Security experts today questioned U.S. plans to give a high priority to deploying nuclear detectors, such as this illustrated version (Los Alamos National Laboratory). U.S. Lawmakers Hear Call for Better Nuclear Detection, Concerns About New Office By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Proliferation experts today expressed concern in a U.S. House of Representatives hearing about the focus of the new Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (see GSN, March 8)...Full Story

New U.S. Office to Prepare Global Terrorism Data The newly created U.S. National Counterterrorism Center this year will prepare statistics for the annual Patterns on Global Terrorism report, taking over from the State Department, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, June 23, 2004)...Full Story

Rice in Russia to Discuss Nuclear Issues U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is in Moscow today for discussions on issues including securing former Soviet nuclear materials and the nuclear standoffs with Iran and North Korea, the New York Sun reported today (see GSN, April 6)...Full Story

	Tuesday, April 19, 2005

New U.S. Office to Prepare Global Terrorism Data The newly created U.S. National Counterterrorism Center this year will prepare statistics for the annual Patterns on Global Terrorism report, taking over from the State Department, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, June 23, 2004). A State Department official said that methodology problems would cause this year’s report to be submitted without the data on terrorist incident trends, which are expected to be added later by the new agency. The report is required to be delivered to Congress by April 30. “The basic decision is that these numbers are a mess,” the official said. “Let the numbers experts do the numbers and we’ll do the policy.” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the current numbers for 2004 were too preliminary to be released, and that the new agency would release final data at a future date. In the wake of significant increases in terrorist incidents reported last year, however, one terrorism expert said the move appears political. “They didn’t want to have to explain to the press why they’re ‘winning’ the war on terror, but the numbers are the highest ever in the 37 years since they’ve been reporting the data,” said Larry Johnson, a former CIA and State Department counterterrorism official. “If terrorist incidents had dropped 50 percent, do you think they’d be eliminating the report?” The number of attacks designated as “significant incidents” rose from 175 in 2003 to 655 in 2004, according to Johnson. Last year, the department initially released the report showing a sharp reduction in terrorism. Following protests by Johnson, another version had to be issued showing that the number of terrorist-related deaths and injuries had more than doubled since the year before. The Bush administration at the time said the mistake was caused by statistical errors. “Last year, it was an act of stupidity,” Johnson said. “This year it’s an act of politics” (Efron/Richter, Los Angeles Times, April 19). Back to top

