The headquarters of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in the Hague, where nations this week are considering whether to extend treaty deadlines for destroying chemical weapons. Nations Urge Rapid End to Chemical Weapons By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire THE HAGUE — Nations that possess chemical weapons this week pledged their commitment to eliminate their stockpiles, while a host of other countries pressed them to ensure that work is finished within the schedule set under international treaty (see GSN, Nov. 28)...Full Story

Interpol Pushes for Strong Anti-Bioterror Laws By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire GENEVA — Pushing to close gaps in anti-bioterrorism legislation among its member states, Interpol has drafted a model law it hopes countries will either adopt or modify for their use (see GSN, July 14)...Full Story

CWC Approaches 10th Anniversary By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire THE HAGUE — The 10th anniversary next year of the entry into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention offers a key opportunity to reaffirm the importance of ending the threat of such weapons, an official at the treaty monitoring body said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 28)...Full Story

	Wednesday, December 6, 2006

Lawmakers Vow Changes to Antiterror Grants By Chris Strohm CongressDaily WASHINGTON — House Democrats plan to introduce legislation at the start of the new Congress to overhaul how billions of dollars in homeland security grants are distributed, but say they will still provide every state with a minimum amount of funding (see GSN, Oct. 25). Incoming House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) is discussing legislation to change the funding formula for the grants with Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), aides said. The legislation would require allocating more money to areas with higher risks. “This will definitely be addressed in the first 100 hours,” a Pelosi aide said. It was not clear, however, whether lawmakers would resurrect previous bills to overhaul the funding formula or write new legislation. The aide said the effort is part of the Democrats’ intention to make good on a campaign pledge to implement recommendations from the 9/11 Commission. The commission recommended in 2004 that the grants should be based strictly on an assessment of risks and vulnerabilities. Under current law, each state is guaranteed at least 0.75 percent of funds allocated under the state homeland security grant program and the law-enforcement terrorism prevention program. Nobody, however, is talking about eliminating a guaranteed minimum. “Every state has some risk,” the Pelosi aide said. “Everyone will get something.” The issue is what percentage of funding should be guaranteed. The House and Senate have deadlocked over competing bills for two years and have not been able to resolve their differences. But a new Congress might bring a renewed appetite to reach an agreement. Thompson has already talked to incoming Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) about changing the grant formula, an aide said. Lieberman said he still supports a minimum funding level. “While we should provide extra funding to places with higher population densities and obvious risk factors such as lengthy coastlines, petroleum reserves and nuclear power plants, we have to keep in mind that terrorists will find vulnerabilities wherever they exist,” he said. Outgoing House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King, R-N.Y., said he is also on board to change the funding formula. “This is not a partisan issue. I’ll do whatever Bennie wants to do,” he said. But he added that he wants to have a bill as close as possible to the House version. Back to top

Gates Favors Diplomacy With Iran, North Korea The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee voted unanimously yesterday to confirm Robert Gates as U.S. defense secretary after a day of questioning in which Gates argued against using military force to resolve the Iranian and North Korean nuclear crises (see GSN, Dec. 1). Gates said he believed Iran was seeking a nuclear weapon capability largely to deter neighboring nuclear powers. “They are certainly pressing, in my opinion, for a nuclear capability,” Gates said.  “They would see it in the first instance as a deterrent.  They are surrounded by powers with nuclear weapons — Pakistan to their east, the Russians to the north, the Israelis to the west, and us in the Persian Gulf.” Nuclear weapons appear to be successfully deterring the United States elsewhere, he said. “One of the reasons why Iran is determined to have nuclear weapons is that they see how complicated it is for us to try and deal with a North Korea that has nuclear weapons.” Gates said.  “They believe that if [former Iraqi leader] Saddam [Hussein] had had a nuclear weapon, we might not have attacked him.” While Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of Israel, Iran would be unlikely to use nuclear weapons against Israel if Tehran acquired such weapons, Gates said. “There are, in fact, higher powers in Iran than [Ahmadinejad],” Gates said. Even without nuclear weapons, Iran poses special problems that require diplomacy as a first course of action, Gates said. “Military action against Iran would be an absolute last resort,” he said.  “Our first option should be diplomacy and working with our allies to try and deal with the problems that Iran is posing to us.” Using force against Iran could have dangerous consequences, Gates added. “We have seen in Iraq that once war is unleashed, it becomes unpredictable,” he said.  Iran “could provide certain kinds of weapons of mass destruction, particularly chemical and biological weapons, to terrorist groups.” Similarly, he urged using diplomacy with North Korea, stating that he had changed his mind since writing in 1994 that a military strike against North Korean nuclear facilities was the “only option.” “I’ve changed my view on how to deal with North Korea.  I believe that clearly at this point the best course is the diplomatic one,” Gates said, praising China’s increased role following Pyongyang’s October nuclear test. “Perhaps the one positive piece of news as a result of North Korea’s nuclear test is that it antagonized the Chinese and got them off the dime on the issue” (Greg Webb, GSN, Dec. 6). Back to top

