|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Al-Qaeda Still Seeking WMD, U.N. Report Says By Jim Wurst UNITED NATIONS — Al-Qaeda and the Taliban still retain “a keen interest” in acquiring and using weapons of mass destruction and therefore greater efforts are needed to control the “elements” of such weapons, according to a report issued yesterday by an expert panel monitoring U.N. Security Council sanctions against those two organizations (see GSN, Nov. 15, 2004). While the arms embargo imposed on the two groups has succeeded in denying them conventional weapons such as assault rifles, the team found gaps in the embargo it believes need to be closed. Although al-Qaeda “operatives are most likely to use small arms and improvised explosives in their attacks,” the panel suggests the Security Council “look beyond the current measures” in the embargo in order to further restrict access to weapons of mass destruction, portable missile launchers and certain kinds of commercially available explosives. Another avenue open is to improve that panel’s cooperation with another Security Council monitoring team set up under Resolution 1540, which is designed to deny “nonstate actors” access to unconventional weapons. No specifics were offered yesterday on what that cooperation would involve. The team is convinced al-Qaeda “retains a keen interest in acquiring chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) weapons, as demonstrated by its statements and doctrine.” Affiliated groups in the United Kingdom and Jordan “have come close to mounting such attacks. It seems only a matter of time before a successful CBRN attack occurs,” the report says (see GSN, Jan. 13, 2003; GSN, Dec. 15, 2004). The report refers to CBRN weapons rather than weapons of mass destruction. Panel coordinator Richard Barrett said the group made that distinction because the “large bomb” scenario suggested by the term WMD is not the most likely to occur. “I don’t think that the al-Qaeda are going to get hold of a large bomb or missile with a nuclear warhead, something we general think of as nuclear weapons,” he said at a news conference yesterday. “I think they are much more likely to get hold of some of the components that go to make up those weapons and release them in some way.” Terrorists are more likely to explode “a highly toxic or radioactive” device in city or at a sports event, which was the goal of the attempts in United Kingdom and Jordan, Barrett said. “That’s why I talk about the elements … rather than the weapons themselves,” he said. Elements would include toxic agents and low-yield radioactive material that could be used in a “dirty bomb.” He also defended the panel’s opinion that such an attack is inevitable. All the experts “will tell you the same,” Barrett said. “It is clear that al-Qaeda has made statements in the past that they are interested in acquiring that sort of technology. They can’t have any interest for any sort of beneficial use, [so] I presume they intend to amount such an attack.” The Security Council adopted Resolution 1267 in 1999, imposing sanctions against Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the then rulers of Afghanistan, the Taliban. The analysis team was organized in January 2004 with the mandate to monitor the implementation of the sanctions and to recommend to the council how the restrictions might be improved. The sanctions include a travel ban, arms embargo and a freeze of financial assets of individuals and groups named on a list maintained by the 1267 sanctions committee. There are 433 names of individuals and entities on the current list; an increase of 41 since January 2004. This week’s report was the team’s second submission. The first report, filed in July 2004, said the sanctions were losing some of their impact because al-Qaeda had transformed itself from a hierarchical organization to a network of loosely connected cells, making it harder to identify who and what are involved. The next report, due in June, is set to focus on cooperation with other agencies “on the issue of weapons likely to cause mass casualties,” the study says.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
