A U.S. Army Audit Agency investigation could not confirm whether the Stryker Armored Vehicle (above), as well as Apache and Comanche helicopters, could operate in areas contaminated by a WMD attack (U.S. Army photo). Pentagon Investigators Find Problems with Army WMD Detection Systems A U.S. Defense Department review of records at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah has found after that three Army reconnaissance systems designed to detect nuclear, chemical or biological contamination might not operate in affected areas, the Deseret Morning News reported yesterday (see GSN, April 5). ..Full Story

IAEA Provisions in U.N. Reform Act Limit U.S. Nonproliferation Funding to New Nuclear Programs By David Francis Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.N. Reform Act recently passed in the U.S House of Representatives requires that funds provided to the International Atomic Energy Agency by the United States for safeguards inspections are used primarily to monitor countries with new nuclear programs (see GSN, March 21). ..Full Story

Security Tight as G-8 Summit Prepares to Open By Greg Webb Global Security Newswire GLENEAGLES, Scotland — Youthful protesters and a predictable drizzle of Scottish rain greeted world leaders today as they arrived for the 2005 summit of the Group of Eight nations. U.S. President George W. Bush arrived in Glasgow this afternoon and planned to reach this scenic golf club and resort in time for dinner with Queen Elizabeth II (see GSN, June 28)...Full Story

	Wednesday, July 6, 2005

Terrorism Numbers Skyrocket Under New Definition The number of terrorist attacks in 2004 around the world increased nearly five-fold over older numbers for the year under a new, broader definition used by the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, April 27). A new database is “the most comprehensive U.S. effort to date to track terrorist incidents worldwide,” said the center’s interim director, John Brennan. Terrorism figures released in April counted 651 significant terrorism attacks worldwide for 2004. The new terrorism figures show 3,192 strikes last year, according to AP. The updated definition of terrorism includes politically motivated attacks by domestic groups, while the previous definition required that victims include at least one citizen of another country before an incident would be defined as a terrorist attack. In addition, only attacks resulting in more than $10,000 damage or serious injuries fell under the old definition. The new designation includes all injuries and all levels of damages (Katherine Shrader, Associated Press/Arizona Daily Star, July 5). Back to top       Pentagon Outlines Plans for Homeland Defense For the first time since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks the U.S. Defense Department has approved a new strategy for protection of the United States, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, June 15). The strategy, contained in a 40-page document called Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support and approved last month, says a more “active, layered” defense is necessary and that soldiers must be prepared to deal with large numbers of casualties arising from “multiple, simultaneous attacks” on U.S. soil. While the Pentagon did not seek additional authority to use troops domestically, the strategy increases the chances that soldiers would be called upon if National Guard and civilian forces were overwhelmed, the Post reported.  The document, signed June 24 by acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, is being used to organize troops, develop weapons and assign missions.  Naval and air forces will continue to patrol entryways into the United States under the strategy. Naval efforts have lagged behind efforts to secure the skies, and air defenses still require improvements to stop cruise missile and pilotless aircraft, according to the Post. “Modular reaction forces” staffed by National Guard personnel are also to be developed to deal with casualties after an attack, although the forces would not be limited to this role.  The strategy also calls for intelligence changes, including the development of “a cadre” of terrorism specialists to be deployed to “interagency centers” to work with personnel from the FBI and other domestic agencies on counterterrorism and homeland defense. This is a departure from the Cold War when Pentagon analysts primarily worked with the State Department and other intelligence agencies “The move toward a domestic intelligence capability by the military is troubling,” said Cato Institute senior editor Gene Healy. “The last time the military got heavily involved in domestic surveillance, during the Vietnam War era, military intelligence kept thousands of files on Americans guilty of nothing more than opposing the war. I don't think we want to go down that road again” (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, July 6). Back to top

