Terrorist activity in Uzbekistan, such as this July bombing at a Tashkent government office, spurred officials to remove nuclear fuel, containing highly enriched uranium, from a research reactor last week (AFP Photo). Uzbekistan Returns Reactor Fuel to Russia in Latest U.S.-Funded Mission By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Energy Department announced yesterday the successful repatriation from Uzbekistan of more than 10 kilograms of Russian-origin nuclear fuel, including material that could be used in a crude nuclear weapon (see GSN, Aug. 13). In a Sept. 9 secret mission, 11 kilograms of enriched uranium fuel was transported from the Institute of Nuclear Physics of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan, near the Uzbek capital of Tashkent, to a secured facility in the Russian city of Dmitrovgrad, where it will be blended down to low enriched uranium. Of the 11 kilograms of material, about 3 kilograms consisted of highly enriched uranium, Energy Department spokeswoman Jeanne Lopatto said today...Full Story

U.S. Lobbies for Tougher IAEA Resolution; ElBaradei Cannot Guarantee Inspection Deadline The United States yesterday pushed for a tougher international response to Iran’s nuclear program. ..Full Story

New National Intelligence Director Could Prevent Repeats of Past Errors, Powell Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday that the creation of an “empowered” national intelligence director would help prevent intelligence mistakes such as the flaws in the presentation he made last year to the U.N. Security Council on prewar Iraq’s alleged WMD efforts (see GSN, June 2)...Full Story

	Tuesday, September 14, 2004

Powell, Ridge Support New Intelligence Post By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge yesterday gave their support to the creation of a new national intelligence director to oversee the entire U.S. intelligence community (see GSN, Sept. 9). In testimony before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, both officials said that the planned director would help them do their jobs. “We need a stronger, empowered quarterback,” Powell said. The creation of a national intelligence director was one of the main intelligence reform measures recommended this summer by the Sept. 11 commission. Last week, the White House proposed that such a director have budgetary authority over the National Foreign Intelligence Program and a strong role in the appointment of heads of various intelligence agencies. “In this town it’s budget authority that counts. Can you move money?  Can you set standards for people? Do you have the access needed to the president? The NID [national intelligence director] will have all of that, and so I think this is a far more powerful player. And that will help [the] State Department,” Powell said yesterday While the White House and the Sept. 11 commission agree on the need for a national intelligence director, they have offered differing approaches for advisors to the new director. The Sept. 11 commission has called for the creation of three deputy national intelligence directors to also serve as the head of the CIA, defense undersecretary for intelligence and either FBI assistant director for intelligence or homeland security undersecretary for information analysis. The White House, however, has instead proposed the creation of a Cabinet-level Joint Intelligence Community Council to assist the new director. Both Powell and Ridge yesterday offered their support for the joint intelligence community council. “The admonition about serving two masters is a good one. And I think the president, in anticipation of that concern, in his recommendation included the joint intel community council. So you’re not dealing with necessarily people serving two roles on a day-to-day basis, but you have access to the principals at the Cabinet level to make the critical decisions and to give guidance and to compete for the attention and the budget and everything else that will be in the control and the responsibility of the NID,” Ridge said. Powell told lawmakers that by serving on such a council, he would be “in a better position to point out the needs of the foreign policy experts of the [State] department and my need as secretary of state.” Ridge also said that the joint intelligence community council approach would also help improve accountability. “Once the consensus is reached, when you have the principals involved, rather than an assistant secretary, an undersecretary, a deputy secretary, then I think, frankly, it streamlines and enhances the credibility that whatever is decided is to be implemented and the principal him or herself is going to be held accountable,” he said. Powell urged caution on the implementation of another intelligence reform measure proposed by the Sept. 11 commission — the creation of national intelligence centers overseen by the new director to conduct joint collection and analysis on specific issues. The White House has requested the presidential commission investigating prewar intelligence on Iraq’s alleged WMD efforts to examine the creation of such a center to focus on