The crater left by the 1962 U.S. nuclear test called Sedan. A dispute over U.S. nuclear testing policy is one issue preventing agreement at the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference this week (DOE Photo). No Agreement in Sight for Nuclear Treaty Conference By Jim Wurst and Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — The 2005 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference entered its final 48 hours this morning deadlocked over the inclusion of a footnote in its final document, after its three main committees failed to reach consensus on any substantive text (see GSN, May 25). ..Full Story

Iran Agrees to Extend Nuclear Suspension While Awaiting New EU Proposal Iran yesterday agreed to continue its suspension of sensitive nuclear activities in exchange for the promise of a detailed proposal of incentives from the European Union by early August, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, May 25)...Full Story

U.S., Russia Secure Latvian Uranium Through a joint effort between the United States, Russia, Latvia and the International Atomic Energy Agency, three kilograms of highly enriched uranium that could be used in a nuclear device was returned from Russia to Latvia, according to an Energy Department press release issued yesterday (see GSN, May 5)...Full Story

	Thursday, May 26, 2005

Pentagon Plans Response to Multiple WMD Attacks The Pentagon has implemented a plan to expand its support of civilian authorities in the event of multiple domestic attacks involving chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons, Inside Missile Defense reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 24, 2003). The Virginia-based Joint Task Force-Civil Support was previously the Pentagon’s only force dedicated to such a mission. “We have identified capabilities within our force structure — beyond Joint Task Force-Civil Support — in order to ensure that we could respond not simply to a domestic attack involving a weapon of mass destruction, but to multiple attacks at diverse locations, several cities perhaps at once where terrorists might have employed weapons of mass destruction,” Paul McHale, deputy assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense, said last week. “It is now the established policy of the Department of Defense that we will train and equip for the mission requirement of multiple WMD response,” said McHale. A Pentagon official familiar with the plan said each of the four armed services is expected to contribute capabilities to the effort. “It is spread across the entire joint force and refers to all components — active, guard and reserve,” said the official (Inside Missile Defense, May 25). Back to top

