U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham discussed international nonproliferation challenges yesterday (AFP photo/Nicholas Kamm). Russia Needs to Play Greater Leadership Role in Nonproliferation, Abraham Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Russia needs to “take on a larger share of responsibility” in nuclear nonproliferation efforts, U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 7)...Full Story

Ivanov Rejects Claims of Russian Loose Nukes By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire NEW YORK — It is a “myth” that Russia does not have control over its nuclear weapons, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said last night (see GSN, July 8, 2004)...Full Story

Terrorists Likely to Conduct Biological Attack by 2020, U.S. Intelligence Report Warns By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A terrorist group is “likely” to conduct an attack using biological weapons by 2020, according to a report released yesterday by a CIA think-tank (see GSN, Jan. 3)...Full Story

Missile Defense Activation Date Remains Uncertain By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Having missed Oct. 1 and Dec. 31 deadlines for activating components of the ground-based national missile defense ordered by President George W. Bush, U.S. military officials now say may never declare the system operational (see GSN, Jan. 13)...Full Story

U.S. Army Considers Moving Some Chemical Weapons Stockpiles to Tooele for Destruction The U.S. Army is considering transporting chemical weapons to the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Utah from some of its other stockpiles, the Deseret Morning News reported today (see GSN, Jan. 6)...Full Story

	Friday, January 14, 2005

Terrorists Likely to Conduct Biological Attack by 2020, U.S. Intelligence Report Warns By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A terrorist group is “likely” to conduct an attack using biological weapons by 2020, according to a report released yesterday by a CIA think-tank (see GSN, Jan. 3). Over the next 15 years, successes in the global war on terrorism and advances in information technology are likely to result in an increasingly “decentralized” terrorist threat, consisting of an “eclectic array of groups, cells and individuals,” says the report, prepared by the National Intelligence Council. While influenced by al-Qaeda, such smaller groups are expected to overshadow the terrorist organization by 2020 and could recruit new members through the war in Iraq and other possible conflicts, the report says.  Acts of bioterrorism would be “particularly suited” to these smaller and better-informed terrorist groups, the report says. “Indeed, the bioterrorist’s laboratory could well be the size of a household kitchen, and the weapon built there could be smaller than a toaster. Terrorist use of biological agents is therefore likely, and the range of options will grow,” it says. The report also warns that while it is “less likely” terrorists would obtain a nuclear weapon; they are expected to continue to attempt to do so over the next 15 years through theft or purchase, “particularly in Russia or Pakistan.” The likelihood that a terrorist attack involving a nuclear weapon occurs before 2020 “cannot be ruled out,” it adds. Even so, the report says that most terrorist attacks in the future are expected to continue to involve conventional weapons, though with “new twists to keep counterterrorist planners off balance.” Among such possible new strategies are the use of simultaneous attacks in widely separated areas, the use of advanced explosives and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and possible cyber attacks against computer systems and information networks. The United States and its interests will continue to be “prime terrorist targets,” but increasingly attacks may also focus on Western Europe and other Middle East countries, the report says. The report is the third to be released by the National Intelligence Council, with previous reports covering periods through 2010 and 2015. It is based on discussions held with more than 1,000 independent experts over the past year, according to reports. “Mindful that there are many possible ‘futures,’ our report offers a range of possibilities and potential discontinuities, as a way of opening our minds to developments we might otherwise miss,” council Chairman Robert Hutchings said in an introductory letter. Along with terrorists seeking weapons of mass destruction, the report warns that a number of countries will continue to seek, and in some cases “enhance,” their own such armaments. Nuclear weapons states are expected over the next 15 years to improve the survivability of their forces, to improve their nuclear delivery systems and to develop the capability to penetrate missile defense systems, the report says.  In an apparent reference to the suspected nuclear weapons programs of Iran and North Korea, the report also says that other non-nuclear countries, especially in the Middle East and Northeastern Asia, may choose to develop atomic weapons “as it becomes clear that their neighbors and regional rivals are already doing so.” Those efforts may be accelerated through proliferators like the former associates of Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who has confessed to transferring nuclear weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. The concern that the nuclear efforts of Iran and North Korea may prompt others to follow suit has been “widely held” among proliferation experts for years, said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association. “It doesn’t take a national intelligence expert to figure that out,” he said today. Countries are expected to continue to hide biological and chemical weapons production capabilities through incorporation into legitimate commercial infrastructures and are expected to be less reliant on foreign suppliers, the report says. It also warns of the development of advanced biological weapons agents and the possible development of chemical agents intended to circumvent the verification regime of the Chemical Weapons Convention.  