nonproliferation. “You can create all kinds of structures — in the military, we’d say you can create all kinds of spaces — but there are a limited number of faces with the expertise needed for these spaces. So be careful about creating any structures that might really not be necessary if all you’re going to end up doing is competing to get the best people from organizations that are doing good work now to fill these new spaces,” Powell told lawmakers. Back to top       U.N. Security Council Debates Al-Qaeda Report By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — The primary tool the United Nations uses to enforce sanctions against al Qaeda and the Taliban — the list of suspected members of the two groups who are subject to Security Council sanctions — needs to be improved to match the evolving nature of the threat, Chilean Ambassador Heraldo Munoz told the council yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 13). Munoz, the chairman of the sanctions committee on al-Qaeda and the Taliban, was presenting to the council the new report of the monitoring team that examines the effectiveness of the sanctions. The list contains the names of 429 individuals and “entities” but that this represents “only a small fraction of the actual number of individuals and entities which are in fact associated with al Qaeda or the Taliban,” Munoz said, since members of the two groups “are mostly unknown and such individuals are difficult to identify unless caught preparing or committing terrorist acts.” The individuals and organizations on the list are subject to financial sanctions, a travel ban and an arms embargo. One of the responsibilities of the team, Munoz said, will be to find ways “to improve the functionality and credibility” of the list. Since there is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism, there is no common ground as to who should be included on the list, the report says. “The list has begun to lose credibility and operational value and now needs updating in terms of its relevance and accuracy,” according the team. Governments have given many reasons for not submitting names to the sanctions committee, including concerns about due process, the lack of a mechanism for removing names from the list, and worries that there are spelling and transliteration mistakes resulting in the wrong people being placed under sanctions. The sanctions have been in place since 1999. The monitoring group was added to the committee’s mandate in January 2004 in order to have a team of experts dedicated to monitoring the implementation of the sanctions. The report was the team’s first submission since coming into existence. The report says that since 1999 “the nature of the threat has changed” with the Taliban out of power in Afghanistan and that al-Qaeda “has evolved to become a global network of groups unbound by any organizational structure but held together by a set of overlapping goals.” The report says the sanctions have not been fully successful “partly because they address a set of circumstances that no longer apply.” For example, the ban on financial transfers is not keeping up with the ways al-Qaeda is moving money around the world.  Munoz said it was “unfortunate” that the team’s report, issued last month, was “misinterpreted … as a ‘failure of the sanctions regime.’” Rather the team noted how the two groups are evolving and that the United Nations “must try to stay ahead of the curve,” he said. “International terrorists are swiftly adapting their strategies, tactics and methods,” Munoz added, “The tools of sanctions must therefore be not only sharp and well targeted, but also implementable.” Besides improving the integrity of the list, Munoz said more needs to be done to evaluate how sanctions “are being applied on the ground.” “I am convinced that without continuous monitoring on the ground, our efforts can prove fruitless,” he added. Back to top

New National Intelligence Director Could Prevent Repeats of Past Errors, Powell Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday that the creation of an “empowered” national intelligence director would help prevent intelligence mistakes such as the flaws in the presentation he made last year to the U.N. Security Council on prewar Iraq’s alleged WMD efforts (see GSN, June 2). In his presentation to the Security Council, Powell included a since-discredited claim that prewar Iraq possessed mobile biological weapon facilities. The reported source for that claim was an Iraq defector known as “Curveball,” who was made available to Western intelligence agencies by the Iraqi National Congress, a prewar exile organization that has been heavily criticized for providing false information on Iraq’s alleged WMD programs. In May, Powell publicly said that he had been “disappointed” that the sourcing for the mobile biological facility claim in his U.N. presentation had been inaccurate, and accused the sources of such information of having intentionally misled U.S. intelligence (see GSN, May 17). Testifying yesterday before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on the issue of intelligence reform — a topic that has dominated