U.S. President George W. Bush (shown with Vice President Dick Cheney (l) and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (r)) delivered his 2005 State of the Union address last night (AFP photo/Luke Frazza). Terror Takes a Back Seat to Tyranny in Bush Speech By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — After using previous addresses to invoke the potential threat posed by WMD-armed terrorists to the United States, U.S President George W. Bush altered his focus in his fourth State of the Union speech last night to promote what he called America’s “great venture” to deliver freedom across the globe (see GSN, Jan. 21, 2004)...Full Story

U.S., Brazilian Officials Offer Preview of Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — In a likely preview of debate at this year’s Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, a U.S. arms control official and a Brazilian diplomat diverged here this morning over U.S. progress on disarmament and the appropriate balance to be struck in reforms of the treaty regime (see GSN, Feb. 2)...Full Story

Iran Testing Centrifuge Components, Diplomats Say Testing the limits of its voluntary suspension of uranium enrichment activities, Iran has been performing quality control checks of uranium centrifuge components, Reuters reported today (see GSN, Feb. 2)...Full Story

	Thursday, February 3, 2005

Terror Takes a Back Seat to Tyranny in Bush Speech By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — After using previous addresses to invoke the potential threat posed by WMD-armed terrorists to the United States, U.S President George W. Bush altered his focus in his fourth State of the Union speech last night to promote what he called America’s “great venture” to deliver freedom across the globe (see GSN, Jan. 21, 2004). In his three previous addresses, which followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Bush had emphasized the risks of terrorists attacking the United States with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. In 2002 he called the prospect “a grave and growing danger,” in 2003 “the gravest danger,” and in 2004 the “ultimate danger.” While he mentioned weapons of mass destruction a number of times as a concern in the speech last night, Bush did not invoke again the specter of grave danger. He instead focused on what the global struggle to spread freedom and end tyranny. “In the long term, the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred, they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America and other free nations for decades,” he said. Actions on Terror/Proliferation Cited Bush did mention as concerns terrorists, terrorist-harboring states, and states seeking weapons of mass destruction. He did not, though, describe them as a potentially combined, dire threat as he had before and suggested those concerns were being dealt with handily.  “The al-Qaeda terror network that attacked our country still has leaders — but many of its top commanders have been removed. There are still governments that sponsor and harbor terrorists, but their number has declined. There are still regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction, but no longer without attention and without consequence,” he said. He noted Libya had renounced its WMD programs, and he praised international cooperation to interdict illicit weapons technologies in transit. The United States, he said, is working with other countries to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions. Iran, Bush charged, “remains the world’s primary state sponsor of terror,” and is pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of freedom. He urged its ruling regime to change its ways and said America supports “liberty” there. Syria, he said, also supports terrorists and is pursuing unconventional weapons. “To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder,” Bush said. Diminishing the prospect of WMD terrorism had been the administration’s central justification for the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, but last night Bush focused on a need to build democracy in Iraq to promote it throughout the Middle East and battle terrorists. “Our generational commitment to the advance of freedom, especially in the Middle East, is now being tested and honored in Iraq. That country is a vital front in the war on terror, which is why the terrorists have chosen to make a stand there. Our men and women in uniform are fighting terrorists in Iraq, so we do not have to face them here at home,” he said. U.S.-led investigators concluded last year that prewar Iraq did not have banned weapons or the intent to use them against the United States (see GSN, Jan. 25). Previous Addresses In his 2002 State of the Union address, Bush said the United States faced two critical challenges: defeating terrorists and preventing certain countries — an “axis of evil” of Iran, Iraq and North Korea — from implementing alleged intentions to threaten the United States with catastrophic weapons, possibly by sharing them with terrorists. In his 2003 address, less than two months prior to the invasion of Iraq, Bush cited efforts under way to combat and mitigate terrorism and again asserted that countries might try to strike the United States by sharing unconventional weapons with terrorists. “Today, the gravest danger in the war on terror, the gravest danger facing America and the world, is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. These regimes could use such weapons for blackmail, terror, and mass murder. They could also give or sell those weapons to terrorist allies, who would use them without the least hesitation,” he said. In the 2004 address, he invoked the theme again. “As part of the offensive against terror, we are also confronting the regimes that harbor and support terrorists, and could supply them with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. The United States and our allies are determined: We refuse to live in the shadow of this ultimate danger.” Invoking suspected Iranian and North Korean proliferation, he said, “America is committed to keeping the world’s most dangerous weapons out of the hands of the most dangerous regimes.” Bush closed last night’s speech by arguing that America since 2001 has been engaged in a global struggle between freedom and tyranny. “The attack on freedom in our world has reaffirmed our confidence in freedom's power to change the world. We are all part of a great venture: to extend the promise of freedom in our country, to renew the values that sustain our liberty, and to spread the peace that freedom brings,” he said. “We have declared our own intention,” Bush said.  “America will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.” Back to top       New, Advanced Technologies Pose Potential Terrorist Risks of Misuse, Expert Tells U.S. Lawmakers By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Terrorists could employ new, advanced technologies to conduct attacks with the potential to cause mass casualties, a U.S. terrorism expert warned lawmakers yesterday (see GSN, June 22, 2004). “There [have] always been small groups and individuals who have threatened societies and nations around the world. The difference today is that advanced technologies, particularly the spread of advanced technologies of mass destruction, are enabling these groups to threaten us in a way that in the past was reserved only to nation states,” said Michael Swetnam, chief executive officer and chairman of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. Among those that pose potential risks is biotechnology, which is “even more frightening” than nuclear technology, Swetnam told the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. “The potential harm from the misuse of biotechnology should frighten everyone in this room, this country, and in fact, everyone in the world,” he said in prepared testimony. “It is conceivable that one could engineer an organism that targets and kills selective segments of the world population,” Swetnam said in his prepared remarks. “Those who might wish to commit genocide … will be able to create biological weapons that accomplish this dastardly goal without firing a shot.” Swetnam also warned lawmakers about the risks of terrorists using advances in neurotechnology to conduct attacks. “On the not-too-distant horizon are technologies that will allow us to directly interface computers with the human brain,” he said in his prepared testimony. “The ease with which Internet viruses are propagated around the world today causing millions of dollars of damage should forewarn us about a time when cyberwarfare might not only attack and spoof our systems, but might attack and spoof our thinking.” “Moving at an equally rapid pace,” Swetnam said, are developments in the field of nanotechnology — the production of microscopic machines and materials. “The potential for harm here is absolutely mind-boggling,” he said. As an example of the possible threat, Swetnam told Global Security Newswire after yesterday’s hearing that at some point in the future, terrorists may be able to use advances in nanotechnology to develop miniature devices that would enter a person’s bloodstream to clog the arteries, resulting in death — in contrast to hopes that such devices could be used to improve cardiovascular health. While neurotechnology and nanotechnology are relatively new areas of research, Swetnam warned that it might not be too long before terrorists are able to take advantage of them. “We have probably a decade or two … to worry about it,” he told GSN. Swetnam warned lawmakers that it is too late to control the spread of biotechnology information and equipment that may be useful to terrorists. “It is unlikely that we can come up with any way to control the spread of biotechnology today, and many of the most frightening parts of biotechnology in fact appear to be the kind of technology that will be readily available in almost all parts of the world,” he testified. One concern, according to Swetnam, is that other countries may take the lead in biotechnology research, and potentially provide their work to terrorist groups, since they spend more money on such efforts than does the United States. “Even though we’re investing billions, the world is investing more,” he told lawmakers. “The import of this is that, clearly, even though we lead in almost all technologies today, that lead is diminishing, and in the future we are not going to be leading in some of the most critical technologies, for good and for evil, in the world.” Instead of seeking to control the spread of advanced technologies, the United States needs to increase its capabilities to track their distribution, as well as those who may seek to acquire them, Swetnam said. U.S. intelligence, however, is more capable of acquiring information on other countries, he said. “We have to understand that our first line of defense, the intelligence community, is not yet well configured to either find those individuals, track them, or to track the technology that they’re seeking,” Swetnam said. He called for improved uses of information technology to better track various signs of human movement. “Human beings moving around the world today more and more, in the industrialized world, at least, and more and more in the entire world, leave an electronic signature.   