Critics have expressed concern about Bush administration plans to place conventional warheads on submarine-launched ballistic missiles, such as this Trident 2 missile (Getty Images). Pentagon Must Avoid Global Strike “Ambiguity,” Report Says By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. House and Senate lawmakers issued a new conference report last week that warns against developing conventional missiles that, if launched, might mimic the flight profile of nuclear weapons and potentially trigger a dangerous response from abroad (see GSN, Nov. 7)...Full Story

U.N. Powers Delay Iran Sanctions Moves Until 2008 A split between Western powers and Russia and China over a proposed sanctions resolution against Iran has forced the U.N. Security Council to table any action on the measure until next year, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Dec. 13)...Full Story

U.S. Lawmakers Discuss Chemical Security Rules By Andy Leonatti CongressDaily WASHINGTON — Senior Democrats on the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee said yesterday that they favored making permanent the regulations issued by the Homeland Security Department to secure chemical manufacturing and storage sites (see GSN, Nov. 26)...Full Story

	Thursday, December 13, 2007

House Passes New Terror Insurance Bill By Bill Swindell CongressDaily WASHINGTON — House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said Wednesday he would not hold up final passage of legislation that would renew the federal government's terrorism risk insurance program in the face of the Senate's continuing take-it-or-leave-it stance with its version (see GSN, Oct. 18). Frank's admission makes it much more likely the House will clear the Senate bill next week, right before the program expires Dec. 31, to the relief of the insurance and commercial real estate industry that had been lobbying hard for a lengthy extension. Frank had threatened that the House would only pass a three-month extension to provide time for negotiations with the Senate over differences between the two chambers' versions.  The Senate passed its bill by voice vote Nov. 16. “Members have asked … and in the end we may just have to accept what the Senate has sent us.  That's possible.  We have preserved the option to do that,” Frank said. But he did not want give up so soon, thus the House passed by a 303-116 vote Wednesday a slimmed-down version of legislation the House originally approved Sept. 19. The revised House bill would reauthorize the program for seven years, like the Senate-passed version.  The original House bill extended the program for 15 years. It also would not contain language requiring carriers to make available coverage for a nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attack; the provision was included in the earlier House version. But Frank kept some items in the original bill, hoping to sway senators, most notably Banking ranking member Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) to accept at least a few provisions.  That includes language expanding the program to group life coverage, which life insurers support, and lowering the program's trigger from $100 million to $50 million, important for small carriers. The changes have not altered the political dynamic. The White House threatened to veto the revised bill.  Shelby also is sticking to his stance. “[The Senate bill] was unanimously approved by the Senate and has the backing of the Administration as well as strong industry support.  Senator Shelby believes it has the best chance of becoming law before the program expires at the end of the month,” said a Shelby spokesman. House Financial Services ranking member Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) said during the debate that Frank should have just moved the Senate bill even though he supported a provision the Massachusetts lawmaker was pushing in negotiations, language that would tighten rules life insurers must follow in offering coverage for those who travel to potentially dangerous countries. “The Senate has said they are not going to include group life.  So why put a provision on about group life when the Senate already said it is not going to include group life?” Bachus noted. Frank replied that his stance was as much for defending the House's prerogative in legislative negotiations as it was for policy concerns. “I don't think we can have a de facto amendment to the House rules that put the Senate in charge of what we could discuss,” Frank said. Back to top

Homeland Security Lauds 2007 Achievements The U.S. Homeland Security Department said yesterday that it produced significant achievements this year in protecting the country from the threat of weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, Oct. 22). A five-page fact sheet on the agency’s 2007 efforts includes the following examples of WMD defense programs: — All U.S.-bound shipping containers leaving Port Qasim in Pakistan, Port Cortes in Honduras and Port Southampton in the United Kingdom are scanned for radiological and nuclear materials (see GSN, Oct. 17).  Additional monitors are expected to be installed at ports in Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Oman. — More than 1,000 radiation detectors have been installed at U.S. points of entry, scanning nearly all cargo containers passing through the northern and southern borders and more than 97 percent of vehicles at seaports. — The Container Security Initiative cargo security program has grown to include 58 ports that handle 86 percent of sea-based containers heading toward the United States. — Pilot programs are under way for radiation detection of small vessels at the Puget Sound in Washington state and for San Diego waterways. — National security standards have been set to block theft of weaponizable chemicals and for preventing attacks on chemical facilities (see GSN, Nov. 2).  The agency’s Science and Technology Directorate also prepared an assessment of the potential impacts of chemical attacks. The fact sheet also covers a variety of other security initiatives to protect the nation against “dangerous people,” to protect critical infrastructure, and to strengthen preparedness and emergency response systems (U.S. Homeland Security Department release I, Dec. 12). This year “was, in fact, a year of tremendous progress and maturation for this department,” Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a speech yesterday.  “From border security and immigration enforcement to passenger screening, critical infrastructure protection and emergency response, we launched a number of important initiatives to strengthen our nation’s security and we begin to see the fruits of our labor in a number of areas” (U.S. Homeland Security Department release II, Dec. 12). Back to top