Congress since the July release of the findings of the Sept. 11 commission — Powell said that he had also been “distressed” that he had been unaware of the concerns of some intelligence analysts over the source of the mobile biological facility claim. “It did not all come together in a single way with a powerful individual and a powerful staff who could force these people to make sure that what one person knew, everyone else knew,” Powell said. “There were some intelligence communities that had put out disclaimers about some of the sourcing that were not known to the people who were giving me the analysis and the conclusions.” Powell also said that the creation of a strong national intelligence director — one of the key intelligence reform measures recommended by the Sept. 11 commission — would help to prevent such mistakes in the future (see related GSN story, today).  “Now it seems to me that if you have a powerful, important, empowered national intelligence director, you are less likely to have those kinds of mistakes made,” he said. “If you focus this new system, this new approach to business on sharing all information openly, widely and without fear of busting your stovepipe, then it’s less likely you will have the kind of situation where I go out there and I’m saying something while there are people in one part of the intelligence community not connected well enough to another part of the intelligence community know — they knew at the time I was saying it — that some of the sourcing was suspect,” Powell added. Last week, the Bush administration submitted its plan to Congress for the creation of a national intelligence director — one that would act as the main intelligence adviser to the president and oversee the entire U.S. intelligence community and who would have budgetary authority over the National Foreign Intelligence Program and a strong role in the appointment of heads of intelligence agencies. In addition to the White House plan, lawmakers in both houses of Congress have proposed various approaches to the creation of the new national intelligence director. In his testimony yesterday, Powell offered support for one aspect of an intelligence reform proposal made by Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) — assigning responsibility for post-hoc evaluations of intelligence assessments to a new inspector general’s office (see GSN, Aug. 24). “The intelligence community does many things well, but critical self-examination of its performance, particularly the quality and utility of its analytical products, is too often not one of them,” Powell said. “Thousands of judgments are made every year, but we’ve got to do a better job of subjecting all of those judgments to rigorous post-mortem analysis to find out what we did right as well as what we did wrong; when we did something wrong, why did we do it wrong, to make sure we don’t do it wrong again,” he added. Powell also said yesterday that he believed it was “unlikely” that coalition forces would find stockpiles of biological or chemical weapons in Iraq. The Iraq Survey Group, the unit conducting the search for evidence of prewar Iraq’s WMD efforts, is set to release its final report by the end of this month (see GSN, Aug. 23). Back to top       G-8 Officials Meet to Follow Up on Nonproliferation Issues Following Summit Officials from the Group of Eight global economic powers met Friday in Geneva to continue nonproliferation discussions held earlier at this year’s G-8 summit in the United States (see GSN, June 10). During the meeting, members of the of the G-8 Senior Group, which was created during the preparation for this year’s summit, discussed several U.S. nuclear nonproliferation proposals, such as efforts to restrict the transfer of nuclear technology and efforts to restrict uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing activities, according to U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton.  The meeting also involved discussions on the expansion of the G-8 Global Partnership, which seeks to provide funding to support nonproliferation activities in the former Soviet Union. During the meeting, G-8 officials heard presentations by nine former Soviet states seeking to become formal Global Partnership recipient countries, Bolton said, adding that as many as four could be included in the G-8 effort by the end of the year. Bolton also said that Friday’s meeting involved discussions on the Iranian and North Korean nuclear issues, which were a topic at this year’s G-8 summit (see related GSN story, today). “The objective that the United States has been pursuing has been to insure that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapons capability, and that is an objective shared by all of the G-8 countries as reflected in the G-8 leaders’ statement issued at Sea Island. So there is no disagreement on our broad objective, no disagreement,” he said (U.S. State Department release, Sept. 13). Back to top

