U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, shown here at the United Nations last week, promised this summer to work with Congress on a plan to reorganize her department’s arms control activities (Getty Images/Daniel Berehulak). State Department Cuts Arms Control Bureau By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department this month quietly began implementing a major reorganization plan to eliminate its arms control and nonproliferation bureaus, despite a U.S. Senate hold on the plan (see GSN, Aug. 3). An order eliminating the two bureaus and transferring their elements into a single bureau of international security and nonproliferation became “effective Sept. 13,” a department official said...Full Story

India Says U.S. Pressure Didn’t Sway Iran Vote Pressure from the United States did not play a role in India’s decision to vote to declare Iran to be in noncompliance with its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations, according to Indian officials (see GSN, Sept. 28)...Full Story

Congressman Says U.S. Residents Should Get Training in Case of Nuclear, Radiological Attack By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. residents should be better prepared for a nuclear or radiological attack, a House of Representatives member said yesterday (see GSN, June 24)...Full Story

	Friday, September 30, 2005

States at Risk to Get More First-Responder Grants The Homeland Security Department appropriations bill passed yesterday by the U.S. Congress focuses funding for first responders in states with a higher risk of terrorist attack, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Aug. 5). Two-thirds of first responder grants would now be directed to states more likely to be attacked by terrorists, according to the bill’s provisions. While this allocation falls short of the Sept. 11 commission to make all grants risk-based, it continues a trend towards a more risk-based approach, AP reported. The total amount of money available for first responder grants fell $680 million to $3.3 billion in this year’s spending bill.  Funding for rail and transit security grants remained steady at $150 million despite the terrorist bombings in London this summer, according to AP. Senator Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) said the spending bill aims at focusing efforts to prevent a terrorist attack with a weapon of mass destruction. He conceded that not all needs were met with the bill. “Were we able to fully meet every need? No, given fiscal constraints, we focused our limited resources on eliminating the most serious and detrimental vulnerabilities of our homeland security,” Gregg said (Associated Press/New York Times, Sept. 29). Back to top