Bolton Vote Anticipated Today Despite requests by Democrats for more time to investigate allegations of improper conduct by Undersecretary of State John Bolton, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee appeared set to vote today on his nomination as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (see GSN, April 18). “It is now time to make a decision,” committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) said in a statement. “The charge that (Bolton) improperly sought to influence intelligence conclusions is a serious one,” Lugar said, “and it is reasonable to assess his conduct in his encounters. But no one should be surprised to find that episodes of conflict have occurred in this environment over the course of a four-year tenure.” While Republican committee members Lincoln Chafee (R.I.) and Chuck Hagel (Neb.) have expressed reservations about Bolton, leaders from both parties said they expect Bolton to be supported by the GOP-controlled panel. The full Senate then would consider his nomination. Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) said he had hoped for more time to investigate allegations against Bolton, the Post reported. “There are four new allegations since the hearing a week or so ago, serious ones. Some of the same type again, (involving) people whose jobs were threatened,” Dodd said. In one incident in the 1980s, when Bolton worked for the Justice Department, “He threatened a woman who needed maternity leave for health reasons,” Dodd said. “There’s a series of these things that are emerging here, a pattern,” he said. “Some of my colleagues have said, ‘Look, I need to see a pattern.’ I don’t know how much more of a pattern you need” (Charles Babington, Washington Post, April 19). Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del.) also plans to request more time to investigate Bolton when the committee meets today, the New York Times reported. He is expected to discuss five allegations against the undersecretary, including efforts to remove three government officials from their jobs. “Senator Biden thinks we need to take more time to review the allegations that have been raised, and he hopes the majority will agree with that,” an aide to Biden said. Bolton acknowledged Monday in response to written questions from Democrats that he had sought information on 10 occasions since 2001 regarding the identity of U.S. officials who were involved in communications intercepted by the National Security Agency, the Times reported. Testifying last week before the committee, Bolton said he had asked for the information “on a couple occasions, maybe a few more.” The agency granted all 10 requests. Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff, also spoke out against Bolton. “Do I think John Bolton would make a good ambassador to the United Nations? Absolutely not,” Wilkerson said. “He is incapable of listening to people and taking into account their views. He would be an abysmal ambassador” (Jehl/Weiseman, New York Times, April 19). Back to top       Detainees at Guantanamo Bay Camp Provide Best Al-Qaeda Intelligence, U.S. Officials Say Detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba have become the top U.S. source for intelligence in al-Qaeda, including information about the group’s plans to acquire weapons of mass destruction, according to a Defense Department report released last month (see GSN, March 30). The intelligence gathered at Guantanamo includes details on al-Qaeda “leadership structures, recruiting practices, funding mechanisms, relationships, and the cooperation between terrorist groups, as well as training programs, and plans for attacking the United States and other countries,” the report says. “Detainees have also provided information on individuals connected to al-Qaeda’s pursuit of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons,” it says. Many of the roughly 550 detainees at the camp would have been likely to have ascended the ranks of the terrorist group’s leadership, according to the report (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, April 18). Back to top