And the more that we build a capability to track that signature and find where those human beings are, who they are, through that technology, the more we’ll be able to really find and track the bad guys,” Swetnam said. In addition, U.S. intelligence needs to improve its measurement and signatures intelligence (MASINT) capabilities, which could be used to identify emissions associated with biological and chemical development, he said. “MASINT has been a third sister in the intelligence community for decades and decades. It’s time we pulled it out of the closet and gave it a front-row seating,” Swetnam said. Back to top       Iraqi U.N. Envoy Calls for End to UNMOVIC Iraq’s U.N. ambassador, Samir al-Sumaydi’i has called for the end of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), which conducted weapons inspections in Iraq, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 2). Instead, Iraq should have the same choice as other countries of abiding by international nonproliferation regimes, he said. “Whatever applies to other independent sovereign states who are responsible, who want to play their part in the international community, we are prepared to be subject to the same regime. But we do not want to continue to be singled out for victimization because the time of [former Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein has gone and this is a new Iraq,” al-Sumaydi’i said. UNMOVIC spokesman Ewen Buchanan said, though, that Iraq still posed some proliferation concerns (see GSN, Sept. 8, 2004). Despite not having a physical presence in Iraq, the commission continues to monitor Iraqi sites through commercial satellite imagery and other means, Buchanan said. “Clearly there are people who still exist in Iraq who were involved in the previous weapons programs. Some of them may have left the country — we don’t know. Clearly there is equipment which has potential for weapons programs still in Iraq, and that’s why we try to do this kind of remote monitoring and clearly, they have done it in the past, so that means you can’t take that knowledge away,” Buchanan said. The United Nations has not detailed any schedule for its planned review of UNMOVIC’s mandate, RFE/RL reported (Robert McMahon, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Feb. 2). Back to top       Russian Cabinet to Consider Agreement on Canadian Aid for Submarine, Chemical Weapons Destruction The Russian Cabinet is expected today to consider ratifying an agreement under which Canada would financially support a number of nonproliferation projects, including the destruction of chemical weapons and decommissioned submarines, according to ITAR-Tass (see GSN, Nov. 16, 2004). Canada would provide its aid through the Group of Eight Global Partnership — an effort launched in 2002 by Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States to provide $20 billion over 10 years for nonproliferation projects. Canada has decided to allocate about $240 million each for chemical weapons disposal and nuclear submarine destruction, ITAR-Tass reported. Canada is also expected to support the registration, control and protection of Russian nuclear and radioactive materials (ITAR-Tass/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, Feb. 2). Back to top       Ohio Antiterror Bill Would Create New WMD Offenses An Ohio antiterrorism bill would create new offenses for possession or use of biological and chemical weapons, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 12). State Senator Jeff Jacobson said many provisions of his bill are based on state laws in New York and Nevada (Associated Press/Ohio News Network, Feb. 2). Back to top

U.S., Brazilian Officials Offer Preview of Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — In a likely preview of debate at this year’s Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, a U.S. arms control official and a Brazilian diplomat diverged here this morning over U.S. progress on disarmament and the appropriate balance to be struck in reforms of the treaty regime (see GSN, Feb. 2). At an Arms Control Association panel discussion held at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Stephen Rademaker stressed the need to head off future nuclear proliferation crises such as those in Iran and North Korea, while Brazilian Ambassador to the United States Roberto Abdenur — whose countryman, Sergio Duarte, will serve as chairman of the review conference — called for “balance” between disarmament and nonproliferation commitments. Rademaker, who heads the State Department Arms Control Bureau, said the United States was adhering to the treaty, including Article VI, which commits nuclear weapon states to work toward disarmament. He said criticisms of U.S. disarmament programs are not based on what the treaty language requires of the nuclear weapon states. “Our critics would have little to complain about if they restricted themselves to arguments based on the text,” Rademaker said. “Under any reasonable interpretation, the United States is in full compliance with its obligations.” Under Article VI, all treaty parties are required to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.” Rademaker laid out a list of reasons for his stance that the United States is in compliance with those provisions. Although Article VI “does not literally require the conclusion of agreements relating to disarmament,” he said, the United States has participated in negotiations resulting in “significant progress,” such as the 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, in which the United States and Russia pledged to reduce their deployed strategic nuclear warheads. Rademaker added that Article VI lays out “no timetable” and “no deadline” for disarmament and that the article’s provision on “general and complete disarmament” could be construed to support the maintenance of nuclear weapons until worldwide conventional disarmament is achieved. Reports that the United States is seeking to develop new nuclear weapons, Rademaker added, are erroneous. He said the 2002 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review indicates Washington is seeking ways to use new technology to maintain a nuclear deterrent while reducing its stockpile, as one way of shifting “emphasis away from nuclear forces