Uzbekistan Returns Reactor Fuel to Russia in Latest U.S.-Funded Mission By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Energy Department announced yesterday the successful repatriation from Uzbekistan of more than 10 kilograms of Russian-origin nuclear fuel, including material that could be used in a crude nuclear weapon (see GSN, Aug. 13). In a Sept. 9 secret mission, 11 kilograms of enriched uranium fuel was transported from the Institute of Nuclear Physics of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan, near the Uzbek capital of Tashkent, to a secured facility in the Russian city of Dmitrovgrad, where it will be blended down to low enriched uranium. Of the 11 kilograms of material, about 3 kilograms consisted of highly enriched uranium, Energy Department spokeswoman Jeanne Lopatto said today. The United States funded the mission and provided technical experts to help monitor the loading of the material into Russian-supplied transportation canisters. International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards inspectors were also present to observe the loading of the material, which was then airlifted under guard out of Uzbekistan, according to the Energy Department. Uzbekistan provided security and transportation for the material from the institute to the airport near Tashkent, Lopatto said. “The recovery, return and eventual elimination of this highly enriched uranium are an important milestone in our campaign to reduce this dangerous material worldwide,” U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said in a press statement.  “It was only with the strong cooperation of the Uzbeks and Russians that we were able to successfully complete this important international security mission.” Lopatto said that while the United States has long intended to aid the repatriation of Russian-origin reactor fuel from Uzbekistan, the mission took on an increased priority due to recent terrorist activity in the region. Concerns over Islamic militant activity in Uzbekistan has made the security of nuclear material there a source of concern for “some time,” said Rose Gottemoeller of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Uzbekistan is home to an Islamic militant group known as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, which is suspected of having ties to al-Qaeda. Some experts warned today, though, that large quantities of Russian-origin irradiated material are still present at the Uzbek site pending the completion of a Russian environmental review, which is legally needed there before the material can be returned. Matthew Bunn of Harvard University’s Project on Managing the Atom said that the material at the site is no longer “self-protecting,” meaning that the material is no longer so radioactive that it would injure anyone who handled it. “Most of the proliferation risks the site had in late August, it still has,” Bunn said. Even so, “getting even a few kilograms of HEU out of this location is a good thing,” he said, also noting the terrorist threat in Uzbekistan. The fuel was originally supplied to Uzbekistan by Russia for use in a 10-megawatt research reactor at the Institute of Nuclear Physics, which the IAEA has described as the largest such facility in Central Asia. Uzbekistan has agreed to convert the reactor to use low enriched uranium as fuel, according to the U.S. Energy Department. The one-day mission was conducted via the U.S. Global Threat Reduction Initiative — an effort launched in May to help prevent terrorists from obtaining fresh and spent research reactor fuel, which could be used to develop crude nuclear or radiological weapons (see GSN, May 26).  Under the initiative, the United States plans work with Russia to repatriate all Russian-origin fresh highly enriched uranium fuel by the end of 2005 and accelerate and complete the return of all Russian-origin spent fuel by 2010 (see GSN, May 27). The United States also plans to work through the GTRI to complete the repatriation of all U.S.-origin research reactor spent fuel under an existing U.S. program from locations around the world within a decade, and to convert research reactors around the world to use low enriched uranium fuel. Over the past year, according to the Energy Department, the United States has aided in the repatriation of almost 50 kilograms of Russian-origin HEU from sites in Bulgaria, Libya and Romania (see GSN, July 21). This weekend, the United States and Russia are scheduled to hold a conference on the Global Threat Reduction Initiative at IAEA headquarters in Vienna. While praising the successful repatriation, Nuclear Threat Initiative Co-Chairman Sam Nunn said yesterday that next week’s scheduled conference would provide an opportunity to increase international support for such efforts to secure vulnerable HEU supplies around the world. “This is a strong step in the right direction, but we are not working as fast as we can or as fast as we must,” said Nunn. “We are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe.” In 2002, NTI helped to fund the repatriation of weapon-grade material from a facility in Yugoslavia to Russia (see GSN, Aug. 23, 2002) Regarding future nuclear material repatriation efforts, Gottemoeller said that Russian-origin material at site in Sofny, Belarus was a source of concern. As for U.S.