State Department Cuts Arms Control Bureau By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department this month quietly began implementing a major reorganization plan to eliminate its arms control and nonproliferation bureaus, despite a U.S. Senate hold on the plan (see GSN, Aug. 3). An order eliminating the two bureaus and transferring their elements into a single bureau of international security and nonproliferation became “effective Sept. 13,” a department official said. The department has otherwise been tight-lipped about the move, but evidence also appeared in the form of a Federal Register notice this week signed by Stephen Rademaker, who was identified as acting assistant secretary of state in charge of the new bureau. Republican and Democratic congressional offices said the move should not have been formalized and that as far as they are concerned the reorganization has not yet gone through. “Our understanding is that it is not yet in place,” said Andy Fisher, spokesman for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and its chairman Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who has endorsed the reorganization plan. “It hasn’t as far as we’re concerned up here,” said Norm Kurz, spokesman for Senator Joe Biden (D-Del.), the ranking Democrat on the committee. “There’s a hold on it, from what I understand, on the matter of how it’s going to get reorganized. There are people who want to look at what are the implications instead of just marching ahead with this and so they’re trying to slow things down,” he said.  The hold is particularly motivated by a concern that nonproliferation activities would not receive sufficient priority under the plan, Kurz said. “There are people who say, ‘What’s going to happen to the nonproliferation part of this?’” Arms Control Dismantlement The reorganization would effectively complete an eight-year, Republican-driven process of dismantling the State Department’s once sizable infrastructure dedicated to advocating, negotiating, implementing and verifying major arms control and nonproliferation agreements. In 1999, the department disbanded its Arms Control and Disarmament Agency which had spearheaded U.S. policy on major Cold War arms control treaties, such as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, and the now-defunct Antiballistic Missile Treaty, among others. In the 1990s, the agency had a $40 million budget and about 250 employees. “The agency’s unique focus on arms control and nonproliferation issues provides a singular and invaluable perspective to the president, different from purely diplomatic, defense or other concerns,” says an archived ACDA Web page published last decade at a time when the agency was fighting for its survival. In 1997, pressured by then-Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) but declaring the aim of “reinventing government,” the Clinton administration announced it would eliminate ACDA and fold it arms control and nonproliferation components, and other pieces, into other State Department bureaus. Now, under the Bush administration’s plan, elements of the department’s Arms Control and Nonproliferation bureaus, each run by an assistant secretary of state, would be merged into a new super-bureau for “International Security and Nonproliferation,” according to an outline provided this year to Congress and obtained by Global Security Newswire. The new bureau would incorporate elements of both bureaus, as well as other responsibilities, and be structured to reflect the administration’s priorities.   The assistant secretary would oversee three deputy assistant secretaries, for: threat reduction, export controls and negotiations; counterproliferation; and nuclear nonproliferation policy and negotiations. Apparently, the only senior State Department official with “arms control” in his title would be the director for the Office of Conventional Arms Control. That official, and other elements of the cancelled arms control and nonproliferation bureaus, would be located in a separate “bureau for verification, compliance and implementation.” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, announcing the plan on July 29, said the changes were needed to address the kinds of threats the United States is facing.   “Today, protecting America from weapons of mass destruction requires more than deterrence and arms control treaties.  We must also go on the offensive against outlaw scientists, black market arms dealers and rogue state proliferators.” “Today’s security threats still require a robust and competent arms control and nonproliferation and disarmament effort on the part of the U.S. State Department,” said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, citing for instance “a need to get a handle on” thousands Russian of tactical nuclear weapons and negotiation of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.  “We believe the reorganization will not be helpful but in the end the proof will be in the administration’s record,” he said. Rice vowed to “continue to work with Congress,” on the plan. However, several days later, Global Security Newswire reported the department planned to begin after a mandatory 15-day congressional review period that happened to coincide with Congress’s August recess (see GSN, Aug. 3). Later that month, the Washington Post reported that House International Relations Committee Chairman Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) had ordered the department not to move forward until his committee could be briefed on the details (see GSN, Aug. 18). The chairman was soon after satisfied, said committee spokesman Sam Stratman. “The hold placed on that by Chairman Hyde was removed in August, following a detailed briefing,” he said. But some in the Senate still are not, Kurz said, and added, “There’s a larger question of accountability.” Back to top       Libya to Increase Oil Sales to U.S. Libya plans to increase exports of crude oil to the United States above its average 80,000 barrels a day, Bloomberg reported today (see GSN, Sept. 19). “The U.S. is an important market for us and we are trying to sell more oil to them,” said Mohammed Abani, head of the state-run monopoly Brega Petroleum Co. Washington last year lifted most sanctions on Libya after Tripoli agreed in 2003 to relinquish its WMD programs and to pay $2.7 billion to family members of individuals killed in a 1998 bombing of a passenger jet over Lockerbie, Scotland (Bloomberg, Sept. 30). Back to top       Turkmenistan Gives Support to Proliferation Security Initiative’s Interdiction Principles Turkmenistan yesterday welcomed and expressed support for the Proliferation Security Initiative’s Statement of Interdiction Principles released in 2003, according to a Turkmenistan Foreign Ministry statement (see GSN, Aug. 17). Turkmenistan’s commitment to the principles reflects its “desire to cooperate in preventing the proliferation of WMD, their delivery systems and related materials,” according to the statement. Turkmenistan is in compliance with Proliferation Security Initiative principles and expects to take place in “future activities connected with the initiative,” the statement said (Turkmenistan Foreign Ministry release, Sept. 29). Back to top