U.S. Lawmakers Hear Call for Better Nuclear Detection, Concerns About New Office By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Proliferation experts today expressed concern in a U.S. House of Representatives hearing about the focus of the new Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (see GSN, March 8). Expert witnesses and lawmakers voiced worries about the potential for the office to focus solely on safeguarding the United States, shortchanging nonproliferation work and interdiction work outside the country. The Bush administration’s fiscal 2006 budget calls for the office to open within the Homeland Security Department to accelerate the installation of detectors around the country and to develop improved nuclear sensors. Randall Larsen, founder and chief executive officer of the consulting firm Homeland Security Associates, said he had “a problem” with the word “domestic” in the office’s title. “I worry about this office, when everything I know about preparing a nuclear terrorist attack on American soil — the majority of it, I think, would take place outside our borders,” Larsen told the Homeland Security Prevention of Nuclear and Biological Attack Subcommittee. “I’m for detection.  I guess my question is where we’re going to deploy it — and it’s not domestic.” Terrorist groups will learn of detection locations and adapt plans accordingly, Larsen said. To avoid detection in ports, he said, attackers could deliver a nuclear bomb in a small airplane or detonate a device in a ship that has reached a U.S. port but has not yet gone through detection devices. “They’re not stupid,” he said. Harvard University professor Graham Allison sought to place the domestic detection push in a broader context of competing priorities, asking, “Where does that rank in a multilayered, 360-degree strategy for preventing nuclear terrorism?” Answering his own question, Allison said detection is a “level 3 topic,” while goals such as a “lockdown” of existing weapon-usable materials in Russia are “level 1.” Within the detection program, Allison added, nuclear forensics — the capability to establish the source of any nuclear material that is used in an attack — should receive a higher priority than detection of material. An effective forensics operation would act as a deterrent, he said, since entities that could potentially provide materials to terrorists would know they would be held accountable.  All speakers pointed to a need for much more powerful technology if nuclear detection efforts are to be effective. However, at times, they expressed doubts about how good such technology could become. “Basic physics will not change, and finding a weapon is very difficult,” said Larsen, who during the hearing brandished a pocket-size device that he said could detect a nuclear explosion miles away — but not a nuclear source inside the hearing room. The chairman of the full Homeland Security Committee, Christopher Cox (R-Calif.), said “some immediate budget choices” would have to be made about whether to invest more heavily in current detection technology or in research into better technology. Back to top       Rice in Russia to Discuss Nuclear Issues U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is in Moscow today for discussions on issues including securing former Soviet nuclear materials and the nuclear standoffs with Iran and North Korea, the New York Sun reported today (see GSN, April 6). Russian officials expect Rice to press for more access for U.S. inspectors to Russian nuclear sites, according to one source. “The Americans want to have a look at those storage facilities, to assess the danger of nuclear materials being sold illegally,” said the source. The Bush administration has made efforts to safeguard Russia’s nuclear stockpile a greater priority in the new presidential term, according to Carnegie Moscow Center Director Andrew Kuchins. While modest progress on the issue can be expected, no “headline-grabbing” announcements are anticipated, he said. Rice is also expected to discuss Iran and North Korea in meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin and other officials, the Sun reported (Michael Mainville, New York Sun, April 19). Back to top       Reasons for Reported Shutdown of North Korean Nuclear Reactor Remain Unknown, Seoul Says South Korea remains uncertain why North Korea would power down its Yongbyon nuclear reactor, the Yonhap news agency reported today (see GSN, April 18). “For now, it is difficult to confirm whether [Pyongyang] halted (the reactor) to remove spent fuel rods or because of technical reasons,” said Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon. “We’re scrutinizing intelligence with many possibilities in mind” (Yonhap/BBC Monitoring, April 19). The International Atomic Energy Agency said it cannot be confirmed that the 5-megawatt reactor actually has been shut down, the Associated Press reported. “This is entirely feasible, but for us to know for sure, we’d have to be physically there ourselves and this is no longer the case,” said agency spokeswoman Melissa Fleming (Barry Schweid, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, April 18). Meanwhile, the United States announced yesterday it would consider referring Pyongyang to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions if North Korea continues to abstain from the six-party nuclear talks, Reuters reported. “If North Korea refuses to come back to the six-party talks then I fully expect we would consult with our partners in the region about the next steps, and that’s certainly one possibility,” said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. “I don’t know that we’ve set a timetable but if they refuse to come back to the talks then we would have to consult with our partners and look at the next steps,” he said (Reuters, April 18). Seoul yesterday played down talk of Security Council referral, AP reported. “There has not been discussion about that at the South Korea-U.S. government level,” said Foreign Minister Ban. “[McClellan] appears to have made the remarks as a reminder that there is such a procedure,” Ban said (Associated Press/Yahoo!News, April 19). Elsewhere, representatives from the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization are scheduled to meet with officials in North Korea today and tomorrow to discuss the suspended effort to build two nuclear reactors, Yonhap reported (Yonhap/BBC Monitoring, April 18). Back to top       Vanunu Must Remain in Israel for Another Year Israel today extended for another year restrictions barring nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu from leaving the country, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, April 18). Interior Minister Ophir Pines-Paz believes Vanunu “possesses information from the time that he was employed at Dimona (a nuclear reactor in southern Israel) that he could reveal if he was allowed to leave the country,” the ministry said in a statement (Agence France-Presse, April 19). Back to top

