North Korea stored nuclear fuel rods in this cooling pond following a 1994 denuclearization agreement (U.S. State Department photo). North Korea Begins to Remove Reactor Fuel Rods Fuel rods are being removed from North Korea’s plutonium-producing reactor as part of the ongoing effort to close down the nation’s nuclear program, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 17). Kyodo News reported that experts last week began moving the rods into water pools as they continue to disable three primary facilities at the Yongbyon nuclear complex...Full Story

Globalization Outpaces Nuclear, Biological Nonproliferation Regimes, Expert Says By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — International nonproliferation regimes have failed to adequately address the potential for an increasingly globalized world to produce new nuclear and biological threats, one expert said yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 26)...Full Story

Russia Issues Nuclear Threat Russia is prepared to aim strategic nuclear missiles at planned U.S. missile defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic, a senior military official said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 14)...Full Story

	Tuesday, December 18, 2007

U.S. Funding Bill Reopens Security Debates By Chris Strohm CongressDaily WASHINGTON — The massive omnibus spending bill unveiled by U.S. congressional appropriators yesterday includes several policy provisions related to border security, increasing safety at the nation's chemical plants and verifying the identity of workers at U.S. ports that quickly sparked outrage among Republicans and interest groups (see GSN, Dec. 5). The bill would give the Homeland Security Department about $35 billion in discretionary spending for the fiscal year, plus an additional $2.7 billion designated as emergency funding for border security. But several provisions in the Homeland Security section immediately came under fire.  Critics said one provision appeared to roll back requirements of a law enacted by the Republican-led Congress last year requiring the Homeland Security Department to build 700 miles of fencing along the southwest border. The provision states that the department should construct the 700 miles of fencing but gives the department flexibility to decide whether fencing and other security devices are the best use of resources for securing a specific border area. "This is either a blatant oversight or a deliberate attempt to disregard the border security of our country," said House Homeland Security Committee ranking member Peter King (R-N.Y.), a chief architect of last year's law. The provision was sponsored by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), her spokesman confirmed.  The spokesman said Hutchison supports fencing, and voted to pass the fencing law in 2006.  But he said that law requires fencing to be built in specific areas. The provision in the omnibus spending bill is intended to give Homeland Security the flexibility to decide where fencing should be built, the spokesman said.  “This is not an effort to block a fence," he said.  "It's an effort to make sure we use our resources as wisely as possible." Critics said another provision in the bill would hamper Homeland Security's ability to construct fencing by requiring the department to first consult with other federal agencies, state and local governments and property owners. A different provision would delay an upcoming Homeland Security rule requiring citizens of the United States, Canada, Bermuda and Mexico to present a passport or other secure identification document in order to enter the Untied States at land crossings. The department planned to put the rule into effect at the end of January.  The provision in the spending bill would delay the rule until June 2009, or until three months after the Homeland Security and State departments certify that it is possible to implement without causing problems. A Homeland Security spokesman said any effort to delay the program "sends the wrong message to our frontline personnel, telling them that Congress is going to publicly demand greater border security but will quietly tie the hands of those charged with delivering it." The department plans to begin a transition phase in anticipation of the rule going into effect, he said. Another provision in the spending bill, written by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), would allow state and local governments to pass laws regulating security at chemical plants that go beyond federal regulations (see GSN, Dec.13). Homeland Security officials issued a rule earlier this year pre-empting the authority of state and local governments, a decision backed by the chemical industry. "We remain hopeful that Congress will settle on language that establishes an appropriate level of preemption that will address everyone's concerns," said a spokesman for the American Chemistry Council. Back to top