Pentagon Investigators Find Problems with Army WMD Detection Systems A U.S. Defense Department review of records at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah has found after that three Army reconnaissance systems designed to detect nuclear, chemical or biological contamination might not operate in affected areas, the Deseret Morning News reported yesterday (see GSN, April 5). The equipment, along with the vehicles that carry the systems, failed certain tests. Pentagon investigators could not determine if upgrades were made and tested before the systems were deployed, according to the Morning News.  Investigators could also not confirm that Apache and Comanche helicopters, Stryker armored vehicles and equipment being developed could operate in areas contaminated by a WMD attack. “As a result, the risk for loss of life and equipment could be significantly increased through the use of mission-essential systems that may not be fully survivable or sustainable in contaminated environments,” states a March 28 report by the U.S. Army Audit Agency. The Army told the Morning News that it is working to correct the problems. The audit found that a 2000 Army directive calling for testing to determine whether “all mission-essential [weapons] systems were capable of surviving the nuclear, biological and chemical environments in which they may operate” was not followed. “Mission-essential Army systems weren't fully assessed for survivability and operation,” the audit found. Three of the six systems tested failed tests but were not subsequently improved, the Morning News reported. The three other systems did not have criteria to allow testing. Systems that did not meet Army standards in testing were the FOX Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance System; the Biological Detection System; and the Stryker family of armored combat vehicles.  In the case of the Biological Detection System, a study done between 1999 and 2001 found that “the system wasn't expected to meet the decontaminability and hardness requirements.” The study recommended “configuration changes and corrective actions.” However, officials at the Army Test and Evaluation Center recommended the system be released, on the basis that it was “generally equivalent to that of other wheeled vehicle systems.” Auditors also found that the FOX and Stryker did not meet criteria for use in areas contaminated with biological or chemical agents or radiation. The Apache and Comanche helicopters, along with the Future Combat System weapons being developed, do not have criteria to test survivability in contaminated areas, inspectors said. The audit discovered that the Army “typically stated that systems must be nuclear-, biological- and chemical-survivable without further explanation or reference.” The Army also relied heavily on computer models and engineering studies instead of testing against live agents. “The Army built a test facility at the West Deseret Test Center and Dugway Proving Ground, which it completed in September 1997 at a cost of about $24.6 million. The Army has not used the facility to conduct tests of a complete system. Instead, engineering studies and analyses were used almost exclusively to assess the survivability of systems in contaminated environments,” according to the audit. Recommendations to correct the problems were not implemented. The Army Audit Agency said these recommendations are under review. Among the recommendations were appointment of officials to oversee survivability testing; reports on survivability programs and clearer survivability requirements (Lee Davidson, Deseret Morning News, July 5). Back to top       Security Tight as G-8 Summit Prepares to Open By Greg Webb Global Security Newswire GLENEAGLES, Scotland — Youthful protesters and a predictable drizzle of Scottish rain greeted world leaders today as they arrived for the 2005 summit of the Group of Eight nations. U.S. President George W. Bush arrived in Glasgow this afternoon and planned to reach this scenic golf club and resort in time for dinner with Queen Elizabeth II (see GSN, June 28). After the royal meal, world leaders are set to take on a number of issues, including improving joint efforts to combat WMD proliferation.  Two working sessions are scheduled for tomorrow for the heads of the G-8 powers:  Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom. International security experts are particularly looking for progress on a key legal dispute that has hampered U.S. support for programs to dismantle and secure WMD materials in Russia (see GSN, July 1). The question of how much liability protection should be afforded to U.S. personnel and contractors in Russia has already disrupted efforts to employ former Soviet weapons scientists and to dispose of nuclear-weapon-usable plutonium. The G-8 leaders, however, are expected to focus their talks on international debt relief for poverty-stricken regions such as Africa.  Antiglobalization protesters from around Europe have vowed to disrupt the meeting, which continues through Friday.  