U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan called for new efforts against terrorism today during an international summit in Madrid (AFP photo/Pierre-Philippe Marcou). Annan Calls for Broad Measures to Reduce WMD Threat By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Deterring terrorists from nuclear or other forms of WMD attack requires a comprehensive strategy that both dissuades people from turning to terrorism and improves states’ abilities to prevent acts of terror, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said today...Full Story

WMD Exercise Tests U.S. Lawmakers By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. legislators this week grappled with how to respond to a 10-kiloton nuclear blast at New York’s Grand Central Station and a smallpox attack in Europe and America...Full Story

Rice Backs Arms Control Resource Reductions By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday argued in favor of cutting back arms control resources at her department as part of a reorganization plan under review at her department (see GSN, Feb. 10)...Full Story

	Thursday, March 10, 2005

Annan Calls for Broad Measures to Reduce WMD Threat By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Deterring terrorists from nuclear or other forms of WMD attack requires a comprehensive strategy that both dissuades people from turning to terrorism and improves states’ abilities to prevent acts of terror, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said today. Speaking in Madrid on the first anniversary of the train bombings there that killed 192 people, Annan said, “We live in a world of excess hazardous materials and abundant technological know-how, in which terrorists clearly state their intention to inflict catastrophic casualties.” That such an attack has not happened “is no excuse for complacency,” he said, but rather “it gives us a last chance to take effective preventive action.”   Such action “means consolidating, securing, and when possible eliminating potentially hazardous materials, and implementing effective export controls.” He cited work by the Group of Eight, the Security Council, and the U.S.-initiated Proliferation Security Initiative as working “to plug the gaps in the nonproliferation regime.” Another measure states could take would be to “complete and adopt without delay” the draft convention on nuclear terrorism. A nuclear attack would not only kill the people immediately affected by the blast, he said, “but would stagger the world economy and thrust tens of millions of people into dire poverty.” Therefore “any nuclear terrorist attack would have a second death toll throughout the developing world,” he added. Annan and other world leaders are attending the International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security. A declaration on cooperation in combating terrorism is expected at the end of the two-day meeting. Combating the threat of bioterrorism requires greater local and national early warning and analytical capacities, Annan said. Because there will soon be “tens of thousands” of laboratories “capable of producing designer bugs with awesome lethal potential,” the best defense is not regulation but “strengthening public health” to ensure that infectious outbreaks — natural or artificial — are discovered and treated early in the outbreak, he said.  Returning to a major theme in his analysis of the terror threat, Annan said the world “cannot compromise on the core values” of human rights and the rule of law. “Terrorism is in itself a direct attack on human rights and the rule of law,” he said, “If we sacrifice them in our response, we are handing a victory to the terrorists.” Emphasizing deterrence and cooperation over military action, Annan said a “principled, comprehensive strategy” for combating terrorism must involve “dissuading disaffected groups from choosing terrorism as a tactic” and deterring states from supporting terrorism. Echoing the recommendation of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, Annan said, “Terrorism is unacceptable under any circumstances and in any culture.” “Groups use terrorist tactics because they think those tactics are effective, and that people, or at least those in whose name they claim to act, will approve,” he added, “Such beliefs are the true ‘root causes’ of terrorism. Our job is to show unequivocally that they are wrong.” Back to top       U.S. Senators Launch Bipartisan Attack on New Bush Approach to Doling Out Emergency Response Funds By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Powerful senators from both major parties expressed opposition yesterday to the Homeland Security Department’s proposed new approach to distributing emergency response grants to state and local institutions (see GSN, March 8). Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-Maine) criticized President George W. Bush’s administration for seeking a 66 percent cut in the percentage of Homeland Security grants that is doled out to each state as a baseline. Senior committee Democrat Joseph Lieberman (Conn.) said the administration simply is not asking for enough funds to adequately protect the country from terrorist attack. The statements came as the panel met to question new Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on the administration’s fiscal 2006 budget proposal. Chertoff said Bush had “affirmed his staunch commitment to the Department of Homeland Security mission by allocating $41.1 billion in new resources, a 7 percent increase over the current year.” The White House says its 2006 request seeks to “restructure” $2.6 billion of a proposed $3.6 billion budget for “state and local first-responder grants and other assistance,” in part by cutting the baseline state rate from 0.75 percent to 0.25 percent and by spending the funds freed up in ways that reflect information about terrorist threats and U.S. vulnerabilities. The change follows heated debate last year in Congress over how much of the money to spend based on risk calculations and how much to use for per-state minimum payments and population-based grants. Collins was among several senators and representatives to propose legislation meant to reform the grant programs, and although no such bill was passed, lawmakers vowed in a “sense of Congress” resolution to try again this year. Her bill would have both retained the 0.75 percent minimum payments and placed more emphasis on risk information in distributing the remaining money. “Every state and local government, regardless of its size, has vulnerabilities, and each should be ensured a baseline level of homeland security funding to assure preparedness,” the chairwoman said yesterday in a letter to the Senate Budget Committee. “Drastically reducing this baseline level of funding will make it virtually impossible for states and localities to conduct necessary emergency planning activities.” Lieberman in his statement did not delve into the specifics of the debate over how to allocate the funds, but he said the administration in its 2006 proposal “underestimates what it will take to keep our citizens as safe as possible here at home.” “There are increases, but they are modest: only a 3 to 4 percent increase in DHS discretionary spending after inflation — and even that increase largely depends upon a controversial airline ticket fee that may or may not be approved by Congress,” Lieberman said. “More important, the increases pale by comparison to what the experts tell us is necessary.” Resulting “gaps,” Lieberman said, range “from the inability of first responders to communicate between agencies and jurisdictions to a lack of preparedness for a biological attack to inadequately defended train, railway and highway transportation networks.” To fill such gaps, he asked the Budget Committee to increase the governmentwide homeland security budget by more than $8 billion and to earmark about half the increase to train, equip and pay emergency responders. Meanwhile in the House of Representatives, Homeland Security Committee Chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) told reporters on a conference call yesterday that he and Collins have discussed response grant reform “in the most general terms” and that his committee has not yet discussed the matter in the incipient congressional session. “We have a good deal of planning work to do … to make sure that this legislation … becomes law this year,” said Cox, who sponsored his own legislation on the matter last year (see GSN, May 11, 2004). He said it is a “fair estimate” that whatever legislation Congress passes this year to reform the grants would reflect the same principles as his bill last year. Back to top