Globalization Outpaces Nuclear, Biological Nonproliferation Regimes, Expert Says By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — International nonproliferation regimes have failed to adequately address the potential for an increasingly globalized world to produce new nuclear and biological threats, one expert said yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 26). Nations can no longer be considered the sole possessors of weapon-usable technologies, said Kenneth Luongo, executive director for the Partnership for Global Security.  Instead, the threat encompasses nations and nonstate entities, crosses regional boundaries and involves military, civilian and economic targets. Nonproliferation systems face obsolescence if they cannot adapt to this changing situation, he said. “Globalization is a reality and it is affecting nuclear and biological proliferation and is likely to affect it more significantly as the years march on,” Luongo said during a panel discussion here on a recently published article, “The Nexus of Globalization and Next-Generation Nonproliferation.” Luongo and co-author Isabelle Williams identified four particular nonproliferation challenges posed by the growing worldwide links between people and commerce: — Globalization has greatly increased the pace at which technology spreads across the world, raising concerns as nations see greater benefits in acquiring technologies in the life sciences and other areas; — Smaller nations have become less susceptible to the will of world powers, as demonstrated in the years-long standoffs over the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea; — The importance of national boundaries has dropped, enabling a global reach for terrorists who are also able to use ever-evolving communications technology to further their plots; and — Nations that are becoming more tied into the international commerce system have greater need for energy, potentially turning to nuclear power programs that could be converted into weapons efforts. “These developments have weakened the pillars upon which the existing nonproliferation regime was built, and little effective action has been taken to update the regime,” the article says.  “Advances in the life sciences continue to develop unchecked; higher universal standards for fissile material have not been seriously considered, much less implemented; and new globally focused institutions and mechanisms are underdeveloped.” There are now 438 nuclear power plants operating around the world and use is likely to grow in order to meet a projected 57 percent increase in energy consumption by 2030.  China, India and Russia are expected to provide most of the growth in the sector and a number of Middle Eastern nations have also announced plans to operate civilian nuclear power plants, according to the article (see GSN, Nov. 9). The spread of biological technology poses an even more complicated situation, Luongo said.  While nuclear energy programs are largely operated by governments using known technologies in sizable facilities, life sciences work often occurs at small sites that are dispersed geographically and not obvious in appearance.  “We don’t really know exactly what is going on in a lot of places,” Luongo said. More than 40 nations already host biotechnology industries and the field is seen as an economic boon for developing nations.  However, a “significant number” of nations have failed to implement policy or oversight systems to prevent proliferation of dual-use equipment that could be used to produce weaponized pathogens and the international community has not set biosecurity regulations. Luongo said “market-based mechanisms” involving economic incentives and penalties should be used more centrally, alongside diplomacy and political responses, to resolve proliferation threats.  The United States in 1992 succeeded in persuading Russia to blend down 500 metric tons of highly enriched uranium to low-enriched reactor fuel in exchange for $12 billion, he said.  Nations in the six-party talks have also used sanctions and incentives to move North Korea toward giving up its nuclear program, though Iran has proven resistant to the approach. The private sector needs to be given reasons to participate in nonproliferation efforts, which cannot succeed in the 21st century without its support, according to Luongo and Williams.  Participation of the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries is particularly crucial in promoting biosecurity, according to the article. There must be understanding of how commercially driven decisions — such as the development of nuclear power — can affect the nonproliferation regime, the authors argued.  They said the traditional elements of the regime, pacts such as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, must operate in tandem with more recent “ad hoc” efforts such as the Proliferation Security Initiative (see GSN, July 3). Other panelists characterized the article as a strong but imperfect consideration of the threats to the global nonproliferation regime.  Globalization is just one component of a crisis that encompasses problematic nonproliferation pacts and the increasing irrelevance of states in development of technologies with world-changing possibilities, argued former U.N. weapons inspector David Kay, “There’s enough there that there’s a fertile field for additional work,” said Kay, a senior fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.  “Having said that, also when I read it I had a reaction, which was it’s too bad he didn’t take it further.” The article does not address market solutions to nuclear nonproliferation as much as the setting of rules by governments on what is appropriate behavior, said panel moderator George Perkovich, head of the Nonproliferation Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which hosted the event. Luongo acknowledged that he did not have all the answers to the questions posed by the article.  The piece is meant to promote discussion on globalization and proliferation rather than resolve the matter, he said. “Our political elites are falling down on the job in that they are not connecting the dots,” he said. Back to top       WMD Advisory Board Begins Work A new expert panel this week is beginning its work of advising the U.S. Health and Human Services Department on prevention, preparedness and response initiatives for public health emergencies involving chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials (see GSN, June 20). The National Biodefense Science Board was established under the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act.  The 13-person panel’s first meeting began yesterday and it is expected to continue through today. “This board will play an important role in ensuring that our nation is well-prepared to prevent and respond to public health emergencies,” Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt said in a press release.  “The members’ depth of expertise will be invaluable as we continue to prepare” (U.S. Health and Human Services Department release, Dec. 17). Back to top

