Brazil’s uranium enrichment facility at Resende. The nation is reportedly opposed to IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei’s call for making the production of nuclear fuel a multilateral effort (AFP photo/Vanderlei Almeida). Nuclear Fuel Production Should be Transferred to Multilateral Control, IAEA Experts Say By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — To reduce proliferation risks, the production of nuclear fuel should be conducted through multilateral approaches, rather than by individual countries, according to an International Atomic Energy Agency report released yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 1)...Full Story

U.S., German Leaders Agree Iran Should Not Develop Atomic Weapons, Differ on Methods of Persuasion U.S. President George W. Bush and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder today agreed that Iran should not develop nuclear weapons, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Feb. 22)...Full Story

Canada Not to Join U.S. Missile Defense Program Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin is expected later this week to announce that his Ottawa will not participate in U.S. missile defense efforts, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Feb. 22)...Full Story

	Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Water Leader Says Communication With U.S. Faltering By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Communication between U.S. drinking water agencies and the federal government is worsening, potentially raising the risk of a waterborne terrorist attack, a leader in the water sector said here yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 15). With the federal government preparing to release the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, which is required under a presidential directive from December 2003, leaders in relevant sectors of the U.S. economy said the draft plan would make too little use of information sharing structures already in place. “The information sharing process … seems to be disintegrating,” said Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center Executive Director Diane VanDe Hei. VanDe Hei, who is also executive director of the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, joined leaders of other Information Sharing and Analysis Centers on a panel yesterday afternoon at a conference organized by the Association for Communications, Electronics, Intelligence and Information Sharing Professionals. The information centers were set up as public-private entities in sectors including water, telecommunications and finance following a 1998 directive by then-U.S. President Bill Clinton. They are intended to facilitate information sharing between key industries and the federal government with an eye to better preparing for or preventing a terrorist attack. The centers’ chiefs generally panned the new federal protection effort yesterday, saying the centers’ work to date is not sufficiently integrated into the plan. They also expressed general reluctance to share sensitive information with the government (see GSN, Feb. 19). “I would take a step back from where I see the department heading, particularly with the NIPP,” VanDe Hei said when asked by the discussion moderator how she would change the situation if given the chance. “It’s a reinvention of the wheel, and I don’t see it as a step forward in terms of homeland security.” Intellectual property litigator Stephen King of the law firm Hunton & Williams partially defended the government’s push to lessen the role of the information sharing centers, some of which he said have been less effective than others. “All ISACs are not created equal,” King said. “They’re trying to give themselves some flexibility.” The acting head of Homeland Security’s National Communications System, Pete Fonash, expressed hope that the final plan would be completed and signed by President George W. Bush before the end of the year. The plan has been reviewed by relevant federal agencies and is expected to be shared with state and local governments “within weeks,” he said. Back to top

Nuclear Fuel Production Should be Transferred to Multilateral Control, IAEA Experts Say By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — To reduce proliferation risks, the production of nuclear fuel should be conducted through multilateral approaches, rather than by individual countries, according to an International Atomic Energy Agency report released yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 1). The report, prepared by an experts group convened last summer, outlines several approaches for transferring nuclear fuel cycle activities to multilateral control. Such activities include uranium enrichment, plutonium reprocessing from spent nuclear fuel and spent fuel disposal. There has been growing concern that countries seeking to acquire nuclear weapons could do so by developing the infrastructure necessary for civilian power programs — including fuel cycle-related facilities. Among the most pressing examples is the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, with Tehran claiming to be pursuing fuel-cycle activities as part of a civilian program while the United States suspects the Islamic republic is seeking to develop nuclear weapons. In response, the Bush administration has proposed a ban on the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technologies to any country that does not already possess such facilities, as well as guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel to countries that agree to forgo nuclear-fuel production. The U.N. nuclear watchdog, though, has pushed for a multilateral approach. The agency’s director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, has proposed a five-year moratorium on the construction of new enrichment and reprocessing facilities (see related GSN story, today). Last month, ElBaradei warned in an interview with Agence France-Presse of the dangers of allowing individual countries to develop their own fuel production abilities. “We just cannot continue business as usual that every country can build its own factories for separating plutonium or