U.S. Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Daniel Glaser was expected to meet today in Beijing with North Korean officials to discuss U.S. financial sanctions on Pyongyang (Getty Images). North Korea Nuclear Negotiations to Resume Feb. 8 China announced today that the next round of six-nation talks on North Korea’s nuclear program would resume on Feb. 8, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Jan. 29). Beijing hopes to see negotiators take “substantive steps” toward advancing the September 2005 agreement in which North Korea agreed to dismantle its nuclear weapons program in return for economic and energy support and security guarantees...Full Story

Homeland Security Panel Chair Backs Cargo Scanning By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The chairman of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee yesterday reaffirmed his commitment to radiation scanning of all cargo containers leaving overseas ports for the United States (see GSN, Jan. 26)...Full Story

No “Timeout” for Iran Sanctions Western nations have expressed little interest in taking a “timeout” from pressuring Iran over its nuclear activities, a move suggested last week by top U.N. nuclear official Mohamed ElBaradei, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 29)...Full Story

	Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Homeland Security Panel Chair Backs Cargo Scanning By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The chairman of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee yesterday reaffirmed his commitment to radiation scanning of all cargo containers leaving overseas ports for the United States (see GSN, Jan. 26). “I believe that the public will at the end of the day accept nothing less than 100 percent screening,” Representative Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) said after laying out his committee’s agenda during an address at George Washington University. The House earlier this month passed legislation that would require scanning of all U.S-bound cargo containers and the screening of all cargo on passenger flights for explosives.  Last week, however, Thompson said he expected that those provisions might not appear in the Senate version. Critics of the expanded scanning requirements have called the measure simply unworkable, suggesting the costs could greatly outweigh the benefits.  Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff told the House Homeland Security Committee last year that requiring 100 percent overseas scanning could cut U.S. international trade by 70 percent. The House bill requires the largest overseas ports to scan all cargo within three years and the smaller ports to follow no later than two years afterward.  While some have criticized the imposition of a deadline, Thompson said a clear time frame is critical. “We believe if we don’t provide a time table it will never happen,” he said. Thompson said he hoped to use the radiation scanning pilot programs at three overseas ports mandated under the SAFE Port Act as models to determine what technology would be best suited for the challenge before moving forward. The committee also plans to focus on rail security in the coming months, Thompson said.  Roughly $9 per passenger is spent on aviation security while only 2 cents are spent per passenger to secure rail transport from terrorist attacks, he said.  “That’s really not where it should be,” Thompson said.  “The real deal requires us to move forward on many of the homeland security initiatives that have languished over the years.” Invoking the rail bombings in London, Madrid and Mumbai, Thompson noted the potential vulnerability that exists in the United States.  Rail security is currently overseen by state and local governments, but Thompson suggested a larger role for the U.S. government in the future similar to federal participation in aviation security.  “We’re working with the industry and advocates to make sure that more than 2 cents of our money goes into it,” he said.  “We’re going to bring the federal government into it to provide the necessary kind of direction.” Thompson noted that abroad one often sees more cameras, security dogs and foot patrols.  Without suggesting similar measures in the United States, he said more needs to be done. “You have to know to some degree who’s traveling.  You need to know what they’re carrying,” he said. He also called for additional congressional oversight to ensure that the priorities of the Homeland Security Department are in line with the emerging threats facing the nation.  “First DHS has to get its house in order,” he said. The department’s Science and Technology Directorate must be strengthened to provide the most up-to-date technology to protect the United States, Thompson said.  “We need a Science and Technology Directorate that has strong but smart leadership, a clearly defined vision and prudent accounting,” he said. Whereas the department has in the past bought off-the-shelf technology to adapt for homeland security needs, Thompson suggested a research division along the lines of the Defense Department’s Defense Advance Projects Research Agency, which produces some of the most cutting-edge defense innovations. The House committee also plans to take a closer look at Biowatch, a DHS program that monitors the air in major urban areas for biological agents.  “It’s a very low-key program,” he said (see GSN, Jan. 11).  “We will hold some hearings to see if it has had any success at all.” The Bioshield program, designed to fund research into countermeasures for biological and other WMD agents, would also get a second look, he said. Back to top