North Korea Begins to Remove Reactor Fuel Rods Fuel rods are being removed from North Korea’s plutonium-producing reactor as part of the ongoing effort to close down the nation’s nuclear program, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 17). Kyodo News reported that experts last week began moving the rods into water pools as they continue to disable three primary facilities at the Yongbyon nuclear complex. North Korea pledged to complete disablement by the end of this year, but relocating the irradiated rods is not likely to be finished until March, AP reported. Reloading the rods in the reactor would prove challenging, experts said.  Disablement is intended to prevent facilities from resuming operations for at least one year (Associated Press/Philippine Star, Dec. 17). Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei, Beijing’s top negotiator at the six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, today observed disablement work at the nuclear reactor, Agence France-Presse reported. He was scheduled to meet his North Korean counterpart, Kim Kye Gwan, and other officials during his trip to the Stalinist state. “The purpose of his visit is to exchange ideas with the D.P.R.K. side … on the current situation in the six-party talks and the work for the next phase,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang. The spokesman did not address reports that Pyongyang would not meet the year-end deadline to complete disablement of the three facilities and issue a full declaration of its nuclear holdings and activities. “Relevant parties should overcome difficulties, deepen mutual trust and cooperation so as to implement the (denuclearization) agreement in a comprehensive way,” he said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Dec. 17). Back to top       Nuclear Fuel Shipment Proves Iran Does Not Need Uranium Enrichment Capability, Bush Says By receiving a recent shipment of Russian-made nuclear fuel, Iran has undercut its case for pursuing a domestic uranium enrichment capability, U.S. President George W. Bush said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 17). “Iran was a threat to peace, Iran is a threat to peace, and Iran will be a threat to peace if we don't stop their enrichment,” which could produce a key nuclear weapon ingredient, Bush told an audience in Virginia. Bush said he supports Russia’s fuel supply to Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant in light of Moscow’s pledge that shipments would occur under the watch of the International Atomic Energy Agency. “If the Russians are willing to do that — which I support — then the Iranians do not need to learn how to enrich.  If the Iranians accept that uranium for a civilian nuclear power plant, then there's no need for them to learn how to enrich,” he said. Tehran has maintained that its uranium enrichment program is aimed solely at energy production. U.S. National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said the nuclear fuel shipment did not reflect waning international support for a new round of sanctions against Iran over its uranium enrichment efforts. “The international community remains united in its desire to see the Iranian regime comply with its United Nations Security Council resolutions,” he said, referring to two past resolutions demanding that Iran halt its uranium enrichment program (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Dec. 17). Russia’s Foreign Ministry agreed with the U.S. assessment, stating that Tehran has “no objective need” to enrich uranium independently, the Washington Post reported. However, a high-level Iranian official quickly dismissed calls for Tehran to suspend such efforts. “There is no talk of halting enrichment,” the official told Reuters.  “Nothing is related to freezing enrichment" (Peter Finn, Washington Post, Dec. 18). Meanwhile, Germany and the five permanent Security Council member nations have postponed consultations originally scheduled for today on a new sanctions resolution. “It's been postponed for scheduling issues.  They’ll get together later in the week,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey (Agence France Presse II/Google News, Dec. 18). While Bush administration officials have said that work on Iran should not be affected by a recent U.S. intelligence conclusion that the country halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, the assessment has bolstered Iran’s confidence in its nuclear policy and undermined Chinese and Russian support for harsh new sanctions, the New York Times reported. Several European diplomats and Bush administration officials have said Russia’s fuel shipment to Iran has further emboldened Iranian officials (Helene Cooper, New York Times, Dec. 18). The arrival of nuclear fuel from Russia completed a “critical stage” in the Bushehr plant’s construction that could enable the facility to begin generating power at full capacity within about one year, the deputy head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization said today. Mohammad Saeedi said the plant could begin generating as much as 200 megawatts of power within the next three months and reach its full capacity of 1,000 megawatts nine months after that, according to AFP. “We could see the startup in a two or three months' time.  We wait for the final agreement which is due within a month from now,” he said without disclosing details on the agreement. Saidi said the Bushehr plant was “95 percent finished” and the Russian nuclear power plant construction company Atomstroiexport has installed all of the major equipment at the facility. “There is no barrier in the way of operations in Bushehr,” he said. Iran also announced plans to build a 360-megawatt nuclear power facility at Darkhoyen, in the western province of Khuzestan. “We have decided the location and site for Darkhoyen and its design has been defined,” Saeedi said, noting that Iran is interested in constructing additional midsized nuclear power stations (Agence France-Presse III/Google News, Dec. 18) Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, insisted yesterday that Iran would produce its own nuclear fuel to use in the planned power plant, AFP reported. “Several years will be required to build this nuclear power station and in parallel we need to develop the enrichment plant in Natanz, where we currently have 3,000 centrifuges,” Aghazadeh said. “The current 3,000 centrifuges in Natanz should reach 50,000 so that it could provide fuel for a 1,000-megawatt power plant … this will take a few years,” he said (Agence France-Presse IV, Dec. 17). Back to top       Congress Zeroes Funding for New U.S. Warhead U.S. lawmakers agreed to provide no funding for a Bush administration program to develop a new nuclear warhead, the Washington Post reported today.  The refusal was part of an agreed omnibus funding bill that could be formally approved by both congressional houses this week (see GSN, Nov. 9). The budget zeroes out funds for the Reliable Replacement Warhead, which U.S. officials have argued is needed to ensure the viability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile without conducting underground nuclear testing, the Post reported. The funding bill instead orders the Defense and Energy departments to prepare a formal assessment of U.S. nuclear needs and strategies. “Moving forward on a new nuclear weapon is not something this nation should do without great consideration," said Representative Peter Visclosky (D-Ind.), chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that handles funding of the nuclear weapons program.  “The U.S. needs a comprehensive nuclear defense strategy, and a revised stockpile plan to guide the transformation and downsizing of the complex … to reflect the new realities of the world.” An Energy Department spokesman criticized the lawmakers’ decision. “We will likely have to go down a path of a full-life extension program for nuclear weapons in our stockpile, which in the long run will be more costly, without introducing modern safety and security measures into our weapons,” the spokesman said (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, Dec. 18). The warhead-funding decision was made as part of a larger congressional negotiation involving U.S. nuclear facilities, the Associated Press reported yesterday. Lawmakers agreed to restore roughly $418 million of the almost $600 million that had been stripped from weapons programs at the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories (see GSN, Sept. 26). “This budget isn't by any means a bed of roses for the labs," said Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.).  "We have what amounts to a good news-bad news budget that is vastly preferable to the potentially devastating cuts that could have occurred.” Los Alamos has already stated plans to reduce 500 to 750 jobs, many through voluntary buyouts (Associated Press/Las Cruces Sun-News, Dec. 17). Back to top       University of California Agrees to Los Alamos Fine The U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration and the University of California have agreed that the university should pay a $2.8 million fine to address a widely publicized security lapse at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the agency announced yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 7). The fine stemmed from last year’s discovery of classified nuclear weapons documents at the home of a laboratory contract worker (see GSN, May 21).  The federal government initially levied a $3 million penalty against the university. In agreeing to the fine, the university accepted responsibility for the lapse which happened shortly before the school lost its laboratory management contract (see GSN, Dec. 17; U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration release, Dec. 17). Back to top