WMD Exercise Tests U.S. Lawmakers By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. legislators this week grappled with how to respond to a 10-kiloton nuclear blast at New York’s Grand Central Station and a smallpox attack in Europe and America. Members of the House Homeland Security Committee went to Wye River, Md., Monday and Tuesday to participate in the two separate tabletop exercises, which were chosen to represent what committee Chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) yesterday called the two “most serious” threats to national security. Unlike a chemical or radiological strike, Cox told reporters in a telephone press conference, a nuclear or biological attack could be a “civilization-buster” bringing about drastic, long-term changes in the very nature of the country attacked. He said the thorny problems raised by the Wye River exercises confirmed the panelists’ belief that preventing such attacks should be their top priority. “The greatest priority now is to prevent a nuclear or biological attack from ever happening,” Cox said. “A nuclear or biological event is the clearest example of why homeland security must continue to push our borders out.” The nuclear scenario involved a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb detonated at Grand Central Station after having been trucked there in a lead-sealed container. Cox said several “radical al-Qaeda terrorist groups” claimed responsibility in the exercise, and initial casualty reports indicated 500,000 dead with a dramatic rise still expected. In playing out the nuclear scenario on the first day of their retreat, the House members focused on emergency response, health care, financial markets, prevention of further such attacks, cooperation with allies and the use of intelligence, according to Cox. The retreat’s second day featured a smallpox and anthrax exercise modeled after the high-profile, U.S.-European exercise conducted last month, known as Atlantic Storm (see GSN, March 9). The exercise involved a smallpox attack, for which al-Qaeda claimed responsibility, in the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and Turkey. The latter invoked the North Atlantic Treaty’s Article 5, in which NATO members pledge to respond to any attack on one member as if it were an attack against them all. Cox said a subsequent anthrax attack also figured in the exercise. During the bioterrorism exercise, legislators discussed the roles of international organizations, allocation of limited medical resources, public information and general infectious disease containment, Cox said. Back to top       Rice Backs Arms Control Resource Reductions By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday argued in favor of cutting back arms control resources at her department as part of a reorganization plan under review at her department (see GSN, Feb. 10). State Department officials previously had indicated that they were preparing plans to implement a recommendation by department’s inspector general to merge the arms control and nonproliferation bureaus. That report has not been released, however, and officials until yesterday had not indicated officially how the resources dedicated to those two missions could change. Rice said yesterday that the department has a reduced need for some arms control expertise as a result of changing international conditions since the Cold War. She testified at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing on the State Department’s budget request. “These bureaus were structured at a time when there was a Soviet Union, when arms control was in many ways the center of our superpower relationship with the Soviet Union, in a way in which it is no longer the centerpiece of that relationship or other relationships,” she said. “Nonproliferation, on the other hand, and our concerns about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction into the wrong hands, state actors, nonstate actors, the kind of example we have of the A.Q. Khan network — these are challenges that were barely imagined when these bureaus were structured,” she said. “I think it’s only appropriate that we take a look at the expertise that has been gathered there and to see whether it is being properly put against the problems that we face today,” she said. The potential reorganization also was motivated by resource constraints, she said: “We don’t have endless resources in terms of people or in terms of money.” Rice’s comments followed a question from Representative Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), who said the inspector general’s “diagnosis was largely accurate, but the prescription amounted to killing one of the patients.” “Eliminating the arms control bureau would send the wrong signal about the administration’s priorities, and the merger would surely make it difficult to retain staff that the [office of the inspector general’s] report praised, calling them, I quote, ‘national treasures,’” he said. A critic said today the proposed restructuring appears to reflect a decrease in emphasis by the administration on pursuing new arms control agreements. “If the arms control is not very used right now, it’s partially a result of the administration’s policy choices,” said Arms Control Association Executive Director Daryl Kimball. “Things that the arms control bureau could or should be pursuing right now include a verifiable fissile material cutoff treaty, verifiable strategic reductions beyond the Moscow Treaty, and accounting for and reductions of U.S. and Russian tactical nuclear weapons,” he said. Back to top