-origin fuel, she stressed the need to remove material provided to a research reactor in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. [EDITOR’S NOTE: Sam Nunn is chief executive officer of the Nuclear Threat Initiative.  NTI is the sole sponsor of Global Security Newswire, which is published independently by National Journal Group.] Back to top       U.S. Lobbies for Tougher IAEA Resolution; ElBaradei Cannot Guarantee Inspection Deadline The United States yesterday pushed for a tougher international response to Iran’s nuclear program.  Meeting in Vienna, members of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors discussed a draft resolution sets a November deadline for Iran to clarify discrepancies found by the agency thus far, the New York Times reported (see GSN, Sept. 13). Drafted by France, Germany and the United Kingdom, the proposed resolution falls short of listing specific demands of Tehran or explicitly calling for the case to be sent to the Security Council. The draft is, however, the toughest to date, as European powers have resisted earlier U.S. pressure to take a firmer stance with Iran. “The Europeans are taking a very hard line now,” said a European diplomat involved in the negotiations (Craig Smith, New York Times, Sept. 14). IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said, however, that there is still no concrete evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons capability, Reuters reported. “Have we seen any proof of a weapons program (in Iran)? Have we seen undeclared (uranium) enrichment? … Obviously until today there is none of that,” he said. “But are we in a position to say that everything is peaceful? Obviously we are not at this stage” (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters/New York Times, Sept. 14). ElBaradei also said he could not guarantee his investigation of Iran would be completed by a particular date, the Associated Press reported. “There is no artificial deadline where I can say, ‘in November everything will be completed’” (Andrea Dudikova, Associated Press/New York Times, Sept. 14). Meanwhile, European ministers yesterday urged Iran to put an end to its uranium enrichment activities, the Associated Press reported. Iran should come clean and “exclusively use its nuclear program for peaceful purposes,” said Dutch Foreign Minister Ben Bot. The EU, however, is concerned that the threat of sanctions could risk its goal of signing a lucrative trade deal allowing the EU to invest in Iranian oil and gas industries, AP reported (Straits Times/Associated Press, Sept. 14). Back to top       South Korean Nuclear Experiments Occurred at Three Undeclared Sites, ElBaradei Says International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei yesterday provided more detail on the recently disclosed nuclear experiments conducted by South Korea, including that the experiments were conducted at three facilities that had not been declared to the IAEA (see GSN, Sept. 13). ElBaradei also told a meeting of the IAEA’s Board of Governors in Vienna that South Korea did not reveal experiments conducted with plutonium in the early 1980s until agency inspectors provided Seoul with a large amount of information they had accumulated, according to the Washington Post. “It is a matter of serious concern that the conversion and enrichment of uranium and the separation of plutonium were not reported to the agency as required,” ElBaradei said.  “I would ask the Republic of Korea to continue to provide active cooperation and maximum transparency in order for the agency to gain full understanding of the extent and scope of these previously undeclared activities and to verify the correctness and completeness of South Korea’s declarations,” he added. Diplomats at the IAEA have said that there was a growing possibility that South Korea could be referred to the U.N. Security Council over its nuclear experiments, the Post reported (Dafna Linzer, Washington Post, Sept. 14).  U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton said last weekend that the United States would not engage in a “double standard” on countries found to have violated their safeguards agreements under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. He also said, though, that the United States would probably not respond formally until the IAEA releases a report of its findings on the South Korea issue, scheduled to occur by the agency’s next Board of Governors meeting set to be held in November. “Despite the chatter in some quarters, I want to make very clear that the United States will proceed to its decision on how to treat this matter considering the facts that the IAEA brings to us, but with no double standard at all,” Bolton said. South Korean officials have maintained that experiments were conducted on only a small scale and without official approval, according to the Los Angeles Times. “Some people can make mistakes, and in this case some scientists, very ambitious in terms of … their scientific inquisitiveness in certain of the aspects of nuclear materials, went a little bit further without any authorization of the government,” said Cho Chang-beom, South Korean ambassador to the IAEA. Some experts have warned, according to the Times, that the South Korean nuclear experiments could set a precedent for other countries possibly considering acquiring nuclear weapons. “South Korea didn’t have a full-fledged weapons program, but clearly they wanted to hedge their bets,” said Daniel Pinkston, a nuclear expert and visiting professor at Korea University in Seoul. “As the world becomes more unstable, one wonders if other states as well will do the same, fearing they don’t want to be the one country caught without a nuclear deterrent” (Demick/Yee, Los Angeles Times, Sept. 14).  