While Prakash Karat, secretary general of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), has threatened a U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal, Bush administration officials could seek to expedite domestic and international support for the pact (Findlay Kember/Getty Images). India Nuclear Deal Might Face Early Vote in U.S. Congress By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The White House might push international regulatory bodies to hasten their reviews of a proposed U.S. nuclear energy deal with India, issue experts said last week (see GSN, Dec. 10). An effort to deliver the agreement to the U.S. Congress as early as March would underscore President George W. Bush’s bid to see the deal approved before leaving office in January 2009, officials and observers say...Full Story

Syria Rebuffed Nuclear Offer From Khan, Assad Says Syria rejected a 2001 offer to buy nuclear technology from an international smuggling ring, President Bashar Assad said recently, providing further evidence of the scope of the nuclear network’s ambitions (see GSN, Sept. 11)...Full Story

South African Nuclear Raid Raises Security Concerns A security breach last month at a South African nuclear site reinforces the need for developing global standards to secure nuclear weapon-usable materials, a Harvard University researcher said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 15)...Full Story

	Thursday, December 20, 2007

Bunker Being Built for Israeli PM, Report Says Workers are equipping the official residence of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert with a bunker capable of withstanding a nuclear or chemical weapon attack, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Nov. 9). Builders are reinforcing the walls of Olmert’s home and installing air purifiers that could provide a defense against chemical weapons agents, according to the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot. Olmert’s office, however, dismissed the report as “unfounded and misleading.”  A statement released by the office said that metal-shuttered windows and reinforced concrete at the site are only components of a “safe room” designed to protect against rocket attacks.  Construction regulations require such rooms in buildings throughout Israel. “No atomic bunker is being constructed at the prime minister’s official residence, or a bunker equipped with special filters or any special equipment,” the statement said. The newspaper report also claimed that Israel is constructing a massive, tunnel-accessible bunker miles outside of Jerusalem to protect Israeli military officials and high-level leaders in an attack employing a nuclear bomb or another weapon of mass destruction. Construction began several years ago and is expected to be completed in 2011, the report said. (Associated Press/Globe and Mail, Dec. 20). Back to top

India Nuclear Deal Might Face Early Vote in U.S. Congress By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The White House might push international regulatory bodies to hasten their reviews of a proposed U.S. nuclear energy deal with India, issue experts said last week (see GSN, Dec. 10). An effort to deliver the agreement to the U.S. Congress as early as March would underscore President George W. Bush’s bid to see the deal approved before leaving office in January 2009, officials and observers say. The bilateral accord, finalized in July, would allow New Delhi to buy U.S. nuclear materials and technology in exchange for submitting the South Asian nation’s civilian nuclear facilities to international safeguards and inspections (see GSN, July 24). Along with its Indian partners, the United States is taking steps toward implementation despite ongoing political opposition in New Delhi that might yet force the deal’s demise.  Sharp criticism has been leveled from both the political left and right.  Most ominously for the pact’s viability, Indian communists have threatened to end their support for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s coalition government and force elections if the deal goes forward (see GSN, Dec. 12). If the so-called “123 agreement” is not enacted, a future U.S. president would be less likely to pursue it in its current form, according to pundits.  Some U.S. lawmakers have voiced concern that the deal weakens global nonproliferation regimes, while others have cited worries that the pact turns a blind eye to India’s friendly relations with Iran (see GSN, Nov. 12 and Oct. 5). Before the agreement can go to Capitol Hill for a vote authorizing implementation, India must first negotiate a safeguards protocol with the International Atomic Energy Agency.  Additionally, the Nuclear Suppliers Group would have to exempt New Delhi from its guidelines banning the export of key nuclear technologies or materials to nations that have not joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or do not allow international monitoring of all their nuclear facilities. Barring any schedule changes, the deal is on track for congressional debate next summer, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace senior associate Sharon Squassoni said last Friday at a panel discussion on Capitol Hill.  Under existing time lines, a safeguards arrangement — currently the focus of Indian and IAEA negotiations — could be approved at the U.N. watchdog’s next board meeting in early March.  The U.S.