth millions of dollars to Greece in preparation for the Olympic Games in August, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, March 29). Last month, hundreds of U.S. Special Forces participated in two weeks of exercises, codenamed “Hercules Shield,” with personnel from numerous countries. Troops trained for “catastrophic scenarios,” among those a radiological or “dirty bomb” attack at the Olympics (see GSN, March 10). The exercises showed some lapses in communication and coordination, but that was to be expected, said George Voulgarakis, Greek minister of public order. “We had to correct many things,” Voulgarakis said. “That is what the exercises are for. You do things, you see the weaknesses, you correct things, you go on,” he added. U.S. officials in Athens said they had no reason to recommend that tourists or athletes avoid the games (Clifford Levy, New York Times, April 7).   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.