U.S. Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) examines a Russian SS-18 ICBM slated for destruction in 2002. Russian officials said yesterday that Moscow is prepared to negotiate deeper cuts to its nuclear arsenal (Photo courtesy Lugar Web site). Russia Willing to Adopt Deeper Nuclear Cuts, Officials Say Two Russian officials said yesterday that Moscow is open to reducing its strategic nuclear arsenal to levels lower than required by a 2002 treaty with the United States (see GSN, May 5). Russia is “ready to reduce to 1,500 warheads or less,” said Lt. Gen. Vladimir Verhovtsev, deputy director of the Defense Ministry’s department of nuclear safety and security...Full Story

Canadian Forces Retool for WMD, Terrorism Threats By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Canada is beginning a major effort to bolster its domestic defenses against weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, two top Canadian defense officials said here yesterday (see GSN, April 1)...Full Story

U.S. Seeks to Improve Hazardous Rail Shipment Information Flow, Researches Structure of Tankers By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The United States is seeking to improve emergency responders’ access to information about hazardous materials on their regions’ rails, as well as its understanding of the structure and behavior of rail tankers, according to a plan the Transportation Department released yesterday (see GSN, April 20)...Full Story

	Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Canadian Forces Retool for WMD, Terrorism Threats By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Canada is beginning a major effort to bolster its domestic defenses against weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, two top Canadian defense officials said here yesterday (see GSN, April 1). Ottawa is sharpening its focus on domestic security generally and on nuclear, biological and chemical threats specifically, the directors general of policy planning and strategic planning in the National Defense Department said at a Heritage Foundation briefing. “For the first time, we are going to treat Canada as a theater of operations,” said Director General of Policy Planning Vincent Rigby. When the government last month released its first International Policy Statement in more than a decade, it used the defense policy component of the statement to preview a major retooling of the armed forces. The document lays out plans for a new “Canada Command,” similar to the U.S. Northern Command, and details Canada’s approach to “21st century threats,” which involves a new focus on special-operations, rapid-reaction and mission-tailored forces. The changes follow closely Canada’s establishment of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, which is analogous to the U.S. Homeland Security Department, and its creation of the post of national security adviser. An expansion of the 3-year-old Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense Company is a “major plank” in the new policy, according to Rigby. The department says in the statement that expansion of the company, which is one of several planned special operations “transformation initiatives,” is intended “to better protect Canadians at home, as well as Canadian Forces units deployed on domestic and international operations.” According to the policy statement, the armed forces will seek to improve the company’s abilities “to support civilian first responders in reacting quickly to a major incident in Canada” and to undertake “overseas operations, including as part of NATO missions.” Canada set up the anti-WMD unit shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States. The 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in Toronto also intensified Canada’s focus on chemical and biological threats, Director General of Strategic Planning Doug Dempster said at yesterday’s briefing. Prime Minister Paul Martin has called for a vote of confidence Thursday on his minority government. Rigby acknowledged “the government could fall” but said the outcome of the vote would not affect prospects for the defense changes, which he said have strong cross-party support. Policy Director Plays Down Missile Defense, Iraq “Glitches” Rigby played down U.S.-Canadian differences over the Iraq invasion and the U.S. missile defense program (see GSN, April 25). “They’re bumps along the road. They’re little glitches,” he said. Canada announced in February that it would not directly participate in the U.S. missile defense system (see GSN, Feb. 24). In August of last year, however, Ottawa agreed to amend the North American Aerospace Defense Command agreement to allow the U.S. missile defense program to draw on NORAD’s 30-year-old missile warning system. Asked by an audience member whether a periodic renewal next year of the overall NORAD agreement could affect last year’s amendment, Rigby indicated the new missile warning provision would not be a matter for debate. “We’re fully committed,” he said. “The NORAD amendment is the NORAD amendment, and we stand by it.” Back to top

Russia Willing to Adopt Deeper Nuclear Cuts, Officials Say Two Russian officials said yesterday that Moscow is open to reducing its strategic nuclear arsenal to levels lower than required by a 2002 treaty with the United States (see GSN, May 5). Russia is “ready to reduce to 1,500 warheads or less,” said Lt. Gen. Vladimir Verhovtsev, deputy director of the Defense Ministry’s department of nuclear safety and security. However, Moscow remains committed to pursuing “a situation where there are no new nuclear threats on our border,” said Anatoly Antonov, director of the Foreign Ministry’s department for security and disarmament. The Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty requires the United States and Russia to reduce their deployed strategic arsenal to less than 2,200 warheads by 2012. Some non-nuclear states have complained that the nuclear powers are not disarming quickly enough, the Associated Press reported today. Antonov