India Says U.S. Pressure Didn’t Sway Iran Vote Pressure from the United States did not play a role in India’s decision to vote to declare Iran to be in noncompliance with its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations, according to Indian officials (see GSN, Sept. 28). India’s ambassador to the United States, Ronen Sen, told the Associated Press that India’s concern that it looked like it was caving to U.S. pressure was “a huge stumbling block in making the decision, which would have happened anyway.” India’s reluctance to back the United States came just weeks after a U.S.-Indian agreement to share nuclear technology was hammered out and drew the ire of Representative Tom Lantos (D-Calif.). He said India “totally disregards our interests” in terms of Iran. Following India’s vote last week in at the International Atomic Energy Agency, Lantos said India “decided it was more important to maintain its relationship with us than to accommodate the ayatollahs in Teheran.” Sen, however, said this pressure made it harder for India to vote with the United States. “The decision that we took was not because of what was said, at congressional hearings or elsewhere — it was in spite of that. No government can be seen to be acting under pressure. I think we did the right thing, but it becomes much more difficult if it is seen to be carried out under duress.” Sen said his country’s vote was consistent with past ballots and said that U.S. pressure made his country consider withholding its vote. “You don’t take even your closest friends for granted,” Sen said. “We don’t have a Pavlovian response: If some country does this, then we do that.” India’s nuclear record was also defended by Sen, who said nuclear energy is needed to support a “demographic bulge.” “Energy is the key, the biggest restraint on our development. For sustaining development, we have to have some alternatives which are immediately available, and which are proven and which we are good at,” he said (Foster Klug, Associated Press/Khaleej Times, Sept. 29). Despite Sen’s remarks, a review of a Sept. 8 U.S. House International Relations Committee hearing on the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal makes it clear that India’s policy towards Iran was key to the agreement, the Hindu reported. “There is a degree of reciprocity we expect of India, which has not been forthcoming ... we agree to undertake a tremendous range of path-breaking measures to accommodate India, while India blithely pursues what it sees should be its goal and policy vis-a-vis Iran,” Lantos said. “There is a quid pro quo in international relations. And if our Indian friends are interested in receiving all of the benefits of U. S. support ... we have every right to expect that India will reciprocate in taking into account our concerns ... and without reciprocity, India will get very little help from the Congress.” However, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said that India had not given a commitment to support the United States in exchange for the nuclear agreement. “As I understand India's position on Iran, India does not wish Iran to become a nuclear-weapon state, and I believe the Indian government has gone on record to say that. We have had, over the last several weeks, and specifically the last few days, a series of conversations with the Indian government about the best way to achieve that. … I can't speak for the Indian government, but I can say that this is an issue where we intend to have further discussions with them next week at the U. N. General Assembly in New York. I know that Secretary [of State Condoleezza] Rice will be raising this with the Indian foreign minister, I will be doing so with the Indian foreign secretary.” Burns called India’s vote a “blow to Iran's attempt to turn this debate into a developed-world-versus-developing-world debate,” according to the Hindu (R. Ramachandran, Hindu, Sept. 30). Meanwhile, India’s communist party has blasted Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for the Iran vote, Agence France-Presse reported today. Communist leader Prakash Karat called the vote a “final act of surrender” to the United States.   In an interview with the Indian Express, he called on India to reverse the “pro-U.S.” stance it has taken. “By the next board meeting of the IAEA in November, the Indian government will have to undo the damage,” Karat said. “It is necessary for all the left and democratic forces to mobilize the people in defense of an independent foreign policy,” he added (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Sept. 30). Back to top       Iran To Remain in NPT, Official Says Iran has no immediate plans to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Tehran’s top nuclear negotiator said yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 28). “Currently there is no reason to get out of the NPT,” said Ali Larijani. Members of Iran’s hard-line dominated Parliament have threatened to revoke the country’s Additional Protocol to the nation’s nuclear safeguards agreement and possibly even withdraw from the treaty itself in the wake of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s decision to censure the country over its nuclear activities. Larijani said Iran could, however, take such measures if it were prevented from pursuing its nuclear fuel program. “If they want to force us to do what they want, then we will think otherwise. If the NPT is implemented well, it is good, but if it used to deprive others of nuclear technology we will never accept it,” ISNA quoted him as saying (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Sept. 29). Meanwhile, Israel could act unilaterally to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, a delegation of Israeli lawmakers traveling in Washington said yesterday. “We feel we are obliged to warn our friends that Israel should not be pushed into a situation where we see no other solution but to act unilaterally,” said Yosef Lapid, head of the centrist Israeli opposition Shinui Party. He added, however, that this was the “worst possible scenario.” “If we have to do it, we’ll do it,” he said. “If the United States and the world community do it, there is a chance the issue can be contained. If Israel has to do it alone, there is no chance the conflict can be contained.” The United States and other major powers must make clear to Tehran that there is “no chance they will ever see the fruits of a nuclear program,” said Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. “Threats of sanctions and isolation alone will not do it,” said Steinitz (David Sands, Washington Times, Sept. 30). Iran has threatened to cut its oil exports by 40 percent in retaliation for the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors decision last week to find Tehran in noncompliance with NPT rules, Gazeta reported yesterday. Iran exports most of the approximately 200 million tons of oil its produces each year. Other OPEC member states’ reserve capacity could not make up for such a shortfall, according to Gazeta (Gazeta (Russia), Sept. 29). Back to top       China, U.S. Clash Over Resolution on North Korea China and the United States differed yesterday over the language of an International Atomic Energy Agency resolution welcoming North Korea’s agreement last week to abandon its nuclear programs, though the rift seems to have been quickly mended, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Sept. 28). The dispute centered on a light-water nuclear reactor promised as a reward to North Korea, diplomats said today. They said Beijing and Washington found compromise language and that the text would likely be presented to the IAEA General Conference for consideration later today. The resolution has only symbolic value, but the disagreement was significant because it reflected likely differences on how to proceed at the next round of six-nation talks, scheduled for November, according to AP. Washington insisted that any resolution “not in any way try to change any understandings or what was agreed to at the six party talks,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack (George Jahn, Associated Press/ABCNews.com, Sept. 30). Washington wanted to make it clear that Pyongyang was not about to receive a light-water reactor for energy production, Agence France-Presse reported. “The United States now realizes that China is in the driver’s seat in the six-party talks and wants to do things for North Korea,” a diplomat close to the International Atomic Energy Agency told AFP. Meanwhile, top U.S. negotiator Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said he had rejected North Korea’s demand to be granted time for a nuclear freeze ahead of dismantlement. “I am not interested in having a discussion with them about freezing this operation,” said Hill (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Sept. 30). Back to top       IAEA Chooses New Board Members The International Atomic Energy Agency has named a new Board of Governors, which includes two more Non-Aligned Movement countries than were on the previous slate, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 26). Still, “the balance of power will not change,” a Western diplomat close to the agency said. “The way the board is structured gives a simple majority for Western powers,” the diplomat said. New members of the 35-nation board include Belarus, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, Indonesia, Libya, Norway, Slovenia, and Syria, according to AFP (Agence France-Presse /InteractiveInvestor.com, Sept. 29). Back to top

