U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers use a mobile Gamma ray scanner to inspect cargo at the Port of Los Angeles (AFP photo/Lee Celano). A new report states that many nonfederal port personnel lack security clearances needed to receive federal information on WMD and other threats. Lack of Security Clearances Hinders Information-Sharing on Threats at U.S. Ports, GAO Says By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Nonfederal port officials’ lack of required security clearances is hampering the sharing of information on weapons of mass destruction and other threats, potentially putting the United States at greater risk from an attack, the Government Accountability Office said yesterday (see GSN, March 23)...Full Story

Little Indication Seen of Al-Qaeda Nuke Progress By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — While the prospect of nuclear terrorism is an urgent concern, there is no strong evidence that the world’s supposedly most worrisome terrorist group has successfully acquired the capabilities needed to produce a nuclear weapon, according to a report published this month...Full Story

Seoul-Pyongyang Talks Extended Officials from North and South Korea are set to extend their bilateral talks through tomorrow as Seoul continues to press its neighbor to rejoin the six-party nuclear talks, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 17)...Full Story

	Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Lack of Security Clearances Hinders Information-Sharing on Threats at U.S. Ports, GAO Says By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Nonfederal port officials’ lack of required security clearances is hampering the sharing of information on weapons of mass destruction and other threats, potentially putting the United States at greater risk from an attack, the Government Accountability Office said yesterday (see GSN, March 23). A new report from the audit office indicates Coast Guard coordination of port security communications among federal, state, local and private institutions has improved through the establishment of regional maritime security committees and Joint Operations Command Centers, both of which include federal and nonfederal members. The Coast Guard program through which nonfederal officials may seek clearance to view classified information such as that collected by federal intelligence agencies is facing obstacles, however, the auditor said. For nonfederal officials to receive information “in a more timely fashion,” the Coast Guard should begin formally tracking data on issuance of security clearances and should do more to inform nonfederal agencies about the clearance application process, the office said. The Homeland Security Department and Coast Guard agreed with the appraisal. “The major barrier hindering information-sharing has been the lack of federal security clearances for nonfederal members of committees or centers,” the report reads. The office said that only 28 of 359 regional committee members who needed clearance had submitted paperwork at the time of the study. As a result, the Coast Guard last month instructed its field offices to seek out nonfederal entities that need clearances. The lack of clearances could lead to poor sharing of vital information on weapons of mass destruction arriving in ports, the office said. “Cargo containers ... are a potential conduit for terrorists to smuggle weapons of mass destruction or other dangerous materials into the country,” it said. To address the matter, Representatives Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) and Tom Davis (R-Va.) are seeking to amend the fiscal 2006 Homeland Security authorization bill to set up an “assistance for security clearance desk” to aid state, local and private committee members. Transportation Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) also introduced port legislation yesterday, proposing a trust fund for security improvements that would be drawn from new fees on importers. The bill would establish new U.S. customs standards for cargo inspections at foreign ports and would require that shippers of certain materials give authorities 24 hours’ notice before loading ships at the ports. It also seeks to aid the resumption of sea commerce following any attack, by streamlining port clearance for shippers with security plans, as well as to expand the presence of the Joint Operations Command Centers and to make port security grants more risk-based. GAO Homeland Security Chief Sees “Challenges” in Port Protection The audit office’s top antiterrorism specialist yesterday told a Senate committee that U.S. ports “are vulnerable on many fronts” and face “challenges” in efforts to reduce vulnerabilities, to secure cargo and to increase “maritime domain awareness” — “a sufficiently informed view of maritime activities by stakeholders involved in security to quickly identify and respond to emergencies, unusual patterns or events and matters of particular interest.” “Considerable” effort has been put forth to improve security, including by assessing potential targets, developing vessel and port security plans, placing U.S. customs inspectors at overseas ports and increasing Coast Guard resources, GAO Homeland Security and Justice Issues Director Margaret Wrightson told the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. “The efforts we have reviewed over the past three years, many of which were quickly implemented to address pressing security needs, have encountered challenges that could significantly affect their success,” Wrightson said. In particular, she said, some agencies have embarked on new programs without sufficient strategic and personnel planning; coordination between the public and private sectors has at times been difficult; and demand for federal grants has outpaced supply amid dwindling port revenue and growing security costs. “Thus far, seaport security actions and homeland security activities in general lack performance measures to define what these activities are intended to achieve and measure progress toward these goals,” Wrightson added. “The future focus in applying resources and efforts also needs to incorporate an approach to identify and manage risk — that is, on assessing critical infrastructure, determining what is most at risk and applying sound measures.” Back to top