to other means.” “Looking at options” for new nuclear weapon activities, he added, “says nothing about what we will do.” The focus at the May review conference in New York, Rademaker said, should be not on the United States but on a “crisis of compliance” involving countries such as North Korea and Iran. He rejected as “misguided” and “dangerous” any linkage between U.S. performance on Article VI and such countries’ alleged nuclear weapon programs. U.S. goals at the review conference are to involve stiffening enforcement of articles I, II and III of the treaty, which lay out the nonproliferation obligations of non-nuclear weapon states, Rademaker said, adding that Washington would seek to encourage all treaty parties to adopt the Additional Protocol to their nuclear safeguards agreements. The protocol allows for more intrusive monitoring of nuclear activities in countries that adopt it.  In addition, he said the United States would recommend that nuclear energy help under the treaty’s Article IV be offered only to countries in compliance with the first three articles. Abdenur said the “integrity and the credibility of the NPT are at risk for various reasons,” including both lagging progress on disarmament and new proliferation crises. “We have to tackle in a more decisive way the aspects of disarmament,” he said, calling for more “transparency” and “accountability” from nuclear weapon states as they disarm. Abdenur called repeatedly for “balance” in reforming the treaty regime between the efforts of nuclear weapon countries, which he called “ever more lax and more aloof” with respect to disarmament, and those of non-nuclear states. The ambassador said bilateral disarmament steps such as those highlighted by Rademaker are welcome but insufficient for fulfilling the nuclear weapon states’ treaty responsibilities, because they are limited, reversible and bilateral, rather than multilateral. “We have no influence whatsoever on that, we the international community,” Abdenur said. Contradicting Rademaker, Abdenur said the United States is planning to develop new nuclear weapons. He also criticized Washington’s development of new doctrine allowing preventive use of nuclear weapons and use of such weapons against non-nuclear weapon states. Turning to proliferation concerns of the sort Rademaker focused on, Abdenur called for strengthening the institutions of the international nonproliferation regime. In particular, he said, a North Korea-style withdrawal from the Nonproliferation Treaty must be made more “politically and technically costly.” The Brazilian also expressed alarm about the lack of an agreed-on agenda for the conference, slated for May in New York. Without advance agreement on an agenda, he said, the review will descend into “chaos.” Back to top       Iran Testing Centrifuge Components, Diplomats Say Testing the limits of its voluntary suspension of uranium enrichment activities, Iran has been performing quality control checks of uranium centrifuge components, Reuters reported today (see GSN, Feb. 2). Iran has continued testing “nonessential items” for centrifuges, despite a commitment to France, Germany and the United Kingdom last year to refrain from all sensitive nuclear activities, according to a Western diplomat who follows the International Atomic Energy Agency. “If they would act in good faith, there would be a complete standstill of every activity that relates to centrifuges,” the diplomat said (Reuters, Feb. 3). Meanwhile, an Iranian exile group in Paris claimed today that Iran has obtained materials and technology needed to manufacture triggers for a nuclear weapon, Agence France-Presse reported. Tehran has acquired or manufactured polonium 210 and beryllium — two elements of a “neutron initiator” — said members of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, citing clandestine sources inside Iran’s nuclear program. “Tehran has already succeeded in using beryllium in conjunction with polonium 210 for large-scale laboratory testing purposes, and is getting very close to the point of industrial production,” said the council’s foreign affairs committee chairman, Mohammad Mohaddessin (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Feb. 3). An Iranian official yesterday continued Tehran’s criticism of its European negotiating partners over the pace of talks and delivery of incentives promised last year in exchange for Iran’s uranium enrichment freeze, the Financial Times reported. “We have not yet seen considerable progress in our cooperation and no incentives in political, security, technological, economic and nuclear fields,” said Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Hossein Mousavian. “Now it is time to deliver something to Iranian public opinion and nation.” He added, however, that Tehran would maintain its uranium enrichment suspension through the conclusion of the talks. “We are determined to carry out the Paris agreement and are thoroughly committed to it,” he said (see GSN, Nov. 22, 2004). Mousavian suggested that Iran is becoming suspicious of possible European policy coordination with the United States, according to the Times. If that were the case, “then we would have a crisis of trust with Europe,” he said. Mousavian added, however, that Iran would not object to Washington joining the talks. Iran and the United States should “finally put aside their hostilities and decrease tensions,” he said, while admitting that the prospect of improved relations is “not good” (Najmeh Bozorgmehr, Financial Times, Feb. 2). Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi said yesterday that Tehran believes it should be able to resume its sensitive nuclear work soon, despite European objections, AFP reported. “Our condition is that the suspension of uranium enrichment is short term but the Europeans are demanding a long-term halt,” he said. “We have to reach a definitive result at the set date,” he added. “We will examine the result of the negotiations after three months” (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Feb. 2). Meanwhile, Pakistan and the largest organization of Muslim countries said yesterday they support European efforts to negotiate a settlement with Iran, AFP reported. “We don’t need any other intervention in the Muslim world,” said Organization of the Islamic Conference Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu. “We support the approach of [France, Germany and the United Kingdom] and welcome the cooperation between Iran and the EU,” he said (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Feb. 2). Back to top       U.S. Tests on Libyan Nuclear Material Inconclusive on Link to North Korea, Some Experts Say Some experts have argued that the conclusions of U.S. tests on confiscated Libyan nuclear materials — indicating that North Korea was the source of some of the program’s uranium gas — are inconclusive and could point to Pakistan as the source, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Feb. 2). “To come to this conclusion, you need a sample from North Korea and no one has a uranium sample from North Korea,” said one official investigating the black market nuclear network of Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan and Libya’s abandoned WMD programs. “The Pakistanis won’t allow any samples of their [uranium hexafluoride gas], either.” The gas, also known as UF6, can be processed for use in a nuclear weapon. The International Atomic Energy Agency, which conducted tests on the same materials examined by the United States, has concluded that potential links between the North Korean and Libyan programs are inconclusive, according to the Post. In 2003, Libya requested 20 tons of UF6 but received only 1.6 tons from the Khan network, according to the Post. Pakistan informed IAEA and U.S. officials investigating the network that North Korea was the source of the uranium shipment. Khan’s partner, Buhary Syed Abu Tahir, however, told U.S. intelligence that Pakistan was the source, the Post reported. Some investigators suspect that North Korea may have sold raw uranium to Pakistan, which converted it to UF6 and then sold it to Libya.  “We can’t exclude the possibility that the UF6 was made in Pakistan,” said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security. Albright added, however, that it remains a possibility that North Korea was the source. It might be possible, for example, that Pyongyang produced the gas, then sold it to Pakistan, which in turn supplied it to Libya, according to the Post. “That has been a theory since last spring,” he said. “What amazes me is why this is coming out again now, and the timing has to make one suspicious that the information is being used to pressure allies to take a tougher line with North Korea” (Kessler/Linzer, Washington Post, Feb. 3). South Korean officials denied speculation that U.S. envoy Michael Green traveled to Seoul this week to discuss the uranium sale evidence, the Yonhap news agency reported. “He is here for consultations on how to reopen the six-party talks at an early date and other bilateral issues,” said one official (Yonhap, Feb. 3). Meanwhile, a North Korean diplomat in New York was quoted by Yonhap as saying that Pyongyang needed time to respond to U.S. President George W. Bush’s apparent encouragement of nuclear negotiations in his State of the Union address last night before deciding to resume talks, Agence France-Presse reported. Bush said the United States is “working closely with governments in Asia to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions” (see related GSN story, today). “We watched his speech, which we think is no big deal, but we need time to respond,” Yonhap quoted the diplomat as saying (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Feb. 3). South Korea today welcomed Bush’s tone, the Associated Press reported. “We assess that President Bush’s speech reflected Washington’s will to resolve the North’s nuclear issue through a peaceful and diplomatic way,” South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement. “Now, it’s time for North Korea to make a positive response and for us to resume the six-party talks soon and make concrete progress for the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue,” it said. Analysts predicted the lack of antagonistic rhetoric would help restart the talks. “The United States appears to have carefully prepared the speech so as not to give North Korea an excuse for not coming to the six-party talks,” said Kim Sung-han of Seoul’s Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security (Soo-Jeong Lee, Associated Press/Washington Post, Feb. 3). The United States yesterday urged Pyongyang to resume six-party talks, adding that its nuclear program poses “a threat to global peace,” AFP reported. “North Korea’s nuclear programs and nuclear weapons programs and its past and continuing proliferation activities are a threat to global peace and security,” said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. McClellan refused to comment on reports of the alleged uranium sales to Libya (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Feb. 2). Former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung yesterday urged the United States to make a specific offer to North Korea of incentives Pyongyang would receive if it scraps its nuclear program, Yonhap reported. “North Korea is now in a desperate situation, economically, socially and internationally,” Kim said. “I believe (the North) will completely give up its nuclear program as long as it is firmly assured of an improvement in its relations with the U.S.” “The U.S. must show its cards ... rather than only imposing its demand for nuclear abandonment,” he said. “The U.S. has not talked about it specifically, only saying there will be a ‘good result.’ This is why North Korea does not trust [the United States]” (Yonhap, Feb. 2). Back to top