No Agreement in Sight for Nuclear Treaty Conference By Jim Wurst and Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — The 2005 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference entered its final 48 hours this morning deadlocked over the inclusion of a footnote in its final document, after its three main committees failed to reach consensus on any substantive text (see GSN, May 25).  The president of the conference, Ambassador Sergio de Queiroz Duarte of Brazil, announced this morning that the main committees would report to the plenary tomorrow morning. The plenary would then begin work on the final document, though it remains in doubt whether it will include any initiatives for reducing the nuclear threat until the next conference in 2010.  The current roadblock relates to the same problem the conference faced earlier this month in agreeing on its agenda. The question of  how to refer to the decisions of the 1995 and 2000 review conferences blocked agreement on the agenda until half way through the four-week session. According to diplomats, the United States opposed referring specifically to the agreements of those meetings, reflecting the Bush administration’s reversal of U.S. position on several issues, including support for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. U.S. officials do not wish this year’s conference to reaffirm those goals. A May 11 compromise agenda removed all references to previous conferences and included, as a footnote, a presidential statement that said, “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.”  That footnote has come back to haunt the drafting committee that will prepare the final document, which is slated to included the same presidential statement. The Nonaligned Movement, however, is seeking to add another statement to the final document that would refer to the 1995 and 2000 decisions and call on “all states parties to implement their obligations and commitments” from those conferences. The United Kingdom objected to the inclusion of that statement. The conference is now deadlocked over this issue. “I think it’s clear now that we’re not going to have a final text,” one European delegate said yesterday after the third committee finished its work without submitting a report. Delegates were working in three committees, each with a subsidiary panel. Main Committee I was working on disarmament, while Main Committee II addressed nonproliferation and regional issues and Main Committee III considered access to peaceful nuclear activities. By yesterday afternoon, the three committees had finished their work without any consensus texts. The committees had texts dealing with the substantive issues on their agendas, but the texts were heavily bracketed — indicating the lack of consensus on particular language. In some cases, the entire draft was bracketed.  Committee I agreed to submit a report, but with the caveat that members had come to no agreement on the text. Committee II decided on Tuesday not to submit its main and subsidiary body papers. Committee III was the last to give up, during a short meeting yesterday. The Egyptian delegation objected to submitting a report by the subsidiary panel on withdrawal from the treaty, onlookers said. The U.S. delegation then blocked submission of the main committee report. Each nation, not surprisingly, took some hits for its action. The European delegate said the Egyptians could offer no “reasonable justification” for blocking the subsidiary panel report, and that their argument kept shifting as the discussion progressed. “I feel really rather angry because this failure is essentially the work of one delegation and that’s the delegation of Egypt,” the delegate said. An Iranian envoy countered that the United States remained determined to block any references to nonproliferation commitments it made in the 1995 and 2000 review conferences. “The main problem is that the United States does not want to honor the commitment under 2000,” the Iranian official said. “Any reference to the language of the past will be objected to by the United States.” The drafting committee, which is charged with synthesizing the various committee reports into a final document for the conference, worked behind closed doors yesterday afternoon. However, without any reports from the main committees, the drafters could only deal with the most basic, technical matters of the conference, such as how many meetings were held and who chaired the various committees.  “This is the drafting committee. The problem is, what are they drafting?” said Rebecca Johnson, executive director of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy. The main committee reports, such as they are, are not scheduled to be submitted to the plenary until tomorrow morning. In contrast to previous review conferences that went deep into the night on the final day, delegates said they expected the meeting to be gaveled to a close promptly at 6 p.m. tomorrow. Johnson said it appears the conference has deteriorated into a series of “tit-for-tat” objections designed to frustrate other nations. The United States, Iran and Egypt have been the most public antagonists. Officials from Washington and Tehran are looking to protect their nuclear interests, while the Egyptians are protesting U.S. officials’ rejection of commitments made by the last administration, Johnson said. The great number of the 188 treaty states “are being held hostage” by the maneuvering of a few nations, she said. “Both sides are trying to score points and it’s a very dangerous game that they’re playing because they’re undermining security and nonproliferation,” Johnson said. Back to top       Iran Agrees to Extend Nuclear Suspension While Awaiting New EU Proposal Iran yesterday agreed to continue its suspension of sensitive nuclear activities in exchange for the promise of a detailed proposal of incentives from the European Union by early August, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, May 25). “From here on it will take us some weeks to make concrete proposals, particularly with the goal of putting in place a civilian [nuclear] program in Iran — exclusively civil — but other issues as well,” said French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier. The meeting yesterday in Geneva was the first in which the European side committed to formulating a concrete plan to assist Tehran in obtaining nuclear reactors, said top Iranian negotiator Hassan Rohani. “The EU has offered to give Iran a detailed proposal. ... We believe we could reach a final agreement within a reasonably short time,” said Rohani (Reuters, May 25). “What they put forward made it hard for us to say no,” one Iranian negotiator told the Times. During the meeting, Rohani told European officials that if they expected a permanent freeze on uranium enrichment by Tehran, they were “going in the wrong direction,” according to one Iranian negotiator. Rohani asked more than once during the meeting for specific details of the European offer. In response, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer asked for patience, adding that Iran would lose nothing by waiting two months, according to the Times. Asked what “carrots,” or incentives, the EU side had offered to Iran, a European negotiator replied, “There were no carrots.” Iran “reaffirmed its commitment to not seeking nuclear weapons,” said British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, adding that Iran’s right to a civilian nuclear program remained intact (Elaine Sciolino, New York Times, May 25). “What [the Iranian commitment] does is ensure that Iran continues with its suspension of processing of nuclear materials,” said Straw when asked to summarize the agreement, Reuters reported. The outcome of the meeting was positive, said Joseph Cirincione, head of nonproliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “Iran has agreed to wait until after [its] presidential elections … for the EU proposal. And it has expressed a willingness to compromise,” said Cirincione. Washington reaffirmed support for the negotiations, but reiterated its suspicion of Tehran, according to Reuters. “Iran hid its nuclear activity from the international community for two decades. That is why we are skeptical about their activities,” said White House spokesman Scott McClellan (Reuters, May 25). Meanwhile, the World Trade Organization today agreed to begin accession talks with Iran, Reuters reported. Iran applied to join the organization in 1996, and the body first considered its application in May 2001. Over the course of the following 22 General Council meetings, Washington consistently blocked Iran’s candidacy. A senior U.S. official told Reuters last night that Washington would drop its opposition as a sign of support for the EU negotiations. “We’re not going to block it, in support of the diplomacy of our European friends ... That is the plan,” the official said. “It was long overdue, I think it was positive,” Mohammad Reza Alborzi, Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, said of the agreement. “It will open new doors to trade cooperation” (Richard Waddington, Reuters, May 26). Back to top       U.S., Russia Secure Latvian Uranium Through a joint effort between the United States, Russia, Latvia and the International Atomic Energy Agency, three kilograms of highly enriched uranium that could be used in a nuclear device was returned from Russia to Latvia, according to an Energy Department press release issued yesterday (see GSN, May 5). The weapon-usable uranium had been supplied to Latvia by the Soviet Union for use in a research reactor in Salispals, near Riga. The reactor was shut down seven years ago, and security over its fuel was improved with the help of the Energy Department. The effort was part of the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Global Threat Reduction Initiative, which has returned 57 kilograms of highly enriched uranium to Russia from former Eastern-bloc countries and 47 kilograms from Serbia. “The recovery, return and eventual elimination of highly enriched uranium is an important component of the administration's Global Threat Reduction Initiative campaign to reduce the threat posed by dangerous nuclear and radiological material worldwide,” said agency chief Linton Brooks. “We applaud the strong leadership of Latvia for taking measures to secure this material and working cooperatively with the United States, Russia and the IAEA to successfully return it to Russia” (Energy Department release, May 25). Back to top       House Passes Defense Bill By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON ð— The U.S. House of Representatives yesterday overwhelmingly passed a $441.6 billion fiscal 2006 defense authorization bill, which includes $7.8 billion for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency and funding for studying a new nuclear weapons capability. The bill contains no major nuclear weapons or missile defense-related amendments to the version passed by the House Armed Services Committee last week (see GSN, May 19). The Missile Defense Agency budget, in the bill, took nearly a $1 billion reduction from what it had planned for the next fiscal year — part of a budget reduction plan announced by the Pentagon in December that followed a quiet budget increase (see GSN, April 22). The Bush administration’s plans for additional interceptor missiles for its Ground-based Midcourse Defense system were partially approved, with money authorized for 10 additional missiles to be fielded in 2006 and 2007, but for only five of 10 requested for fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009.  In addition, $100 million was authorized for an additional flight-intercept test of that system “as soon as practicable.” Nuclear Weapons The legislation authorizes $4 million for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator program, to resume a major feasibility study stopped by Congress last year. The study would be moved to the Air Force from the Energy Department. It also includes $4.5 million to fund a study on deploying such a weapon on B-2 stealth bombers. The Senate version of the bill does not include money for the latter study and authorizes $4 million for the Energy Department to resume the feasibility study. The House bill also authorizes $9.4 million for the Reliable Replacement Warhead program, an effort to design long-lasting nuclear warheads without the need to conduct explosive nuclear tests. The administration had requested $9.3 million.  House appropriators this month approved $25 million for that program (see GSN, May 25).  The total amount authorized by bill was $19.5 billion above what was approved by Congress for the current fiscal year. In addition to approving the regular Pentagon budget, the bill authorizes $49.1 billion in “supplemental” appropriations, principally for Defense Department spending on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Back to top       Pakistan Seeking Several Dozen F-16 Fighters Pakistan has inquired about purchasing up to 75 new F-16C/D Falcon warplanes since Washington announced in March it would resume arms sales to Islamabad, Reuters reported today (see GSN, March 29). U.S. military aircraft sales to Pakistan were previously banned for many years in response to Pakistani efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Pakistani officials have also asked about purchasing 11 used F-16s, said Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kohler, head of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which heads up U.S. government-to-government arms sales. The numbers indicate that Pakistan wants to make the F-16 the foundation of its combat aircraft fleet, said Kohler, which would be “very ambitious in terms of regional strategy and very costly.” Congress could be notified of a deal late this summer, with deliveries likely three years later, Kohler said (Jim Wolf, Reuters, May 26). Back to top       New Model Gives More Accurate Fallout Predictions A new modeling tool has been developed that allows for more accurate predictions of the aftermath of a nuclear explosion, Congressional Quarterly reported yesterday (see GSN, May 10). The model, created by the Federation of American Scientists and available on the organization’s Web site, is able to take the size of a weapon and its method of delivery into account when projecting damage.  Scenarios can be predicted for Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles and Reno, Nev. “This is just a very graphic way to let anyone see what the effect of a bomb on his city would be,” said Ivan Oelrich, strategic security project manager at the Federation (Sean Madigan, Congressional Quarterly, May 24). Back to top       University of California Regents Approve Los Alamos Bid University of California students are protesting a decision made yesterday by the school’s board of regents to bid for the contract to operate Los Alamo National Laboratory, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 20). “UC should take this opportunity to get out of the bomb-making business,” Garrett Wright, University of California at Berkley law student told the regents. Other students chanted “We vote no!” during the regent’s meeting. However, regents argued the university had an obligation to keep control of Los Alamos. “The nation needs us to do this job,” said Regent Peter Preuss. Final approval of the decision must be given by the full board of the university, which is expected to meet today. If approved, the university will complete with a joint bid from the University of Texas and Lockheed Martin. The University of California has run the New Mexico laboratory since it was commissioned during World War II to create a nuclear bomb. This is the first time control of the laboratory will be up for grabs (Michelle Locke, Associated Press/Baltimore Sun, May 26). Back to top