Kimball said that “not too much is being done” to address the advancing biological weapons threat. As countermeasures, he recommended increasing efforts to have private industry self-regulate biological research, to have government oversight of some research and the development of a verification regime for the Biological Weapons Convention. “Nothing of substance” is being done now on such measures, Kimball said. Countries are also expected to continue development of improved ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles, over the next 15 years, according to the report. By 2010, several countries of concerns will probably acquire land-attack cruise missiles and North Korea and Iran are almost certain to have developed ICBM capabilities, it says. In additional, several other countries are likely by 2010 to have developed space launch vehicles, which can be used to aid ICBM development, the report adds. There is also increasing concern that organized crime groups may increasingly deal in weapons of mass destruction over the next 15 years if countries “lose control of their inventories,” the report says. Back to top       New Senate Homeland Security Panel to Hire Additional Staff for Expanded Jurisdiction By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The newly launched U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee plans to hire additional staff to address issues arising from the panel’s expanded jurisdiction over the Homeland Security Department, committee staff said yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 5). In a written response to Global Security Newswire, committee staff said that the additional personnel would be hired from across “the public and private sectors.” They declined to comment, though, as to how many new staff members would be hired or when they would be in place. As part of its expanded jurisdiction, the panel — formerly known as the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee — is set to oversee a number of WMD-related agencies within the U.S. Homeland Security Department. Such agencies include the Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate’s Office of Science and Technology; Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency; the Office for National Laboratories; the Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee; the National Bioweapons Defense Analysis Center and the Plum Island Animal Disease Center. The committee will also have oversight of the advanced scientific computing research activities of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. Within the department’s Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, the Senate panel will oversee the Office of Domestic Preparedness, the Domestic Emergency Support Teams, the National Disaster Medical System and the Nuclear Incident Response Teams. Previously, a wide array of Senate panels had oversight over the various Homeland Security Department agencies, including the Armed Services, Energy and Natural Resources and Foreign Relations committees. Oversight was consolidated, though, with the approval last fall of a Senate resolution that added a homeland security aspect to the Governmental Affairs Committee. The resolution was prepared following the release this summer of the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, which included a call for improved congressional oversight of homeland security-related issues through the creation of permanent homeland security committees in each house of Congress.  Prior to assuming oversight over most of the Homeland Security Department, the panel had experience with WMD-related issues, such as nuclear export policies, through its international security subcommittee, committee staff said yesterday.  Back to top

Russia Needs to Play Greater Leadership Role in Nonproliferation, Abraham Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Russia needs to “take on a larger share of responsibility” in nuclear nonproliferation efforts, U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 7). Noting the improving Russian economy, Abraham called on Moscow to increase its own funding of domestic and international nonproliferation efforts. Doing so would demonstrate Russia’s commitment to such projects and illustrate that they are “permanently sustainable,” he said. “The maintenance of the security programs in the Russian Federation is a permanent challenge, a permanent, ongoing cost into the future,” Abraham said in remarks here hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations. “It would be very comforting to know that these programs would be sustainable regardless of what external resources are made available because the Russian Federation, you know, was taking a greater level of responsibility for them because those are not one-time costs; they’re ongoing costs,” he said. Abraham also called on Russia to allow increased U.S. access to sensitive nuclear and radiological facilities in order to meet a 2008 target deadline for completing security upgrades throughout the country’s nuclear weapons complex (see GSN, Dec. 21, 2004). “We’re still working to gain access to some of these facilities in Russia that, in my judgment, need to be addressed sooner rather than later. It is imperative that the Russian Federation work together with us to quickly resolve