The Senate Foreign Relations Committee today debated the nomination of U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton (shown last month) as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (AFP photo/Brendan Smialowski). Voinovich Blasts Bolton, But Will Not Block Full Senate Vote U.S. Senator George Voinovich (R-Ohio) today agreed to send the nomination of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to the full Senate for a vote, but blasted the nominee as “arrogant” and “bullying,” according to the Associated Press (see GSN, May 11). “John Bolton is the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be,” Voinovich said during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. “That being said, Mr. Chairman, I am not so arrogant to think that I should impose my judgment and perspective of the U.S. position in the world community on the rest of my colleagues. We owe it to the president to give Mr. Bolton an up or down vote on the floor,” he added...Full Story

EU to Abandon Talks if Iran Resumes Nuclear Work British, French and German foreign ministers yesterday submitted a letter to Iran pledging to abandon negotiations if Iran resumes sensitive nuclear work, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, May 11)...Full Story

NPT Conference Breaks Agenda Deadlock By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference last night broke a procedural deadlock that has plagued them for more than a year, allowing the conference to move to the next phase of its work (see GSN, May 11)...Full Story

	Thursday, May 12, 2005

U.S. Terrorism Grant Reform Finds Bipartisan Support in House of Representatives By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Lawmakers of both major parties expressed support today for reforming the U.S. system for doling out antiterrorism funds as the full House of Representatives took up a landmark bill on the grants to state and local agencies (see GSN, April 13). The bill is the first major piece of legislation from the months-old Homeland Security Committee to reach the House floor. Legislators expressed hope that it would end reports of haphazard federal funding to protect against terrorism, by linking spending to overall plans and standards and by directing more money to locations considered to be at the highest risk of attack. “This bill should be the end” of low per-capita payments to high-risk states, said Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), “and hopefully the end of media reports about misspent homeland security funding.” As the chamber began debate on the measure, signs of discord were rare and muted. They focused mainly on the bill’s proposed cut in per-state “baseline” payments — as opposed to those based on risk assessments — from 0.75 percent to 0.25 percent of the Homeland Security Department’s budget for its main antiterrorism grant programs. “While some of my colleagues have called this a cut, I like to think of it as better use of our homeland security dollars,” said Representative Mike Rogers (R-Ala.). Maloney, whose New York City district straddles the boroughs of Manhattan and Queens, said she was supporting the bill despite her view that baseline payments should be eliminated entirely — a view that appears to be supported by the recommendations of the federal Sept. 11 commission. The federal government, the commission wrote in its report last year, should “base federal funding for emergency preparedness solely on risks and vulnerabilities, putting New York City and Washington, D.C., at the top of the current list. Such assistance should not remain a program for general revenue sharing or pork-barrel spending.” Representative Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) said the bill is in the spirit of the panel’s work. “It will turn the 9/11 commission’s recommendation into law,” Menendez said. The House bill would set up the first specific grant process for antiterrorism purposes, separate from ongoing “pre-Sept. 11” programs for institutions such as fire departments and school security programs. It would create a “first responder grant board” to prioritize applications from state and local agencies and would strictly tie federal grants to states’ overall antiterrorism assessments and plans. The effort has not been limited to the House. A related bill introduced by Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) in January would reduce the state minimum payments to 0.55 percent and would grant Homeland Security increased decision-making power in spending the remaining money. The bill was approved last month by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, of which Collins is chairwoman. The Bush administration is seeking in its fiscal 2006 budget proposal to put more decision-making on the antiterrorism spending under Washington’s control. In both congressional chambers, however, lawmakers have expressed concern that the administration’s approach would lead to overly drastic cuts in the baseline funds and threaten state and local decision-making prerogatives. Back to top