Little Indication Seen of Al-Qaeda Nuke Progress By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — While the prospect of nuclear terrorism is an urgent concern, there is no strong evidence that the world’s supposedly most worrisome terrorist group has successfully acquired the capabilities needed to produce a nuclear weapon, according to a report published this month. The principal and widely reported conclusion of Securing the Bomb 2005, published jointly by Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, is that the United States and other countries have made important efforts to secure nuclear weapons materials internationally, but that increased leadership is needed to accelerate the process to minimize the prospect of nuclear terrorism (see GSN, May 5). Less noted was its conclusion that so far al-Qaeda appears to have made little progress toward obtaining a nuclear weapon and in some instances has demonstrated naivete in its efforts. “In short, more than a decade after al-Qaeda’s pursuit of the bomb began, there is as yet no strong, publicly available evidence that the group or its followers have put together the capabilities that would be necessary to make a bomb,” the report says. “We wanted to make sure when we talk about the intentions, for which there is a good deal of evidence, we didn’t want to conflate that with the capability,” for which there is not, said Anthony Wier, a research associate at the center, in an interview today. Desire Has Exceeded Capability Al-Qaeda has sought to obtain a nuclear weapon at least since 1993 and has continued to show interest in obtaining such a capability, the report says.  It cites a 2003 religious ruling reportedly received by al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from a radical Saudi cleric that said use of nuclear weapons against U.S. citizens is permissible under Islamic law. It also notes reports that al-Qaeda operatives were seeking to obtain nuclear materials for either nuclear or radiological weapons as recently as this year. The report further cites a 2004 statement by former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer to a congressional committee that the CIA’s bin Laden unit in 1996 “acquired detailed information about the careful, professional manner in which al-Qaeda was seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.” “There could be no doubt after this date that al-Qaeda was in deadly earnest in seeking nuclear weapons,” Scheuer’s statement said, according to the report. The report nevertheless concludes, “At the same time, the limited evidence publicly available continues to suggest a broad gap between the capabilities that well-organized and capable terrorist groups could put together, and the capabilities they have demonstrated to date.” David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, said he generally agreed with that assessment. “It’s clear they haven’t gotten that far,” he said in an interview today. He added, though, that there remains uncertainty about any knowledge or equipment al-Qaeda may have obtained from reported contacts with two Pakistani scientists and said there are questions about possible al-Qaeda connections with the Pakistani proliferation network run by former nuclear weapons scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. “Don’t let the absence of information convince you there is none,” he said. The report similarly says: “Unfortunately, we simply cannot know what capabilities al-Qaeda and its followers may have managed to keep hidden — or may acquire in the future.” Wier added that when al-Qaeda fled its bases in Afghanistan, members might not have left their most important documents indicating attempts to obtain a nuclear capability. Many Documents “Extremely Naive” Public understanding of al-Qaeda’s efforts is informed partially by documents found by U.S. forces in Afghanistan in fall 2001 and by interviews of al-Qaeda personnel. “While a few of the documents recovered in Afghanistan do include some disturbing sophistication on nuclear subjects, many are extremely naive,” the report says. Other reports of al-Qaeda efforts to obtain nuclear or radiological materials also demonstrated a lack of sophistication, the report says. It says two al-Qaeda associates presented a senior leader on the “absurd” idea they could make a nuclear bomb using instructions downloaded from the Internet.   That leader, Abu Zubaydah, and another judged the idea not feasible and suggested pursuing a radiological weapon, the report says. Zubaydah, according to a U.S. government account, had described a radiological weapon as “explosives wrapped in uranium,” which the report says suggested “a rather low level of expertise, since uranium, which is not very radioactive, would be among the least deadly materials to use in a radiological dirty bomb.” The report similarly criticizes an effort by two al-Qaeda operatives, who were arrested in Germany in January, to obtain uranium probably meant for a radiological weapon. “The choice of uranium for that purpose again suggests a very rudimentary level of nuclear knowledge,” it says. Along similar lines, the March report from a U.S. presidential commission on weapons of mass destruction intelligence says the U.S. intelligence community in October 2001 concluded that “al-Qaeda was unlikely to have built a nuclear device or obtained sufficient fissile material for a nuclear weapon, and was “significantly less likely” to have acquired a complete nuclear weapon. The commission said documents found at al-Qaeda sites in Afghanistan indications of interest and discussions with two Pakistani scientists about what would be needed to build such a weapon. It said, though, the intelligence community had correctly assessed al-Qaeda did not have a nuclear weapon. It noted that in May 2002 technical experts from the CIA and Energy Department assessed there was no credible information that al-Qaeda had obtained fissile material or a nuclear weapon. Potential Viewed Real Despite such information, the Harvard report says the construction of a crude nuclear weapon is within the grasp of a terrorist group. It notes the U.S. intelligence community in October 2001 reportedly assessed that al-Qaeda was capable of making at least a crude nuclear weapon if it could acquire sufficient fissile material and that a CIA assessment then judged the group probably had the expertise and facilities to do so. Those judgments were made, though, before the al-Qaeda documents were seized in Afghanistan and before most of the al-Qaeda leaders now in custody were captured. The report also cites a conclusion last year by a high-level U.N. panel, which said “scientists have repeatedly warned of the ease with which terrorists could, with parts from the open market, assemble a simple gun-type nuclear device,” if they could obtain insufficiently secured fissile material. In addition, the Harvard report says a terrorist group could try to obtain a complete nuclear weapon from stockpiles in Russia or other nations. It cites news reports of a U.S. Defense Department suspicion that a Pakistani businessman currently detained by U.S. forces told an al-Qaeda operative “that nuclear weapons should be used against U.S. troops and suggested where these weapons might be obtained.” It also notes the much-reported meeting between two senior Pakistani nuclear scientists and bin Laden and aide Ayman al-Zawahiri during which nuclear weapons were discussed. “The nuclear stockpile in Pakistan is heavily guarded, but faces deadly threats from armed remnants of al-Qaeda in the country and senior nuclear insiders who have marketed nuclear bomb technology around the globe,” the report says. Albright, a physicist, says the likelihood that a terrorist group could obtain fissile material or a complete bomb and successfully detonate it is small, perhaps a 1-percent chance.  