Pentagon Must Avoid Global Strike “Ambiguity,” Report Says By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. House and Senate lawmakers issued a new conference report last week that warns against developing conventional missiles that, if launched, might mimic the flight profile of nuclear weapons and potentially trigger a dangerous response from abroad (see GSN, Nov. 7). In resolving differences between the two chambers’ defense authorization bills for fiscal 2008, the conferees prohibited the Defense Department from fielding submarine-launched Trident missiles converted from their traditional nuclear warhead configuration to a conventional capability.  The Pentagon had requested $175 million for the so-called Conventional Trident Modification as the first in a series of “prompt global strike” weapons that could hit targets halfway around the world within 60 minutes of a launch order. These arms are to be tailored for threat scenarios in which targets are fleeting, such as when a terrorist location has been pinpointed or a rogue nation is preparing to launch a weapon of mass destruction. However, following the lead of the defense appropriations conference bill last month, the authorizers voiced worries about the possibility that Russia or other nuclear powers might misinterpret the launch of a conventionally tipped D-5 missile from a Trident submarine as a nuclear attack.  The misunderstanding, in turn, might elicit a nuclear-armed response, lawmakers have said. “The conferees remain concerned about prompt global strike concepts that would employ a mixed loading of nuclear and non-nuclear systems and believe that DOD should carefully address these ambiguity concerns,” according to the report filed last week. Under the Pentagon’s plan for conventional Trident, defense officials had intended to install 96 non-nuclear warheads on 24 D-5 missiles throughout the submarine fleet at a total cost of $503 million.  The remaining missiles aboard the boats would have carried nuclear warheads. Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a leading advocate of the conventional Trident concept, recently acknowledged that Capitol Hill concerns would likely stall the effort.  Cartwright told Global Security Newswire he saw “signaling … from the Hill, which I don’t necessarily disagree with,” to shelve the conventional Trident and “start to focus the [research and development] on the next generation beyond conventional Trident.” An alternative land- or sea-based weapon system might “provide either flight profile or launch conditions that would be less ambiguous,” he said. As one such alternative, the Pentagon is working on a concept for building a new, medium-range weapon that could be launched from any of four converted Ohio-class submarines, which are to carry only conventional weapons (see GSN, Sept. 18). However, Russia’s advanced early warning systems might similarly misinterpret the launch of this weapon as a U.S. nuclear strike using a “depressed-trajectory” Trident D-5, according to Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Washington-based Federation of American Scientists. Launching the missile in a flatter arc involves a shorter flight time to target and gives less time for other nations to detect and react to an incoming attack, according to nuclear weapons experts.  The shorter time lines might make for hasty and more provocative responses from Russia or other nuclear powers, critics worry. Last week’s conference report backs existing plans to create a multiservice funding pot for an “integrated” prompt global strike program that would support an array of technologies.  The bill language does not preclude the Pentagon from spending some of $100 million in joint fiscal 2008 funds on conventional Trident components or technologies, as long as they are “applicable to other [prompt global strike] alternatives or use of the Trident D-5 as a test platform.” It remained unclear at press time whether the report language was intended to limit the types of tests that might be conducted using the Trident D-5 missile. Last month, President George W. Bush signed into law a defense appropriations bill providing $100 million in fiscal 2008 for prompt global strike research and development.  The House yesterday approved the authorization conference report, and it is expected to go to a vote on the Senate floor before the holiday recess. Potential land-based alternatives for the mission include an Air Force Conventional Strike Missile and an Army Advanced Hypersonic Weapon.  Congress last month provided the Army weapon $41.7 million in unrequested funds, outside of the multiservice prompt global strike account (see GSN, Nov. 8). Generally speaking, the lawmakers noted in the report “the value of developing conventional prompt global strike capabilities that may be needed for time-sensitive operations.”  These capabilities “would also continue the post-Cold War trend of reducing U.S. reliance on nuclear weapons by providing the president with a wider variety of non-nuclear strike options,” the document reads. The legislators also directed the defense secretary to submit to Congress a research, development and test plan for prompt global strike technologies.  They also extended through 2009 an existing annual requirement for the defense secretary to present an integrated plan for developing, deploying, and sustaining a prompt global strike capability. Further, lawmakers called on the Pentagon’s head of acquisition and technology to report on how the Defense Department plans to allocate its fiscal 2008 prompt global strike funds.  