said disarmament “depends on all of us,” rather than just two nations. “What about other countries that continue to work on nuclear weapons?” he said. “We’re telling our partners we can’t close our eyes” to developments on Russia’s borders and around the world, Antonov added. In answer to questions about why Russia has announced it is developing a new nuclear missile system if it is committed to arms reduction, Verhovtsev replied, “developing doesn’t mean possessing” (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 17). Back to top       Iran Expresses Pessimism on Nuclear Talks With EU An Iranian nuclear negotiator said today “there is not a very big chance for an agreement” in emergency nuclear negotiations Monday with the European Union, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, May 16). “The Europeans are not capable of acting independently from the extremists in the American administration,” said negotiator Sirus Naseri. “We don’t have a problem with the Europeans themselves, but when it comes to making a decision they want to coordinate with the Americans” (Agence France-Presse/Sify news, May 17). British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said yesterday he was “cautiously hopeful” of a resolution to the stalemate, the Associated Press reported. “What we seek is a pathway by which Iran is able to do that to which it is entitled, namely to generate electricity by means of nuclear energy,” Straw said. At the same time, France, Germany and the United Kingdom want “very clear objective guarantees that Iran is not using its nuclear program as a cover to build a nuclear weapons program,” he said (Ed Johnson, Associated Press, May 16). The United Kingdom believes Iran is “quite serious” about its recent threats to resume uranium enrichment-related activities, a senior British official yesterday. While the previous notion was that “the Europeans do the nice stuff and the Americans do the nasty stuff” in convincing Iran to abandon its nuclear work, now “we all have to contribute to an attractive path to Iran cooperating, and all have to contribute to wielding the big stick if Iran doesn’t cooperate,” said the official. “The Iranians are coming to terms with the fact that we are serious,” the official said (Alan Cowell, New York Times, May 16). Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice plans to discuss with Straw the possibility of referring Iran to the Security Council in Washington today, two U.S. officials told the Washington Post (Dafna Linzer, Washington Post, May 17). Even if Iran’s case is referred to the Security Council, however, several council members are seen as likely to oppose sanctions, Reuters reported. “If Vienna refers it to New York, we would be obliged to discuss it. But imposing sanctions would be another thing,” said council member Lauro Baja of the Philippines. “Perhaps the United States and the European Union would be satisfied if this was discussed in the council. The mere fact of a referral to the council might be sufficient to prod Iran to restate its position. This is a possibility that we cannot discount, but it is not likely,” Baja said (Irwin Arieff, Reuters, May 16). Back to top       Pyongyang Evades South Korea Proposal on New Round of Six-Party Nuclear Negotiations North Korean officials would not agree in talks with their counterparts from Seoul to a new round of six-party negotiations on Pyongyang’s nuclear program, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, May 16). South Korean Vice Unification Minister Rhee Bong-jo said he made an “important offer” to North Korea yesterday but received no reply today. A planned luncheon was canceled. “The talks are bogged down,” said a North Korean delegate. Washington said it had not been consulted on the South Korean proposal. “We’re not involved in any new proposal at this point,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said yesterday. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States and its allies agreed “the main thing is that the North Koreans would not escalate cost-free.” Washington was “getting a great deal of support for the notion that escalation on the part of the North Koreans is going to deepen their isolation a lot,” she said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 17). Seoul said yesterday it saw no decisive indications that North Korea was planning a nuclear weapons test, the New York Times reported today. “Our government has made it clear there is not any evidence that North Korea would make a test in the future,” said Lee Kyu-hyung, the spokesman for the South Korean Foreign Ministry. Some South Korean officials are quietly frustrated by the aggressive U.S. stand on North Korea, the Times reported. U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, traveling in Seoul, played down such differences between Seoul and Washington. “We’re in pretty good contact with all these governments,” Hill said. “We’re working pretty well and we don’t want to see a situation where this very tough problem causes difficulties in these relations” (Norimitsu Onishi, New York Times, May 17). Beijing today announced its opposition to a Japanese proposal to schedule talks on Pyongyang’s nuclear program without North Korea, AFP reported. “I don’t think it’s a good idea, because facts have proved that six-party talks are a realistic and effective way to peacefully resolve the nuclear issue,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, May 17). Meanwhile, North Korea reportedly asked China to arrange a visit by Secretary of State Rice to Pyongyang, AFP reported. “Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing conveyed the North’s request to Rice when the two spoke over the phone last Friday,” says a report yesterday in Japan’s Nihon Keizai Shimbun business daily. Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda, however, said that the State Department denied any such request, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 17). China today also denied the report. “This report is full of imagination but groundless in terms of fact,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, May 17). Documents recently released from the archives of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Hungarian government indicate that North Korea was attempting to acquire nuclear weapons technology from its communist allies by the early 1960s, the Associated Press reported today. “They are prepared for war. If a war comes in Korea, it will be waged by nuclear weapons, rather than by conventional ones,” states a February 1976 memo from the Hungarian Foreign Ministry. “By now the D.P.R.K. also has nuclear warheads and carrier missiles, which are targeted on the big cities of South Korea and Japan, such as Seoul, Tokyo and Nagasaki, as well as on the local military bases, such as Okinawa,” the document says. The memo is signed by a Hungarian official and goes on to say, “When I asked whether the Korean People’s Army had received the nuclear warheads from China, they replied that they had developed them unaided through experimentation, and they manufactured them by themselves.” “It was an idle boast. It’s just curious,” Kathryn Weathersby, senior associate at the Wilson International Center for Scholars, said yesterday. “My reading of it is first of all, it shows how eager they were to be able to claim that. That claim was untrue, but they wanted it to be true” (William Mann, Associated Press/USA Today, May 17). Back to top       Nuclear Scientists Question Their Role as Los Alamos National Laboratory Management Bids Near As the list of bidders grows to take over management of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the facility’s historic role as an institution of science is being questioned, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, May 13). The University of California’s management contract ends in September. Some scientists fear that if defense contractors Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman take control of the laboratory, the focus at Los Alamos will shift to weapon production and design. The Energy Department is expected to release this week a request for proposals outlining the type of work the department wants performed at the laboratory. Bids are due within 60 days. Important personnel would leave Los Alamos if the work is to focus on weapon production, warns Hugh Gusterson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientist who studies nuclear laboratories.   “I’m not sure that turning Los Alamos into a lackluster lab focused on manufacturing is a good thing for the country,” Gusterson said “If you’re trying to recruit a young Ph.D. from Princeton, and you tell them you’re working for the University of California and not a bomb shop, it really matters.” Gusterson, who last month visited the laboratory, said the possible shift away from science is hurting morale. “People were just stricken,” Gusterson said. “They’re worried that Los Alamos will increasingly become a manufacturing facility. A lot of people were talking about early retirement.” However, Lockheed and Northrop say science does not have to be sacrificed in the name of industrial production. “We don’t want to devalue the role of science and technology,” Lockheed’s Paul Robinson said.   “That’s what drives the innovation.” Robinson, who will head Lockheed’s bid for Los Alamos, is the former director of Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico Gusterson says the Energy Department must be careful not to stifle the innovations that have traditionally emerged from Los Alamos. “I’m sure it’s attractive to have a tightly run ship,” Gusterson said. “But you’ll get worse science” (William Broad, New York Times, May 17). Back to top

U.S. Researchers Await Final WHO Approval on Genetically Modified Smallpox Experiments The World Health Organization is expected to make a final decision soon on a proposal by U.S. scientists to genetically modify the smallpox virus for research purposes, the Guardian reported today (see GSN, Jan. 24). A technical committee of the organization has already approved the proposal, but a final decision by the full assembly is pending. WHO representatives are expected to address the matter during a 10-day annual meeting that began yesterday in Geneva. Supporters believe that genetic modification could lead to new vaccines and treatments for smallpox, according to the Guardian. Some scientists have expressed concerns that the proposed experiments could increase the chances that smallpox would be used in an act of bioterrorism. For example, while stocks of the virus are now kept in only two secure laboratories — one in Russia and the other in the United States — relaxation of the rules would allow small components of the smallpox DNA to be made available to several laboratories. Donald Henderson, former director of the WHO global smallpox eradication program, has objected to permitting greater numbers of researchers to conduct smallpox experiments. “The problem is that we have got a lot of people with a lot more talent working in biological laboratories around the world and a lot of them are very well-trained and the potential for mischief here is much greater,” he said (Boseley/Borger, Guardian, May 17). Back to top       Disagreement on Testing Delays CDC Investigation University of Nebraska scientist Steven Hinrichs delayed submitting vials of tularemia to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention until confident that the agency would use the most up-to-date testing methods to analyze them, the Boston Globe reported yesterday (see GSN, May 16). The delay is slowing a CDC investigation into how a lethal strain of tularemia ended up in a Boston University laboratory, where three workers were exposed to the bacteria while working on what they believed was a dormant sample of tularemia. “Obviously, it would be nice to have that all done now so we wouldn’t still be waiting,” said investigator Alfred DeMaria of the Massachusetts Public Health Department. “Any delay means a delay in getting answers.” The investigation into the lethal strain has involved the University of Nebraska because scientists there provided tularemia samples to Boston University for work on a vaccine.  