Back to top       North Korea to Allow Outsiders to Visit Blast Site North Korea has reportedly granted a request by visiting British Foreign Office minister Bill Rammell to view the site of Thursday’s massive explosion in Yanggang Province near the Chinese border, the BBC reported (see GSN, Sept. 13). “Having asked the vice foreign minister this morning for our ambassador and other ambassadors to be allowed to visit the scene of the explosion I am very pleased the North Koreans have agreed to the request,” Rammell said. British Ambassador David Slinn would be allowed to visit the site as early as Tuesday, Rammell added (BBC, Sept. 14). North Korea blamed an alleged South Korean “smear campaign” for early speculation that the explosion was related to a nuclear test, the New York Times reported. “Plot-breeders might tell such a sheer lie,” North Korea’s official news agency announced yesterday. Referring to South Korea’s recent admissions of nuclear experimentation, the agency said, “The story about the explosion is nothing but a sheer fabrication intended to divert elsewhere the world public attention focused on the nuclear-related issue of South Korea.” Some nuclear experts in South Korea said the ambiguities surrounding last week’s explosion are consistent with Pyongyang’s usual mode of operation. “Taking into consideration North Korea’s strategies — brinksmanship diplomacy and strategic ambiguity when dealing with the U.S. — I think this incident was in line with their usual tactics,” Kim Tae-woo, a nuclear policy specialist at the Korean Institute of Defense Analysis, a government-financed research center, said yesterday. “It was a way to send out the message and boast that they can stage such a large-scale explosion if they wanted to” (James Brooke, New York Times, Sept. 14). North Korea also refused to commit to taking part in the next round of six-party talks on its nuclear program, the Financial Times reported. While Pyongyang was agreed in principle to continuing the talks, North Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Gye-gwan told Rammell that a firm date could not be set due to a “souring of relations” with Washington. Kim also told Rammell that North Korea had a plutonium-based “nuclear deterrent”, but declined to give details (Adams/Ward, Financial Times, Sept. 13). U.S. Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly said today after a brief visit to China that the United States was eager to resume negotiations with North Korea, Reuters reported. “We remain ready and anxious to return to the six-party talks and we are disappointed with the reasons [North Korea has] given for stalling,” he said in a statement released by the U.S. embassy in Beijing. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan acknowledged that there were difficulties, but added that if talks could not resume in September, “the sky will not collapse, China will continue to play a constructive role as it always does.” Japanese officials said North Korea appeared to be using the revelations about South Korea’s experiments as further reason for a delay. “North Korea has hardened its stance following the revelations of South Korea’s nuclear experiments, and perhaps we should not expect them to soften their stance so quickly and come to the negotiating table,” a senior Japanese government source told Reuters today. “It is increasingly becoming difficult, if not impossible, to arrange the talks by the end of this month,” the source said (Rhoads/Lim, New York Times, Sept. 14). Back to top       Pakistani Lawmakers Pass Nuclear Export Controls The lower house of the Pakistani parliament today passed a bill tightening controls on the export of nuclear and biological weapons technology and missile delivery systems, Reuters reported (see GSN, Sept. 13). “This law provides a framework to deal with sensitive technologies and proliferation,” State Minister for Foreign Affairs Makhdoom Khusro Bakhtiar said. “Pakistan respects its international obligations as a nuclear-capable state. This bill will further enhance Pakistan’s image as a responsible nuclear state.” The Senate is expected to pass the bill later this week before sending it to President Pervez Musharraf for his signature. The bill’s passage through the upper house, according to Reuters, should be a formality due to the majority status of the ruling coalition. The legislation provides for a prison sentence of up to 14 years or a fine of up to $85,000, or both, for anyone spreading nuclear technology