Obtaining a complete bomb, he says, would be probably less likely than obtaining the requisite fissile material, he said, and even with the fissile material, al-Qaeda could have difficulty building a bomb. “Certainly the main challenge for al-Qaeda, particularly if they don’t have a base, is to get the fissile material and then be able to go someplace where they could make a bomb. And there are some challenging steps for making a bomb that requires several kinds of expertise. It’s in my mind it’s not easy, even if they actually know how to make the bomb,” he said. Nevertheless, a 1-percent change should not be considered small enough, Albright said. “Would you get on a plane if the chance of an accident was one in a hundred?” he said. “You need to drive down the probability,” he said.  “When the intention is there, al-Qaeda has shown themselves a pretty capable organization. When they’ve wanted to do something, they’ve been patient, diligent, and they’ve gone after it,” Weir 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       Seoul-Pyongyang Talks Extended Officials from North and South Korea are set to extend their bilateral talks through tomorrow as Seoul continues to press its neighbor to rejoin the six-party nuclear talks, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 17). “We have made it clear that we cannot accept North Korea’s nuclear weapons, and if the principle of denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula is not followed, reconciliation and cooperation between the South and the North would be impossible,” said Vice Unification Minister Rhee Bong-jo, head of the South Korea delegation. South Korean media speculated that Seoul would offer significant levels of aid to the North in a new, undisclosed proposal aimed at reviving the talks, AP reported (Associated Press/USA Today, May 18). Pyongyang would not receive economic assistance unless it resumed six-party negotiations, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said today. “If North Koreans are concerned about their security and they’re concerned about their economy, their well-being, they should want to come to the talks,” said Hill (Rod McGuirk, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 18). China, meanwhile, encouraged the United States and North Korea to have bilateral discussions, AP reported yesterday. “China hopes these two countries can have contacts so they can build mutual trust and understanding,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan. “Such contacts conducted anywhere and any time would receive our congratulations” (Joe McDonald, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 17). U.S. Representative James Leach (R-Iowa), chairman of the House International Relations subcommittee on Asia, warned yesterday that Washington is increasingly feeling that China “has not been nearly helpful enough” in encouraging Pyongyang to resume six-party talks. “As the nuclear showdown with North Korea grows more acute, there could well be an American backlash against China if (it) is perceived as refusing to modify its role as North Korea's indispensable benefactor,” he said. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Evans Revere, however, played down Leach’s comments.  “We and the Chinese by and large see this issue through pretty much the same lens,” Revere said (Reuters, May 17). Elsewhere, European Union legislators are scheduled to make visit Pyongyang and Seoul in July, during which they are expected to discuss the nuclear issue with both North and South Korean officials, AP reported today. The delegation is expected in Pyongyang on July 9 and in Seoul on July 14, a European official said today (Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 18). Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi yesterday expressed caution about a March 10 proposal from the European Parliament to include the European Union in multilateral talks, AFP reported. “I welcome the EU’s interest,” Koizumi told a delegation from the Parliament, according to a Japanese official. “When it comes to participation in the six-nation talks, it is necessary to consult the countries concerned,” said the official (Agence France-Presse, May 17). Back to top       Los Alamos Chief Promises Safety Protocol Review The newly appointed head of Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has promised to look into complaints from scientists that paperwork on safety protocols are hampering their work, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, May 17). Robert Kuckuck, who assumed leadership at Los Alamos on Monday following the departure of former director Peter Nanos, also promised more open communication with scientists. Kuckuck is a physicist who spent seven years as deputy director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. He has pledged to improve business operations, security and safety and to establish trust and civility with Los Alamos employees, according to AP. “He’s the right person to put in at this time to help the laboratory get back on its feet,” said former Los Alamos director Siegfried Hecker. Hecker said he expects Kuckuck to improve working conditions for scientists. “It has become increasingly difficult for us to do work, and I think that’s most important in terms of morale,” Hecker said (Associated Press, May 17). Meanwhile, the University of California and Bechtel National have picked Lawrence Livermore chief Michael Anastasio to lead a potential bid for the Los Alamos management contract, AP reported.  The university now operates both laboratories. Its contract for Los Alamos ends in September, and several entities have expressed their intent to become the laboratory’s new manager. The UC Board of Regents has yet to decide whether to bid for control of the facility. A decision is expected once the Energy Department later this month outlines the job specifications for the laboratory (Michelle Locke, Associated Press/North County Times, May 18). Back to top       Uranium Not Secure at Oak Ridge, Group Says A U.S. watchdog group has argued that a uranium 233 stockpile at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee should be transferred to the nearby high-security Y-12 nuclear weapons plant as a safety measure against terrorism, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, March 30). A recent report by the Project on Government Oversight says the most significant security concern today “is that a suicidal terrorist group would reach its target at one of the facilities and, in an extremely short time, create an improvised nuclear bomb on site” (see GSN, May 9). Uranium 233, not used in any nuclear weapon arsenal, is believed to be contained in about 1,000 cans at Oak Ridge, is “just as potent and dangerous” as weapon-grade plutonium in developing a makeshift nuclear weapon, the organization said. “[Oak Ridge] was considered ‘self-protecting’ against theft because a person could die from handling it,” the report says. “However, 9/11 taught us that any terrorists are willing to die to inflict the maximum damage to their targets. The radioactivity can no longer be viewed as an obstacle because a terrorist would still have enough time to set off an (improvised nuclear device) before dying from the radiation.” The uranium stockpile should be transferred, said Oak Ridge Deputy Director of Operations Jeff Smith, because guarding the material is a “burden” that detracts from the laboratory’s scientific work. “It’s not because I fear something catastrophic is going to happen,” Smith said. “Our protection strategy for the facility right now is adequate,” he said. “We are fully prepared and in compliance with (the Energy Department’s) current expectations regarding security of the material.” The uranium 233 stockpile has been stored at Oak Ridge for decades, according to AP (Associated Press/Ashland City Times, May 17). Back to top

