U.S. State Department official Sung Kim, shown in Beijing this week, recently held talks with North Korea on disabling nuclear facilities at Yongbyon (Frederic Brown/Getty Images). North Korean Nuclear Disablement to Begin in Three Weeks Disabling North Korea’s nuclear facilities could begin in about three weeks, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 18). The U.S. State Department announced the schedule based on an assessment from agency official Sung Kim, who led a U.S. team of experts on a weeklong trip to North Korea. “Work to actually start the process of disablement could begin somewhere in the next three weeks or so.  So we look forward to that happening,” said State Department spokesman Tom Casey.  ..Full Story

Biological Sciences Must Balance Security With Openness, National Academy Report Says By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The United States must develop policies that help encourage international collaboration in the life sciences while improving oversight of potentially dangerous dual-use technology, a National Academy of Sciences committee concluded in a report released yesterday (see GSN, July 23)...Full Story

Syria Begins Cleanup of Suspected Nuclear Site Syria has started to clear a site attacked by Israel last month in a possible effort to conceal the nature of the facility, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Oct. 15)...Full Story

	Friday, October 19, 2007

Large-Scale Terror Drills Necessary, Chertoff Says U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said yesterday that large-scale terrorism exercises are necessary to prepare local, state and federal agencies to respond together in the face of an actual crisis, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Oct. 17). Some critics have argued that major drills cost too much money and don’t approximate the chaos that would follow an actual incident.  They have said the money spent on the events would be better used for responding to natural disasters. Likening emergency response agencies to sports teams, Chertoff said practice is necessary or “it would be a lousy football team.” He spoke in Portland, Ore., which this week hosted the main component of the fourth TOPOFF terrorism exercise.  Smaller drills were also conducted in Guam and Phoenix, Ariz. While the exercises are necessary, releasing all the details about the events is not, Chertoff said. “We don’t necessarily want to reveal all of the weaknesses or vulnerabilities we’ve detected and put it on the Internet,” he said. An exercise summary is expected to be released within two to three months and participating agencies would receive details, AP reported.  Homeland Security does not expect to issue a full “after action report.”  The House Homeland Security Committee has yet to receive such a report from the 2005 drill (see GSN, Oct. 3; William McCall, Associated Press/KATU.com, Oct. 18). An actual law enforcement response interrupted the events yesterday in Portland, the Oregonian newspaper reported. Bomb-sniffing dogs detected something during a security search of a hotel prior to Chertoff’s arrival.  Police cordoned off the area and halted operations of passing MAX light rail trains. The alert forced the cancellation of a press briefing and a tabletop drill on the aftermath of the mock “dirty bomb” strike on Portland. The suspicious material is believed to be residue left in or on a vehicle by police officers or soldiers who work with explosives and were staying at the hotel during the exercise (Joseph Rose, Oregonian, Oct. 19). Back to top