Voinovich Blasts Bolton, But Will Not Block Full Senate Vote U.S. Senator George Voinovich (R-Ohio) today agreed to send the nomination of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to the full Senate for a vote, but blasted the nominee as “arrogant” and “bullying,” according to the Associated Press (see GSN, May 11). “John Bolton is the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be,” Voinovich said during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. “That being said, Mr. Chairman, I am not so arrogant to think that I should impose my judgment and perspective of the U.S. position in the world community on the rest of my colleagues. We owe it to the president to give Mr. Bolton an up or down vote on the floor,” he added. Committee Democrats had hoped Voinovich would vote against Bolton, creating a tie vote on the 18-member committee that would result in no endorsement from the committee before a full Senate vote. Instead, the senator said he would allow the nomination to move on without making a vote of approval or disapproval, AP reported. The committee hearing was continuing at deadline (Barry Schweid, Associated Press, May 12).  Democrats continued their investigation of Bolton right up to the hearing, the Associated Press reported today. “Democrats continue to feel that Mr. Bolton is the wrong person for the job,” said Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.). Ranking committee Democrat Joseph Biden (Del.) planned to ask Bolton in writing whether he would allow the release of documents filed when Bolton requested information from the National Security Agency. The committee also interviewed two State Department officials who worked with Bolton in his posting as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security. Leading Democrats have not ruled out a filibuster to stop the nomination. “It is not my intention to do that but it depends on how this plays out,” Biden said. “It’s certainly a real possibility,” said Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) (Anne Gearan, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 12).  Since being nominated, Bolton has visited Capitol Hill more than 20 times to answer questions from both Democratic and Republican senators, the Financial Times reports. According to the Times, debate over the nomination is expected to focus on whether: Bolton distorted intelligence; he fired people who did not share his views; he treated colleagues unprofessionally; and whether he lied to the committee (Demetri Sevastopulo, Financial Times, May 11). Bolton has asserted that he believes a government official has the right to interpret intelligence, even if the interpretation is out of line with other intelligence agencies, the New York Times reports. Bolton made the statement in response to written questions from Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.). “A policy official may state his own reading of the intelligence (assuming the information is cleared for release as a policy matter) as long as he does not purport to speak for the intelligence community,” Bolton wrote. The Times also reports that Democratic senators have received documents revealing CIA opposition to testimony Bolton planned to give on Cuba in 2002. According to the documents, the CIA took issue with Bolton’s tone, saying it did not represent intelligence judgments on biological weapons and terrorism (Douglas Jehl, New York Times, May 12). While Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expects “message discipline” from subordinates, Bolton could be expected to chart his own course as U.N. ambassador, retired senior diplomat Princeton Lyman told Knight Ridder. “If someone is as independent-minded as John Bolton, we can pretty much expect him to follow his own directions and own instructions,” said Lyman, who opposed the nomination. Supporters say Bolton is loyal to the White House and would follow its directions. “He was never a cowboy,” said Thomas Boyd, a former colleague of Bolton’s at the Justice Department. Rice also expressed her support for Bolton’s nomination, according to Knight Ridder. “I’m the one who talked to the president about having John do this job,” Rice told Larry King on CNN (Warren Strobel, Knight Ridder/Kansas City Star, May 12). Back to top       Democrats Question White House on British Memo Showing Early U.S. Plan for War in Iraq U.S. House Democrats have submitted a letter blasting the White House over British documents that indicate that President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair had committed to war with Iraq before U.N. weapons inspections were completed, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, May 6). The Democrats cite a British memo indicating that Bush as early as July 2002 saw military action as inevitable. “If the disclosure is accurate, it raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war as well as the integrity of our own administration,” states the letter signed by 89 Democrats. Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), the letter’s chief author, said the memo exposes an abuse of presidential power. "While the president of the United States was telling the citizens and the Congress that they had no intention to start a war with Iraq, they were working very close with Tony Blair and the British leadership at making this a foregone conclusion,” Conyers said. Conyers said he had not received a response from the White House (John Daniszewski, Los Angeles Times, May 12).  Back to top