enriching uranium,” he was quoted yesterday by AFP as having said. “Then we are really talking about 30, 40 countries sitting on the fence with a nuclear weapons capability that could be converted into a nuclear weapon in a matter of months.” In its report, the agency expert group recommended the increased use of measures such as commercial fuel banks and fuel leasing agreements, in which a supplier country would agree to provide nuclear fuel on the condition that the spent material would be returned for storage and final disposal. Russia and Iran are reportedly close to concluding such an agreement for Moscow to provide fuel for the Bushehr nuclear reactor. The group also recommended developing international fuel supply guarantees, “notably with the IAEA as guarantor of supply services.” The agency could act as the administrator of an international fuel bank, according to the report. In addition, work should begin to persuade countries to convert existing fuel-cycle facilities to multilateral control, the report recommends. It also encourages the creation of “multinational and in particular regional” approaches for new facilities, such as joint ownership or co-management. USEC, the sole U.S. producer of enriched uranium, opposes placing fuel-cycle facilities under multilateral control, company spokesman Charles Yulish said today. “This is a system that works and has worked for decades,” he said. The approaches considered by the IAEA experts group were “difficult bureaucratic, political [and] business concepts,” Yulish said. He added that USEC plans to continue to work with the agency to develop “simpler approaches that can work more effectively.”  The report is likely to be discussed at this year’s fifth Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, set to be held in May in New York, according to reports. Back to top       U.S., German Leaders Agree Iran Should Not Develop Atomic Weapons, Differ on Methods of Persuasion U.S. President George W. Bush and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder today agreed that Iran should not develop nuclear weapons, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Feb. 22). “It’s vital that the Iranians hear the world speak with one voice that they shouldn’t have a nuclear weapon,” said Bush, who is traveling in Europe. “Iran must not have a nuclear weapon, for the sake of security and peace.” “Iran must not have any nuclear weapons,” Schroeder said. “They must waive any right to the production thereof.” Bush and Schroeder continued to disagree, however, on how to persuade Iran to renounce nuclear weaponry. While Schroeder wants to extend incentives to Iran — such as membership in the World Trade Organization — Bush says Tehran must not be rewarded for violating the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. “They were caught enriching uranium,” Bush said. “They have breached a contract with the international community. They’re the party that needs to be held to account, not any of us,” he said (Tom Raum, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Feb. 23). Bush yesterday denied reports that Washington may be planning a military strike on Iran, Agence France-Presse reported. “This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table,” he said. Meanwhile, U.S. officials did not respond to French President Jacques Chirac’s proposal that “a gesture” be made to Iran, such as some action on its desire to join the World Trade Organization. An Iranian official said yesterday Tehran was willing to consider talks with the United States over its nuclear program, AFP reported. “On the specific topic of the nuclear program, Iran is ready to enter into negotiations with the U.S. to prove the civilian nature of the nuclear program,” Mahmud Vaezi, deputy head of a studies institute affiliated to the Foreign Ministry, was quoted as saying by state media (Agence France-Presse/PoliticalGateway.com, Feb. 22). The U.S. Defense Department yesterday denied reports that it was conducting reconnaissance flights over Iran. “I’m telling you that we’re not doing those kinds of activities,” said Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita. “It’s not going on out of this department. … But it’s not for me to speak for other departments. It is our belief that it’s not happening elsewhere (in the U.S. government), either,” he said (Xinhua, Feb. 23). Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi said Iran is not violating international law in developing a nuclear program, AP reported. “We are not concerned about the threats from Americans because they know themselves that Iran is very different from other countries. We are capable enough to defend ourselves,” he said (Nirmala George, Associated Press/ABC News, Feb. 22). Top Iranian nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani is scheduled to meet with senior French officials tomorrow in Paris tomorrow, AP reported (Associated Press, Feb. 22). Back to top       Some Countries Oppose IAEA Chief ElBaradei’s Proposed Moratorium on New Fuel Production Sites Diplomats said that a number of countries oppose a proposal by International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei for a five-year freeze on the construction of new nuclear fuel facilities, Reuters reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 7). Among the countries opposed to the proposal is Iran, Reuters reported. Diplomats said there had been hope the moratorium would have helped persuade Tehran to give up its uranium enrichment program. “The idea is that it would be easier for Iran to give up enrichment as part of an international movement,” said a diplomat involved with negotiations on Iran’s nuclear efforts conducted by the European Union. Argentina, Brazil, Japan and Pakistan also oppose the moratorium proposal, diplomats said. Australia and Canada have raised objections, while the United States only backs a moratorium on nations that do not already possess nuclear fuel production capabilities, Reuters reported. “Some countries are worried that the moratorium would eventually become compulsory, especially countries that would be affected by it,” one diplomat said. “They don’t want to limit their options for the future” (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters, Feb. 22). Back to top       Officials From U.S., Japan, South Korea to Meet to Discuss North Korea Nuclear Issue U.S., Japanese and South Korean officials are scheduled to meet Saturday in Seoul to discuss the possible continuation of six-party talks to address North Korea’s nuclear program, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Feb. 22). South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon; Kenichiro Sasae, director general of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's Asia-Oceania bureau; and Christopher Hill, U.S. ambassador to Seoul, are expected to attend, AP reported. Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice agreed in a telephone conversation yesterday that “the six-party talks should be resumed as early as possible,” the Xinhua news agency reported (Bo-Li Lim, Associated Press/phillyburbs.com, Feb. 23). Meanwhile, Washington expressed skepticism regarding North Korea’s reported readiness to resume talks, Agence France-Presse reported. “The proof of the pudding is in the eating,” said a top State Department official, noting that North Korea has made several similar statements since the last round of talks in 2004. “All of these statements don’t amount to them showing up,” he said. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the United States and its negotiating partners are prepared to resume talks. “It’s only North Korea that claims current conditions are unfavorable,” he said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Feb. 22). Japan’s insistence on resolving the issue of Pyongyang’s abduction of Japanese nationals during the Cold War is one obstacle to the resumption of talks, ITAR-Tass yesterday quoted a source close to the Chinese Embassy in Moscow as saying. The issue was one of the conditions North Korean leader Kim Jong Il brought up in meetings with Chinese envoy Wang Jiarui, according to the source. Tokyo’s position on the issue “created serious problems for resumption of the six-party talks,” the source quoted Kim as saying, adding that Pyongyang considered the abduction issue “completely settled” (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Feb. 23). Russia yesterday welcomed indications that North Korea was willing to resume talks, said Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko, Xinhua reported. “The Russian side believes the negotiations in the six-party format is the shortest route for achieving the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and for resolving other related issues,” Yakovenko said in a prepared statement (Xinhua, Feb. 23). Back to top       South Korean Officials Predict IAEA Board of Governors Will Not Discuss Past Nuclear Work Past South Korean nuclear experiments are not likely to be discussed at the next meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors, set to be held next week, South Korean Foreign Ministry officials said today (see GSN, Feb. 18). Last fall, Seoul acknowledged having conducted undisclosed experiments involving plutonium in 1982 and uranium in 2000. The U.N. agency did not report South Korea to the U.N. Security Council, but rather issued a statement expressing concern over the experiments (Yonhap/BBC Monitoring, Feb. 23). Back to top

U.S. Postal Workers Believe They Were Treated Unfairly in Wake of 2001 Anthrax Attacks Public health officials provided “very little useful information” to U.S. postal workers and Senate staffers who might have been exposed to anthrax during the 2001 attacks, according to a RAND Corp. study released yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 9, 2004). Some workers at the Brentwood mail facility in Washington said they believed officials considered them more as case studies than people in need of treatment, according to the Associated Press. “I made it plain that I thought it was a cover-up,” said one employee.  “Because the government’s done it before. They did it with syphilis,” the employee added, referring to the Tuskegee experiments of the 1930s, in which government researchers withheld treatment from black study participants. Nearly all of the 36 postal workers who participated in the RAND study identified themselves as African-American. Five of the seven Senate staffers were white; they reported receiving good information from doctors at the U.S. Capitol, AP reported. Two Brentwood employees died of anthrax in 2001 after the facility processed contaminated mail sent to former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle. Senate staffers were treated the day the letter was opened. The Brentwood employees were not treated until six days later, the RAND report found. U.S. Postal Service spokesman Gerry McKiernan said the agency was not aware of anthrax exposure at the facility until the day workers were treated. “It’s unfortunate and regrettable that some employees might still hold those views,” McKiernan said. “At the time of the occurrence, very little was known about anthrax. And we were acting based on advice given to us by public health officials.” “There was no preference shown” in treating some 10,000 people exposed to anthrax during the attacks, according to a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The RAND focus groups were small and comprised of volunteers — not selected at random — meaning that individuals “more likely to have strong opinions about the events may have been more likely to participate,” according to the authors (Lara Jakes Jordan, Associated Press/San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 22). Back to top       Al-Qaeda Could Launch BW Attack, Interpol Warns There exists a substantial threat of a biological weapons attack by al-Qaeda, the head of Interpol warned yesterday, Reuters reported (see GSN, July 4, 2004). “The number of terrorist attacks that have occurred around the world and the evidence that has been seized revealing the kind of planning that al-Qaeda has done in the area of biological weapons or chemical weapons ... is enough evidence for me to be concerned about it,” said agency chief Ronald Noble. “Anyone who is honest about this has to admit