North Korean Nuclear Disablement to Begin in Three Weeks Disabling North Korea’s nuclear facilities could begin in about three weeks, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 18). The U.S. State Department announced the schedule based on an assessment from agency official Sung Kim, who led a U.S. team of experts on a weeklong trip to North Korea. “Work to actually start the process of disablement could begin somewhere in the next three weeks or so.  So we look forward to that happening,” said State Department spokesman Tom Casey.  “In terms of next steps, what we would be looking for is a technical team to go out and help participate in that actual disablement,” he added. The U.S. team would collaborate with North Korean officials “on the actual specific work of disablement” of the Yongbyon nuclear reactor and other atomic facilities, Casey said. Pyongyang pledged earlier this month to fully declare and disable its nuclear complex by the end of 2007 (see GSN, Oct. 3).  There has been some concern about the definition of disablement and of North Korea’s ultimate willingness to address all areas of its nuclear program, including existing weapons (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Oct. 18). “The reason that North Korea wants to resolve the nuclear issue is because it wants to improve relations with the United States,” South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said today (Jon Herskovitz, Reuters/Washington Post, Oct. 19). Back to top       Syria Begins Cleanup of Suspected Nuclear Site Syria has started to clear a site attacked by Israel last month in a possible effort to conceal the nature of the facility, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Oct. 15). U.S. officials have growing confidence that the site held an unfinished nuclear reactor that was being constructed with North Korean assistance, but Syrian officials have denied that claim.  Aerial images of the site suggest similarities to North Korean nuclear facilities used to produce weapon-grade plutonium, U.S. officials told the Post. The Sept. 6 Israeli air raid has spurred analysts to debate the nature of the threat posed by a Syrian reactor and the appropriateness of the Israeli action. Some experts have said the reactor was reportedly far from completion and therefore nonmilitary responses should have been attempted first. “This isn't like a Road Runner cartoon where you call up Acme Reactors and they deliver a functioning reactor to your backyard.  It takes years to build,” said Joseph Cirincione, of the Center for American Progress. “This is an extremely demanding technology, and I don't think Syria has the technical, engineering or financial base to really support such a reactor.” U.S. or Israeli officials should have alerted the International Atomic Energy Agency when they acquired evidence of the Syrian site, said Arms Control Association head Daryl Kimball. “The reason we have an IAEA and a safeguard system is that, if there is evidence of wrongdoing, it can be presented by a neutral body to the international community so that a collective response can be pursued,” he said.  “It seems to me highly risky and premature for another country to bomb such a facility” (Wright/Warrick, Washington Post, Oct. 19). Following the attack, U.S. intelligence services provided imagery of the Syrian site to the agency, diplomats told the Associated Press.  Early analyses of the images have supported the contention that the target was a nuclear site, the diplomats said, while emphasizing that analysts were continuing their work (George Jahn, Associated Press I/Google News, Oct. 19). Syria’s post-attack behavior has nevertheless raised suspicions and appears to be similar to Iran’s strategy of dealing with the international community regarding its nuclear activities, said former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton. “The common practice for people with legitimate civilian nuclear power programs is to be transparent, because they have nothing to hide,” he said (Wright/Warrick, Washington Post). Meanwhile, a U.N. interpreter faces disciplinary action for mistranslating a Syrian statement to the General Assembly’s disarmament committee this week (see GSN, Oct. 18). The interpreter’s account of a Syrian official’s speech included an admission that Israel had attacked a Syrian nuclear site.  The official, however, did not use the word ‘nuclear,’ an error that may have been caused by the interpreter translating into English from an Arabic-to-French interpretation of the speech. “Action will be taken against the freelance interpreter to the fullest extent of the U.N. rules and regulations,” U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said yesterday. U.N. staffers familiar with institutional rules said the interpreter’s freelance contract would probably not be renewed (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/International Herald Tribune, Oct. 18). Back to top       Iranian President Denies Russian Nuclear Proposal Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday denied a state media report that Russian President Vladimir Putin had made a secret proposal to Iran’s supreme leader to resolve Tehran’s nuclear confrontation with the West, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Oct. 17). Putin “did not say any word” about a proposal on the nuclear standoff, Ahmadinejad said, according to Iranian state media.  “We both emphasized that we were determined to negotiate” on the nuclear program, he added. “There was no nuclear proposal.  Putin's message was a message of comprehensive cooperation and friendship,” Ahmadinejad said. Earlier reports indicated that Putin might have suggested that Iran suspend controversial uranium enrichment activities in exchange for a “time out” on U.N. sanctions. The Associated Press could not find an immediate explanation for inconsistencies in the Wednesday and Thursday media reports or for the conflicting statements quoted from Ahmadinejad and Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It is possible that Putin took his proposal directly to Khamenei, who holds ultimate authority in all Iranian political decisions and is believed to play a close role in managing the nation’s nuclear program (Nasser Karimi, Associated Press I/Google News, Oct. 18). Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini yesterday dismissed U.S. President George W. Bush’s assertion that Iran’s nuclear program might lead to the development of nuclear weapons that could trigger “World War III,” Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Oct. 18). “They are using the idea of war to cover up their domestic policies and try to divert attention from their problems,” Hosseini said in a statement. “The statements by the American president, who claims that Iran is seeking to make an atomic bomb, are part of a psychological war,” he said (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Oct. 18). The Bush administration’s press secretary yesterday qualified Bush’s warning as “a rhetorical point,” AP reported. “The president was not making any war plans, and he wasn't making any declarations,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.  “He was making a point, and the point is that we do not believe — and neither does the international community believe — that Iran should be allowed to pursue nuclear weapons” (Associated Press II/Google News, Oct. 18). U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said yesterday that by acquiring nuclear weapons, Iran would start a Middle East arms race that would increase the risk of a major war “with who knows what consequences,” AFP reported. “If Iran acquires nuclear weapons it seems very probable that there will be other states in the region that will decide for their own protection they will have to obtain nuclear weapons as well,” he said. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the Bush administration is addressing Iran’s controversial nuclear activities using diplomatic pressure and that he considered “the military operation one of the last resort.” “From a military standpoint there is more than enough reserve to respond if that in fact is what the national leadership wanted to do,” he said.  “And so I don't think we are too stretched in that regard” (Agence France-Presse II/Google News, Oct. 18). Elsewhere, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert urged Putin yesterday during a meeting in Moscow to press for new U.N. Security Council sanctions over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment, AP reported. Olmert “expressed his opinion that effective sanctions by all the international community would have the potential to stop Iran pursuing the nuclear path,” spokeswoman Miri Eisin said. Putin said he recognized Olmert’s concern over Iran’s nuclear program and vowed to share details on his discussions with Iranian officials. “We know how concerned you are about the situation surrounding the Iranian (nuclear program),” Putin said.  “I am ready to share the results of my visit” (Associated Press III/Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 19). Back to top       U.S. Charges Chinese Native in Sensor Export Bust A federal grand jury in California yesterday charged a 39-year-old Chinese woman living in Connecticut with trying to acquire small sensors used to measure the force of nuclear explosions for shipment to her home country, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 23). According to the indictment, undercover federal agents received an e-mail from Qing Li in April about buying the sensors, which are manufactured by California-based Endevco. Corp. and can be used in missile and artillery development.  The U.S. State Department has classified the sensors as defense equipment requiring special approval to export. Qing Li requested up to 30 of the $2,500 sensors to be shipped to mainland China through Hong Kong as “a favor for a friend in China,” according to a criminal complaint.  She later added that if the devices were effective, her Chinese buyer could look to buy up to 100. A partner working with Qing Li reportedly admitted earlier this month the sensors were intended to be sent to “a special agency, a scientific research institute in China.” Officials said that Qing Li never received the sensors, but it was uncertain if she had obtained weapons or equipment for export in the past.  Her accomplice in the attempted deal has not been detained, named or indicted (Allison Hoffman, Associated Press/MSNBC, Oct. 19). Back to top       India, Pakistan Open Nuclear Peace Talks India and Pakistan began a daylong discussion today intended to further reduce the likelihood of an accidental nuclear conflict between the neighboring rivals, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Sept. 18). The meeting continued a peace process begun by the nuclear-armed nations in January 2004, according to an Indian Foreign ministry statement.  The sides were expected to review progress in implementing confidence-building measures as well as security matters involving the United Nations and other international institutions, the statement said. The two sides agreed in February to immediately notify one another of any nuclear accidents.  Before that, they pledged to annually exchange lists of nuclear facilities and provide each other with advance warning of any ballistic missile tests (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Oct. 19). Back to top