FDA OKs Treatment for Smallpox Vaccination Reactions The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved for use a medication that counters adverse side effects that could be caused by a smallpox vaccination, the Biodefense Funding Report reported yesterday (see GSN, May 17). Approval came nine months after manufacturer Cangene submitted the Vaccinia immune globulin to the agency for review. The company developed the treatment under its contract with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Biodefense Funding Report, May 17). Back to top

Additional Funds Designated for U.S. CW Disposal The Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday approved adding $20 million in fiscal 2006 for construction of chemical weapons neutralization facilities at Pueblo, Colo., and Blue Grass, Ky., the Lexington Herald-Leader reported (see GSN, May 13). If the full Senate approves the funding boost, the facilities would receive $53 million in 2006 rather than the previously anticipated $33 million (Lexington Herald-Leader, May 18). “This funding will be used to accelerate the destruction of chemical weapons at the Pueblo Depot and at Blue Grass,” Senator Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) said in a press release. “It will keep this program on track and moving forward.” “The Armed Service Committee recognized that, in order for the United States to meet its treaty obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, more money was needed at Pueblo for construction,” Allard added (Allard press release, May 16). Back to top       Pine Bluff Fire Halts Chemical Weapons Destruction A small fire halted weapons disposal for two days last week at the U.S. Army’s Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Arkansas, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 10). The fire occurred May 11 in the explosive containment room, Army officials said. Weapons disposal resumed on Friday. The Army says corrective measures have been taken, but the cause of the fire remains under investigation (Associated Press, May 17). Back to top

India Adds Short-, Medium-Range Missiles to Command India has added the short-range Agni 1 and intermediate-range Agni 2 missiles to its Strategic Forces Command arsenal, the Press Trust of India reported yesterday (see GSN, March 30; Press Trust of India/newindpress.com, May 17). Back to top

United States Needs Boost-Phase Missile Defense Against Threat From North Korea, Expert Says U.S. ground-based interceptors are unlikely to successfully intercept any North Korean missiles in midflight, a U.S. expert said yesterday (see GSN, May 3). The United States should develop a boost-phase missile defense system to counter such a threat, said Richard Garwin, a fellow at the Watson Research Center, United Press International reported. Placing interceptor rockets on cargo vessels within range of North Korea offers a better chance of destroying missiles launched by Pyongyang in the boost phase of flight, Garwin said. Interceptors deployed in silos in the Russian Far East could also be effective, he said (United Press International/M&C News, May 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.