The defense buying czar must issue the report before the funds can be spent. Back to top       U.N. Powers Delay Iran Sanctions Moves Until 2008 A split between Western powers and Russia and China over a proposed sanctions resolution against Iran has forced the U.N. Security Council to table any action on the measure until next year, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Dec. 13). A 90-minute telephone discussion Tuesday between political directors from China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States drew attention to the emerging rift between the major players regarding Iran’s nuclear program, leading them to postpone a vote on the resolution until 2008. “I think it unlikely, unfortunately, that we will be able to make progress during 2007,” said British Ambassador to the United Nations John Sauers.  “We will come back to this issue in 2008.” China and Russia have opposed imposing additional strong penalties on Iran for refusing to halt uranium enrichment activities.  Chinese U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said the governments of the six nations continue to consider the sanctions and little time remains this year to reach a consensus. “I think it's more likely that it will come in January to the Security Council,” Wang told AP. “I think we all start from the presumption now things have changed,” Wang said last week, referring to the recent U.S. intelligence conclusion that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. U.N. diplomats said anonymously that China has resisted any punitive measures that would affect its trade with Iran while Russia has opposed sanctions that would isolate any Iranian banks (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Google News, Dec. 13). Meanwhile, French President Nicolas Sarkozy has warned that war with Iran could erupt if Israel deems the country’s nuclear ambitions to pose a serious security threat, according to an interview slated for publication in a French magazine today. “The problem for us is not so much the risk that the Americans launch a military intervention, but that the Israelis consider their security to be truly threatened,” Sarkozy said in the interview with Le Nouvel Observateur. “Everyone agrees on the fact that what the Iranians are doing has no civilian explanation,” Sarkozy said of Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which could produce nuclear power plant fuel or weapon-grade nuclear material.  “The only debate is about whether they will develop a military capacity in one or five years.” “The danger of a war exists,” said the French president, adding he had “never been in favor of war” (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Dec. 12). In Tehran, Iranian nuclear negotiators said today they have concluded their most recent discussions with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Representatives of the U.N. nuclear watchdog have been meeting with Iranian officials in an effort to clarify Iran’s nuclear ambitions.  The sides, which have already held talks on Iran’s past plutonium research and its installation and development of P-1 and P-2 uranium enrichment centrifuges, focused this week on the origin of uranium contamination discovered at a Tehran university. “The discussions took place in a constructive climate.  An extra step has been made to solve the outstanding questions on the Iranian nuclear program,” Iranian IAEA envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh told state media. “During these discussions, we responded to the technical questions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  The agency will examine the results of these discussions and announce its conclusions,” he said (Agence France-Presse II/Google News, Dec. 13). The head of the Russian nuclear power plant construction firm Atomstroiexport said today it has resolved disputes with Tehran that have delayed completion of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant. “The difficulties with the Iranian client are resolved and we have an agreement on the timetable for construction,” Sergei Shmatko said during a news conference.  “We absolutely plan to build Bushehr.” Shmatko declined to specify when Iran is expected to receive Russian nuclear fuel it would need to operate the plant (Agence France-Presse III/Google News, Dec. 13). Back to top       U.S., Russia Upgrade Nuclear Security Training Site U.S. and Russian officials yesterday marked the completed renovation of Russia’s main facility for training security personnel at the nation’s nuclear warheads and materials sites, the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration said (see GSN, Dec. 12). The Russia’s Internal Affairs Ministry paid $3.5 million to revamp the infrastructure of the Lunevo Protective Force Training Center near Moscow.  The U.S agency chipped in $1.5 million for barracks, classroom equipment and training areas. “The completion of this work is an important milestone in the U.S.-Russian cooperation to account for, control and protect nuclear materials,” NNSA Deputy Administrator William Tobey said at the ceremony. The two nations made the upgrades under the Material Protection, Control and Accounting program, a joint effort to secure Russian nuclear warheads and weapon-grade nuclear materials.  