U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton arrives at U.N. headquarters in New York today to discuss the reported North Korean nuclear test (Stan Honda/Getty Images). North Korean Nuclear Explosion Small, Experts Say The North Korean nuclear explosion announced yesterday appears to have been of low strength, indicating it was a failure or limited success, the New York Times reported (see GSN, Oct. 6). Other nations’ first nuclear detonations have historically been in the range of 10 to 60 kilotons.  The North Korean test appears to have been less than one kiloton in strength, according to U.S. analysts. Sources said Pyongyang had sought a four-kiloton explosion, according to a senior Bush administration official...Full Story

Security Council Leaders Move Toward Iran Sanctions The permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany agreed Friday to begin talks to impose sanctions against Iran for its refusal to abide by a council demand to suspend its sensitive nuclear activities, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Oct. 6)...Full Story

London Bombers Reportedly Planned Sarin Attack on British-Australian Cricket Match Two of the men who carried out the 2005 suicide bombings of London’s transit system reportedly had planned to unleash the nerve agent sarin that year during the Ashes cricket match between Australia and the United Kingdom, the London Sunday Times reported (see GSN, July 7, 2005)...Full Story

	Tuesday, October 10, 2006

London Bombers Reportedly Planned Sarin Attack on British-Australian Cricket Match Two of the men who carried out the 2005 suicide bombings of London’s transit system reportedly had planned to unleash the nerve agent sarin that year during the Ashes cricket match between Australia and the United Kingdom, the London Sunday Times reported (see GSN, July 7, 2005). Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer received their orders from al-Qaeda in December 2004, according to a man using the pseudonym Ahmed Hafiz. The two men were to find jobs as stewards at the British cricket ground during the August match in Birmingham and to spray sarin inside changing rooms used by the teams. Hafiz said a witness told him that Tanweer was a fan of cricket and did not want to carry out the attack. “Tanweer had Sidique in a headlock, and the fight had to be broken up by the chaperone,” said Hafiz, who said he is a friend of the family of another bomber, Hasib Hussain. The men learned of the plot to bomb the London transit system several days later, Hafiz said.  “It was always there, as Plan B,” he said   Dozens of people were killed on July 7, 2005, when terrorists set off bombs on three subway trains and a double-decker bus (Taher/Hasnain, Sunday Times, Oct. 8). Terrorism experts questioned the report, the Australian Associated Press reported yesterday. Hafiz said the two men received their orders a training camp in Kashmir.  One expert said, however, that the London bombers did not train at that site. “The source says that the 7/7 bombers trained in the Kotli camp in Kashmir, but we know that the 7/7 bombers trained in the Malakand camp in Pakistan,” said Rohan Gunaratna.  “So there is some information that is contradictory with the information that is currently available.” Sarin, which was used in the 1995 attacks on the Tokyo subway system, is dangerous and not easily produced, said David Wright-Neville of Monash University in Australia. “There’s no evidence that sarin has ever really loomed in the al-Qaeda cells in Europe’s thinking.  It’s a difficult chemical to use,” he said.  “The fact that you might be able to access players’ dressing rooms with pump packs of sarin strapped to your back and a small hose is similarly, I think, odd.” Australian Prime Minister John Howard also expressed skepticism. “I think we have to have the source of the allegation very carefully checked out before we assume it’s correct,” he said (Maria Hawthorne, Australian Associated Press, Oct. 9). Back to top       FBI Slow to Adopt New Methods, Official Says Five years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the FBI continues to struggle to improve its intelligence gathering methods, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, July 27). Remembering domestic spying abuses of the 1960s and 1970s, many bureau officials have been wary of adopting methods that could butt against civil rights protections, according to the Times. That concern, however, has led agents to make some terrorism arrests too soon, before gaining more knowledge about the suspect’s connections and plans, said one FBI official trying to modify the bureau’s strategy. “I don’t want to take [a suspect] down too quickly,” said Philip Mudd, second in command of the FBI’s National Security Branch.  “I want to understand what we know and what we don’t know.  If we’re focused solely on [individual] cases, I can’t have confidence that we know what’s going on.” Changing the rapid arrest tactic could be difficult, however, because solving specific cases has historically been the key to career success in the bureau, according to a former FBI official. “Supervisors will say, ‘Why don’t you have any cases?’,” said Christopher Hamilton, who retired recently after 22 years with the bureau.  “Cases are good for getting resources, good for publicity and good for morale.” Mudd acknowledged that producing change could be a long-term process. “There [are] 31,000 employees in this organization and we’re undergoing a sea-change,” he said.  “It’s going to take a while for what is a high-end national security program to sink down to every officer.” Some officials said traditionalists might nevertheless win the day by delaying change until reformers such as Mudd move on to new jobs. “They’ll just wait him out,” said one counterterrorism official (Shane/Bergman, New York Times, Oct. 10). Back to top