FBI Continues Senate Ricin Probe The FBI is continuing its investigation into ricin-laced mail sent to the Washington office of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) a year ago, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, July 7, 2004). “We’d love to see it solved,” said FBI spokeswoman Debbie Weierman. No one became ill after the powdered toxin was found on a mail-opening machine in Frist’s space in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, but more than 12 staffers had to be decontaminated. Meanwhile the U.S. Postal Service said “serious lapses” in communication between the agency and its workers — including the failure to inform employees at the Chattanooga, Tenn., postal facility that they had processed a ricin-laced letter intended for the White House — have been fixed. “I think it would be fair to say there’s been an enormous improvement,” said Postal Service spokesman Jerry McKiernan (Associated Press, Feb. 3). Back to top

Arkansas Congressional Delegation Not Standing in Way of Pentagon Study of Chemical Weapons Relocation Lawmakers from Arkansas are withholding judgment on a U.S. Army study that includes consideration of transporting chemical weapons to existing destruction facilities as a strategy for meeting a 2012 deadline to destroy the U.S. stockpile of such munitions, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Jan. 26). With the newly built incinerator at the Pine Bluff Arsenal expected to go online next month, Arkansas could be a possible destination for chemical weapons stockpiled at depots in Kentucky and Colorado. Construction of disposal facilities at those sites could be delayed until 2011 due to budget troubles. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) is waiting for more information before making any decisions about the potential relocation, a spokesman said. “Senator Lincoln has two concerns with all of this,” said spokesman Drew Goesl. “Those are the health of the residents of Pine Bluff and the jobs the Pine Bluff Arsenal supports.” “That’s why she’s waiting for results of this study, to determine what the implications would be and determine if (the shipment option) could even move forward.” Senator Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) said last week that if studies determine the materials can be moved safely, such a plan “could be something very good for Pine Bluff.” As the Pine Bluff incinerator was not built to destroy projectiles like those kept in Colorado and Kentucky, it is unlikely to be chosen as a destination if the Defense Department decided to move the weapons, said U.S. Representative Mike Ross (D-Ark.), whose district includes Pine Bluff. Retrofitting the facility to incinerate projectiles would probably cost millions of dollars, he added. “I don’t see any reason to stop the study,” said Ross. “It’s just a study” (Associated Press, Feb. 3). Back to top       Jordanian Court Orders Re-Arrest of Man Implicated in Foiled Chemical Weapons Plot A Jordanian military court judge ordered yesterday that one of 13 alleged al-Qaeda chemical attack conspirators be recaptured after he failed to appear for a hearing, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Dec. 15, 2004). Hosni Sharif Hussein Mustafa was arrested in April with eight other suspects in the plot; alleged mastermind Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi and three other fugitives are being tried in absentia. They are suspected of planning to use 20 tons of chemicals in an attack on the Jordanian intelligence service office, part of a series of foiled strikes reported to include the U.S. Embassy in Amman and the Jordanian prime minister’s office. Mustafa, a blacksmith, is accused of manufacturing chemical containers and other items for the suspected terror cell. He was freed in September because there was insufficient evidence linking him to the alleged terror plan, said Sameeh Khreis, an attorney representing the defendants in custody. Mustafa failed to show up for a trial hearing yesterday, and his whereabouts are not known, AP reported. “I want him arrested again and brought here under guard,” said the tribunal’s presiding judge, Col. Fawaz Buqour (Associated Press, Feb. 2). Back to top

U.S. Prosecutors Indict Man for Allegedly Transferring Computer Equipment to Iranian Missile Program U.S. businessman Mohammad Farahbakhsh was indicted yesterday on charges of having illegally smuggled computer equipment to Iran for use in its missile programs, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Jan. 20). Federal prosecutors alleged that between 1998 and 2000, Farahbakhsh sold computer parts from the Texas-based company National Instruments to the Iranian Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group, which is believed to be involved in the development of ballistic and cruise missiles, AP reported. Farahbakhsh is suspected of hiding the transactions by working with a branch of an Iranian bank in the United Arab Emirates. Farahbakhsh was previously indicted in the United States for allegedly smuggling pressure sensors to Iran. His attorney, Kristan Peters, denied the new allegations. “I have never seen any documents that would support that allegation,” she said (Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press/The Telegraph, Feb. 3). Meanwhile, Iranian Defense Minister Rear Adm. Ali Shamkhani denied yesterday that Tehran is seeking to develop missiles capable of hitting targets in Europe, calling such allegations “Zionist propaganda.” “Iran has the technical capability to respond to its needs but does not need to make such a missile,” he said. “There is no threatening target in Europe” (Agence France-Presse, Feb. 2).   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.