U.S. House-Senate Lawmakers Meet to Resolve Differences Over U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal Approval U.S. House and Senate lawmakers began meetings yesterday to craft legislation enabling the U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal to proceed.  Earlier in the day, the entire House instructed its representatives to approve a Senate provision that Bush administration and Indian leaders have protested, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Dec. 5). Both houses have passed their own versions of the bill to exempt India from U.S. nuclear nonproliferation laws.  The modification is required to allow the nuclear deal to advance because the pact calls for the United States to supply nuclear technology and materials to a nation that is not party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.  In exchange for U.S. technology, India would open its civilian nuclear sector to international monitoring. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week complained about a Senate provision requiring the president to determine “that India is fully and actively participating in U.S. and international efforts to dissuade, sanction and contain Iran for its nuclear program.”  Rice said the effect of the measure was to add unnecessary conditions to the deal. The Senate language, however, drew support from key House leaders, including Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), who is slated to become chairman of the International Relations Committee when Congress begins its next session. “I strongly believed that obtaining such an assessment of India’s policy in this regard is a critical piece of information to aid our deliberations when we consider an actual agreement for civil nuclear cooperation with India,” Lantos said. A frequent critic of the nuclear deal also praised the House decision to keep the Senate provision. “Apparently, the Bush administration has entered the nuclear twilight zone,” said Representative Ed Markey (D-Mass.).  “It can go to war in Iraq to disarm imaginary WMD, but then turns to give a huge nuclear gift to India and specifically tells Congress not to ask India to stand up to Iran’s WMD programs.” “Whose foreign policy is the administration promoting?” he said (P. Parameswaran, Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Dec. 6). Back to top       Some Progress, But No Deal in Latest Iran Talks U.N. powers yesterday failed to agree to penalize Iran for continuing its nuclear activities, but Russia made some concessions that led France to express confidence that sanctions would be forthcoming, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Dec. 4). “The question is about the scope of sanctions, but there will be sanctions,” French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said today. Officials from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany met in Paris to discuss sanctions proposed by France, Germany and the United Kingdom.  The United States has backed the European draft resolution, but Russia and China have said the proposed measures are too expansive (Angela Charlton, Associated Press/International Herald Tribune, Dec. 6). “If sanctions are imposed on Iran by the U.N. Security Council, they should be realistic,” Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said today in Athens.  “Otherwise, we might face a risk of losing the possibility for any political or diplomatic solution.” “We shouldn’t push the situation to a North Korean scenario,” he added (Agence France-Presse, Dec. 6). The six nations are trying to craft a response to Iran’s refusal to heed a Security Council demand to freeze its uranium enrichment activities (Charlton, Associated Press). Douste-Blazy said the Security Council leaders need to reach agreement quickly. “Are we in a hurry or not?” he said today.  “Yes, because I believe, as someone said earlier, that the credibility of the United Nations Security Council is at stake” (Francois Murphy, Reuters, Dec. 6). Some progress was achieved yesterday, a top European diplomat said, when Russia agreed to allow sanctions barring financial transactions with “problematic” Iranians connected to the nation’s nuclear or missile programs. Still, a major disagreement persisted over the European proposal to freeze some Iranian assets and to ban international travel by some Iranian officials, according to AP (Charlton, Associated Press). “The gap between the Russian and U.S. positions is still huge,” said another European diplomat who doubted that any agreement would be reached before the end of the year. The next step of the process would be for the six nations’ foreign ministers to confer by telephone, said Douste-Blazy, and then the discussion would return to New York, Reuters reported (Murphy, Reuters). Back to top       Golf Could Ease Korean Crisis, Businessman Says Golf, not U.N. sanctions, would help resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis, according to a consultant who organized a recent international business outing at the exclusive Pyongyang Golf Club. “North Korea needs engagement through business, not sanctions that will isolate it further,” said Beijing-based consultant Roger Barrett, who assembled a group of North Korean and international business people to play a round.  “Golf is the perfect way to make partnerships.” The “First Business-Golf Challenge” event convened at the links located 24 miles from Pyongyang.  Membership fees run $10,000 a year and daily fees for nonmembers cost $100.  With just 100 members, getting a tee time is not difficult. “It’s pretty expensive for nonmembers,” said a member of nongovernmental group who works in Pyongyang.  “But it’s never a problem getting a round.” North Korean leader Kim Jong Il enjoyed a legendary experience on the 7,770-yard, par 72 course, scoring 11 holes in one in his first round, although the date of his feat remains uncertain (Peter Simpson, Agence France-Presse, Dec. 6). Back to top