Biological Sciences Must Balance Security With Openness, National Academy Report Says By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The United States must develop policies that help encourage international collaboration in the life sciences while improving oversight of potentially dangerous dual-use technology, a National Academy of Sciences committee concluded in a report released yesterday (see GSN, July 23). The recommendation drives at thorny issues confronting those working in the biological sciences, including the “dual-use dilemma” — the potential for legitimate research to be turned in the wrong hands toward weapons purposes. The report’s authors also note that “the materials and equipment required to create and propagate a biological attack using naturally occurring or genetically manipulated pathogens remain decidedly ‘low-tech,’ inexpensive, and widely available.” Keeping an eye on the type of dual-use technology and information that potential terrorists could use to develop a biological weapon becomes even more complex when one considers the speed at which the scientific knowledge is barreling forward. In 2002, after three years of research, a team of scientists published work describing the synthetic reconstruction of a polio virus (see GSN, July 12, 2002).  The following year, another team of researchers reconstructed a virus of similar complexity in just two weeks. “Although the risk that pathogens will be used for harm has been around for centuries, the emerging global, fast-paced, and collaborative nature of the life sciences now makes protecting information, personnel, and materials for abuse that much more difficult,” the report’s authors concluded. Even in the wake of the 2001 anthrax attacks (see GSN, Oct. 4) and increasing anxieties regarding the prospect of bioterrorism (see GSN, Oct. 12), it is difficult to gauge the risk of publishing sensitive information that has dual-use potential. In October 2005, the journal Science published the genome of the deadly 1918 influenza virus, information that could potentially, in the wrong hands, wreak mayhem.  Just months before another article in a scientific publication modeled a bioterrorist strike on the milk supply of the United States (see GSN, June 29, 2005). While both articles could conceivably offer dangerous aid to terrorists, some argued, the committee behind the National Academy of Sciences report found that the prevailing view among scientists is “the risk of bioterrorism is far outweighed by the benefit of further scientific work based upon openly disseminated information.” The committee also found most scientists believed “that open dissemination, in virtually all cases, is best for national security as well.” “The reasoning is that the ability to further the scientific frontier is based upon knowledge of where the frontier lies,” they said.  “Obscuring the scientific frontier could limit the progress of the scientific enterprise as a whole and perhaps would limit the abilities of terrorists very little, if at all.” In some cases, however, those in which limiting the publication of information and research could benefit national security, some form of restriction should be imposed, the authors concluded.  “How that determination would be made and by whom is not clear.” To navigate the “dual-use dilemma” the U.S. government, leveraging work that is already under way at the Health and Human Services Department, should develop oversight policies that encourage international scientific collaboration and control strategies of biological materials while “harmonizing” with local oversight, the committee wrote. “The history of U.S. biosafety oversight of the life sciences and biotechnology research hinges on self-governance by researchers and on local risk-based oversight,” they said.  The report’s authors, members of the scientific and intelligence communities, also suggested establishing a national-level education program on the basic principles of risk-based biosecurity. Also this week, experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the J. Craig Venter Institute released a study addressing the question of how to regulate technology that can produce genes, and also viruses, synthetically.  Among the group’s suggestions were requiring firms to use software to screen orders for suspicious requests and requiring owners of DNA synthesizers to be licensed and their machines registered. Back to top