In recent years, similar groups have protested major international meetings, including those of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, both headquartered in Washington. Law enforcement officials here appear to have adopted the methods practiced in Washington: turn out in massive numbers, allow limited protests in designated areas far from the targeted meeting and react firmly to the first sign of violence. In an effort to make travel here difficult, all train and bus traffic to the summit area has been canceled and all the roads surrounding the site have either been closed entirely or are controlled by police checkpoints.  Police have exceeded their vehicle capacity and can be seen packed into rental vans throughout the area. Despite these official efforts, demonstrators boarded private buses and cars today to get as close as possible to Gleneagles, and their demonstrations successfully closed roads for short periods.  The action followed a significant Edinburgh protest Monday that turned physical as demonstrators clashed with police armed with plastic shields and nightsticks.  About 30 protesters were jailed at the time and at least three more were arrested today in additional skirmishes. Many businesses in the capital city have chosen to chosen to remain closed this week and some have boarded up their windows. Some vandalism was reported today in Stirling, about 10 miles from the summit site. Most demonstrators appeared to be unaware of the G-8's nonproliferation efforts and were focused on an anti-U.S. agenda. “I came to criticize the fact that these countries are producing more and more weapons to make war,” said one demonstrator on the Gleneagles security perimeter, explaining why he traveled from Germany.  “These nations prevent us from moving toward peace in the world.” Plus, “this is good place for making holiday,” he added as he asked for anonymity. Back to top       Russian Parliament Approves Agreement With Canada on WMD Disposal, Security Assistance The Russian parliament today ratified an agreement under which Canada is set to provide support for WMD disposal and security projects, ITAR-Tass reported (see GSN, July 1). Canada has pledged to assist with construction of a chemical weapons disposal facility in Shchuchye and with scrapping of decommissioned nuclear submarines in the Arkhangelsk and Murmansk regions, according to ITAR-Tass. Ottawa would also provide support for nuclear security upgrades in Russia (ITAR-Tass, July 6). Back to top

IAEA Provisions in U.N. Reform Act Limit U.S. Nonproliferation Funding to New Nuclear Programs By David Francis Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.N. Reform Act recently passed in the U.S House of Representatives requires that funds provided to the International Atomic Energy Agency by the United States for safeguards inspections are used primarily to monitor countries with new nuclear programs (see GSN, March 21).  Nuclear weapons experts fear that the language could be interpreted to exclude countries like Iran that have long-established nuclear programs, and that the reform legislation might be viewed as a heavy-handed attempt by the United States to wield its influence. However, a House Republican aide familiar with the legislation said the funding language includes countries that use existing nuclear facilities for uses not approved by the U.N. nuclear watchdog and would focus nonproliferation efforts on countries that do not comply with IAEA regulations. “If Iran starts to pursue weaponized nuclear reactors, that would be initiating a new program,” the aide said. “It’s not a sanctioned use of nuclear power under IAEA rules or guidelines.” “A lot of what the language in this section did was strengthen what was already there to focus the efforts of IAEA to catch programs like North Korea and Iran and places where they weren’t supposed to have programs,” the aide added. The section also dictates that U.S. funding for the U.N. agency is voluntary and must be primarily used for nonproliferation and nuclear verification activities as opposed to the development of nuclear energy. Countries that support terrorism or have not dismantled nuclear facilities as mandated by the U.N. agency would not be eligible for U.S funding. In addition, nations under investigation for breach of compliance with IAEA regulations and countries violating their IAEA obligations would also be barred from receiving U.S. funding for nuclear science. The goal of using voluntary funding primarily for nonproliferation activities is to make the International Atomic Energy Agency “more accountable, more efficient, more results oriented” to ensure countries like North Korea do not develop weapons, according to the aide. Since 2001, the United States has voluntarily contributed approximately $50 million a year to the agency, according to the nonprofit Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation. The aide was not familiar with a Senate version of the bill, which is to be drafted by members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “We’re working with the committee members to try to come up with a bill that we will have a hearing on in July,” said Andy Fisher, spokesman for committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). Language Called Ambiguous, Heavy-Handed Some weapons experts said they fear the language in the House bill is too vague and that other U.N. members would perceive the legislation