International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei (center), pictured today in Vienna, urged Iran to provide the agency with more information on its nuclear program (Dieter Nagl/Getty Images). ElBaradei Pushes for Solution to Iran Nuclear Crisis By Greg Webb Global Security Newswire VIENNA — The world’s top nuclear official today urged the international community to resume diplomatic efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear standoff, and expressed cautious hope that a deal could be reached soon to avoid further escalating the crisis (see GSN, March 3)...Full Story

U.S. Plans to Maintain, Modernize Nuclear Arsenal A top U.S. official on Friday acknowledged that Washington does not intend to give up its nuclear arsenal in the near future, Agence France-Presse reported Saturday (see GSN, Feb. 1)...Full Story

Guards Claim Poor Security at DHS HQ Private guards said that security at the U.S. Homeland Security Department’s headquarters in Washington is lacking, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Feb. 28)...Full Story

	Monday, March 6, 2006

Guards Claim Poor Security at DHS HQ Private guards said that security at the U.S. Homeland Security Department’s headquarters in Washington is lacking, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Feb. 28). The guards have made lawmakers aware of their concerns, which include poor training, failed security tests and troubled reactions to biological weapons and bomb threats.  Security personnel claim they have no training on how to respond to a WMD attack and that ineffective chemical detection equipment has replaced dogs. Two senators have asked for the DHS inspector general to investigate the allegations. In one incident, an envelop with white powder last fall was taken near the office of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, then taken outside and shaken without any evacuation of the area, guard said. This incident “stands as one glaring example” of security problems at the department, said security guard Derrick Daniels. “I had never previously been given training ... describing how to respond to a possible chemical attack,” said Daniels, who at the time of the incident worked for Wackenhut Services Inc. (see GSN, Oct. 7, 2005), which provides security for the Homeland Security headquarters.  “I wouldn't feel safe nowhere on this compound as an officer.” Department officials said they presently cannot control Wackenhut’s training, but said improvements would be made with a new contract. A Homeland Security spokesman said the letter had already been irradiated and that the incident was blown out of proportion. Daniels said that during the white powder incident, the area where the letter was found was not evacuated for an hour and that biohazard face shields were not used. He also said that once the evacuation order was given, many employees had left for lunch and had to be located and quarantined. Homeland Security spokesman Brian Doyle said “"the incident was resolved before anything was moved” (Larry Margasak, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 6). Back to top       Deeper Inquiry into Ports Deal Expected Port inspections, employee background checks and reviews of United Arab Emirates antiterrorism efforts are expected to be included in a Bush administration study of a deal in which Dubai Ports World would take control of six U.S. ports, the New York Times reported Saturday (see GSN, March 3). “This is a full review without preconceptions,” said Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Stewart Baker. “We are going to give this transaction a very robust examination.” The company agreed last week to resubmit its application to manage the ports. Senate Republicans and Democrats have demanded to be kept informed of the review process. The review of the deal is due to take 45 days and then be submitted to President George W. Bush. He would accept or reject the deal, according to White House officials. Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt conducted the original 30-day inquiry into the deal.  Baker said the United Arab Emirates’ record on fighting terrorism would be a key piece of the new inquiry. “It is appropriate to examine the government record, as well as the company record,” he said. Expected to be looked into are efforts to stop terrorists from using financial institutions in the United Arab Emirates as well as the company’s work to stop weapons smugglers and the movement of parts used for nuclear weapons through its ports. Such dual-use equipment in 2003 passed through Dubai and on to Libya, the Times reported. Baker said Dubai Ports employees at American ports would be examined to determine if they are on terrorist watch lists. The company has pledged to turn over information on these workers, Baker said (Lipton/Sanger, New York Times, March 4). Back to top

ElBaradei Pushes for Solution to Iran Nuclear Crisis By Greg Webb Global Security Newswire VIENNA — The world’s top nuclear official today urged the international community to resume diplomatic efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear standoff, and expressed cautious hope that a deal could be reached soon to avoid further escalating the crisis (see GSN, March 3). International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei primarily called on Iran to provide the agency with more information about its nuclear program. “We need to interview people, we need to have access to documents. We are getting some transparency, but not with the magnitude, the speed expected, and I hope that Iran will continue to show transparency, speed up the transparency measures,” he told reporters at the outset of the quarterly meeting of the agency’s governing board. “The earlier we are able to clarify the past, the better for Iran to be able to regulate the future in its relationship with Europe and the rest of the international community.” This week’s meeting of the board follows recent efforts by Iran to work out a deal