Greater Push Needed to Prevent Nuclear Terror, Former U.S. Senator Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — While having made some progress, the United States and Russia must do more to prevent the spread, and possible use, of nuclear weapons, former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn said yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 25). “Every American citizen today has at least the right to ask, are we doing at the governmental level all we can do to prevent a nuclear attack on America? The simple answer is no, we are not,” Nunn said in remarks at the National Press Club. Among the positive steps taken to reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism was last month’s summit in the Slovakian capital of Bratislava between U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin, said Nunn, a longtime nonproliferation advocate who now co-chairs the Nuclear Threat Initiative. The meeting resulted in the two countries agreeing to several nuclear security enhancements, including U.S. and Russian experts agreeing to share “best practices” on nuclear site security and improved cooperation on responding to potential acts of nuclear or radiological terrorism. One of the most important aspects of the summit, Nunn said, “was the fact that the two leaders stepped up and have started assuming personal responsibility” for nonproliferation issues. Even so, a number of potential threats remain, he said, including the possibility that terrorists could acquire and use a nuclear or radiological device, an unauthorized or accidental nuclear attack by Russia, or an increase in the number of nuclear-armed states. “In measuring the adequacy of our response to today’s nuclear threats, on a scale of from 1 to 10, I would give us about a 3 with the recent summit between Presidents Bush and Putin moving us closer to a 4 on a scale of 10,” Nunn said. He outlined a number of measures to reduce nuclear terrorism risks, including giving greater priority to international efforts to secure nuclear weapons and related materials, accelerating U.S. and Russian efforts to remove and secure materials from research reactors around the world; pursuing a U.S.-Russian agreement on full transparency on tactical nuclear weapons; removing U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons from “hair-trigger” alert status; and developing a global inventory of vulnerable radioactive sources. Nunn also called for improved diplomatic efforts to resolve crises surrounding Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs and for the nuclear weapon-states to begin devaluing their nuclear arsenals. The two issues are linked, he added. “It’s awfully hard to ask countries around the globe to do a lot more to fight against the North Koreans or the Iranians getting nuclear weapons if we ourselves seem to be increasing our dependence on nuclear weapons, and the same thing would apply to the Russians,” Nunn said. He also criticized Bush administration efforts to study the possible development of a nuclear “bunker-buster” bomb, saying such a weapon would jeopardize international cooperation needed for nonproliferation efforts. “I think you can make a theoretical case why we would find, under some conceivable set of circumstances, the need to have that kind of weapon. I think the price we pay, though, in developing that kind of weapon is enormously disproportionate to the benefit we would gain,” Nunn said. [EDITOR’S NOTE: The Nuclear Threat Initiative is the sole sponsor of Global Security Newswire, which is published independently by the National Journal Group.] Back to top       Sufficient Evidence Supports Concern Over Iran Nuclear Program, U.S. Officials Say U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday defended his concerns over Iran’s nuclear intentions and responded to reports that the United States lacks enough intelligence on Tehran’s plans (see GSN, March 3). “I think it’s very wise for the free world to be concerned about the Iranians’ desire to develop a weapon,” he said. “One reason there needs to be worry about Iran is that this is a nontransparent society. There’s no openness,” Bush added. “It’s very easy for them to solve the problem, and that is to not only give assurances about any nuclear weapons program, but to allow full IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspection processes in a transparent way,” he said (AFP/SpaceWar.com, March 9). Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also said yesterday that there was enough reason for concern, AFP reported. “I believe that there is enough evidence that there are problems with Iran’s civilian nuclear power ambitions,” Rice told Univision. There are “a number of countries, and indeed the International Atomic Energy Agency itself, that are concerned about suspicious activities in Iran,” she said. “That is why there have been IAEA investigators going out to Iran. That is why the Russians have determined that when they build a nuclear reactor for Iran, they will have to take back the fuel so that there is no proliferation risk,” she said. Rice declined to comment reports of the bipartisan intelligence review critical of the quality of U.S. intelligence on Iran. “But, of course, Iran is not an easy place to know precisely what is going on. It’s a very closed-in society,” she said (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, March 9). Meanwhile, the latest round of negotiations between Iran and the European Union is expected to end tonight in Geneva with the two sides deadlocked over demands that Tehran abandon uranium enrichment, Iranian state media reported. The two sides “will draw up their conclusions and present them to the technical committee,” said Iranian negotiator Sirous Naseri. The committee is scheduled to meet next week to examine conclusions, Naseri said (IRNA/Payvand, March 10). France, Germany and the United Kingdom have told Iranian officials that if they insist on enriching uranium, they should “put in place objective guarantees as good as their abandoning the fuel cycle and they haven’t come back on that,” said one European diplomat, AFP reported. While Iran has threatened to abandon talks and end its temporary freeze on uranium enrichment if a sufficient incentives package is not offered soon, the European nations have been content to drag out the negotiations, said the diplomat. “As long as we’re talking, the Iranians are suspending their fuel cycle activities, and that is good.” Another European diplomat said the process may depend on Iranian presidential elections in June. “One side may be prepared to make a deal. Another side may want a bomb at all costs,” the diplomat said. A third European diplomat said the negotiations “certainly are tough but the Iranians will never make a concession even at the 11th hour. They will wait for the very last minute or seconds” (AFP/SpaceWar.com, March 10). Elsewhere, a senior Pakistani official acknowledged today that Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan provided Iran with uranium enrichment centrifuges, but insisted Islamabad had nothing to do with the transfer, the Associated Press reported. “Dr. Abdul Qadeer gave some centrifuges to Iran,” Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told AP. “He helped Iran in his personal capacity, and the Pakistan government had nothing to do with it.” The disclosure marked the first time the Pakistani government has admitted Khan gave nuclear technology to Iran, according to AP (Associated Press/MSNBC, March 10). Back to top       Rice to Visit Asia for Nuclear Proliferation Talks U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is expected to travel to Asia Monday for a one-week visit to discuss nuclear proliferation, in the midst of a multilateral diplomatic push to resume six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, the Financial Times reported (see GSN, March 9). Meanwhile, Ning Fukui, China’s special envoy to the negotiations, is scheduled to meet with U.S. top negotiator Christopher Hill and other officials in Washington today (Guy Dinmore, Financial Times, March 9). The six-party talks should serve as a framework for forming a new multilateral relationship in Northeast Asia, Hill said yesterday. “I think we should use this process to our advantage to solve the nuclear issue and move on to form the multilateral relationship (among the member countries),” he said, adding that Washington carried a “sense of optimism” toward the six-party talks (Lee Joo-hee, Korea Herald, March 10). Elsewhere, the deputy head of Russia’s atomic energy agency said today that North Korea has no nuclear weapons, Itar-Tass reported. While Pyongyang may have processed plutonium from some 8,000 nuclear fuel rods, this does not mean North Korea has the requisite technology to produce nuclear weapons, said Sergei Antipov (Andrei Antonov, Itar-Tass, March 10). Back to top       Singapore Joins U.S. Megaports Initiative Singapore yesterday joined the U.S. Megaports Initiative, which seeks to prevent illicit shipment of nuclear and radioactive materials into the United States, according to Agence France-Presse (see GSN, Jan. 12). U.S. and Singapore officials signed a “declaration of principles,” under which the Asian country will install detectors at its ports (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, March 10).  The United States will supply the detectors and related training, along with maintenance of the devices, said U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration Assistant Deputy Administrator David Huizenga. The United States is currently in negotiations with 30 other countries on joining the Megaports program, Huizenga said. He added that agreements with Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand could be finished within months (Koh Gui Qing, Reuters, March 10). Back to top