NIH Employee Pleads Guilty to Anthrax Charges A former U.S. National Institutes of Health employee pleaded guilty yesterday to threatening the Broward County, Fla., Property Appraiser’s Office with anthrax, the Miami Herald reported (see GSN, Aug. 25). Michelle Ledgister conveyed “false information to another regarding their exposure to the biological agent anthrax,” a violation of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Act of 2004.   She faces up to five years in prison and $250,000 for the violation, according to the Herald. Her sentencing is scheduled for Dec. 16.  The FBI says Ledgister, upset over a property tax dispute, left a message at the property appraiser’s office saying, “It’s Michelle Ledgister … NIH is located where infectious agents are, and you guys now have anthrax spores once again, so do be careful. Toodles” (Miami Herald, Sept. 30). Back to top

Congressman Says U.S. Residents Should Get Training in Case of Nuclear, Radiological Attack By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. residents should be better prepared for a nuclear or radiological attack, a House of Representatives member said yesterday (see GSN, June 24). Since terrorists with nuclear weapons are the United States’ “No. 1 concern,” Representative Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) said at a subcommittee hearing on counterterrorism, Washington should be preparing U.S. residents for such an occurrence by conducting attack drills and acquiring radiation countermeasures. “We have to be more realistic and prepare our population on how to deal not just with hurricanes but with small nuclear weapons,” said Sherman, the senior Democrat on the International Relations International Terrorism and Nonproliferation Subcommittee. Sherman recalled Cold War bomb drills conducted in schools, saying such drills might have been pointless given the probable severity of any Soviet attack. He contrasted that potential with the current threat of a terrorist radiological attack. “Now is when such bomb drills might not be laughable,” Sherman said. In addition to drilling for an attack, Sherman said, everyone in the country should have on hand countermeasures such as potassium iodide, which prevents thyroid uptake of cancer-causing radioactive iodine. The failure to take such measures is a sign the country is seeking to “hide” from the threat, he said. Sherman also said Washington should try to head off the possibility by stepping up efforts to persuade Iran to renounce any nuclear-weapon ambition and by courting Russia as a partner on non-nuclear matters as a way of building confidence for nuclear security operations. Center for National Policy President Tim Roemer, a witness at the hearing, said al-Qaeda is determined to get nuclear weapons and the United States should react accordingly by doing more to lock down Russian nuclear materials. “We know where they are, we know how to secure them, and we’re not doing enough of doing that,” said Roemer, a Democratic former House member from Indiana and member of the Sept. 11 commission. Back to top       New Opera Tells Tale of Atomic Bomb’s Birth Pulitzer Prize-winning composer John Adams has dramatized the hours leading up to the first successful nuclear test explosion in an opera set to debut tomorrow, Reuters reported. “Doctor Atomic,” a tale of Manhattan Project head Robert Oppenheimer’s eleventh-hour questioning of his creation, is set to premiere at the San Francisco Opera. It is then scheduled to be performed in London, Tokyo, Chicago and Amsterdam, Reuters reported. Adams said he expects a mixed reception to the performances because many opera-goers prefer familiar old classics. “‘Doctor Atomic,’ in its capacity to challenge people to think about nuclear weapons and the potential of their destroying the planet, is definitely not ‘Madame Butterfly,’” he said (Victoria Looseleaf, Reuters/Yahoo!News, Sept. 29). 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.