outstanding questions about access to these sites so that we can get this job done to ensure that terrorists are cut off from these locations and this material,” he said. U.S. efforts to improve the security of Russian nuclear weapons and radioactive materials, Abraham said, have provided “a lot of positive, tangible evidence that we can engage … in the safeguards program and safety programs at sensitive sites without creating any difficulties for the Russian Federation’s host facilities or their security considerations more generally.” To date, the Energy Department has completed security upgrades on more than 300 metric tons of weapon-usable materials in Russia and at about 70 percent of the sites where such material is located, according to Abraham (see GSN, Dec. 13, 2004). The dispute over access to sensitive locations is one of several lingering issues between the United States and Russia that have hampered efforts to improve the security of Russian nuclear sites. Last month, U.S. President George W. Bush publicly suggested providing Russia with equal access to U.S. nuclear storage sites. Bush’s comments came a month after a high-level delegation from Russia’s Federal Atomic Energy Agency visited several U.S. nuclear sites to discuss best practices and to see how the United States protects nuclear materials. Abraham also hinted that progress could be made “in the months ahead” on another lingering U.S.-Russian dispute concerning liability protections for U.S. workers in the event of an accident or sabotage at a Russian facility. The dispute led to the end in 2003 of the Energy Department’s Nuclear Cities Initiative, which sought to aid the restructuring of the Russian nuclear weapons complex; and has stalled a U.S.-Russian project to eliminate almost 70 tons of weapon-grade plutonium. While declining to comment on the state of negotiations on the liability issue, Abraham said, “I’m not just speculating here, I really believe there is a basis to be cautiously optimistic, based on the current status of both our viewpoints and those of the Russian Federation.” Russia also needs to accelerate efforts to retrieve spent Russian-origin fuel from foreign research reactors, Abraham said. The project is part of the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, an effort launched last year to secure stockpiles of nuclear and radiological materials around the world.  As part of the initiative, the United States plans to aid the repatriation of all Russian-origin fresh reactor fuel by the end of next year and all Russian-origin spent fuel by 2010 (see GSN, Dec. 23, 2004). While progress has been made on the repatriation of Russian-origin fresh research reactor fuel, with more than 100 kilograms returned from six countries, Russia has yet to accept spent fuel, citing the need to conduct an environmental assessment before each shipment. Abraham called on Moscow yesterday, however, to conduct “a programmatic or at least regional approach to the environmental review process.” In his remarks, Abraham praised the relationship that has developed between the Energy Department and its Russian counterpart, now known as Rosatom.  “I don’t think that there is any stronger direct relationship between our department and any counterpart in the world than exists with regard to the … Rosatom directorate in the Russian Federation,” he said. Radiological Security, International Atomic Energy Agency Reform Abraham yesterday also called for greater international focus on improving the security of radioactive materials that could be used to make so-called “dirty bombs,” which use conventional explosives to disperse radioactive materials (see GSN, Jan. 3).  Noting that low-level materials that have medical and industrial uses could also be used in a dirty bomb, Abraham said that as efforts progress to secure weapon-grade materials, terrorists may become even more interested in developing radiological weapons. “Given the breadth of the challenge, it is clear that guarding against the threat of RDDs [radiological dispersal devices] simply cannot succeed without the active participation of as many nations as possible,” he said. In addition, Abraham cited the need to reform two of the main aspects of the international nuclear nonproliferation regime — the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the International Atomic Energy Agency. The examples of Iran and North Korea’s separate suspected nuclear weapons programs has cast “doubt” on the effectiveness of both, he said (see related GSN stories, today). “Presently, we seem to have meeting after meeting on topics of serious concern, only to put matters off to the next meeting. And that must change,” Abraham said. “We must take appropriate steps to ensure that the nonproliferation tools contained in the NPT are effective, and that the treaty’s members have the political will to ensure that no nation can exploit the treaty to its own advantage,” he added. Abraham was referring to concerns by the Bush administration that would-be nuclear weapons states would seek to develop weapons programs under the guise of civilian nuclear power work. In response to such concerns, the Bush administration has called for a ban on the export of uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing technologies to those countries that do not already possess them in exchange for guarantees of reliable access to nuclear power plant fuel. Within the IAEA Board of Governors, there needs to be “a more efficient and effective mechanism” for dealing with countries seemingly in violation of the treaty, Abraham said. Such a process should either result in “compliance with nonproliferation obligations” or “swift action,” he said. Abraham’s criticism of the U.N. nuclear watchdog