with Russia and the three major European Union powers, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Those talks were unable to find firm common ground, however, and the prospect of the U.N. Security Council taking a serious look at the issue appears to have grown. Late last year the agency board found Iran to be in noncompliance with its nuclear safeguards agreement (see GSN, Sept. 26, 2005). Last month, the board formally reported the Iranian nuclear crisis to the U.N. Security Council, representing an escalation in the international response to Iran’s nuclear activities. Senior officials from the permanent members of the Security Council agreed, however, not to debate Iran at the council level until this week’s board meeting has concluded. Council consideration of the matter could lead to sanctions against Iran. Over the weekend, officials sparred over the consequences of the latest failed talks. In Washington, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton issued a stern warning. “[Iran] must be made aware that if it continues down the path of international isolation, there will be tangible and painful consequences,” Bolton said yesterday in a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Associated Press reported. For their part, Iranian officials suggested that Iran might ramp up its uranium enrichment activities and trim its oil output if the U.N. Security Council decided to act. “We are not interested in using oil as a weapon ... but if the conditions change, it could affect our decision,” chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said yesterday, according to Reuters. “If Iran's nuclear dossier is referred to the U.N. Security Council, (large-scale) uranium enrichment will be resumed,” he added, according to AP. ElBaradei today asked nations to tone down their language.  “Confrontation could be counterproductive. It would not provide us with a durable solution. The earlier that we bring the parties back to the negotiating table the better for everybody,” he said. “I call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint in their public statements.” Members of the agency board are expected this week to consider a report on Iranian nuclear activities that ElBaradei completed last week. That document described the agency’s continuing concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities. “It is regrettable, and a matter of concern, that … uncertainties related to the scope and nature of Iran’s nuclear program have not been clarified after three years of intensive agency verification,” the report says. In particular, it singles out Iran’s refusal to turn over documents about shaping uranium metal into forms for nuclear weapons. It also highlights a discrepancy between the quality of plutonium Iran actually produced in some experiments with the quality Tehran declared. Those ongoing problems represent continuing fodder for U.S. rhetorical guns. “Iran’s leaders have not provided the full cooperation to the IAEA that Dr. ElBaradei has requested. Iran’s leaders have not resolved any of the outstanding problems. The bottom line is that Iran’s leaders have not taken steps to give the international community confidence that they are not seeking nuclear weapons,” said a U.S. State Department official at the meeting here today. “Iran is seeking to acquire the material, equipment and expertise to produce nuclear weapons. This is our position.  They’re enriching uranium and they plan to install thousands of centrifuges in a full-scale enrichment facility within a year,” he added. “ElBaradei’s report validates the findings the board has already made: the finding of noncompliance, the finding of the absence of confidence and Dr. ElBaradei’s report reinforces the decision the board already took to report Iran to the Security Council,” said another State Department official, who made clear the U.S. view of Iran’s goal in nuclear research. “This is not basic research and development. Clearly they want to be able to move ahead and master [nuclear] technology. This is the logical progression they would want to do if they wanted to enrich material for a nuclear weapon,” he said. “They would … conduct it on a pilot scale then replicate it either at a facility we know about, so they’re in a position to break out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or at facilities we don’t know about so they can covertly produce this material,” he added. A Deal in the Works? In the background of this week’s agency meeting, one compromise solution could be under serious consideration, the Associated Press reported today. Russian officials are willing to allow Iran to operate a small number of uranium enrichment centrifuges as a face-saving gesture, and in exchange, Iran would agree to let Russia produce the nuclear fuel for Iran’s planned nuclear power program. Russia is seeking agency guidance on how many centrifuges Iran should be allowed to run without posing a threat of producing enough material for a nuclear weapon, AP reported. Russia has also sought European Union support for the plan. The United States, however, has made clear that Iran must at least suspend its enrichment activities while agency inspectors verify the nation’s peaceful intent. The State Department officials did not rule a long-term solution that would allow Iran to operate some centrifuges, but said any such agreement would be far in the future. “What the Board of Governors has made clear, and EU-3 has made the clear and the Russians have made clear, is that there needs to be a suspension of these enrichment facilities and there’s going to be a prolonged period of time necessary to restore confidence,” said one of the officials. “Two years is not a prolonged period of time.” Technical Problems While officials from Iran and the West have gradually ratcheted up diplomatic pressure, technical problems in Iran might reduce some of the urgency to find a rapid solution, the New York Times reported yesterday. Setbacks in building centrifuges