The University of Iowa also delivered a vial of tularemia, the Globe reported. CDC tests showed that the Iowa strains were harmless, but the Nebraska strains contained some lethal elements. To determine where the lethal strains originated from, the federal agency examined samples from the University of Nebraska’s Lincoln campus and Boston University. The agency has expanded its investigation to samples from Hinrichs’ University of Nebraska laboratory in Omaha. Hinrichs said CDC officials told him there is a connection between the tainted samples and his laboratory. The agency requested samples for testing on Feb. 11, and he submitted them three weeks ago. Hinrichs said he was not trying to hinder the investigation by delaying sending the samples. The agency was using pulse-filled gel electrophoresis to test the samples. Hinrichs argues that another test offers a more accurate genetic signature. “It’s important for this study to be done the right way, and when it’s done the right way, we’ll be able to find out what happened,” Hinrichs said. “What I’m determined to do is find the truth. If it is a problem that began here, then we will deal with it. Our belief is it is not” (Stephen Smith, Boston Globe, May 16). Back to top

U.S. Seeks to Improve Hazardous Rail Shipment Information Flow, Researches Structure of Tankers By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The United States is seeking to improve emergency responders’ access to information about hazardous materials on their regions’ rails, as well as its understanding of the structure and behavior of rail tankers, according to a plan the Transportation Department released yesterday (see GSN, April 20). The plan’s release follows a January chlorine-tanker accident in Graniteville, S.C., that left nine people dead and comes amid efforts by Washington and other cities to limit hazardous rail shipments in their jurisdictions. A key legal underpinning of Washington’s bid, which a federal appeals court halted this month by granting an injunction requested by rail operator CSX, has been the premise that the U.S. government has failed to address the threat represented by rail tankers containing chlorine gas and other materials historically used as chemical weapons. “The rail industry transports roughly 1.7 million shipments of hazardous materials annually, ordinarily without incident, but the Graniteville accident demonstrates the devastating consequences when something does go wrong,” Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said yesterday as he announced the safety plan in Columbia, S.C. The department’s Federal Railroad Administration has asked the Association of American Railroads, an industry group, to implement a new system in which emergency responders can receive immediate notification of derailments detected by rail companies and download information about train contents from a secure Internet site. The railroad agency is also conducting new research on the structure of rail cars and their behavior during derailments and other incidents, with an eye toward improving the structural integrity of tank cars, according to the plan. The plan indicates the steps are being taken despite good performance to date by the industry. “Generally, the rail industry’s record on transporting hazardous materials is very impressive,” it reads. “During the period 1994 through 2004, a total of nine fatalities resulted from the release of hazardous materials in train accidents.” District of Columbia Council member Kathy Patterson said today that the new federal plan does not address the central concerns of the council, which fears terrorists could attack a chlorine tanker and release a massive chlorine cloud causing thousands of deaths. “It doesn’t address the risks of terrorism. It doesn’t address the risks of a deliberate attack on hazardous cargo,” said Patterson, a chief sponsor of the Washington ban legislation. Patterson said “it was good to see” the government’s request for rail companies to provide more information to local response agencies. She praised the new research into tanker structure as well but added, “There are a lot of things that there is technology to do today that they haven’t required the railroads to do.” A spokeswoman for CSX, the primary target of the Washington ban, said the company “shares the secretary’s commitment to rail safety,” is “focused on improving all aspects of rail safety” and has “worked closely with the DOT and its agencies in that regard.” “CSX transported more than 518,000 carloads of hazardous materials in 2004 with a 99.99 percent safety record,” spokeswoman Misty Skipper said today, “and we are certainly striving to make that 100 percent.” Back to top       Russian Authorities Thwart Potential Chemical Attack Russian commandos killed three militants, one of whom was suspected of planning a chemical weapons attack, ITAR-Tass reported today (see GSN, May 6). Russian authorities identified one of the individuals as Mumad Aliyev. He was carrying instructions on how to trigger a bomb and maps of Nazran, Grozny and Nalchik. Potential targets such as rail stations and water reservoirs were circled on the maps, ITAR-Tass reported. The two other individuals killed have not been identified (ITAR-TASS, May 17). Back to top       Newport VX Disposal Goes Forward Without Problems More than 540 gallons of VX nerve agent have been destroyed since disposal began May 6 at the Newport Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Indiana, the Terre Haute Tribune-Star reported (see GSN, May 16). “It’s going very well,” said project site manager Jeff Brubaker. The Newport facility is set to destroy VX stored in 1,169 1-ton containers. Brubaker said he expects VX destruction to speed up as the process moves along (Patricia L. Pastore, Tribune-Star, May 16).     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.