Canada Warns of Bird Flu as Possible Weapon Avian influenza could be used as a bioterrorist weapon, according to a Canadian military intelligence agency report, the Canadian Press reported Tuesday (see GSN, March 3). The report, Recent Human Outbreaks of Avian Influenza and Potential Biological Warfare Implications, was prepared by the J2 Directorate of Strategic Intelligence and outlines methods that could be used to create a strain of influenza capable of causing a human flu pandemic. If potential perpetrators intended to cause panic and financial damage, influenza would be a good choice for a biological weapon, said Brian Ward, a virologist at McGill University in Montreal. “To me it’s one of the most logical viruses to use. It doesn’t have to be a really bad one to throw a huge wrench,” Ward said. “If you want to hurt the world’s economy, that’s an awfully good way.” Other experts said weaponizing a flu virus would be difficult. “Flu is a wimpy virus, which I think is the one knock against it. It doesn’t persist in the environment (outside a human) very long,” said Earl Brown, a University of Ottawa scientist who specializes in the evolution of influenza viruses (Helen Branswell, Canadian Press/Canada.com, March 8). Back to top

Army Reaches Chemical Weapon Destruction Milestone The U.S. Army’s Deseret Chemical Depot in Utah destroyed its millionth munition yesterday, the Salt Lake Tribune reported (see GSN, Jan. 20). The depot is expected to complete destruction of its stockpile by 2008, according to the Tribune. All nerve agents at the site are scheduled to be destroyed by next year, leaving only mustard agent, said Deseret commanding officer Col. Raymond Van Pelt. Officials also dismissed concerns that additional chemical weapons could be shipped to Utah for destruction under a plan being studied by the Defense Department. “As it stands now, there are no plans” to ship chemical weapons, said depot spokeswoman Alaine Southworth (Thomas Burr, Salt Lake Tribune, March 10). Back to top

Pentagon to Review Missile Defense Test Equipment U.S. Missile Defense Agency chief Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry Obering said yesterday that he has ordered a review of all ground equipment used in missile defense testing, according to the Washington Post. The review follows two recent tests of the Ground-based Missile Defense system in which missile interceptors failed to launch (see GSN, Feb. 14). In a conference call with reporters, Obering said he has also asked a team of independent experts to review “our completed test processes on the ground” and that he has created a new position of director of mission readiness to manage future tests. The new position is set to be filed by Navy Rear Adm. Kathleen Paige, who previously managed the Defense Department’s sea-based missile defense program, the Post reported. “We’ve got some things to correct in our test program, but they are not major deficiencies in the system,” Obering said. “I will take some steps to make sure that we have solved those minor problems that keep tripping us up. But, overall, I’m very optimistic,” he added (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, March 10). Obering also said that last month’s failed missile defense intercept test occurred because a support arm in the interceptor’s silo failed to move away properly, according to Agence France-Presse. “The hard things about missile defense we are accomplishing. The easy things is what we are having trouble with, like arms moving out of the way,” he said. The next missile defense flight test could be held as soon as the end of next month, Obering added (Agence France-Presse, March 10). Back to top

Homeland Security Department Conducts Fewer Food Inspections, GAO Says Inspections of imported food at U.S. ports have decreased since they were shifted from the Agriculture Department to the Homeland Security Department, the U.S. Government Accountability Office said in a report released yesterday (see GSN, March 9). The decrease in inspections, from 40.9 million in fiscal 2002 to 37.5 million in fiscal 2004 after the transfer, came when “experts agree that U.S. agriculture is vulnerable to agroterrorism because of the relative ease with which highly contagious diseases can be introduced in livestock and crops,” the report says. The Homeland Security Department said in a written response to the report that it plans to hire an additional 500 inspectors over the next year (Mimi Hall, USA Today, March 10).   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.