North Korean Nuclear Explosion Small, Experts Say The North Korean nuclear explosion announced yesterday appears to have been of low strength, indicating it was a failure or limited success, the New York Times reported (see GSN, Oct. 6). Other nations’ first nuclear detonations have historically been in the range of 10 to 60 kilotons.  The North Korean test appears to have been less than one kiloton in strength, according to U.S. analysts. Sources said Pyongyang had sought a four-kiloton explosion, according to a senior Bush administration official. “As first tests go, this is smaller and less successful than those of the other nuclear powers,” said Philip Coyle, former nuclear testing director at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. “If it turns out to be a kiloton or less, that would suggest that they hoped for more than that and didn’t get it,” he added. Verifying that North Korea actually detonated a nuclear weapon is expected to take several days, an intelligence official told the Times.  While no radiation has been detected leaking from the underground blast site, experts said it is unlikely that the test was a fake involving massive amounts of conventional explosives. “It’s difficult to fake it when you know people are looking down on you,” said Paul Richards, a seismologist for Columbia University.  “The execution of a chemical explosion would be hard to hide” (Broad/Mazzetti, New York Times I, Oct. 10). Some U.S. officials expressed more doubts, the Washington Times reported. “There was a seismic event that registered about 4 on the Richter scale, but it still isn’t clear it was a nuclear test.  You can get that kind of seismic reading from high explosives,” said one official. “It appears there was more fizz than pop,” the official added (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Oct. 10). The explosion is believed to have occurred at 11:36 a.m. Monday in Korea, 10:36 p.m. Sunday in Washington, the Times reported. Officials in Pyongyang notified China minutes before the test was to take place.  China alerted the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, which in turn sent word to the White House (David Sanger, New York Times II, Oct. 9). Pyongyang quickly released a statement announcing the test. “The field of scientific research in the D.P.R.K. successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions on Oct. 9, 2006, at a stirring time when all the people of the country are making a great leap forward in the building of a great, prosperous, powerful socialist nation,” the announcement states (Associated Press I/Washington Post, Oct. 10). South Korea said today it believed the announcement to be valid, but that confirming the success or failure of the test would take two weeks, Agence France-Presse reported. “The government believes North Korea actually conducted a nuclear test,” said Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok. Seoul “believes the reason North Korea officially announced (its nuclear test) was to secure the status of a de facto nuclear state,” Lee said, according to the Yonhap News Agency.  South Korea is not yet willing to make that concession, he said (Agence France-Presse I, Oct. 10). South Korea has “detected no signs of preparations for an additional nuclear test at suspected sites,” said Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung.  However, Pyongyang could still use a portions of its suspected 50 kilograms of weapon-grade plutonium for further testing, he said (Agence France-Presse II, Oct. 10). “North Korea’s nuclear test is a grave threat to stability and peace in Northeast Asia, and it is an unpardonable provocative act,” Yoon said. Other nations also lashed out, according to AFP.  The United States plans to push for tough sanctions against Pyongyang at the U.N. Security Council.  “We’re talking about really making it hurt,” said U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, Washington’s point man on the North Korean nuclear crisis (Simon Martin, Agence France-Presse III, Oct. 10). A U.S. draft resolution circulated at the Security Council condemns the test and calls on North Korea to return to the six-party talks.  It seeks an arms embargo and economic and trade sanctions against Pyongyang, along with barring Pyongyang’s import of luxury items, the Washington Post reported.  U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said the resolution would hinder North Korea’s ability to acquire or ship nuclear and missile technology.  If the resolution is approved, North Korea would have 30 days to meet the U.N. demands or face “such further action as may be needed.” While France and the United Kingdom backed sanctions without actually endorsing the resolution, Japan offered suggestions that would increase the penalties included in the document. Chinese Ambassador to the United Nations Wang Guangya said yesterday his country continues to favor diplomacy (Abramowitz/Lynch, Washington Post, Oct. 10). He did, however, appear to open the door for possible sanctions.  A “firm, constructive, appropriate but prudent response” is needed from the Security Council, he said. “I think there has to be some punitive actions but I also think these actions have to be appropriate,” Wang said (Associated Press II, Oct. 10). Chinese officials warned against military strikes against North Korea, AP reported.  “Taking military action against North Korea would be unimaginable,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao. Washington offered a different take on the question of force, the Times reported. “We’re keeping the military option on the table, because North Korea needs to know that it’s there,” Bolton said.  Japan also said that “all possibilities” are being considered in Tokyo (Choe/O’Neil, New York Times, Oct. 10). North Korea followed the test with aggressive rhetoric, AP reported. “We hope the situation will be resolved before an unfortunate incident of us firing a nuclear missile comes,” one official told Yonhap.  “That depends on how the U.S. will act.” The test was “an expression of our intention to face the United States across the negotiating table,” the official said. U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Alexander Vershbow said the test undermined the chances for direct talks between Pyongyang and Washington. Experts also do not believe that North Korea possesses a nuclear weapon that could be fitted on a missile (William Foreman, Associated Press III/Yahoo!News, Oct. 10). Back to top       Security Council Leaders Move Toward Iran Sanctions The permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany agreed Friday to begin talks to impose sanctions against Iran for its refusal to abide by a council demand to suspend its sensitive nuclear activities, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Oct. 6). Foreign ministers from the six nations — China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States — met Friday in London and agreed that a sanctions discussion should ensue, although no specific measures were decided, according to AFP. “We’re deeply disappointed that … Iran is not prepared to suspend its [uranium] enrichment-related and reprocessing activities,” said British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett in a joint statement. “Accordingly, we will now consult on measures under Article 41 of Chapter 7 of the U.N. charter,” she added, referring to the charter’s language that gives the council authority to impose sanctions to enforce its resolutions. While China and Russia have consistently opposed imposing sanctions, they were now behind the effort, said U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns. “It is very clear that this group of countries is united,” he said.  “The Iranians believed, apparently, that they could divide this group.  They haven’t succeeded in doing that.” Burns said the work on a sanctions resolution would probably begin today or tomorrow with officials at his level. “There will be tough negotiations ahead to define the specific nature of those sanctions,” he said.  “This is always a complex business.” Higher-ranking officials would become involved later in the process, Beckett said. “It will be some little time before we are actually in the Security Council.  It will require a great deal of work and understanding,” she said (Agence France-Presse I/Yahoo!News, Oct. 7). Any council discussion on Iran, however, could be pushed to the back burner by the need to respond to the reported North Korean nuclear test yesterday (see related GSN story, today). Iran talks could be deferred for “days, even weeks,” said former State Department nonproliferation official Robert Einhorn, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Iran will be watching the council’s reaction to North Korea, he said. “If the U.S. can’t build consensus for a tough reaction to North Korea, Iran may see that it can go down the nuclear path with impunity,” Einhorn said (Associated Press/International Herald Tribune, Oct. 9). Meanwhile, Iranian officials continued to resist the world leaders’ push to freeze Iran’s nuclear activities. “The suspension is completely unacceptable and we have rejected it,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini (Stuart Williams, Agence France-Presse II, Oct. 8). Back to top       D.P.R.K. Test Threatens U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal North Korea’s reported nuclear test yesterday could endanger implementation of the planned U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal, Indian analysts and former officials said yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 2). For the deal to move forward, changes must be made to both U.S. export control rules and international trade guidelines, but the political climate might have changed following the nuclear test (see related GSN story, today). “Some U.S. legislators have been saying that this one-time exception [to U.S. export laws] in India’s case could embolden countries like North Korean and Iran to go nuclear,” said C.U. Bhaskar of the Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis.  “North Korea’s nuclear test at this juncture complicates matters.” The test would “definitely energize the nonproliferation lobby on Capitol Hill,” he said. A former Indian ambassador to the United States agreed. “The nonproliferation lobby can now ask for amendments to the bill, put tougher conditions for its passage,” said Lalit Mansingh. “If the deal survives till Christmas, it is through, otherwise it is dead,” he added (Elizabeth Roche, Agence France-Presse, Oct. 10). Back to top       IAEA Needs Better Tools, Official Says International nuclear inspectors need improved high-technology tools to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, a top International Atomic Energy Agency official said last week (see GSN, Oct. 4). Easier access to weapons technology, both through widespread information and lower costs, has led some nations to consider pursuing nuclear weapons, said agency Deputy Director General Olli Heinonen, speaking at a scientific colloquium in Germany. “The educational level is higher, they have access to material,” he said.  “Many of the tools and materials are there.  The know-how is there too.  The threshold of getting there is actually lower now.  It has become more attractive an option.   You still need money, but less than in the 1960s or 70s.” Consequently, the demand on the agency to monitor international nuclear programs has grown. “We need more support than ever before if you look at the challenges before us,” Heinonen said (Isabel Parenthoen, Agence France-Presse/ChannelNewsAsia.com, Oct. 10). Back to top