EU to Abandon Talks if Iran Resumes Nuclear Work British, French and German foreign ministers yesterday submitted a letter to Iran pledging to abandon negotiations if Iran resumes sensitive nuclear work, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, May 11). In a message to Iranian Supreme National Security Council chief Hassan Rohani, the foreign ministers warned that a resumption of nuclear activities “would bring the negotiating process to an end.” “The consequences could only be negative for Iran,” the letter says. Iranian officials, meanwhile, said they would delay notifying the International Atomic Energy Agency of their intent to resume uranium conversion. Tehran was instead following up on an offer in the EU officials’ letter for a meeting within the next two weeks, one Iranian diplomat said. If Iran informs the agency of an intent to resume nuclear activity, “it will set off a series of outcomes and escalations towards the [U.N.] Security Council that will be hard to stop,” said a U.S. official (Dafna Linzer, Washington Post, May 12). “We certainly will support referral to the United Nations Security Council if Iran breaches its obligations and undertakings,” British Prime Minister Tony Blair said today (Reuters, May 12). Rohani warned today that denial of Iran’s right to pursue a complete nuclear energy program would endanger Tehran’s commitment to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Reuters reported. “If Iran cannot use its legitimate rights in the framework of the NPT, it will no longer have respect for the treaty,” Rohani said. “Using the fuel cycle in the framework of the NPT and international regulations is Iran’s final and national decision,” he said (Reuters, May 12). Rohani’s statement today that Iran would “resume part of its nuclear activities in the near future,” seemed more vague than other recent warnings, the Associated Press reported (George Jahn, Associated Press/ABCNews.com, May 12). Iran may choose not to deliver a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency today announcing resumption of nuclear work, opting instead to allow negotiations with the European nations one more chance, officials close to the talks said today. Tehran’s chief delegate to the agency, Sirus Naseri, was expected to deliver the letter of intent, diplomats said. Naseri, however, declined to say if he had such a letter, Reuters reported. “I will let you know if it comes to that,” Naseri said. Iranian officials over the last few days conducted emergency meetings with their European counterparts, said an official close to the talks. “These recent negotiations have created a new chance to break the deadlock,” an official told Reuters. “This is the last chance for the talks” (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters, May 12). Naseri met with the IAEA official late yesterday but did not deliver the letter, one diplomat said, describing the visit as a “social call” (Jahn, Associated Press, May 12). A Russian nuclear official called Iran’s planned resumption of nuclear work “legitimate,” Agence France-Presse reported. “The fact that Iran has restarted conversion will not have an impact on nuclear cooperation between Russia and Iran,” said the official. “It is legitimate and legal,” she said, adding that differences between Moscow and Washington regarding cooperation with Tehran were “narrowing.” The head of Russia’s atomic energy agency, Alexander Rumyantsev, said in an interview published today that Russia expects to make its first shipment of nuclear fuel to Iran in late 2005 or early 2006. “All the necessary precautions have been made in line with international standards,” Rumyantsev said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 12). Back to top       NPT Conference Breaks Agenda Deadlock By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference last night broke a procedural deadlock that has plagued them for more than a year, allowing the conference to move to the next phase of its work (see GSN, May 11). The conference began on May 2 without an agenda due to a dispute over how to refer to the decisions of previous review conferences.  The United States led limited opposition to including any references to those conferences, as the Bush administration does not support many of the decisions made in 1995 and 2000.  The majority of treaty states wanted such language included as a way of reaffirming support for the disarmament and nonproliferation commitments made as part of the package of decisions that allowed for the indefinite extension of the pact in 1995. The compromise called for removing from the agenda all references to previous conferences and reading into the record a presidential statement that addressed, in a general manner, those issues.  The agenda now says simply, “Review of the operation of the treaty.” Conference President Sergio Duarte of Brazil yesterday read into the record the statement: “It is understood that the review will be conducted in the light of the decisions and the resolution of the previous conferences, and allow for discussion of any issue raised by states parties.”  