was in apparent reference to the IAEA board’s handling last year of Iran’s nuclear program, which despite pressure by the United States, was not referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. “The reality is that the IAEA Board of Governors must serve as an instrument for guaranteeing the safety and security of its members, not merely as a debating club, and not as a convenient protective shield for those who in reality might jeopardize the world’s safety,” he said. Back to top       Ivanov Rejects Claims of Russian Loose Nukes By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire NEW YORK — It is a “myth” that Russia does not have control over its nuclear weapons, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said last night (see GSN, July 8, 2004). “There has not been a single loose nuke case on the record, not as little as a gram’s worth of weapons-grade uranium or plutonium has been lost,” he said. Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, Ivanov said keeping weapons of mass destruction off the black market is a priority for Russia. “To counter this danger, it is essential to make concerted action that will serve as an added practical mechanism for reinforcing the existing system for nonproliferation,” he said. Ivanov said that existing cooperation on this issue with the United States means “we are not even partners, our relations here are very close to allies.” Nuclear safety and security exercises last year in Russia, which were overseen by NATO countries, “proved that Russia was capable of ensuring dependable controls, safe custody, and security at nuclear facilities,” Ivanov said. He called the exercises “another testimonial to the Russian capability both to reliably safeguard its nuclear facilities and weapons and to ensure their full safety and security” (see GSN, Aug. 3, 2004). Ivanov’s claims that no material has ever been lost are strongly disputed by nonproliferation experts. “He’s wrong,” said Matthew Bunn of Harvard University’s Managing the Atom project. “There have been multiple, well-documented cases of theft of real weapon-usable highly enriched uranium and separated plutonium over the last decade.” In addition, Bunn cited a 1992 case in which a worker stole 1.5 kilograms of weapon-grade uranium from a facility near Moscow. “He was convicted and has repeatedly described to the press exactly what he did and how and why. So the notion that this kind of thing hasn’t happened is just plain false,” Bunn said (see GSN, Sept. 16, 2004). On other topics, Ivanov dismissed rumors that conservatives in the Russian military and industry “secretly shipped WMD components to Iraq or Iran” are “complete nonsense.” “The mythology demonizing Russia as a habitual proliferator is being trumpeted not only in action movies … but is already being used by some fortune seekers to cash in on it.” As an example, he said that he has reports of Russian containers containing weapon-grade nuclear material being found in Afghanistan. Ivanov said his talk was the first public mention of the claim, which he called “nonsense.” When asked if Russia would agree to accelerate the Cooperative Threat Reduction program — designed to secure former Soviet nuclear and unconventional weapons — Ivanov said Russia still had concerns about the program but that “the project so far works. … We are eager to cooperate.” Ivanov said there are areas of cooperation possible within the joint NATO-Russia Council. The plan for 2005 lists “the most promising areas of cooperation,” including tactical missile defenses, nonproliferation of WMD and delivery vehicles, crisis management, and counterterrorism. When asked if Russia would destroy the nuclear missiles it is due to decommission under the Strategic Offense Reductions Treaty with the United States, he said, “on a reciprocity basis … yes.” The treaty only requires the parties to reduce their stockpiles of deployed nuclear warheads to 2,200 each by the end of 2012. “Above all, strategic stability in today’s world is inseparable from the reductions in strategic offense arms,” Ivanov said. Ivanov acknowledged there are fields where the two powers do not see eye-to-eye. “We cannot but have some concerns about possible plans to deploy U.S. silo-based antimissile launchers in Eastern Europe,” he said. “To say the least, the choice of the deployment area for such a [missile intercept] system” for the United States “is rather arguable” (see GSN, Oct. 18, 2004). “It would substantially undermine the work on theater missile defense programs” by the NATO-Russia Council, Ivanov said, “as well as having an adverse impact on the entire system of Euro-Atlantic security.” On North Korea, he said Washington and Moscow agree that Pyongyang’s withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty “runs counter to international efforts in nuclear nonproliferation” and that the country should rejoin the treaty. However, any efforts should be diplomatic through the six-party talks, he added. “The military pressure scenario on North Korea is unacceptable to us because it’s likely to spark off a regional conflict right on our borders,” he said. Ivanov said there were also differences over the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, “but I won’t stress that point.” Back to top       North Korea Pledges Return to Six-Party Talks North Korean officials told a visiting U.S. congressional delegation that Pyongyang is prepared to resume six-party talks on its nuclear program, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Jan. 12). “Our unanimous impression is that the D.P.R.K. is ready to rejoin the six-party process,” said Representative Curt Weldon (R-Pa.). North Korean officials told the U.S. lawmakers that they “would not stand against the U.S. but respect and treat it as a friend” unless Washington “slanders” the North or “interferes” in its internal affairs, the country’s official news agency said.  