that if al-Qaeda launches a spectacular biological attack which could cause contagious disease to be spread, no entity in the world is prepared for it,” he added. “Not the U.S., not Europe, not Asia, not Africa.” Interpol is scheduled to hold its largest-ever conference beginning Tuesday in Lyons, France, according to Reuters (Reuters, Feb. 23). The conference is expected to focus on encouraging intelligence agencies and police departments to strengthen their cooperation and information sharing to better combat the bioterrorism threat, the BBC reported today (BBC News, Feb. 23). Back to top       U.S. Senate Leader Warns of “Biological Event” U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) yesterday warned of the potential for terrorists to unleash a “biological event” (see GSN, Jan. 28). “Science has advanced to a time unlike 10 years ago or unlike 20 years ago where a post-doc type trained in a very small laboratory with off-the-shelf type materials could create such an attack,” he said during a terrorism preparedness conference, according to the Associated Press. Frist called for increased training of first responders, “medical infrastructure” improvements and continued research efforts “so we can stay ahead of whatever might enter the mind of that post-doc in a small laboratory” (Associated Press, Feb. 22). Back to top       U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approves Product for Treatment of Smallpox Vaccination Complications The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved the first intravenous human plasma-derived product to treat people who suffer complications from the smallpox vaccination, the agency announced Friday (see GSN, Feb. 2). The smallpox vaccine occasionally causes infections in people who are vaccinated or those in close contact with them. People with weakened immune systems or skin conditions such as eczema are among those susceptible to side effects. The new product, Vaccinia Immune Globulin Intravenous, helps treat these complications, according to the press release. The product is made from donor plasma from individuals who have received booster immunizations with the licensed smallpox vaccine, Dryvax. In clinical studies, the medicine showed mild side effects, including headaches, hives, and other rashes, according to the agency (U.S. Food and Drug Administration release, Feb. 18). Back to top

Influential U.S. Legislator Enters Washington Chlorine-Train Fray on Side of Rail Operator By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Powerful U.S. Representative Tom Davis (R-Va.) yesterday weighed in to support railroad company CSX in its rapidly escalating legal battle with the District of Columbia over shipments of chlorine gas and other toxic materials (see GSN, Feb. 17). Davis wrote the U.S. Transportation Department’s Surface Transportation Board in support of CSX’s bid to invalidate an emergency city ordinance banning the shipments (see GSN, Feb. 10). The Transportation Department itself has also written the board in support of CSX’s petition. The ban, signed this month by Mayor Anthony Williams, would effectively block rail and truck shipments of the most hazardous materials through the capital city (see GSN, Feb. 16). Washington’s city council passed the ban after more than a year of debate that focused often on the possibility of a terrorist attack on a rail tanker carrying hazardous materials through central Washington, which is considered a top terrorist target. Some experts estimate such an attack could kill thousands of people within minutes. “The act seeks to challenge our nation’s long-standing federal regulatory structure and establish a new precedent that will undermine the efficiency and efficacy of the national rail network,” Davis wrote the board. “Accordingly, I urge you to declare the ordinance invalid.” Echoing arguments in CSX’s petition to the board and its related suit in U.S. District Court, Davis wrote that the Washington law “unreasonably burdens interstate commerce” and that “interstate transportation of hazardous materials by railroad is exclusively the subject of federal regulation.” Davis is the chairman of the House of Representatives Government Reform Committee, which has jurisdiction over federal matters involving the District of Columbia, and a member of the new House Homeland Security Committee. The lawmaker, who represents a suburban district outside Washington, has often taken up the capital’s cause in Congress — proposing a plan last year, for example, under which Washington would have received a seat in the House of Representatives in exchange for an additional seat for Utah. In this case, however, he finds himself supporting the federal and business view in opposition to the mayor and most of the city council. “CSX has been working with and continues to work with the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation in hardening the D.C. rail corridor specifically to address security issues surrounding the movement of bulk hazardous materials,” Davis wrote. “This plan utilizes national initiatives for rail security as well as taking into account the unique security needs and considerations specific to the national capital region.” CSX maintains that those voluntary security efforts are sufficient to guard against an attack in Washington. The railroad has at times gone so far as to suggest it was diverting the trains to avoid passing through Washington, a practice it appears to have adopted at least for some portion of last year. In its petition to the board this month, however, CSX wrote that it “routinely routes both loaded cars containing commodities that are covered by the D.C. ordinance and empty return movements of such cars on trains operating on its lines traversing the District of Columbia.” Back to top