as arrogant. “It’s clumsily written,” said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association. “It should be up to the IAEA to determine where and how and why and how safeguards should be focused rather than have Congress dictate where they should go. IAEA is in a better position to determine where inspections should take place.” Kimball said he also worries that the bill could be viewed at the United Nations and by foreign countries as an attempt for Congress to influence the agency. “The larger question is to what extent is that larger bill going to affect the credibility and the ability of the U.S. to achieve these objectives” of curbing nuclear ambitions. “Will it be perceived as an arrogant attempt to dictate what the U.N. and IAEA should do?” The lack of specificity in the language also concerned Rose Gottemoeller, a nuclear policy adviser in the Clinton administration and senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.  “What are they trying to accomplish?” she said. “It could be tighter, it could be cleaner, it could be neater about what they’re trying to do.” “They should take another careful look at it and really do some consultations with experts,” she said, adding that she doubted the language would significantly change IAEA operations. In addition to the changes to safeguard inspection funding, the bill also calls on the United States’ IAEA representative to work to create a compliance office at the agency. This office would be made up of technical experts charged with monitoring compliance to and recommending penalties for breaches of IAEA regulations. The U.S. ambassador would also establish a Special Committee on Safeguards and Verification, which would seek to improve the agency’s ability to monitor and enforce compliance to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and IAEA statutes. This committee would also work to detect undeclared nuclear activity in member countries, according to the U.S. legislation. Penalties for noncompliance are also included in the bill. Countries being investigated for violating agency regulations would not be permitted to vote when the IAEA Board of Governors votes on its case. Noncompliant member nations could also not receive technical assistance for civilian nuclear programs and could not host IAEA meetings. Finally, the bill would require IAEA officials to provide the United States with a detailed annual report on how U.S. money is spent on nuclear inspections. Back to top       Iran “Not Very Optimistic” About EU Nuclear Talks Iran’s top nuclear official said yesterday that he was “not very optimistic” about a new round of nuclear talks with the European Union scheduled for this month, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, July 5). France, Germany and the United Kingdom had not yet come to grips with the election of hard-line President Mahmood Ahmadinejad, said Gholamreza Aghazadeh. “The Europeans were waiting for the election of the new president to present their proposals. Taking into account the personality of the new president, I think the negotiations will be more difficult,” said Aghazadeh. “I am not very optimistic about the European proposal. The Iranian nuclear case is very important and I think the capacity of the Europeans to solve it is very weak,” he said. “The Europeans have to understand that we are not worried about our case going to the [U.N.] Security Council,” said Aghazadeh (Siavosh Ghazi, Agence France-Presse/Khaleej Times, July 5). French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy yesterday said the EU might offer security guarantees for Tehran to halt its nuclear work, the Associated Press reported. “I think what we need to do is to base ourselves on finding a package which is credible for the Iranians,” said Douste-Blazy. In addition to offers of technical equipment, the EU negotiators should “make sure, also, that we discuss with them the security of their country,” he said. Speaking at the same press conference, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reiterated Washington’s position that Iran should not have access to the nuclear fuel cycle. “There must be objective guarantees that Iran is not surreptitiously gaining the technology or technological know-how that might lead to the development of a nuclear weapon,” Rice said. “And that means enrichment, reprocessing and the entire — all of the activities associated with the fuel cycle.” “We have been very clear that we do not see the need for civilian nuclear power in Iran,” she said. Douste-Blazy appeared more open to civilian Iranian nuclear work. “I’d like to say that France was the first to start the negotiations and discussions with Iran on the possibility of having civil nuclear energy,” he said (Anne Gearan, Associated Press/Baltimore Sun, July 5). The European Union would not, however, accept any nuclear weapons work by Iran, Douste-Blazy said. “It’s absolutely basic to remember that the word of the Paris agreement is indeed suspension. But having spoken with them and having made a proposal, I think it’s absolutely necessary to state that the Europeans will never accept a resumption of