-Indian deal would proceed to the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group later in the spring before making its way to Capitol Hill in the summer, she said. Many observers believe the administration hopes to land congressional approval before the 2008 presidential campaign switches into high gear.  As it stands, this timing is somewhat tight, Squassoni said.  However, the Bush administration might move to put the accord on an even faster track, which could have U.S. lawmakers debating implementation legislation by March, Squassoni and other deal-watchers said. One congressional staffer attending last week’s event, which was sponsored by the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, said IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei might reach a nuclear safeguards agreement within the coming weeks.  Once an accord is struck, the White House would probably request an emergency meeting of the IAEA governors to approve it, perhaps even before the end of January, the aide said. The Bush administration might take a similar tack at the Nuclear Suppliers Group, pushing to gather in advance of a consultative group meeting slated for March and a plenary session slated for May, the aide said.  A hastened process might start as soon as early February. “On a very optimistic fast track, we could have this agreement before us by as early as … March,” the congressional official said.  “That’s very optimistic, particularly given the way events have gone on everything related to this negotiation so far.  There have been nothing but roadblocks.” The staff member spoke during a question-and-answer session on condition of not being named publicly. Squassoni and fellow panelist Henry Sokolski, who heads the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, agreed that the White House would likely press the international organizations to act swiftly.  That said, Squassoni noted, any such administration effort might get tripped up if even one of the IAEA board’s 35 nations requests a delay. Few U.S. lawmakers are actively tracking the issue, Sokolski said.  Many erroneously believe that a prior vote in Congress constituted all the approval necessary for Washington’s agreement with New Delhi to proceed, he said.  In fact, the Hyde Act, which lawmakers passed in January 2006, enacted limits on just the outlines of the deal Bush negotiated with Singh.  Another vote to approve the trade agreement itself would be required following action by the two international regulatory bodies. To ensure that the IAEA and Nuclear Suppliers Group reflect U.S. congressional priorities for the accord, lawmakers should speak out about the importance of the Hyde Act’s nonproliferation provisions, Sokolski urged. For example, the United States should insist that India submit its nuclear facilities to international controls into perpetuity, and in so doing, reject a number of loopholes Delhi is seeking that would allow it to suspend inspections under certain conditions, he said.  Lawmakers might also urge the Nuclear Suppliers Group to grant an exception for India only so long as the nation maintains its existing moratorium on nuclear testing, he said. Sokolski was pessimistic, though, that Congress would be adequately prepared for a vote if the administration submits the pact for early approval. “If Congress does what it normally does, which is to sit squarely on its haunches as long as possible, you’re going to get smacked across the face with this thing,” he said.  Instead, lawmakers should summon “the moral fortitude and courage” to hold the agreement to Hyde Act provisions, he said.  That, Sokolski said, would “discipline all of this [process] immensely.” Back to top       Syria Rebuffed Nuclear Offer From Khan, Assad Says Syria rejected a 2001 offer to buy nuclear technology from an international smuggling ring, President Bashar Assad said recently, providing further evidence of the scope of the nuclear network’s ambitions (see GSN, Sept. 11). The smuggling ring once led by top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan was exposed in 2004 and is believed to have provided nuclear equipment and technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. “Someone brought a letter from a certain Khan,” Ashad said in an interview published yesterday in the Austrian Die Presse.  “We didn’t know whether the letter was real or a fake from the Israelis who wanted to entice us into a trap.” “In any case, we turned it down,” he added.  “We had no interest in nuclear weapons or a nuclear reactor.  We never met with Khan.” Assad also dismissed reports that a Syrian facility bombed in September by Israeli aircraft was an incomplete nuclear reactor, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Nov. 14). The site was “a military facility in the process of being built,” he said. U.S. intelligence officials have anonymously asserted that the target appeared to be a nuclear reactor of North Korean design (George Jahn, Associated Press/Washington Post, Dec. 19). Back to top       South African Nuclear Raid Raises Security Concerns A security breach last month at a South African nuclear site reinforces the need for developing global standards to secure nuclear weapon-usable materials, a Harvard University researcher said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 15). The Pelindaba nuclear facility stores enough highly enriched uranium to make about two dozen nuclear weapons, yet its security system failed to prevent four intruders from entering key parts of the facility on Nov. 8, wrote Micah Zenko in a Washington Post commentary today.  