Canada Not to Join U.S. Missile Defense Program Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin is expected later this week to announce that his Ottawa will not participate in U.S. missile defense efforts, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Feb. 22). Martin reportedly told other NATO leaders yesterday during a meeting in Brussels that his country would not join program, AP reported. Diplomats in Ottawa and Washington also relayed word on Martin’s decision to U.S. officials, according to AP. Polls showed that two-thirds of Canadians opposed involvement in the missile defense effort, and Martin faced strong opposition to cooperation within his Liberal Party (Beth Duff-Brown, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Feb. 23). Back to top

Communication Plans Failed in Boston Terror Scare By Siobhan Gorman National Journal WASHINGTON — Around 9 a.m. on Jan. 19, an agent from the FBI’s Boston office was called out of a meeting that was planning for an upcoming local terrorism-response exercise. When he returned to the meeting, according to one person familiar with the event, the agent described in “heavy detail” an uncorroborated threat report that had been working its way through local law enforcement channels: Two Iraqis and four Chinese chemists might be conspiring to launch some sort of nuclear attack on Boston (see GSN, Jan. 26). It was an odd setting in which to share a rumor: 100 or so local officials, as well as health and transportation consultants from the private sector, were in the room. “At that point, you’re essentially briefing the public,” said one senior Massachusetts official, who asked for anonymity for fear of retribution from the FBI. “To maintain an expectation that the information is going to be kept quiet is absurd.” Earlier that morning, in response to a report sent from its San Diego office, the FBI had sent out a nationwide bulletin and alerted its Joint Terrorism Task Force in Boston. By noon, state and local offices were deluged with phone calls from reporters nationwide. By 4 p.m., the Boston Herald had published a story online. The next morning, the FBI bulletin was front-page news. After a few days of investigation, the FBI concluded that the report was false. In its wake, fingers are being pointed over whom to blame for unnecessarily scaring the public. Several Massachusetts officials, pointing to a Feb. 7 Washington Post story in which an unnamed FBI official criticized state and local representatives for leaks, have said in the past week that the federal government made them scapegoats. The local officials in turn put the blame on the FBI. Asked why the FBI agent briefed the group, FBI Boston office spokeswoman Gail Marcinkiewicz said, “We would not typically talk about what goes on internally.” The incident illustrates a problem highlighted by the 2001 terrorist attacks: mangled lines of communication within government and with the public that could have spelled real danger. “The first step is to admit you have a problem,” said one state homeland-security official. “We’ve been living in this fantasy world, saying information-sharing is better.” The root of the problem, says this state official, is that federal and state officials see information in ways that conflict. While the FBI is reluctant to share information because it could compromise an investigation, the local U.S. attorney might see the need to notify elected leaders, and state officials would want to notify people outside law enforcement and in the private sector. Back at FBI headquarters, agents complain that they can’t win. “It’s become a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t type of thing when you’re sharing information,” said FBI spokesman Ed Cogswell. Additionally, the role of the Homeland Security Department remains unclear. Department officials believe they, not the FBI, should be the main conduit to state and local representatives regarding terrorist threats. “DHS could have presented it in a much better context,” said one senior department official. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney acknowledged recently that federal-state communications fell apart. “There were so many failings all along the line that it’s impossible to point the finger at any one place,” Romney said last week at a regional security meeting. What was particularly mystifying to state officials was that clear channels of communication were set up last summer for the Democratic National Convention. So when federal officials deviated from those protocols, said several state officials, they added credence to the rumor. For example, instead of routing the threat information through the normal channels — the FBI’s Counterterrorism Watch Center and the National Counterterrorism Center — the FBI’s San Diego office sent an “urgent” report to headquarters and to the Boston field office. And instead of routing the information though the regular protocol in Massachusetts, which allows aides in the Executive Office of Public Safety to develop an action plan, the Boston U.S. Attorney’s Office called the governor’s office directly. For these reasons, say state officials, they took the threat more seriously, and Romney decided to skip President George W. Bush’s inauguration in Washington and return home. Meanwhile, state and local officials responsible for communicating with the public say they felt muzzled by the FBI, even after the threat was in the open. Suppressing information compounded panic rather than quelled it, because rumors inevitably filled the gap, said Katie Ford, press secretary for the Executive Office of Public Safety. “Even though the people on the ground in Boston knew there was a need to put information out there,” Ford said, “we were essentially being told by Washington, ‘Don’t do it.’” State officials will soon have a chance to vent to their federal counterparts and to rewire lines of communication. Massachusetts U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan says he plans to convene his Antiterrorism Advisory Committee in the next week to dissect everyone’s performance. “There are some things we learned from those experiences,” he said. Declining to elaborate before the meeting, Sullivan said, “I certainly have some ideas along those lines.” Yet tangled communications persist: Marcinkiewicz of the Boston FBI said that her office had no plans to assess its response to last month’s threat, and Massachusetts officials said at press time that they had yet to be told of such a meeting. 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.