Hundreds of U.S. Labs Work With Deadly Agents Hundreds of private and public laboratories are registered in the United States to work with anthrax, smallpox and other potentially lethal biological agents, the Hartford Courant reported Sunday (see GSN, Oct. 8). Laboratories that handle any material that is on the list of select agents must register with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the U.S. Agriculture Department. Centers for Disease Control records show it has registered 335 laboratories.  Among those, 245 facilities are authorized to work with live anthrax.  About 100 actually do so, compared to roughly 12 prior to the 2001 anthrax mailings. More than 7,200 U.S. scientists and lab personnel are authorized to handle live anthrax.  The number of registered personnel before the anthrax attacks is not known, as registration was not required at that time. Another 75 laboratories have registered with the Agriculture Department, the Courant reported. There has not been a large increase in facilities authorized to access anthrax or other potentially lethal diseases, said Lori Bane of the CDC Select Agent Division.  Numerous laboratories and hospitals were likely before the mailings to have stored such agents without using them actively for research, she said.  Those sites are now required to register with the government. Others argue that the increased availability of bioterrorism preparedness grants has increased the number of laboratories handling anthrax and other live pathogens. “The huge U.S. investment in biodefense research — including dozens of new high-security labs and thousands of additional researchers — has actually made the Biosecurity problem worse,” said Jonathan Tucker, a senior fellow at the Monterey Institute’s Center for Nonproliferation Studies. Security reviews of personnel at registered laboratories is inadequate, he said. “It is likely that the newly expanded pool of biodefense researchers with access to dangerous pathogens includes a few sociopaths or people with extreme political views who might be motivated to divert pathogens or toxins for criminal or terrorist purposes,” Tucker said. U.S. Health and Human Services investigators in 2004 found that 11 of 15 inspected university laboratories failed to meet federal rules in at least one of five areas:  record-keeping, laboratory access, training, security and emergency response planning.  Those problems have been fixed, Bane said. The Agriculture Department’s inspector general in January found similar problems at all 15 inspected laboratories (Dave Altimari, Hartford Courant, Oct. 8). Back to top       Progress Reported on Botulism Vaccine British scientists reported significant progress in efforts to develop a single vaccine that could be used against the seven strains of botulism, the London Daily Telegraph reported yesterday (see GSN, June 1). Researchers have developed a shot providing protection against the two most common forms of botulinum toxin.  It is expected to take another year to produce a vaccine against the full seven strains. The threat of airborne botulism being used in an act of bioterrorism could be eliminated by the end of the decade, the Telegraph reported. Cambridge Biostability received $3.3 million from the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases to develop the vaccine (Nic Fleming, The Daily Telegraph, Oct. 9). Back to top