Interpol Pushes for Strong Anti-Bioterror Laws By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire GENEVA — Pushing to close gaps in anti-bioterrorism legislation among its member states, Interpol has drafted a model law it hopes countries will either adopt or modify for their use (see GSN, July 14). Currently, law enforcement agencies in a number of countries are constrained by an inadequate legal framework to detect and stop the development of biological weapons, Interpol officials said.  In many cases, no law would be violated until a biological agent is actually deployed. “It’s just simply difficult to prosecute, not to mention investigate and convict,” said Scott Spence, manager of Interpol’s biocriminalization project. Yesterday, Interpol officials from the organization’s headquarters in Lyon, France, presented the draft legislation to diplomatic delegates gathered here for a review of a 1972 international treaty banning biological weapons. Strong laws are necessary to provide police forces with the tools to stop the development, transport and use of biological weapon by terrorist groups, he said.  If law enforcement is unable to act before biological agents are employed, it is already too late.  “What you want to prohibit is everything up to use,” Spence said. In order to describe the legislative terrain, identify gaps and measure progress, Interpol is compiling a database of national anti-bioterror laws that will be accessible on the international police organization’s Web site.  Over time Interpol hopes to show more and more countries adopting stronger laws. The information accessible on the Internet, however, will not include country-specific information.  That data is “just too sensitive,” Spence said.  Instead, the statistics will include overall numbers and numbers by Interpol region.  The information, as it is collected, will be available online starting either at the end of this week or the beginning of the next. “There will be the beginnings of a very one-stop shopping database,” he said.  “This will be a long process, but it is absolutely critical that we have an understanding of what legislation is out there.” Created with the assistance of the Verification Research Training and Information Center (VERTIC) in London, the Interpol law would criminalize the development, production, stockpiling, transfer and financing of biological weapons.  It would also establish a biological emergency response and investigation support system, a bio-specific response team. Such a team would coordinate activities between the separate agencies — national security, law enforcement and public health — likely to be involved in a response to an act of bioterrorism. “We’ve put together a lot of elements and a lot of issues into one law,” said Angela Woodward, deputy director of VERTIC. The bill is also designed to assist countries in meeting their obligations to prevent the proliferation of biological weapons under the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, a treaty with 155 member states. Action is imperative, because the threat of a terrorist attack with a biological weapon remains real, cautioned Adrian Baciu, coordinator of Interpol’s bioterrorism unit. “We are dealing with something very serious,” he said, adding that terrorists, including al-Qaeda, are still considering large-scale attacks and are still interested in biological weapons.  “It’s obvious and has been demonstrated by the arrests worldwide.” National police forces must be enabled by new laws because they “should have and will have a role to play,” Baciu said.  Legislation is crucial because “we have to respect the law, we have boundaries … which is not the case for terrorists.” While experts say it is difficult to know if a sophisticated act of bioterrorism is within the capacity of nonstate actors, the gap between intentions and capability is shrinking all the time. “What we know is that the trend lines are all pointing the wrong way,” said Barry Kellman, a professor at DePaul Law School in Chicago and legal adviser to Interpol. Speaking in Geneva, Kellman called for aggressive legislation to safeguard against what he said is the most likely way for a terrorist group to inflict mass casualties. “Very little is being done to prevent biocrimes,” he said.  “The international community is fiddling while the world burns.” Under the Interpol draft law, countries would devise their own lists of controlled substances.  Interpol can direct legislative bodies to suggested lists, but the final decisions will be up to the national governments, Spence said. The law was designed to be comprehensive and, while countries are urged to adopt it in whole, they are free to adopt or reject certain elements.  Spence stressed the draft legislation is part of a service to Interpol member states not a mandate. “It’s intended to be like a tool kit from which certain provisions may be picked,” he said.  “There has to be a certain measure of flexibility when it comes to using this as a model, and we are aware of that.” Interpol plans promote the draft law from its offices in member states and also to visit capitals to assist governments in tailoring the bill to their needs. “We want to get our feet on the ground we want to go into capitals and do the hard work that must be done,” Spence said.  “It’s not glamorous. It’s very hard work but it must be done.” Back to top