Zenko is a research associate at Harvard’s Managing the Atom Project. The four breached an electric fence, entered the site’s emergency control center and broke into an electronically sealed room.  They were filmed by security cameras, but were not detected during the incident because no security forces were monitoring the cameras, Zenko said. Ultimately, the intruders spent 45 minutes inside the facility before shooting a person inside and fleeing.  They remain at large. During this time, at least three other would-be intruders attempted, but failed, to enter the facility at a different point on the perimeter.  Three suspects were arrested 10 days later, Zenko said. “The timing suggests a coordinated attack against a facility that contains an estimated 25 bombs' worth of weapons-grade nuclear material,” Zenko wrote. “Had the armed attackers succeeded in penetrating the site's highly enriched uranium storage vault, where the weapons-grade nuclear material is believed to be held, they could have carried away the ingredients for the world's first terrorist nuclear bomb,” he added (Micah Zenko, Washington Post, Dec. 20). Back to top       Former Los Alamos National Laboratory Employee Linked to Security Breach Faces $384,000 Fine The U.S. Energy Department is seeking $384,000 in restitution from the former Los Alamos National Laboratory contract employee who took classified documents home with her, the Albuquerque Journal reported yesterday (see GSN, May 21). Jessica Quintana removed more than 200 pages of classified information from the New Mexico laboratory so she could work at home on a project to archive 1970s-era nuclear testing documents.  The documents were discovered during a drug raid targeting other people staying at her trailer home. The incident renewed concerns about security failures at the nuclear weapon research facility and led to a $2.8 million fine against former operator the University of California (see GSN, Dec. 18). After pleading guilty in July, Quintana is scheduled to be sentenced today on a federal misdemeanor count of mishandling classified material.  She could face up to a year in prison but appears more likely to be placed on probation, according to the Journal. In court papers, defense attorney Stephen Aarons said the Energy Department is seeking restitution from Quintana for downloading and printing the documents, the Journal reported.  A nearly $400,000 penalty is unfair for papers of “negligible replacement value,” he wrote. No fines of this size have been assessed against other government officials found to have mishandled classified papers, Aarons argued.  A Los Alamos staffer who sent classified information through an unclassified e-mail system also did not face discipline, he said (see GSN, Aug. 7). “It seems ironic that the laboratory would request restitution in this case when the employee happens to have been a college student earning 14 credits at the University of New Mexico while working part time at Los Alamos to help pay for her tuition,” Aarons wrote (Raam Wong, Albuquerque Journal, Dec. 19). Back to top       Bushehr Plant Will Not Operate Before Late 2008 Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant would not become operational before the end of next year, the Russian contractor building the facility said today (see GSN, Dec. 18). “We can predict that the Bushehr station will be launched no earlier than the end of 2008 due to the current situation,” Atomstroiexport spokeswoman Irina Yesipova told Agence France-Presse Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, said Tuesday that the 1,000-megawatt facility could begin producing 200 megawatts of power within three months and reach full capacity nine months after that. “The official who made this statement was probably not appraised of the technical issues,” Yesipova said.  “There is a technical schedule of work and we cannot deviate from it.” The spokeswoman for the Russian firm said that Bushehr’s construction has not been delayed further, but rather that the contractor requires time to finish shipping nuclear fuel and conducting tests at the power plant. Russia this month began shipping fuel to the reactor.  It is expected to take an additional two months to transport the remaining fuel to the facility, she said. Six months after the shipments are complete, the firm plans to begin operations tests at the plant (see GSN, Dec. 17). “Six months after the end of deliveries of fuel we will start tests with the fuel.  When the tests are successfully completed we can launch the station.  