This statement has been added as a footnote to the agenda. “The resolution” is a reference to the resolution from the 1995 review conference endorsing negotiations for a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Egyptian Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz, who led the campaign for the more inclusive language, said yesterday that delegates “didn’t want to stall the conference.” However, they also wanted acknowledgement of the 1995 decisions.  If not, “we would be letting go of the whole thing. … We cannot accept this.  So it is that spirit that we are defending, and at the same time we do not want to let go of the 2000 review conference outcome,” he said.  The final document of the 2000 conference includes a series of specific disarmament steps, including entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and reductions in nonstrategic nuclear weapons. “From the very beginning, we have witnessed an attempt to bypass the year 2000 review outcome.  There are certain things in that 2000 outcome that others do not like, so they wanted to bypass them,” Abdelaziz said before the agenda was finalized. He added, “Our concerns are how to preserve the document of 2000 and build on it in 2005.”  The delegates are meeting today in closed session to organize the next phase of their work.  In past review conferences, there have been three main committees — on disarmament, nonproliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear power — organized according to the various articles of the treaty.  There are also proposals for subsidiary bodies to deal with regional issues, particularly the Middle East, proposed guarantees by nuclear states not to use atomic weapons against non-nuclear states and other issues. All these proposals are contentious and are not likely to be resolved quickly. The review conference is scheduled to continue through May 27. Back to top       North Korea Has Taken “Preparatory Steps” Toward Nuclear Test, Says U.S. Ambassador to Japan North Korea appears to have taken measures to prepare for a nuclear test, the U.S. ambassador to Japan said yesterday (see GSN, May 11). “I believe they have taken some preparatory steps,” Ambassador Thomas Schieffer told Japanese ruling coalition leader Takenori Kanzaki, according to a U.S. Embassy official. “If there is a test it would be a serious blow to the process” of resuming six-party talks on Pyongyang’s nuclear effort, Schieffer said. Kanzaki leads New Komeito, Agence France-Presse reported. A New Komeito spokesman said Schieffer indicated that there was a “high possibility” of a nuclear test (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 11). However, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, asked about Schieffer’s reported comments, replied, “I wouldn't quite read as much into his statements as you do.” In addition, a senior U.S. official who last week confirmed the presence of a reviewing stand near a possible test site (see GSN, May 6) said late yesterday that he now questioned the structure’s relevance, the New York Times reported. He added, however, that he was now even more concerned that a test could be in the works. Meanwhile, a former CIA official noted the difficulty in gathering intelligence on the ultra-secretive nation. “There’s a reason I call North Korea the longest-running intelligence failure in the history of American espionage,” said Donald Gregg, a CIA station chief in Seoul and later ambassador. “And I can say that with pride because I was part of the failure.” North Korean activity led to concerns in the White House of a possible test in October and January, the Times reported. As North Korea has never conducted a test, no one knows whether preparations would bear a resemblance to those seen in the former Soviet Union or in China, both of which have assisted Pyongyang with its program. “We might not know until it is fired off,” one U.S. official said (David Sanger, New York Times, May 12). South Korean Vice Unification Minister Rhee Bong-jo said today that North Korea’s latest moves amounted to a ploy “to increase pressure and bolster its negotiating power,” the Associated Press reported. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said North Korea has made similar threats in the past to strengthen its hand going into negotiations (Burt Herman, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, May 12). Meanwhile, Chinese officials today rejected U.S. demands for a tougher line on North Korea, Agence France-Presse reported. “In principle the Chinese government is not in favor of exerting pressure. We do not support resorting to sanctions to resolve international conflicts,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan. “Facts have proven that pressure will not help solve the question but further complicate the situation,” he said. “The most important thing at present is for North Korea and the United States, the two major parties concerned, to do more positive things and send more positive signals,” Kong said (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, May 12). Back to top       Moscow Nuclear Site Secured With U.S. Assistance The U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration late last month completed significant security improvements at Russian nuclear research facility (see GSN, May 4). U.S. and Russian nuclear experts secured nuclear material at the Kurchatov Institute in Moscow, the agency said in a press statement (U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration release, May 6). Back to top       U.S. Ballistic Missile Test Expected in May The United States plans separate tests of an intercontinental ballistic missile and an antimissile interceptor this month, ITAR-Tass reported yesterday (see GSN, April 28). “The Russian side has been notified of all space launches planned by the Americans,” sources in the Russian Defense Ministry said yesterday. Integrated flight tests of the ground-based missile interceptor have been scheduled at the Ronald Reagan missile range on the Marshall Islands, according to one Russian defense official. The interceptor will be aimed at a target fired from Alaska, ITAR-Tass reported. U.S. officials also plan to launch a Minuteman 3 missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California to strike a target on the Kwajalein Atoll of the Marshall Islands, the official said (ITAR-Tass, May 11). Back to top       UC Partners with Bechtel for Possible Los Alamos Bid The University of California plans to collaborate with engineering firm Bechtel on a possible bid to maintain the management contract for the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, April 27). “This is a very strong move by the university to bring on an industrial partner and to continue our preparations for future management of Los Alamos,” said university spokesman Chris Harrington. Bechtel is working with the government to develop the planned Yucca Mountain radioactive waste storage facility in Nevada. Along with the university, it would work with several other private contractors on Los Alamos. The university has operated the nuclear weapons research center since the laboratory was created to work on the atomic bomb during World War II. University President Robert C. Dynes said he believes the Bechtel partnership would allow the university to more effectively manage Los Alamos. Regents Chairman Gerald Parsky said a bidding decision by the university depends on the Energy Department’s commitment to science and technology work at the laboratory. A description of the work the department wants done at Los Alamos is expected later this month (Michelle Locke, Associated Press/San Luis Obispo Tribune, May 12). Back to top

Former CIA Chief Says U.S. Unprepared For Bioterrorism Attack, Calls for Intelligence Review By David Francis Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Former CIA chief John Deutch told a Senate subcommittee yesterday that the country remains unprepared for a biological attack, and called for a thorough review of U.S. intelligence agencies’ ability to collect, analyze and disseminate intelligence on potential acts of bioterrorism (see GSN, May 3). “This threat is real,” said John Deutch, who also served as deputy defense secretary. “Our country should be doing more about it.” Deutch, who testified in front of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Bioterrorism and Public Health Preparedness Subcommittee, said the United States is vulnerable to a biological attack, and that preparedness needs to be a national priority. Deutch said near-term concerns need to be focused on anthrax and smallpox, and called for the resumption of smallpox vaccination for all Americans. Modern biology and biotechnology could produce a new class of bioterror agents that would be difficult to treat, Deutsch warned. He encouraged the development of a vigorous research and development programs that would allow for the quick production of new countermeasures if a new biological agent were created. The Bioshield legislation passed last year provides a framework for this research to occur, Deutch said. The federal government needs to take the lead in preparing the country, providing financial and technical assistance to state and local governments, Deutch argued. A plan integrating the federal response plan with local and state plans is also needed, Deutch said. This strategy should include: specific procedures for first responders in the event of a biological attack; emergency procedures for conducting quarantines and epidemic controls if a biological agent attack occurs; and improved biological agent detection, research and development and treatments. Deutch acknowledged the difficulty in forming such a plan, as it involves many different federal agencies under the direction of the Homeland Security Department. “DHS is still getting its bearings” as a young agency, Deutch said. The responsibility falls on other government agencies and Congress to ensure readiness. Deutch said a preparedness plan would also strengthen the public health infrastructure. A sound plan for bioterror preparedness provides an “intelligent design” for day-to-day operations of the public health system, he said. Other panelists echoed Deutch’s call for a more comprehensive public health infrastructure to respond to bioterror threats. Harvey Fineberg, president of the Institute of Medicine, argued the Bush administration