The KCNA announcement said North Korea decided to return to the negotiations after considering the potential policy of the second Bush administration toward Pyongyang. “The D.P.R.K. would opt for finding a final solution to all the outstanding issues between the two countries, to say nothing of the resumption of the six-party talks and the nuclear issue,” if what Weldon’s delegation said was really U.S. policy, the announcement added. Weldon said his six-member delegation came with the goal of persuading North Korea to rejoin the talks and to reassure it that Washington wished it “no ill will, to reinforce the fact of what our president has said, that we do not wish to have a regime change, that we will not pre-emptively attack the North, but we do need to resolve the nuclear issue.” “I am convinced, as are all my colleagues, that if in fact we move along the process that we are moving today, the six-party talks can and will resume in a matter of weeks, as opposed to months or years,” Weldon said. “And they are looking to see if any other comments would come out of Washington that would be negative or that would cast a negative aspect or negative feeling about the D.P.R.K. and its leaders,” he added. The lawmakers flew from Pyongyang to Seoul today to brief South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon, Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung and South Korean lawmakers on the visit, according to AP (Associated Press/New York Times, Jan. 14). Back to top       IAEA Inspectors Visit Parchin International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors yesterday visited the Iranian military complex suspected by the United States of sheltering secret nuclear weapons work, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Jan. 12). “A team of IAEA inspectors today carried out an inspection at Parchin, including the taking of environmental samples,” agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky announced yesterday. The one-day Parchin visit “went as planned,” according to a diplomat close to the agency, adding that inspectors gained access to buildings they sought to view. “There was no restriction of any kind” in the area where the IAEA inspectors were, the diplomat said (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Jan. 13). Meanwhile a European Union official said today that two days of EU trade negotiations with Iran went well this week, AFP reported. “The Iranians showed themselves to be very engaged, very interested, the tone was very good,” she told AFP. “What was important for these two days was the tone, not the substance” (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Jan. 14). Elsewhere, Israeli officials for the first time publicly expressed concerns over EU efforts to persuade Iran to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program, Reuters reported. “They (Europeans) achieved an agreement now with Iran. We do not like it very much but still it is much better than it was before,” Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said Wednesday. “We believe that it should be moved, should be transferred to the (United Nations) Security Council, in order to stop the Iranians from what they are doing,” Shalom added. Maj. Gen. Aharon Zeevi-Farkash, chief of Israeli military intelligence, predicted Tuesday that Iran would be capable of producing atomic weapons within months. “According to estimates, Iran is not currently capable of enriching uranium to build a nuclear bomb, but it is only half a year away from achieving such independent capability, if it is not stopped by the West,” Zeevi-Farkash said. “The Iranians can reach Portugal with nuclear weapons,” he said of the range of Iranian missiles. “This doesn’t worry the Europeans. They tell me that during the Soviet regime as well they were under a nuclear threat, and I try to explain to them that Iran is a different story” (Dan Williams, Reuters, Jan. 13). Back to top       Russia May Sell Strategic Bombers to China Russia is considering selling long-range bombers to China, Russian Air Force Commander Gen. Vladimir Mikhailov said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 3, 2004). “We could sell some Tu-22 M3 and Tu-95 bombers to China. We will show them to our neighbor. … If they have the money, let them buy,” he said, referring to the planned first ever joint Russian-Chinese military exercise announced last month. The bombers mentioned by Mikhailov are capable of carrying long-range nuclear cruise missiles and would significantly increase China’s nuclear weapons capability, according to defense analyst Konstantin Makiyenko (Lyuba Pronina, Moscow Times, Jan. 14). Back to top       University of Texas Drops Out of Los Alamos National Laboratory Management Contract Competition The University of Texas System will not seek to become the new manager for the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, university officials announced yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 11). Chancellor Mark Yudof said he would recommend that the system drop its bid to manage the nuclear weapons laboratory, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported. “When you weigh the risks ... we didn’t think it was the appropriate time to do it,” Yudof said. Texas A&M also considered competing for the management contract, but ultimately decided against such an effort, according to the Star-Telegram. The University of California has managed Los Alamos since the facility was established in 1943. University of California regents are expected to decide whether to pursue the contract after the final release of the request for proposals, said university spokesman Chris Harrington (Patrick Mcgee, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Jan. 14). Back to top       Lockheed Martin Wins Trident 2 Missile Contract U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $676.3 million contract for work on Trident 2 submarine-launched ICBM systems, the U.S. Defense Department announced yesterday (see GSN, April 22, 2004). Work on the contract is set to be completed by September 2008, according to the Pentagon (Defense Department release, Jan. 13). Back to top