Cause of Umatilla CW Fire Still Not Known Investigators have not yet determined the cause of fires that occurred during the destruction of sarin-filled M55 rockets at the Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Oregon, the Hermiston Herald reported yesterday (see GSN, May 19). “We are trying to narrow down the possible causes,” said Rick Kelly, a spokesman for Washington Group International, the site contractor who is leading the investigation. “The task force will be looking at the rockets, the design of the building and the design of the equipment.” Kelly said investigators are drafting a report on the incidents, which caused destruction at the facility to stop, and will send it to the Army soon. “Once it goes to them, it will be up to them to give us the go ahead and start,” Kelly said (Karen Hutchinson-Talaski, Hermiston Herald, May 24). Meanwhile, the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency yesterday opened its own investigation into Umatilla fires as well as fires at the Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Arkansas, which is also destroying M55 rockets, according to an agency press release (see GSN, May 20). The purpose of the inquiry is to determine if there is a connection between the fires, according to agency director Michael Parker. “We’ve had these situations before and have learned from them. The current frequency might be indicative of a potential change in something in the stockpile,” Parker said in a statement. “At this point, we don’t know what it is or if the frequency will continue. But we still need to investigate and get to the bottom of any issue that could affect our ability to safely destroy the weapons or to maintain confidence within our communities.” No time frame is given for completion of the investigation (Chemical Weapons Agency release). The investigation of the Umatilla and Pine Bluff facilities has raised concerns in Alabama, home of the Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, the Birmingham News reported today (see GSN, April 28). Army spokesman Mike Abrams said similar incidents could occur at Anniston — which shares the same design as the Umatilla and Pine Bluff facilities — when it begins destruction of the M55 rockets next year (Katherine Bouma, Birmingham News, May 26). Back to top