Dutch Businessman Seeks Saddam Hussein’s Testimony in Appeal of War Crimes Conviction A Dutch businessman is seeking to call former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein as a witness in the man’s appeal of his conviction for selling chemicals to Hussein’s regime, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 23, 2005). A Dutch court gave Frans van Anraat a 15-year sentence last year after he was found guilty of war crimes for selling materials that were used in chemical weapons attacks during the 1980s. “We have asked if we can call [Hussein], and it’s up to the court to say if it considers that a realistic request,” said Anraat lawyer Ruud Gijsen.  The court is scheduled to make a ruling on the request on Oct. 23 (Associated Press, Oct. 9). Back to top       Cost Review Planned of New U.S. CW Disposal Sites Rising price estimates for chemical weapons disposal sites to be built in Colorado and Kentucky require the U.S. Defense Department to conduct a cost review of the facilities, The Pueblo Chieftain reported Saturday (see GSN, Sept. 11). Congress has approved $3.38 billion for neutralization facilities the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky and the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado.  Anticipated costs for the projects have risen above approved costs by more than 25 percent, the point at which a review becomes mandatory. The review is expected to last 60 days, according to a spokeswoman for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program.  Defense Undersecretary Kenneth Krieg will then offer recommendations for reducing costs, the Chieftain reported. Colorado’s senators said they were told the review would not change plans to use neutralization technology at Pueblo and to treat waste created by the process at the depot. “I was assured that any plans to transport the wastes off-site or recommend an incineration process instead are off the table,” said Republican Senator Wayne Allard.  “The review will not keep any work from going forward.” One observer said previous underestimating of the expense for the projects led to what is now seen as cost overruns. “It is a concern that as part of a review — given the Pentagon’s tight budget — some people in the Defense Department may want to try and delay the work.  But previous delays are another reason the costs have been going up, too,” said Ross Vincent, a member of the Colorado Chemical Demilitarization Citizens Advisory Committee (Peter Roper, The Pueblo Chieftain, Oct. 7).   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.