I can't say how long the tests will last.” “A deviation from the schedule risks having a negative effect on the security of the power station,” she said (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Dec. 20). Meanwhile, political directors from China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States plan to speak by telephone today to discuss a proposed new round of U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran over its disputed nuclear activities, Reuters reported. “This will be an opportunity for them to continue their discussions about issues related to the third Security Council sanctions resolution on Iran,” U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said. He cautioned that the five permanent U.N. Security Council member nations and Germany would probably not reach a final agreement on a resolution today. “I don’t think you will have an ‘it's all done, let's go forward,’ point coming out of this call,” Casey said (Reuters/Yahoo!News, Dec. 19). Back to top       Nuclear Laboratories Face Steady Worker Losses New Mexico’s nuclear laboratories are expected to lose about 20 percent of their nuclear-weapon workers over the next decade, according to plans announced Tuesday by the U.S. Energy Department (see GSN, Dec. 19). Most of the job cuts would come from attrition and transfers to non-nuclear work, the Associated Press reported. “Fundamentally, this plan is not radical, but an affirmation of the direction the labs have been moving in recent years,” said laboratory proponent Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.). At Los Alamos National Laboratory, high-level nuclear materials would be consolidated at one site, and Sandia National Laboratories would see the removal of all moderate- and high-level nuclear materials. Sandia would therefore focus more work on non-nuclear material applications. “We are encouraged that Sandia’s expertise in non-nuclear component work, gas transfer and environmental test is recognized,” said laboratory spokesman Michael Padilla in a prepared statement (Heather Clark, Associated Press/Las Cruces Sun-News, Dec. 19). The Energy Department plans represent a step back from long-term laboratory goals to build a new nuclear-weapon manufacturing facility, the Albuquerque Journal reported. The United States once operated a major assembly site at Rocky Flats in Colorado, but the site was closed and cleaned up to address major environmental problems. Since then, other U.S. facilities have conducted low-level weapon manufacturing and assembly activities. Los Alamos, under the plans, would make up to 80 plutonium cores for nuclear weapons each year (see GSN, Nov. 16).  For its part, Sandia would continue to contribute design work and some manufacturing for nuclear weapons, according to the new plan (John Fleck, Albuquerque Journal, Dec. 19). Back to top       North Korea Reaffirms Denuclearization Pledge North Korea committed again this week to meet its obligations under a denuclearization pact reached at the six-party talks, the Chinese Foreign Ministry announced (see GSN, Dec. 19). Senior North Korean officials reaffirmed their commitment to the agreement during meetings in Pyongyang with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei, Agence France-Presse reported. “The D.P.R.K. told Vice Minister Wu that it would seriously honor its commitments and implement its obligations,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang. He did not say, though, whether North Korean officials said they would meet the end of the year deadline to disable three key nuclear facilities and issue a full declaration of the nation’s nuclear activities.  There have been indications recently that Pyongyang would not stay on schedule in meeting the next milestones in the effort to dismantle its nuclear program (Agence France-Presse I/Spacewar.com, Dec. 20). South Korean President-elect Lee Myung-bak said today that Pyongyang must eliminate its nuclear weapons if it wants normal trade relations with Seoul, the Associated Press reported. “The most important thing is for North Korea to get rid of its nuclear weapons,” said Lee, who was elected yesterday and takes office in February.  “Full-fledged economic exchanges can start after North Korea dismantles its nuclear weapons” (Burt Herman, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Dec. 20). Back to top       Russia Offers to Assist Libyan Nuclear Program Russia yesterday offered to provide Libya with nuclear energy development assistance and announced that Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov plans to visit the Middle Eastern nation this weekend, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Dec. 11). “We are ready to help Libya realize its enduring right to attain civilian nuclear (energy),” said Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin. He added that Lavrov would travel to Libya on Sunday for a two-day visit and would discuss various issues with Foreign Minister Abdelrahman Shalgham. France this month said it would sell nuclear reactors to Libya (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Dec. 19). Back to top

Russia Could See Interceptor as ICBM, General Warns Russia’s military chief of staff said that the nation’s missile warning system could mistakenly interpret a U.S. missile interceptor launched from Poland as an enemy ICBM, Interfax reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 19). “There is a danger of this missile (antiballistic missile) being classified as an intercontinental ballistic missile,” Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky said in a television interview. The Bush administration hopes to place 10 interceptors in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic under its missile defense program.  