must create a preparedness strategy that allows quick reaction to naturally occurring and deliberate biological incidents. He advocated dual-use research that can be used for scientific research and to combat bioterrorism, such as using avian flu epidemic modeling to stop the spread of an intentional smallpox outbreak. “By undertaking actions that do both, we do each better than we could do if we did not have this dual-purpose research in mind,” Fineberg said. Fineberg said increases in world population, frequent and rapid travel, global commerce and changes in land use, among other factors, contribute to human vulnerability to microbial threats. Vigorous research into countermeasures would not only strengthen the public health, but also provide tools to combat a bioterror attack. Scarce public health resources limit the ability of states to respond to biological outbreaks, whether they are natural or intentional, said Shelly Hearne, executive director of the Trust for America’s Health. Hearne pointed out that nearly one-third of states had federal bioterrorism funding decrease by more than $1 million dollars in 2004, and only six states are now adequately prepared to administer and distribute vaccines from the Strategic National Stockpile. The lack of scientists trained in creating bioterror countermeasures is also troubling, Hearne argued. Without capable scientists, health agencies will lack personnel knowledgeable in how to act in the event of an attack. Hearne said the federal government needs a broad “bio-game plan,” which should begin with a review of federal response capabilities. More extensive simulations and drills should be conducted to identify gaps in federal response. Liability limits for vaccine makers are also needed to encourage more drug companies to enter the vaccine market and conduct research on new vaccines, Hearne argued. A national summit on public health should be convened, bringing together these drug companies, hospitals and the federal government to identify necessary vaccines and countermeasures. “There are several basic pieces that need to be fixed,” Hearne said. “Part of what this subcommittee will deal with is making sure all of these pieces fit together.” Guenael Rodier, director of communicable disease surveillance and response at the World Health Organization, urged the United States to take the lead in preparing for an attack. The reach of a bioterror event or infectious disease outbreak will likely be worldwide, and the international health body would need U.S. support to stop its spread. Rodier called for better pathogen containment plans and improved early warning and response systems to ensure an attack or outbreak does not become an epidemic. Committee Chairman Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.) pledged to work with Senator Richard Burr (R-N.C.), chairman of the bioterrorism subcommittee, to explore legislative options. Enzi said he would review the Bioshield II legislation introduced recently by Senators Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), as well as legislation introduced by the Republican leadership in January. Enzi also indicated he is considering drafting his own bioterrorism legislation. Back to top       Man Sentenced 30 Years for Fake Anthrax Threat A federal judge yesterday handed down a 30-year prison sentence for a Connecticut man convicted of sending fake anthrax to a state prosecutor, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 11). Defense attorney Timothy Pothin sought leniency for his client, calling Noel Davila’s actions a “crime of stupidity.” “It’s more a cry for help and a cry for attention than it is a criminal act,” Pothin said. Davila, who is serving time for drug and weapons charges, mailed a letter from prison containing baby powder, claiming the substance was anthrax. Under the court’s ruling, the conviction for threatening to use a weapon of mass destruction will add 13 years to his current sentence. The 34-year-old suspected gang member is expected to be released from prison at age 65. “It is an unusual situation in that the supposed anthrax was not anthrax,” Judge Ellen Burns said. “Nevertheless, it was a threat” (Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press, May 12). Back to top

Disruptions Again Hinder Jordanian Trial Defendants standing trial in Jordan for plotting a chemical weapons attack shouted verses from the Koran yesterday in protest of being handcuffed in court, the Jordanian Times reported (see GSN, May 5). “Jihad is our only way and dying for God’s sake is our wish … the Koran is our constitution,” the defendants chanted. Nine suspects are in custody, while Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and three others are being tried in absentia for foiled strikes on sites believed to include the U.S. Embassy in Amman and the Jordanian intelligence agency. “We will fight with our blood and our souls for your sake Abu Musab, you our great leader … a hero of our religion,” the defendants shouted. The defendants were handcuffed for the hearing following an outburst last week in which suspect Azmi al-Jayousi threw his slippers and made a death threat against the three-judge panel. Lawyers for the defendants yesterday charged the handcuffs violated their clients’ rights. Judge Fawaz Buqour eventually ordered the handcuffs to be removed, according to the Times. An officer with Jordan’s Antiterrorism Force involved in the raid that captured Jayousi testified that the suspect surrendered easily when his home was stormed.   