Florida Authorities Find Ricin, Weapons in Man’s Home Authorities in Florida on Wednesday arrested 22-year-old Steven Michael Ekberg after finding ricin and a small cache of weapons in his home, according to officials (see GSN, Jan. 10). Ekberg, who has been charged with possession of a biological agent, could face up to 10 years in prison, according to the Associated Press.  Ekberg reportedly told acquaintances that he kept ricin in a vial. He “had stated that if the government ever did anything to him, he would take some sort of action,” a federal criminal complaint states. FBI agents said they did not believe Ekberg had ties with any terrorist groups. Ekberg’s mother Teresa was quoted as saying her son was “not a bad kid.” “He’s not a terrorist,” she told a local newspaper. “Sometimes kids make bad choices. ... That’s all I can say” (Associated Press/USA Today, Jan. 14). Back to top       FDA Seeks Public Comments on Anthrax Vaccine The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has requested public comments on its finding that the anthrax vaccine used by the U.S. military’s inoculation program and stopped by a court order in October is safe, the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy News reported (see GSN, Dec. 17, 2004). The agency published a Federal Register notice on Dec. 29 seeking public comment by March 29 on the FDA plan to reaffirm its approval of the vaccine. An expert panel concluded that five cases of inhalational anthrax in the 1950s clinical trial on which the FDA safety conclusion was based were too few to assess the vaccine’s efficacy against that route of exposure, the Federal Register notice says.   However, the agency noted that the vaccine prevented 92.5 percent of all forms of anthrax. Therefore, the agency proposes to label the vaccine for anthrax immunization without specifying the “route of exposure” (Robert Roos, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy News, Jan. 13). Back to top

U.S. Army Considers Moving Some Chemical Weapons Stockpiles to Tooele for Destruction The U.S. Army is considering transporting chemical weapons to the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Utah from some of its other stockpiles, the Deseret Morning News reported today (see GSN, Jan. 6). Shipping chemical stockpiles to Utah for destruction would require an act of Congress to change the current law, which requires that all chemical weapons be destroyed at their present storage sites, according to the Morning News. However, construction is reportedly to be delayed by five years on disposal facilities for chemical weapons depots at Pueblo, Colo., and Blue Grass, Ky. (see GSN, Jan. 12). The U.S. Defense Department has directed the Army and the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program “to develop alternatives that achieve the extended CWC (Chemical Weapons Convention) 100 percent destruction deadline of April 2012, and to also develop options for relocation along with other alternatives,” said Defense Department spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin. Some local groups in Utah expressed opposition to the proposed transfer of the munitions. “Utah has already had nearly half the stockpile of chemical weapons,” said Jason Groenewold, director of the Salt Lake City-based Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah. “The last thing we need to do is open the doors to even more dangerous weapons and waste” (Joe Bauman, Deseret Morning News, Jan. 14). Back to top       National Guard to End Security Work at Newport The Indiana National Guard is expected to stop providing security at the Newport Chemical Depot in Indiana in April, the U.S. Army announced Wednesday (see GSN, Jan. 13). The National Guard’s assignment had been supplementing security while operating contractor Mason & Hanger hired and trained additional guards for the facility’s security force, said Army spokeswoman Terry Arthur, according to the Associated Press. “Now that we have implemented additional security measures, their mission will be completed as of April 2005,” she said (Associated Press/INDYchannel.com, Jan. 14). Back to top

Missile Defense Activation Date Remains Uncertain By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Having missed Oct. 1 and Dec. 31 deadlines for activating components of the ground-based national missile defense ordered by President George W. Bush, U.S. military officials now say may never declare the system operational (see GSN, Jan. 13). The administration has invested billions of dollars to install up to 10 interceptor missiles in Alaska and California and other equipment last year in preparation for the deployment of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. The interceptors are designed to strike enemy warheads in space on their way toward the continental United States.   