China Buys Biodefense Equipment for 2008 Olympics China has paid $160,000 for 25 boxes of biodefense strips it plans to use at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing to detect deadly biological agents such as anthrax and ricin, the Washington Business Journal reported (see GSN, Nov. 20). The deal was one of the largest biodefense contracts secured recently by manufacturer Tetracore Inc.  The Rockville, Md., company has experienced declining demand for such products as public concern about biological terrorism has become less prevalent (Vandana Sinha, Washington Business Journal, Dec. 17). Back to top

Activists Worried by Blue Grass CW Waste Plans Activists are worried that plans to conduct off-site disposal of a small amount of chemical weapons waste from the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky could pave the way for larger shipments when the site begins full munitions destruction, Superfund Report reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 10). The U.S. Army announced earlier this month that it would use a mobile neutralization system to dispose of sarin and neutralizing chemicals stored in three bulk containers, one of which leaked 1 gallon of the nerve agent in August. Waste produced through neutralization of the material is set to be shipped to another location for disposal.  Craig Williams of the Chemical Weapons Working Group, an independent watchdog based near Richmond, Ky., warned, though, that the shipment could set a precedent allowing the Army to transport more dangerous waste as it destroys the remainder of the depot’s chemical weapons stockpile. “There is significant opposition to that [in the local community] chiefly because it is seen as a precedent for future neutralization,” said Williams, who with other environmental and community groups has unsuccessfully fought to halt shipments of hydrolysate waste from Indiana to a Texas incinerator (see GSN, Dec. 10). The Defense Department has not yet built the neutralization plant that would destroy the chemical weapons stockpile at Blue Grass.  It set 2023 for completion of work at the depot, but U.S. lawmakers have demanded that the end date be shifted to 2017 (see GSN, Nov. 12). A spokeswoman for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program, the Defense Department agency charged with eliminating the Blue Grass stockpile, said the nerve agent waste shipment should not be considered an indicator of future waste disposal operations.  Program project manager Kevin Flamm is making that case to the Chemical Weapons Working Group and other activists, she said. She said the  alternative, storage of the three nerve agent containers until an on-site weapons disposal facility is constructed, is unreasonable (Superfund Report, Dec. 17). Back to top