Anthrax Care Said More Cost-Effective After Attack Using vaccines and antibiotics to treat people after they are exposed to anthrax would be more cost-effective than trying to vaccinate residents of an urban area before a potential incident, U.S. and Canadian researchers said in an article published today in the Annals of Internal Medicine (see GSN, Dec. 16, 2004). “Our findings make clear that combination therapy with antibiotics and vaccination is better than either treatment alone,” said senior author Douglas Owens of the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department Palo Alto Health Care System. “And the best strategy is actually the least expensive.” Researchers determined that vaccinating a city of 5 million people believed to be at low risk for a bioterror attack would cost between $500 million and $1 billion, Business Wire reported. Researchers considered several response methods to an aerosolized anthrax attack on an urban area, ranging from no treatment whatsoever to using solely antibiotics or vaccines to applying both treatments to victims. The value of pre-attack vaccinations was also studied. The post-attack combination of vaccines and antibiotics was estimated to cost $46,099 per patient, saving $355 per person and resulting in a four-month gain in life, according to Business Wire. A strong distribution system for the medicine is necessary to ensure an adequate response, researchers said. “There must be a way to get antibiotics to a very large number of people very rapidly; otherwise you won’t get the benefits that we predict,” Owens said (Business Wire/Yahoo!Finance, April 18). Experts posed several questions about the study’s results, including shy researchers did not consider how the time it could take authorities to identify and respond to an anthrax attack might affect the program, according to Canadian Press. “Unfortunately, this effort doesn’t really tell us much about the effectiveness of post-vaccination and antibiotic delivery if it doesn’t define the time period following release to the initiation of the action and how long it takes to complete vaccine and antibiotic distribution in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, a special adviser to the Bush administration on bioterrorism. The research article also did not consider the deterrent effect a mass vaccination program might have on terrorists considering an urban area for an attack, or the “incalculable societal impact” of such an incident, according to an editorial in the Annals. “Would social panic and civil chaos result if a true alarm were broadcast to a large city? Would the medical infrastructure disintegrate from lack of organization, personnel, facilities, equipment and supplies,” wrote editorial author Glenn Webb of Vanderbilt University in Tennessee (Helen Branswell, Canadian Press/Yahoo!News, April 18). Back to top       Waiter Faces Prison for Ricin Possession A Florida waiter has pleaded guilty to possessing ricin, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Jan. 14). Steven Michael Ekberg, 22, created the toxin at home using do-it-yourself guidebooks, according to AP. He faces a maximum 10-year prison term, but is likely to serve less time under a plea agreement (Associated Press/WSVN.com, April 19). Back to top

Judge Backs D.C. Ban on Toxic Rail Shipments U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan yesterday upheld the District of Columbia’s right to ban rail shipments of chlorine and other toxic materials from passing through the nation’s capital, the Washington Post reported (see GSN, April 6). The emergency order is scheduled to begin tomorrow. “Vague predictions of increased costs and logistical burdens” made by rail operator CSX and the federal government “pale in comparison to the potential devastation predicted to occur in the event of a terrorist attack on a railcar transporting hazmats in the nation’s capital,” Sullivan wrote in his decision. Sullivan said the federal government, which backed the CSX lawsuit against the ban, failed to submit a rail security plan, the Post reported. “CSXT argues that it has been ‘more than three years after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001’ and there is no reason to believe there is an imminent emergency,” Sullivan wrote. “The court sincerely hopes plaintiff is right, but it is unwilling to take that gamble.” CSX said it would take its case to the federal appeals court. In the meantime, it will comply with the law, said company spokesman Robert Sullivan. CSX “continues to place great focus on rail security — as it has since Sept. 11, 2001,” the spokesman said in a prepared statement. The company charges that the ban violates its constitutional right to interstate commerce and infringes upon federal authority over the rail system. CSX also fears the D.C. rule could become a precedent for other cities that could disrupt rail transportation around the country. Baltimore, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are considering similar bans, according to the Post (Carol Leonnig, Washington Post, April 19). Back to top

Arkansas Food Processing Industry Steps Up Security The Arkansas food processing industry has increased security to head off possible efforts by terrorists to attack the U.S. food supply, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, March 10). Members of the Ozark Food Processors Association have been increasing surveillance, employee training and product tracking, AP reported. However, food security specialist Rod Wheeler said he did not need to show identification to gain entrance to several food processing plants. “All I needed was a vial of ricin to dump in there,” he said. Government regulations on food processors have become more stringent since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, said Michael Roberts, director of the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas. “There is a great deal more communication and interaction and cooperation that goes on now between the government agencies that have responsibility for food security,” he said (Associated Press, April 18).   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.