Nations Urge Rapid End to Chemical Weapons By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire THE HAGUE — Nations that possess chemical weapons this week pledged their commitment to eliminate their stockpiles, while a host of other countries pressed them to ensure that work is finished within the schedule set under international treaty (see GSN, Nov. 28). Delegates from 127 nations gathered here this week yesterday to open the four-day 11th Conference of States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention. One of the primary issues being considered at the meeting is the requests for extensions to the final deadline for member states to completely destroy their chemical arsenals.  The treaty sets the deadline at April 2007, but allows the finishing date to be pushed back as far as 2012. Russia, the United States, and China and Japan jointly are requesting the full five years, while India, Libya and South Korea have sought shorter extensions.  Only Albania, holding an estimated 16 tons of mustard agent, is expected to close out its arsenal by next spring. Actual consideration by delegates of the extension requests is largely occurring behind closed doors or in informal meetings.  The Executive Council to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has backed all the petitions save those from Russia and the United States, and is expected to recommend those as well before the conference makes its final decision on Friday, a diplomatic source said.  “It’s just a matter of when, not a matter of if,” he said. All chemical weapons possessor states have made “significant strides” in disposal efforts over the last year, said Rogelio Pfirter, director general of the treaty’s monitoring body, in his opening statement to the conference.  Fourteen disposal facilities are operating around the world, and nations have to date destroyed 22.5 percent of the global stockpile. However, the United States recently acknowledged that it would not finish its work until 2023, and experts question whether the elimination of weapons in Russia, or of Japanese weapons abandoned decades ago in China, can end by 2012. This issue was clearly on the minds of speakers at the opening plenary sessions to the meeting.  They expressed their concerns, however, in broad terms and rarely named any of the chemical weapons states. “The (Nonaligned Movement) CWC states parties and China express our deepest concern about the current pace of the destruction process,” said Oscar de los Reyes Ramos, Cuba’s envoy to the organization, speaking yesterday for the NAM states and Beijing.  “We reaffirm that all the provisions of the convention must be upheld to the letter.  This equally applies to the deadline set for the destruction of chemical weapons.” “At this conference, we shall … agree to extension requests that are before us for decision.  However, we emphasize the need for all approved extensions to be predicated on effective management of the destruction process and high levels of international transparency and local security,” said Stephen Brady, Australia’s representative at the organization. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, in a speech today that took aim at the United States and Israel without identifying those nations by name, asked whether the U.N. Security Council could address violations of the treaty. Representatives from the weapons states said they understood the seriousness of their work, but highlighted their progress and the difficulty of actually destroying the munitions. “Experience has shown that the task of eliminating the legacy of chemical weapons stocks has proven more difficult than any of us imagined,” said Ambassador Eric Javits, head of the U.S. delegation at the conference.  “While there are great challenges, the commitment to complete destruction of all CW stocks is very clear.” The chemical weapons holders “face technical, financial, environmental and legal problems” as they conduct disposal, said Russian envoy Victor Kholstov.  He said that only 20 percent of the international assistance pledged to Moscow for its disposal of 40,000 metric tons of chemical agent has arrived.  However, Russia counts only the money it receives directly, not funds given to firms contracted by Western nations, said Paul Walker, director of the Legacy Program at Global Green USA. Russia spent more than $700 million this year on disposal efforts and plans to allocate nearly $1 billion in 2007.  As of yesterday, it had destroyed more than 6,000 tons of blister and nerve agents, he said. Beijing and Tokyo have so far recovered more than 1,700 World War II-era munitions from various sites around China, said Takeshi Nakane, director general for disarmament, nonproliferation and science at the Japanese Foreign Ministry. A number of nations said they supported plans to have Executive Council members visit destruction facilities, particularly in Russia and the United States, to ensure that work is progressing.  The envoys from Moscow and Washington did not discuss the matter in their statements. Tension was also evident in comments from speakers representing Cuba, Indonesia and other developing nations regarding the treaty’s Article 11, which calls on member states to facilitate the “fullest possible exchange of chemicals, equipment and scientific and technical information” to promote peaceful uses of chemistry.  They made the case — mostly obliquely, though Cuba made a clear reference to the United States — that developed nations are not meeting their obligations under the provision. “The ‘have-nots’ obviously want what the ‘haves’ have,” Walker said.  The developed nations, however, fear that their technology and materials could be diverted to create weapons, he said. There was more consensus among delegates on the need to continue bolstering the ranks of treaty members and for all states parties to meet major commitments upon joining. The Chemical Weapons Convention has 181 member nations, six more than at this time last year, and only 14 nations remain outside the treaty.  