One suspect was killed in the raid on Jayousi’s house, and three died in a shootout with police at another house (Rana Husseini, Jordan Times, May 11). Back to top       Leak Investigation Stops Sarin Disposal at Umatilla Investigators with the Oregon Environmental Quality Department are trying to determine how sarin nerve agent leaked into a corridor at the Umatilla Chemical Depot, exposing two workers, The Oregonian reported today (see GSN, May 10). The cause of the leak has yet to be determined. Investigators have sealed off the contaminated area until the investigation is complete, and sarin disposal has stopped. The two workers were not sickened, according to a U.S. Army spokeswoman Mary Binder. Binder said destruction of rockets containing sarin could resume by the end of the week (Joe Rojas-Burke, The Oregonian, May 12). Back to top

India Successfully Tests Nuclear-Capable Missile India today test-fired a nuclear-capable missile designed for battlefield use, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, March 30). The Prithvi 1 missile has a range of 190 miles and can carry low-yield nuclear or conventional warheads. The test was successfully conducted at the Chandipur-on-Sea test site in eastern India. Last tested in March, the 28-foot surface-to-surface missile is undergoing review before being added to India’s arsenal (Agence France-Presse/Khaleej Times, May 12). Back to top

Senators Question Climbing Missile Defense Budgets By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — While the U.S. Missile Defense Agency has projected significant budget increases through the end of the decade that could rise further if it decides to pursue new capabilities, a key senator yesterday warned that future missile defense funding by Congress was not likely to climb (see GSN, April 22). “Funding for missile defenses may have reached its high-water mark in fiscal 2005,” said Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), chairing a Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee hearing on missile defense. “The administration is also contending with the global war on terror, [and] with all the competing priorities, resources are extremely limited,” he said. The agency received $8.8 billion for fiscal 2005. Stevens and other senators urged the agency to consider increased focus on systems the agency is developing and building for near-term deployment, rather than on multiple other technological approaches to missile interception it is considering for the future. “Are we clearly focused on near-term priorities? It seems to me that as you want to balance the budget under these circumstances, that we probably should be looking more to the near-term deployment priorities,” he said, addressing Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Henry Obering and U.S. Strategic Command Commander Gen. James Cartwright. “We’re trying desperately to reach that balance between the near-term priorities and the longer-term priorities that are involved in our development program,” Obering responded. “We cannot give up on the future though,” he said. Cuts Questioned Responding to Defense Department budget pressure, the Missile Defense Agency is planning a $1 billion cut from previous spending estimates for the upcoming fiscal 2006 — down to $7.8 billion. It projects, however, budgets subsequently climbing to more than $10 billion by fiscal 2009. To address the near-term cut, officials disclosed this year they had delayed some work on two longer-term programs, for an Airborne Laser and a Kinetic Energy Interceptor. The agency also budgeted, though, for increased efforts to develop new miniature kill vehicles and a new plan to possibly develop space-based interceptors. Stevens questioned an $80 million cut for fiscal 2006 to the agency’s most advanced development and deployment effort, Ground-based Midcourse Defense.  Senator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), meanwhile, questioned a $95 million cut to the agency’s most advanced medium-range missile defense system. The Aegis system is being deployed, but its development could be delayed a year by the cuts, Inouye said. “Why are we setting aside such a successful program where the outcome is almost predictable and spending it on other riskier programs?” he said. Similarly, Senator John Kyl (R-Ariz.), speaking at an event sponsored today by the National Defense University Foundation, said the agency should continue to pursue a “layered,” missile defense capability involving multiple systems. He said, though, “we need to rethink the pursuit of new systems that at best will only marginally improve the capability provided by our existing systems and may drain critical funding for these existing systems.” “I think because the resources are going to be constrained we’re going to have to prioritize more than we’ve done in the past,” Kyl said.   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.