Russia Issues Nuclear Threat Russia is prepared to aim strategic nuclear missiles at planned U.S. missile defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic, a senior military official said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 14). If the U.S. initiative is assessed to undermine Russia’s nuclear deterrent, said Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, head of Russian strategic missile forces, “I do not exclude … the missile defense shield sites in Poland and the Czech Republic being chosen as targets for some of our intercontinental ballistic missiles” (see GSN, Dec. 17). The threat did not sit well with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Agence France-Presse reported.  “No declaration of this kind will influence Polish-American negotiations,” he said. The Bush administration wants to deploy 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic.  It has identified Iranian missiles as the primary target of the system. Solovtsov indicated he was not prepared to trust the United States. “If the Americans signed a treaty with us that they would only deploy 10 antimissile rockets in Poland and one radar in the Czech Republic and will never put anything else there, then we could deal with this,” he said. “However, they won’t sign, they just tell us verbally, ‘We won’t threaten you,” Solovtsov added (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Dec. 17). Back to top       Japanese Interceptor Hits Test Target A Standard Missile 3 interceptor launched from a Japanese warship yesterday destroyed a ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Dec. 14). Stationed off the coast of Hawaii, the Japanese destroyer JDS Kongo fired the U.S.-built interceptor at a missile fired from the shore.  The interceptor hit its target at 12:08 p.m. Hawaii time about 100 miles above the earth’s surface, according to the Japanese navy. The launch was the first time a U.S. ally has tested the SM-3 missile system.  Previous Japanese collaboration in U.S. missile defense exercises was limited to tracking and sharing information about targets and interceptors launched by the United States. Japanese Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba said the test was “extremely significant.”  It was part of an ongoing U.S.-Japanese effort to shield the nations against a possible North Korean missile salvo. “We will continue to strive to increase the system's credibility,” he said in a news conference, insisting the missile defenses would be worth the high cost of investment. “We can't talk about how much money should be spent when human lives are at stake,” he said. Japan’s intends to invest $11.2 billion in missile defenses based on the Aegis defense system over a four-year period ending in March 2008.  Defenses are expected to include four Aegis-equipped Japanese destroyers by March 2011, along with land-based Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile interceptors, AFP reported. The test was “a major milestone in the growing cooperation between Japan and the U.S.,” said a joint statement by Japanese Rear Adm. Katsutoshi Kawano and Lt. Gen. Henry Obering, head of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Dec. 17). Back to top

Nevada Considers New Yucca Mountain Challenge Nevada officials might try to require the U.S. Energy Department to revise its assessment of the terrorism risks created by shipping nuclear waste to a long-delayed storage facility at the state’s Yucca Mountain, Superfund Report reported yesterday (see GSN, March 7). A recent federal court ruling in California found that federal agencies must consider the consequence of terrorism when agencies conduct environmental impact reviews of proposed projects. Energy Department officials have said their assessments have accurately taken terrorist risks into consideration, but Nevada officials and environmental activists disagree.  The department is working to open a long-term storage facility for spent nuclear fuel generated at the U.S. nuclear power plants. An attorney for Nevada’s Transportation Department this month said the federal agency had played down the “consequences of a successful terrorist attack” against the mountain tunnel storage site and the rail cars delivering waste containers to the facility. Activist Kevin Kamps agreed, saying the shipments would constitute “mobile Chernobyls and dirty bombs on wheels.” The Energy Department has argued that is has properly considered the terrorist risks. The department “believes that under general credible threat conditions the probability of a sabotage event that would result in a major radiological release would be low,” according to one environmental assessment document.  Still, the department would frequently re-evaluate the threat, according to the document. “The department would continue to modify its approach to ensuring safe and secure shipments of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste between now and the time of shipments,” it says (Superfund Report, Dec. 17).   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.