or hardware, Reuters reported. Once enacted, however, it would not apply retroactively to individuals such as former top nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who has admitted to selling nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea (Reuters, Sept. 14). Back to top       Pentagon Conducts Nuclear Accident Exercise The U.S. Defense Department yesterday began a three-day exercise at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana to simulate a nuclear weapon transportation accident and its subsequent cleanup, according to the Great Falls Tribune (see GSN, Aug. 26). The exercise, known as Diligent Warrior, is set to involve 650 federal, state and local military and disaster relief officials, according to the Tribune. Observers of the exercise include two representatives from the British Royal Navy, the Tribune reported. “The exercise is designed to check how all of our contingency plans and procedures work if a situation like this ever occurs,” said base project leader Capt. Rick Cross. One problem in the exercise occurred, according to the Tribune, when a few military volunteers pretending to be civilians came upon the transportation accident and did not realize an evacuation order given by military police was directed at them.  “One or more of the bystanders has been ‘shot’ by security police, apparently for moving closer when they’d been ordered to back away,” said Capt. Joe Macri of the Air Force Space Command. While security forces are authorized to use deadly force if they believe that the nuclear weapon they are protecting is under threat, they are also called to use the minimum force required, Macri said. Officials conducting the exercise later decided to pretend that the mock shooting had occurred to prevent unnecessary complications, the Tribune reported. “That said, we will resurrect the actors,” Macri said (Peter Johnson, Great Falls Tribune, Sept. 14). Back to top       U.S. Air Force to Investigate Location of Lost Cold War-Era Nuclear Weapon An unarmed nuclear weapon, lost off the Georgia coast following a collision of a B-47 bomber and an F-86 fighter in 1958, might have been found, the U.S. Air Force announced yesterday. Experts from the Air Force and the Defense and Energy departments are examining the information collected by a group led by retired Air Force Lt. Col. Derek Duke that found the object underwater near Savannah in July, said Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Frank Smolinsky. If the bomb were found, Smolinsky said, a decision would have to be made about whether to attempt recovery or leave it where it is. An Air Force investigation concluded in 2001 that the bomb is probably harmless if left undisturbed, according to CNN, and that a recovery operation could set off the conventional explosives in the bomb. The 7,600-pound, 12-foot-long thermonuclear bomb, which the Air Force says did not contain the plutonium trigger needed for a nuclear explosion, contained 400 pounds of high explosives and an undisclosed amount of uranium (CNN, Sept. 13). Back to top

Missile Defense Test Encounters Further Delays The U.S. Defense Department has once again postponed flight-testing new elements of its missile defense system until the end of November, the Washington Post reported (see GSN, Sept. 10). Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Henry “Trey” Obering said, however, that the delay would not alter plans to begin operating the system in the next month or two. A number of critical hardware and software changes have been made on the system since it was last tested in December 2002, the Post reported, and officials were expecting to acquire crucial data about the system’s reliability in the pending round of tests. Democratic lawmakers yesterday criticized the Bush administration, accusing it of seeking to avoid embarrassment during the presidential campaign should the system fail during testing. “This has been a program so fraught with political calculation, rather than strategic and scientific thought, that I would assume there’s some political aspect to the delay,” said Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.), a member of the Armed Services Committee. “If you’re not confident enough to take a chance on a test, how can you say that this can engage successfully in a real operational mission?” Obering, however, said the decision to delay the tests was made solely due to technical considerations. “I have not been asked, influenced or pressured one way or another with respect to putting this system through its paces, through its tests,” he said. Obering said he made the decision to delay after learning last week of modifications to the test interceptor that were not checked out fully in ground tests, the Post reported. Another factor, Obering said, was the inability so far to find the root cause of a software glitch in the flight computer of the interceptor’s booster rocket, which had led to an earlier delay (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, Sept. 14).   Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

© Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.