Another 10 interceptors are scheduled for emplacement this year and 20 more after that. Target dates to make the system operational were set twice for last year, but yesterday a Defense Department spokesman said a formal deployment might never happen. “I don’t know that such a declaration will ever be made,” said Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita in a press briefing. “Whether or not that occurs — and when that occurs — is not my decision,” Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Henry Obering reportedly told reporters Tuesday. Critics of the program praised the idea of putting off a deployment, arguing the system is not ready to work. “The sensible and only justifiable position is to keep the Alaska site as what it was supposed to be — a test facility.  It hurts the nation’s and the military’s credibility to declare a collection of untested parts an operational defense. We will need years of testing to know if any of these proposed systems will work,” said Joseph Cirincione, director of the Nonproliferation Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Deadlines Passed Di Rita was pressed on the timing of the deployment yesterday, with reporters noting that Bush signed a directive in December 2002 stating his administration “plans to deploy a set of initial missile defense capabilities beginning in 2004.” Following Bush’s 2002 order, officials initially had set the deployment date for Oct. 1, 2004. They later said it would occur by the end of the year (see GSN, Oct. 14, 2004). Deploying a national missile defense system by the end of 2004 had been a Bush campaign vow in 2000 and again last summer (see GSN, Aug. 5, 2004).  “Later this year, the first components of America’s missile defense system will become operational,” he said at a major bill signing in August. Di Rita said yesterday, however, the Pentagon is “not marching toward a particular date on which we will say the system is now operational.” He also denied the administration had ever set a deployment date. “I don’t think that the goal was ever that we would declare it was operational.  I think the goal was that there would be an operational capability by the end of 2004,” he said. Questions Persist About Capability Di Rita did not say why the Pentagon is not now planning for deployment, though he suggested that operating the system might conflict with development and testing. “Testing is, at the moment, a higher priority,” he said. The first full flight test of the system in two years failed last month after a computer shutdown that Obering described this week as a “minor glitch.” The previous flight test also failed.  Di Rita said a decision on deployment was not linked to the recent test failure. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld foreshadowed a change of deployment plans last August. “I can’t imagine anyone who is dumb enough to set a firm date,” he said (see GSN, Aug. 19, 2004). Philip Coyle, the Pentagon’s top testing official during the Clinton administration, said he suspects that officials recognized that the system simply was not ready for activation. “It sounds like the secretary of defense, because Di Rita speaks for him, and the head of the MDA have come to realize that the system has no demonstrated capability to defend against an enemy missile under realistic conditions,” said Coyle, now a senior adviser at the Center for Defense Information. Coyle and other critics have argued that the administration should never have planned to deploy the system in 2004, noting that key elements — an advanced radar and a satellite network — are years away from operation (see GSN, May 14, 2004). Critics have also charged that fundamental technological hurdles continue to challenge the system’s ability to work effectively, in an inability to defeat basic enemy countermeasures, such as using decoys to conceal a warhead during its flight (see GSN, Sept. 29, 2004). “I never understood how they were going to be able to declare operational capability because major pieces were missing and they hadn’t been able to demonstrate in flight intercept tests that the system could work without targeting aids and other artificial features,” Coyle said. Di Rita said yesterday, “Some capability exists,” describing that capability as “nascent” and “limited.” He would not comment when asked whether he was confident the system could intercept a North Korean warhead, the primary threat most often cited by administration officials. “The system is what it is, and it will get better over time.  … You’ll have some capability.  It’s limited. It’s not what everybody wishes it may be, perhaps.  But some capability exists while you continue to improve upon the capability of that system,” he said. Back to top       Japan Considers Expanded Powers for Defense Agency Chief in Case of Missile Attack Japan is considering giving its Defense Agency chief authority to order the shooting down of enemy ballistic missiles without prior approval from the prime minister’s Cabinet, the Daily Yomiuri reported today (see GSN, Nov. 22, 2004). If the proposed law is approved by the Diet, Japan’s Self-Defense Forces Law would be revised to extend the director general’s powers, which already include the authority to order the interception of enemy aircraft violating the country’s airspace, sources said (Daily Yomiuri, Jan. 14). Back to top

Japan to Assist Scrapping of Five Russian Submarines Japan plans to provide Russia with about $40 million to aid in the scrapping of five decommissioned submarines, ITAR-Tass reported today (see GSN, Nov. 16, 2004). Scheduled for dismantling are three Victor-3 boats and one Victor-1 submarine in the port of Vladivostok and one Charlie-1 missile-carrying submarine on the Kamchatka Peninsula, according to ITAR-Tass. The aid could be discussed during a meeting between Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura, who arrived in Moscow yesterday, a Japanese Foreign Ministry official said (ITAR-Tass, Jan. 13).   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.