and in producing high-quality uranium gas for the centrifuges mean that Iran faces large hurdles before it could produce enough material for a nuclear weapon, according to the Times. Back to top       U.S. Plans to Maintain, Modernize Nuclear Arsenal A top U.S. official on Friday acknowledged that Washington does not intend to give up its nuclear arsenal in the near future, Agence France-Presse reported Saturday (see GSN, Feb. 1). “The United States will, for the foreseeable future, need to retain both nuclear forces and the capabilities to sustain and modernize those forces,” said Linton Brooks, head the National Nuclear Security Administration. The 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, to which the United States is a party, states that signatories will “facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery.” Article 6 of the document states that “each of the parties to the treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.” The then-leaders of the United States and Russia in 1998 also pledged their commitment to “the ultimate goal of nuclear disarmament.” Brooks’ statement Friday in Tennessee seems to contradict that commitment, according to AFP. He said, however, that the United States nuclear program is “entirely consistent with our international obligations.” “The end of the Cold War did not end the importance of nuclear weapons,” he said.  “I do not see any chance of the political conditions for abolition arising in my lifetime, nor do I think abolition could be verified if it were negotiated.” Brooks also rejected the notion that new nuclear weapons efforts — such as the Reliable Replacement Warhead program (see GSN, March 2) undercut nonproliferation efforts, saying that countries such as Iran or North Korea “are reacting more to U.S. conventional weapons superiority than to anything we have done or are doing in the nuclear weapons arena.” (Agence France-Presse/Gulf Times, March 4). Back to top       U.S. Says Congress Will Address India Nuclear Deal The U.S. ambassador to India said the nuclear technology sharing agreement finalized last week between New Delhi and Washington would receive “positive attention” from Congress, Agence France Presse reported today (see GSN, March 3). “The members (of Congress) will give very close scrutiny to this deal in order to determine how they are going to vote,” Ambassador David Mulford said in an interview with Indian television. U.S. lawmakers must approve the deal before it can be implemented.  “I believe it will get the sort of positive attention that it deserves,” Mulford said (Agence France-Presse, March 5). The German Foreign Ministry said that the Nuclear Suppliers Group is expected to review the deal at an upcoming meeting, Reuters reported. “How the international community will deal with this issue will come up at one of the upcoming sessions of the NSG ... which will then take a position on it,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Martin Jaeger. Congressional approval and support from the Nuclear Suppliers Group for the deal could open the door for India to begin trading nuclear technology with other countries, according to Reuters. “I would like to say that there have been no American proposals or documents put to the group so far,” Jaeger said (Reuters, March 3). The Press Trust of India reported that negotiations last week on the U.S.-India deal were “tough, tortuous and down-to-the-wire” and that “the deal nearly did not happen but for ... last-minute intervention by the U.S. leader,” Kyodo News reported. Sources close to the deal said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on the eve of President George W. Bush’s visit to India last week, phoned Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to say that New Delhi’s negotiators were making “impossible demands” and to ask for more flexibility.  Singh, however, would not back down, but took the unusual step of greeting Bush at the airport. Bush told Singh that, “I want this deal.” “Even as flashbulbs popped, the two leaders were actually negotiating the nuclear deal,” according to PTI. In their conversation, Rice told Singh that India must accept permanent international safeguards on nuclear facilities. Singh said he would agree to that as long as the United States ensured that India would receive a permanent supply of fuel. He added that he could not place more than 65 percent of nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring. Rice also called for Singh to place all future civilian nuclear facilities under safeguards.   The prime minister said he would agree to this as long as India decided which facilities were designated as civilian.  “Finally, the U.S. accepted the Indian position, agreeing to permanent supply of fuel and New Delhi’s right to classify its nuclear facilities as civilian or military,” PTI reported (Kyodo News/Yahoo!News, March 5). Back to top       Australia Considers Uranium Sales to India Australian Prime Minister John Howard said that his nation would consider selling uranium to India if it believes safeguards will be placed on New Delhi’s civilian nuclear reactors, Reuters reported today (see GSN, March 3). Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said he would ask Howard to support the Indian-U.S. nuclear technology sharing deal in talks this week. The potential sale of uranium is also expected to be discussed. “We do have a long-standing policy of only selling uranium to countries that are part of the [Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty] regime, but we will have a look at what the Americans have done and when we get a bit more information about that we'll further assess it,” Howard said in comments released yesterday. “Australia does have large supplies of uranium ... and provided the rules are followed and the safeguards are met, we are willing to sell, but we have to be satisfied about the safeguards,” he added (Reuters, March 6). Singh said India needed uranium to supply energy for its growing economy, the Australian Associated Press reported. “We would very much like ... Australia to sell uranium to India,” Singh said. Howard’s comments on selling the material to India sparked criticism from environmental organizations and Australia’s opposition parties. They charge the sale of uranium would undermine the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. “This is a major change. … Howard talks constantly about global security and yet what he is doing is (to) facilitate BHP selling uranium into China and India (and) is making the world less safe,” said Australian Greens Senator Christine Milne. Howard today said the Australian policy on uranium sales has not changed. “There is no change in policy,” he said.   “I have said, [Foreign Minister Alexander Downer] has said, that we have for 30 years had a policy of not selling uranium to countries that do not adhere to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.” “We have both said ... there is no current intention to change that policy,” he added. He, however, did not rule out future changes in policy. “We are ... interested in what the Americans and the Indians have agreed to, there are a lot of good things about that agreement, including in particular that for the first time India's civilian nuclear facilities will come under international inspections,” Howard said. “We will listen to what the Indians have (to say)” (Australian Associated Press/Sydney Morning Herald, March 6). Back to top       No Chance of Nuclear Deal for Pakistan, Bush Says U.S. President George W. Bush indicated Saturday that the United States was unlikely in the foreseeable future to offer Pakistan a civilian nuclear agreement comparable to the one struck last week with India, the New York Times reported (see GSN, March 3). Bush and Pakistani leader Gen. Pervez Musharraf discussed the issue Saturday morning. “I explained that Pakistan and India are different countries with different needs and different histories,” Bush said at news conference later that day with Musharraf. “So as we proceed forward, our strategy will take in effect those well-known differences.” Bush administration officials had said earlier that nuclear proliferation and terrorism remained concerns in Pakistan that would preclude such a deal between Washington and Islamabad, according to the Times (Bumiller/Gall, New York Times, March 5). Back to top       France to Support Libya’s Nuclear Energy Program France plans to sign an agreement with Libya to assist with the development of Tripoli’s civilian nuclear program, Reuters reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 17, 2005). “An agreement on cooperation in civilian nuclear power will be signed [in] the next two to three weeks,” Patrick Ollier, president of the French National Assembly’s economic affairs committee, told Reuters after returning to Paris from Tripoli. “The governments have already given their approval,” he added. Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qadhafi renounced weapons of mass destruction in 2003, but said at the time that he still hoped to develop a peaceful nuclear program, according to Reuters (Emmanuel Jarry, Reuters, March 5). Back to top       U.S., South Korean Diplomats Discuss Stalled North Korea Nuclear Disarmament Negotiations Top South Korean and U.S. envoys to stalled talks on North Korea’s nuclear ambitions met Saturday at Seoul’s main international airport, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, March 3). “We exchanged opinions on the situation and discussed general things,” Chun Young-woo, Seoul’s new chief nuclear negotiator, said today. “It would be good to resume the talks at an early date but the resumption itself is not an objective,” Chun added. “The talks would be of no use if no conditions are in place to make any progress” (Kwang-Tae Kim, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 5). The Indian-U.S. civilian nuclear technology sharing agreement reached last week could undermine the North Korea talks and lead to nuclear proliferation in the region, experts have said. China, which sees India as a strategic rival, is likely to attempt to undermine the deal, said Mohan Malik, a professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu. China has already offered nuclear technology to Bangladesh, and Myanmar could also be seeking such assistance, according to AP. “China could step up proliferation of nuclear technologies in India’s neighborhood to countervail India-U.S. ties,” Malik said. The deal could also undermine the North Korea talks, other experts said. “In the short run, it will probably make the U.S.-North Korean relationship more fractious,” said Donald Gregg, a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea. “What is needed is a sustained and mutually respectful dialogue to be established. Only within such a framework may it be possible to fully explain to Pyongyang why we decided to do what we have done in New Delhi, and to work out a solid foundation for an improved relationship.” “Regardless of U.S. intentions or actions, North Korea will choose to take the wrong signal, and try to manipulate this development for its own gain,” said Balbina Hwang, a Northeast Asia policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation. Nations “should ignore this rhetoric, and instead focus on North Korea’s actions, and continue to insist that the North behave responsibly” (Burt Herman, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 6). Back to top