Moscow has objected to the plan as a threat to its security. The Russian warning system is set to locate launch sites and respond to any missile launched from either Iran or Poland, the general said. “All this will be literally a matter of seconds, which will not allow the U.S to let us know that they are going to knock down this (Iranian) missile,” Baluyevsky said (Interfax, Dec. 19) Back to top       Experts Question Indian Missile Defense Program Some analysts believe India’s plan to develop a missile defense system in the next three years could be more trouble than it is worth, the London Guardian reported Friday (see GSN, Dec. 14). New Delhi’s defense research agency announced plans last week to deploy a ballistic missile shield system by 2010.  “Pakistan is acquiring advanced missile technology from China.  No missile defense system is perfect, but if we can knock out three or every five warheads, it means our adversary has to fire more rockets,” said defense writer K. Subrahmanyan.  “It is a means of deterrence.” The neighboring nuclear-armed rivals are conducting peace efforts but continue to develop improved missile systems (see GSN, Dec. 11 and Dec. 12).  An Indian missile shield could spark another arms race, said Pakistani defense analyst Ayesha Siddiqa.  “The first impulse is to ask how does Pakistan get (a missile defense system), Siddiqa said.  “The next will be to increase the number of missiles to make sure it has enough to evade the shield.” Indian analysts said the government should direct its money to more worthwhile pursuits. “The U.S. can afford such follies, but a developing country like India cannot,” said defense analyst Bharat Karnad of the Center for Policy Research.  “We should be getting more missiles, not finding ways of shooting them down” (Randeep Ramesh, London Guardian, Dec. 14). Back to top       Israel Tests Patriot Missile Defenses Israel conducted a successful test launch Tuesday of a Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile interceptor as it seeks to boost radar coverage after its 2006 military intervention in Lebanon, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Oct. 22). The test in southern Israel was “part of series of improvements conducted in the missile’s operational system towards a new radar system that allows a wider cover and detection ranges,” Israel’s army said in a statement. Reports first emerged in August that the Israeli air force planned to buy U.S.-built PAC-3 missiles.  The interceptors are said to be capable of hitting aircraft and long-range ballistic missiles, including missiles launched from regional foe Syria. A single PAC-3 missile launcher holds 16 of the 700-pound interceptors, giving the PAC-3 missile battery a higher rate of fire than PAC-2 launchers, which hold only four missiles (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Dec. 19). Back to top       U.S. Could Complete $10 Billion in PAC-3 Sales U.S. defense contractors are preparing $10.4 billion in sales of Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile defense equipment to Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, Inside Missile Defense reported yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 24). The United Arab Emirates has said it would pay $9 billion for 288 PAC-3 missiles and related technology, according to a Dec. 4 statement to Congress from the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency. The potential sale would “strengthen the effectiveness and interoperability of a potential coalition partner, reduce the dependence on U.S. forces in the region, and enhance any coalition operations the U.S. may undertake with the United Arab Emirates,” the statement said. The agency said in another announcement that Kuwait wants to buy 80 interceptors along with defense system upgrades for $1.4 billion. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin would be the leading contractors for the UAE deal and Raytheon would be the primary dealer for Kuwait.  Congress must approve the sales (John Liang, Inside Missile Defense, Dec. 19). Back to top       South Korea Prepares Missile Defense System South Korea is looking to augment its rudimentary missile defenses, the Chosun Ilbo reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 12). Unlike Japan, Seoul to date has not collaborated with the United States on missile shield systems despite facing a greater potential missile threat from neighboring North Korea (see GSN, Dec. 18). Sixty-four Patriot missiles at a U.S. military base are presently the only missile defenses in South Korea. However, the nation is preparing the “Korea Air and Missile Defense” system that would include a Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile battery to be purchased sometime after 2010, along with medium-range surface-to-air missiles produced within South Korea, Chosun reported. Aegis vessels would carry Spy-1D and ballistic missile early warning radar systems and eventually would be equipped with short-range missile interceptors.  The interceptors are not likely to be Standard Missile 3 missiles being developed by the United States and Japan, military officials said. “Given the small size of the Korean Peninsula, we’ll purchase shorter-range missiles, if the U.S. ever develops them, and deploy them on the Aegis vessels,” one source said. Seoul is not expected to have a comprehensive missile shield system before 2015, experts believe.  The system would likely be connected to Washington’s missile shield in some fashion, in order to ensure access to technology including U.S. early warning radar capable of quickly detecting North Korean missile launches (Chosun Ilbo, Dec. 19).   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.