The Bahamas, Congo, Dominican Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Israel and Myanmar have signed but not ratified the treaty, while Angola, Barbados, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, North Korea, Somalia and Syria have never signed on. Treaty nations must fulfill seven requirements under Article 7, which include developing domestic legislation and administrative rules to enforce the treaty’s provisions and designating a national authority to act as a liaison to the organization and other member countries (see GSN, Dec. 1).  Speakers applauded the Executive Council’s recommendation that the organization and states parties for another year continue their intensified program of assistance to nations in meeting those commitments. “It is particularly important that states parties playing prominent roles in the manufacturing, processing and trade of chemicals fully meet their obligations for national implementation,” Javits said.  “The United States will continue its efforts to provide assistance in this area.” Speakers also largely offered support for the planned 2007 OPCW budget.  Funding is proposed to be identical to this year, when the organization received $88 million.  With inflation, that is a drop of about 1.7 percent. The only budget issue still being negotiated is a shift away from OPCW inspections of Schedule 1 and 2 chemical production facilities in favor of an increase in visits to those identified as “other chemical production facilities,” the diplomatic source said.  Schedule 1 sites produce minimal levels of chemicals that have little to no use outside of warfare.  Schedule 2 facilities produce in limited amounts specialty chemicals that could be precursors to warfare agents.  These sites have been inspected regularly and repeatedly.  However, there are more than 5,000 “OPCFs” internationally which use technology that could be used to develop chemical precursors or weapons agents, the source said. The organization wants to increase the number of inspections in 2007 at these sites to 200, 20 more than conducted this year.  Inspections at the Schedule sites would drop, though an exact number was not available.  China has opposed this move, the diplomatic source said, and discussions are continuing. “This is a reduction in numbers and not in quality,” Pfirter said. Back to top       CWC Approaches 10th Anniversary By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire THE HAGUE — The 10th anniversary next year of the entry into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention offers a key opportunity to reaffirm the importance of ending the threat of such weapons, an official at the treaty monitoring body said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 28). “We’d like to highlight the … dangers of CW as weapons of mass destruction,” said Krzysztof Paturej, special projects director for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.  “When you open today the newspaper, you have only maybe one weapon of mass destruction, nuclear weapons.” “We have to highlight this danger, that these weapons exist and you have to eliminate it totally,” he said during a presentation on the sidelines of the conference of states parties to the treaty (see related GSN story, today). The organization body plans a series of events to commemorate the April 29, 2007, anniversary of the pact that bans development, possession and use of chemical weapons. Main events include the dedication of a memorial to the victims of chemical weapons on May 9 near the OPCW headquarters here; a two-day academic forum in September in The Hague; and an industry and protection forum in November. Exhibitions, workshops and lectures are planned for Brussels, Geneva, New York and Vienna.  Additional cultural events and activities in The Hague and elsewhere would be designed to appeal to young people. While most of the events are now scheduled in the Northern Hemisphere, Paturej said he hopes to see activities spread around the world.  Countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America have expressed interest in participating, he said. Along with youth, the events are aimed at engaging states parties and signatory states to the treaty, industry groups and firms, nongovernmental and international organizations and the media. Paturej also expressed hope that they would raise the profile of the multilateral treaty system and of the organization itself. The organization has gone from having 65 members in 1997 to 181 in 2007.  It covers the globe and oversees chemical weapons disposal under strict controls, but is known only to a limited audience, he said. “People ask, ‘OPC what?’” Paturej said. Former OPCW official Serguei Batsanov said the events could also serve as a tool to promote transparency in the work conducted by the organization and its member states, and to begin consideration of the organization’s role in a world free of chemical weapons. Back to top       Hussein Hears Final Witness on Chemical Attacks The final witnesses in former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s genocide trial testified today in a Baghdad courtroom, where they described chemical weapons attacks against Kurds in northern Iraq, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Dec. 4). “After diagnosing the patient, I knew the man had been hit with mustard gas,” said Faiq Mohammed Ahmed, a doctor who treated villagers after an attack in the late 1980s.  He also recounted treating other gas attack victims, including an 8-year-old boy. The prosecution is next expected to begin presenting documentary evidence of Hussein’s involvement with the attacks, AFP reported (Paul Schemm, Agence France-Presse/Khaleej Times, Dec. 6). 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.