the Iranian military nuclear activities,” he said. Rice said the Paris agreement between Tehran and the European nations “is initially about suspension but ultimately the world has to be assured that Iran cannot have this capacity and that (there) would ultimately have to be objective guarantees and we believe that means cessation” (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, July 5). Back to top       New Round of North Korea Nuclear Talks Could Be Discussed During Rice Visit, Seoul Says U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s upcoming visit to South Korea will provide an opportunity to discuss resuming stalled nuclear talks with North Korea, a senior official in Seoul said today (see GSN, July 5). The two-day visit, scheduled as part of an Asia trip next week, “will be a good opportunity to have substantial discussions for an early resumption” of the six-nation negotiations, said South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon. “An outline to resume the talks should be made in July,” Ban said. “We hope North Korea would meet the expectations of the international community by returning (to the talks) and do its part as a responsible member.” Cho Tae-yong, head of the South Korean Foreign Ministry’s task force on the nuclear issue, is in Washington for consultations, a South Korean official told the Associated Press (Bo-Mi Lim, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, July 6). U.S. Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) on Monday called on President George W. Bush to send an envoy to meet directly with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, the Associated Press reported. “The North Koreans have said they regard a U.N. sanctions resolution as tantamount to war, and Security Council members such as China are not likely to support sanctions unless there is a failure of diplomacy that the international community views as entirely North Korea’s fault,” Clinton and Levin wrote in a column in the Washington Post. The Bush administration’s diplomatic effort to end Pyongyang’s nuclear work “is carried on in an almost lackadaisical fashion, captive to pride and preconditions,” the column says. They also advised Bush to offer considerable economic assistance to North Korea and to avoid verbal attacks, according to AP (Associated Press, July 5). European Union lawmakers are scheduled to visit North and South Korea this month to discuss the nuclear issue, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday. Led by Austria’s Ursula Stenzel, the nine-member delegation is expected to visit Pyongyang from July 9-14 to meet with North Korea’s second-in-command, Kim Yong Nam, and Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun before going on to South Korea for another three days of meetings (Agence France-Presse/INQ7.net, July 5). Back to top

Scientists Fear Increase in Biodefense Research Increases Likelihood of Attacks or Accidents Some scientists are concerned that the increase in the number of researchers working in the United States to counter bioterrorism increases the risk of an attack and the accidental release of a bioagent, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reported last month (see GSN, June 14). More than 300 institutions and 12,000 individuals have access to weaponizable biological agents, said Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University molecular biologist and critic of the expansion in biodefense since the anthrax attacks of 2001. Biodefense watchdog the Sunshine Project claims that 97 percent of principal investigators who received grants from the U.S. National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases from 2001 to 2005 to study six biological agents had not previously conducted similar work.   The explosion of “NIAID newbies” increases the likelihood of accidents, said Edward Hammond, U.S. director for the Sunshine Project. Martin Hugh-Jones, an anthrax researcher at Louisiana State University, told the Baltimore Sun last year that before 2001 researchers “knew each other by name. [Now] I see a lot of names I’ve never heard of. … On a probabilistic basis, there’s more of a risk of accidents or attacks.” Mishaps have happened, according to the Bulletin. In February, a researcher at Rocky Mountain Laboratories in Montana was exposed to the bacterium for Q fever, a pathogen that causes flu-like symptoms. The National Institute called the Rocky Mountain incident a “small spill.” Sunshine’s Hammond said the Rocky Mountain incident and last year’s tularemia exposures at Boston University (see GSN, May 11) are “indicative of what’s to come.” Rutgers’ Ebright agreed, blaming the accidents on the “influx of large numbers of institutions and individuals with no prior experience into bioweapons agents research.” NIAID officials counter that, despite their inexperience, researchers are qualified to deal with bioweapons. Scientists “can’t learn about anthrax by studying E. coli. It is important that people work on these [bioweapon] organisms,” said senior NIAID program officer Rona Hirschberg. Jeanne Guillemin, a senior fellow at the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is not convinced, the Bulletin reported. Increasing access to pathogens heightens the chances that rogue scientists could use them in an attack. “What [NIAID Director Anthony Fauci] and others haven’t thought through is the particular kind of expertise, from basic bench work to aerosolization, that comes with defensive biological weapons programs,” she said (Nick Schwellenbach, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2005). Back to top