So far, the project has secured 85 percent of the facilities it has targeted, and officials expect to secure the remaining sites next year (U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration release, Dec. 12). Back to top       Cyprus Installs Radiation Detector at Port U.S. and Cypriot officials yesterday commissioned new equipment to scan for radioactive materials in shipping containers moved through the Limassol seaport, the U.S. Energy Department announced (see GSN, Oct. 24). The portal monitor, designed to detect and deter nuclear smuggling, was funded through a U.S. program to establish radioactive checks at border posts around the world. “Cyprus and the United States are working closely together to stop the smuggling of nuclear and radiological materials,” said William Tobey, a senior official with the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, in a press release.  “This partnership plays a critical role in the global fight against illicit trafficking and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction” (U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration release, Dec. 12). Back to top       Iran, North Korea to Remain Priorities for Bush Administration in Last Year in Office, Rice Says The nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea are expected to remain among the Bush administration’s foreign affairs priorities in its last year in office, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Associated Press yesterday (see GSN, June 26). The two nations are not close to being removed from the “axis of evil,” despite an intelligence assessment that Iran halted nuclear weapons work in 2003 (see GSN, Dec. 12) and progress in denuclearization negotiations with North Korea (see GSN, Dec. 12), Rice said. “They are clearly still states about which there are significant proliferation concerns,” she said.  “It would be very irresponsible not to deal with those dangers.” Pyongyang must give up its nuclear programs before it can expect significant diplomatic engagement with Washington, Rice said. “This is not a regime that the United Sates is prepared to engage broadly,” she told AP.  “If we are going to engage it broadly, it’s clear in the program that we have laid out how that would happen, after denuclearization.” North Korea “remains a country that is dangerously armed and a considerable threat on both the proliferation front and its own program,” she added. Rice said the recent National Intelligence Estimate did not give Iran a clean slate regarding the threat posed by its nuclear program.  “I don’t think the [report] gives a benign reading of Iran,” she said.  “I see it as still quite dangerous.” The White House, in the wake of the report, has focused on Iran’s continuing uranium enrichment efforts, which could produce nuclear weapon material. Rice dismissed comments from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the report could lead to improve diplomatic relations between his nations and the United States. “Since they have embraced the NIE, I assume that they are embracing the entire thing,” she said.  “That means that they must have had a weapons program and that means they have a lot to answer for.” Rice also listed Middle Eastern peace, Iraq and troubles in Lebanon as priorities for the White House (Associated Press/New York Times, Dec. 13). A senior U.S. official said yesterday that Washington hopes to see a Middle East free of nuclear weapons, but that certain milestones must first be met, Agence France-Presse reported. Israel is the only nation in the region believed to possess a nuclear arsenal.  It maintains a policy of nuclear ambiguity (see GSN, Dec. 13, 2006). “Israel never signed the (Nuclear) Nonproliferation Treaty, so never violated the NPT,” U.S. Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency Gregory Schulte said during a debate in Dubai. “That said, the USA, Germany and other countries have called upon Israel to join the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state.” The Bush administration backs the “vision of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons.  We agree on that in principle,” Schulte said. First though, there must be “something that looks like a comprehensive peace settlement” in the region and Iran must resolve the standoff over its nuclear program, he added. “I think we have to be more worried about a nuclear weapons arms race in the Middle East than having a nuclear weapons-free zone,” Schulte said (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Dec. 13). Back to top       U.S. Funding Debate Snares Nuclear Laboratories Faced with the threat of a presidential veto of a large fiscal 2008 funding bill, U.S. House and Senate leaders have been discussing whether to reduce spending plans for U.S. nuclear weapon activities, the Albuquerque Journal reported yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 26). “If we are forced to go the president’s (spending) levels, then there will be serious cuts to valuable programs across the board,” said Kirsten Brost, spokeswoman for House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.). On the Senate side, nuclear weapon laboratory backer Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) confirmed that assessment. “It’s hard to (decide on specific programs); it’s awful,” he said.  “We’ll probably just take a trim off everything.” “If we could put them in our shoes and have them see what we’re trying to do, they might not want to make these nuclear laboratories so weak,” Domenici added (Coleman/Fleck, Albuquerque Journal, Dec. 12). Back to top