U.S. STRATCOM Chief Backs Limited Missile Defense The U.S. Strategic Command chief has said that long-range missile defenses are necessary to deter potential enemies even if the defenses are not foolproof and take away resources from other areas, Inside Missile Defense reported yesterday (see GSN, May 12). Missile defense “ought to be discussed, it ought to be debated, which is what Congress is doing,” James Cartwright, Marine Corps general and head of U.S. Strategic Command said recently.   “But I think you have to think about the regret factors in this one. If something were to happen [involving] a weapon of mass destruction in the United States, what price would you pay to make sure it didn’t happen again? And [don’t] you really want to get into a preventative rather than a reactive state?” Cartwright used North Korea as an example of why robust missile defenses are necessary. He argued that North Korea could launch missiles at the western United States, and expressed concern that Pyongyang was belligerent in diplomatic negotiations and cruel to its people. “In light of that, what would you do to create the environment where they wouldn’t just get up in the morning and decide to lob some weapon of mass destruction at the United States?” asked Cartwright in a second interview.   “To me, you’ve got to have a credible offense and defense. The offense is not enough to bother them.” Strong missile defense also could give confidence to U.S forces overseas, Cartwright said. “You wouldn’t send Lance Cpl. Cartwright into the streets of Mogadishu without body armor [or with] no weapon,” Cartwright explained. “When you put the two together, it really changes the calculus of Lance Cpl. Cartwright because he feels safer. So he’ll go into harm’s way a little more freely.” Cartwright added that a nuclear strike would take a great financial toll on the United States (Elaine Grossman, Inside Missile Defense, May 25). Back to top       U.S. Air Forces Gets Final Early Warning Satellite The final Defense Support Program satellite, designed to provide early warning of worldwide missile launches, was delivered to the U.S. Air Force earlier this month, Inside Missile Defense reported yesterday (see GSN, May 20). Northrop Grumman Corp. announced delivery of the 23rd satellite in the DSP series to Cape Canaveral Air Station May 10. The DSP satellites are slated to be replaced over time by a new constellation of sensors, the Space-Based Infrared System (Inside Missile Defense, May 25). First launched in 1970, the final DSP satellite is expected to be launched this fall, the company announced. “This upcoming launch of the last DSP is a major milestone,” said program manager Peggy Paul. “This program has produced many technical innovations, provided the nation with a reliable missile-warning system and has honed the expertise of several generations of engineers and technicians who have contributed to other Northrop Grumman programs” (Northrup Grumman release, May 10). Back to top

Board Denies Utah Appeal on Nuclear Waste Site A nuclear safety board yesterday denied a Utah appeal of a Feb. 24 decision to go ahead with plans for a spent nuclear fuel storage facility in Skull Valley, Utah, the Tooele Transcript-Bulletin reported Tuesday (see GSN, March 7, 2002). In February, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, an independent arm of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, rejected the state’s claim that there is a substantial risk that an F-16 aircraft traveling through Skull Valley from nearby Hill Air Force Base could rupture a fuel storage cask and cause a radiological release (Tooele Transcript-Bulletin, May 24).   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.