Report Finds Chemical Plants at Risk The U.S. Congressional Research Service warned in a report that a disaster at certain chemical plants could endanger the lives of more than 1 million people, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, June 15). Plants in 23 states are located in heavily populated areas, according to the report. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency, the report found that more than 100 plants were potential targets for terrorism, AP reported. “Chemical facilities are at the top of the terrorists’ target list, and I thought it would be helpful for the full picture to be presented,” said Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who requested the report. The Research Service compiled state-by-state figures, but it did not specify the names or locations of facilities. The report said one chemical release was not likely to affect the full nearby population. Researchers also found that one-fifth of chemical facilities are located near population centers. At least 106 facilities are located near cities with populations of 1 million or more people. Texas is home to 29 of the plants, more than twice any other state. California and Illinois have 13 such plants each, while Ohio has eight. Florida and New Jersey have seven each. A spokesman for the Environmental Protection Agency and environmental experts said that the Research Service’s estimate is less than the 123 plants at risk in a 2000 survey. They attribute the drop to industry efforts to move dangerous chemicals away from population centers. Chemical experts said factors such as wind and the size of a chemical leak would determine how many casualties result from an attack. An attack on a plant could cause the release of “poison gas clouds to kill people,” said chemical industry watchdog Andy Igrejas of the National Environmental Trust. “It's violent deaths you're talking about — it melts your lungs, essentially.” Markey said industry has not done enough to find alternatives, test security or protect whistleblowers at plants. He added that the Bush administration “still has refused to put its money where its mouth is and commit to any meaningful upgrades” (Lara Jakes Jordan, Associated Press/Yahoo News, July 6). Back to top       GAO Questions Chemical Depot Closure Schedule A U.S. Government Accountability Office report questions whether the Deseret, Newport and Umatilla chemical weapons depots will finish eliminating their stockpiles in time to be closed as proposed in May by the U.S. Defense Department’s Base Realignment and Closure committee (see GSN, May 16). “Given the general delays in the Army’s chemical weapons destruction program it is uncertain that it will be able to complete the chemical weapons destruction mission and close these depots within the 6-year BRAC statutory implementation period,” the agency said in its report released last week. Deseret Chemical Depot spokeswoman Alaine Southworth admitted that a 2007 goal for weapons destruction might slip “just a bit” but added, “We've always talked about being down to the ground by 2010.” She noted that this is within the federal time frame, the Salt Lake Tribune reported today. Deseret, located in Utah and originally slated for closure in 2007, is more than half finished with weapons destruction (Matthew LaPlante, Salt Lake Tribune, July 6). Back to top

Japan to Proceed With Cooperation on Missile Defense Development With United States Japan plans to proceed in the upcoming fiscal year to development of a sea-based missile defense system being created jointly with the United States, United Press International reported yesterday (see GSN, July 1). “The time has come to move to the development phase,” Japanese Defense Agency chief Yoshinori Ono said Sunday. “I would like to have arrangements made within the government swiftly and submit the budget request for fiscal 2006.” Ono also confirmed that Tokyo and Washington plan to conduct the first test of their sea-based Standard Missile 3 interceptor — designed to be deployed on Aegis cruisers — in March in Hawaii (United Press International/MENAFN.com, July 5). Back to top       India to Develop Its Own Missile Defense System India has no plans to purchase a missile defense system from the United States, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, June 29). “There is no question of accepting (a) missile shield from anyone,” said Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee. “What we are interested in is developing our own missile program and we are doing that,” said Mukherjee (Agence France-Presse/SiliconIndia.com, July 5).             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.