Iraqi Leaders Clash Over Executions Iraq’s three-member presidency council has continued to challenge the death sentences of the man known as “Chemical Ali” and two other former high-level figures from Saddam Hussein’s regime, the Associated Press reported today.  The ongoing debate comes amid concerns that executing the men or conversely failing to do so could ignite violent backlashes by different ethnic factions and hinder reconciliation efforts (see GSN, Oct. 18). Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has refused to give the final go-ahead on the executions arguably mandated by a provision in Iraq’s constitution. Talabani’s Kurdish heritage could give his opinion extra weight with Iraqi Kurds seeking justice for Ali Hassan al-Majid — known as “Chemical Ali” — for his role in mass killings of Kurdish communities in the late 1980s.  The two other men — former Defense Minister Sultan Hashim Ahmad al-Tai and former Iraqi military deputy operations chief Hussein Rashid Mohammed — were also sentenced to death for orchestrating the Anfal campaign linked to the deaths of up to 180,000 Kurds. Tariq al-Hashemi, one of two Iraqi vice presidents, also said the presidency council must sign off on the executions.  The Sunni warned that carrying out the executions could result in a wave of revenge killings by Sunnis. “The American troops who are keeping the convicted people must not hand-over them to any side without permission from the presidency council,” al-Hashemi said in response to recent rumors that the executions were imminent. However, when Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh was asked at the White House if al-Majid would be executed in the near future, he replied, “Well, I think so, yes, in the coming days the execution will come.” Iraqi legal analysts remain divided over whether the constitution requires the presidency council to approve the executions of former regime officials convicted of carrying out war crimes. Judge Munir Hadad noted that the executions of Saddam Hussein and three other former regime officials were carried out without approval from the presidency council. “There is no need for a presidential decree because four people were executed without such a decree,” he said.  “It is a political problem and not [a] legal one.  Legally, there is no problem.  It is political interference.” A significant point of controversy in the current round of executions has been the death sentence given to al-Tai, whom many Iraqis of all sects have considered a reputable officer in spite of his connections to the Hussein regime. U.S. and Iraqi officials reported that the United States maintained custody yesterday of the three former regime officials. “Our understanding is that there are still discussions within the government of Iraq about how to proceed with this case and we are waiting for further clarification on the issue,” said U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Mirembe Nantongo (Kim Gamel, Associated Press/San Diego Union Tribune, Oct. 19). Back to top       China Worried About Chem Weapons Disposal Schedule The Chinese government is concerned that Japan’s investigation of a chemical weapons disposal contractor might slow the collection and elimination of roughly 400,000 munitions abandoned in China after World War II, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 17). “We hope that this issue will not affect the process of the (disposal) work.  We hope that Japan can take a responsible attitude to settle this issue at an early date,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao. Japanese authorities on Wednesday raided several subsidiaries of contractor Pacific Consultants International, which is suspected of misusing $858,000 meant for weapons disposal.  This would not be the first time the firm had been linked to misappropriation of funds from government contracts, officials said. Tokyo in 1999 pledged to fund disposal of chemical weapons in China, a project that would include construction of a destruction facility.  Progress to date has been limited, AP reported. China has linked at least 2,000 deaths to the weapons (Chisaki Watanabe, Associated Press I, Oct. 18). Ninety percent of the shells and canisters have yet to be recovered and work is not yet under way on the disposal plant, AP reported.  Japan last year successfully requested a five-year extension to 2012 to complete weapons disposal under the Chemical Weapons Convention (see GSN, Dec. 11, 2006). “If the Japanese government says that the project is delayed due to the company’s scandal, it is using the scandal as an excuse,” said Chinese lawyer and activist Su Xiangxiang (Mari Yamaguchi, Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, Oct. 20).     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.