Report Criticizes Biosecurity in Australian Territory A report found that the government of the Northern Territory in Australia is not prepared to respond to a bioterrorism incident or a disease outbreak, the Australian Broadcasting Corp. reported today (see GSN, Feb. 1). There are several areas in which the territorial Primary Industries and Natural Resources and Environment departments have failed to adequately address biological security, according to the draft document. Funding from the Natural Resources and Environment Department that could be used for biosecurity is instead directed toward management of cane toads and crocodiles, the report found. The Northern Territory government has failed to fully meet its obligations under national biosecurity directives, said Deputy Opposition Leader Terry Mills. “We are at the doorstep of Asia and so the capacity to respond to issues of biosecurity are alarmingly deficient in the Northern Territory,” he said.  “I’m accusing this government of being dishonest and ineffective in its capacity to govern the territory.” The final version of the report is scheduled to be released by mid-2008, ABC reported. “I’m disappointed in the deputy leader of the opposition [for] scare mongering with such an important topic,” said Primary Industry Minister Chris Natt.  “I can assure all territories that when it comes to biosecurity issues that the Northern Territory government is right up there doing the right thing” (Australian Broadcasting Corp., Dec. 13). Back to top

U.S. Lawmakers Discuss Chemical Security Rules By Andy Leonatti CongressDaily WASHINGTON — Senior Democrats on the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee said yesterday that they favored making permanent the regulations issued by the Homeland Security Department to secure chemical manufacturing and storage sites (see GSN, Nov. 26). Both Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and Homeland Security Transportation Security Subcommittee Chairwoman Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) — whose panel also monitors infrastructure protection — noted that the department's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards, designed to identify high risk sites where dangerous chemicals are made, used or stored, expire in October 2009.  But a discussion draft of legislation that would make the regulations permanent raised concerns over what security measures would be required to be taken and the amount of resources the department actually needs to enforce the regulations. The department implemented the regulations Nov. 20 and began requiring companies to identify the chemicals and quantities present at over 50,000 facilities to determine if the sites fall under the regulations.  The department also released a list of “chemicals of interest” with over 300 compounds, including the common industrial chemicals chlorine and propane. Companies will be required to complete site-vulnerability assessments and security plans subject to department approval.  The department will field an inspection staff of 30 even though it estimates that at least 5,000 facilities will be subject to regulation.  Witnesses testifying before Jackson Lee's subcommittee yesterday called for increased funding for a larger staff. “How can 30 personnel inspect the entire country?” said Representative Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.).  “We're not being serious about this.” Clyde Miller, corporate security director for BASF, said that chemical companies have been moving swiftly to complete the chemical inventory, and urged Congress to slow down on making the regulations permanent. “I can assure you that the program that is currently in place establishes considerable demands on companies to comply,” Miller said.  He also criticized the committee's discussion draft of legislation for its inclusion of a mandate for instituting “inherently safer technologies.” Miller agreed with Bob Stephan, the assistant Homeland Security secretary for infrastructure protection, who said his department favored implementing risk-based security measures, such as keeping smaller quantities on hand or making substitutions for hazardous materials. “No single security measure is the only right one,” Miller said, adding that safety experts at the facilities are in the best position to decide which security measures to employ. Back to top       Work Begins on Blue Grass Laboratory Construction began Tuesday on a laboratory intended to analyze chemical weapons agents stored at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky, the Richmond Register reported (see GSN, Dec. 10). The planned 2,500-square-foot facility is expected to replace a laboratory about one-fourth that size that has been in use for about 25 years.  The new site would provide personnel with a safer, “far better environment” to perform analytical work for the depot’s yet-unbuilt chemical agent disposal plant (see GSN, Nov. 12), said Dick Sloan, a spokesman for the Blue Grass Chemical Activity program. “There’s going to be additional needed room in the new lab,” said engineer Rhonda Shay.  “We will create a better working environment for our laboratory technicians and additional work stations to give us the capability to handle all foreseeable laboratory requirements.” Construction is expected to cost roughly $600,000 while equipment for the building would cost about $426,000. “We intend to build a very robust laboratory that will take care of all of our monitoring and analytical needs until the stockpile is completely destroyed,” said Lt. Col. Tom Closs, commander of Blue Grass Chemical Activity (Ronica Shannon, Richmond Register, Dec. 12). Back to top

U.S. “Regrets” Russian Suspension of Weapons Treaty U.S. officials expressed disappointment yesterday that Russia has frozen its compliance with a major European arms control agreement, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Dec. 12). The United States “deeply regrets the Russian Federation's decision to ‘suspend’ implementation of its obligations under the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe," said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack. “Russia's conventional forces are the largest on the European continent, and its unilateral action damages this successful arms control regime,” he said in a statement. “This ‘suspension,’ which is not provided for under the terms of the CFE Treaty, is the wrong decision,” McCormack added in his statement (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Dec.12). NATO officials expressed similar regret but said they would not make retaliatory moves against Moscow, AFP reported. “NATO allies deeply regret that the Russian Federation has proceeded with its intention to unilaterally ‘suspend’ implementation of CFE Treaty obligations as of Dec. 12, 2007,” the alliance said in a statement. The powers called the pact “a cornerstone of Euro-Atlantic security” on which they would continue to place “the highest value” (Agence France-Presse II/Khaleej Times, Dec. 12). 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.