L.A. County Bioterror Spending Problems Identified An estimated $2 million of the federal grant money directed to Los Angeles County for bioterrorism preparedness has been used for public relations, response to unrelated health problems and the purchase of questionable services and supplies, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, Feb. 15). The county spent some of the money on extras to participate in a 2004 smallpox vaccination drill because officials could not find enough volunteers. Central Casting received more than $57,000, while the county spent $10,000 on gift certificates and $13,600 for other gifts for the participants. Most of the federal money has been spent to train first responders. However, the definition of terrorism readiness has sometimes been stretched, drawing concern from inside the county Health Services Department.  “Unless we have a compelling public message, this seems to be a big waste of taxpayer funds,” said John Wallace, head of external and government relations at the department, in a 2004 e-mail message. Wallace was addressing a proposed $1 million press campaign. “I am concerned that it will appear that we are trying to spend grant dollars for the sake of not having to return them, and that is not acceptable,” he said. The department has not used one out of every six dollars allocated by the federal government from 2002 to 2004 for bioterrorism readiness. In that period, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention granted more than $2.7 billion to cities, states and counties to prepare for a bioterrorism attack. Los Angeles County received $83 million, $14 million of which was not spent.  As there has not been a biological attack, it is hard to say whether the spending issues have hurt preparedness. However, it is clear that the county has fallen behind on projects in important areas, such as the construction of a new public health laboratory.  According to documents reviewed by the Times, the county has spent: — More than $128,000 on trinkets such as letter openers, whistles, flashlight and pens that have been given to the public; — $1,000 for nylon discs for Public Health Week; — $4,145 on stress balls, notepads and clipboards for a forensic epidemiology conference; — at least $170,000 to train staff on how to prepare videos for online viewing; — $4,675 for a teleprompter, as well as $450 for improvements to the machine; — $2,187 for a laptop computer to write teleprompter scripts; — $3,392 for a portable microphone; — hundreds of dollars to replace a podium “damaged by rodents”; — 70 high-end chairs that cost $600 each, as well as 800 computers; and — $18,000 to print fliers and cards with West Nile virus information and $4,629 for printer cartridges in response to an “increased amount of bite reports” in connection with West Nile. The California Health Services Department does not allow counties to spend bioterrorism funding on West Nile, according to Betsey Lyman, California’s deputy director for public health emergency preparedness. Los Angeles County Public Health Director Jonathan Fielding defended the spending, arguing it meets federal guidelines. For example, CDC Julie Gerberding approved the West Nile spending, he said. He said the teleprompter had been used three times in training and that it was cheaper to hire actors than to use country employees for the smallpox drill. “Even actors might need to know how to reach the BT [bioterrorism] Web site or have the material available on how to prepare themselves — that was our thinking,” said Sharon Grigsby, county bioterrorism preparedness director. The public health laboratory, which was supposed to be completed by November 2004, will not be done until late spring and is set to cost more than $15 million. Original estimates had the cost at $9 million, but increased because of rain and “unforeseen structural and infrastructure problems,” according to county records. Various problems have been identified with Los Angeles County spending requests. Alison Johnson, director of the CDC state and local readiness division. Some restrictions have been placed on the county’s and better justification is now required. “I would say they have more issues than what we would normally see,” Johnson said. “They definitely have more issues than average.” When told of the spending irregularities discovered in the documents, she said, “You’ve raised some valid concerns.” Donna Knutson, an official at the agency senior to Johnson, later said that Los Angeles County’s problems were not excessive (Charles Ornstein, Los Angeles Times, March 6). Back to top

Chemical Weapons Discovered in Clam Processing Plant Four 75 mm weapons filled with mustard agent were discovered last month in a clam processing plant in Delaware (see GSN, Feb. 21). U.S. Army personnel recovered one of the munitions on Feb. 24, and collected the other three on Feb. 28, according to a U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency press release. The Army team took the weapons to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware. The munitions will remain there until they are destroyed (U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency press release, March 2). Back to top

U.S. Defense Department to Investigate MIT Missile Defense Research Fraud Allegations Allegations of fraudulent missile defense research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology will be examined by the U.S. Defense Department, the Boston Globe reported Saturday (see GSN, Jan. 2, 2003). “We wanted to conduct our own investigation, that was Plan A,” said MIT Associate Provost Claude Canizares. “What we have here is Plan B.” The Pentagon, backed by two scientists at the university’s Lincoln Laboratory, called a 1997 infrared missile sensor test successful. However, MIT professor Theodore Postol conducted an independent analysis and concluded that problems with the test were so great that the MIT scientists could not have endorsed the results in good faith. Postol criticized the Pentagon’s plan to launch its own inquiry. “What MIT is in effect doing is turning over responsibilities for oversight of its own academic operations to the Department of Defense,” he said. A 2003 study by an MIT professor concluded that the university should look into Postol’s allegations. The Missile Defense Agency refused to allow MIT investigators access to the pertinent documents, according to the Globe (Marcella Bombardieri, Boston Globe, March 4). 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.