Arab Nations Discuss WMD Issues, Israel Arab military leaders began a 10-day meeting yesterday to discuss the threat of WMD proliferation and Israeli nuclear capabilities, United Press International reported (see GSN, Sept. 12, 2006). Senior military trainers from 17 Arab nations began the meeting at Arab League headquarters in Cairo. The conference plans to address blocking WMD proliferation “in light of Israel’s possession different types of these weapons and the possibility of using them in the future,” said Arab League national security official Muwaffak Nassar (United Press International, Jan. 29). Back to top

North Korea Nuclear Negotiations to Resume Feb. 8 China announced today that the next round of six-nation talks on North Korea’s nuclear program would resume on Feb. 8, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Jan. 29). Beijing hopes to see negotiators take “substantive steps” toward advancing the September 2005 agreement in which North Korea agreed to dismantle its nuclear weapons program in return for economic and energy support and security guarantees. “We hope the relevant parties can make joint efforts … toward implementing the joint statement in a comprehensive way,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu. The length of the negotiations “will depend on the progress made during the talks,” Jiang said. The meetings are expected to end by Feb. 18, the beginning of Chinese New Year, AP reported. “The very fact that there was agreement to hold a new round testifies to signs of small movement in the positions of the participants,” said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Lusyukov, Moscow’s lead envoy to the negotiations. Setting dates for talks to resume is not alone a sign of progress, said U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Alexander Vershbow.  “Continued unity” is necessary by China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States to persuade North Korea to give up its weapons, he said. “North Korea must live up to its commitments” from 2005, he said. “If the six-party talks fail to yield results, international pressure on North Korea will be further increased,” said Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.  “It will be North Korea that will be in the most difficult situation.” Meanwhile, U.S. Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Daniel Glaser was scheduled to meet today in Beijing with North Korean officials, to discuss U.S. financial sanctions on Pyongyang.  Glaser said he was “hopeful” for progress on the issue, which North Korea has used as a reason for avoiding serious negotiations on disarmament. “We’re prepared to go through these talks as long as it takes for us to get through our agenda,” Glaser said (Audra Ang, Associated Press/FOX6, Jan. 30). Back to top       No “Timeout” for Iran Sanctions Western nations have expressed little interest in taking a “timeout” from pressuring Iran over its nuclear activities, a move suggested last week by top U.N. nuclear official Mohamed ElBaradei, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 29). Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, ElBaradei urged Western powers and Iran to step back from the crisis by simultaneously suspending nuclear activity and economic sanctions. While Iranian officials said they would study his proposal, Western officials appeared to reject it in favor of the U.N. Security Council plan, which calls for lifting sanctions only after Iran freezes its nuclear program. “If Iran verifiably suspends all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, then the Security Council will suspend sanctions,” said Gregory Schulte, U.S. ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. A British Foreign Office spokesman said the council “was clear and requested Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment and related processing activities.  The resolution has been passed, and we are still waiting for Iran to comply with it” (Michael Adler, Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Jan. 29). While appearing to be unified on this issue, the United States and European nations have disagreed on how far to pursue economic sanctions against Iran, the New York Times reported today. The United States has pushed European countries to impose measures even stricter than those required by the Security Council resolution. “We are telling the Europeans that they need to go way beyond what they’ve done to maximize pressure on Iran,” said a senior Bush administration official.  “The European response on the economic side has been pretty weak.” The United States, however, has much more limited business and diplomatic relationships with Iran than European nations do, so it might be easier for Washington to impose harsher measures, the Times reported. “We want to squeeze the Iranians,” said one European official.  “But there are varying degrees of political will in Europe about turning the thumbscrews.  It’s not straightforward for the European Union to do what the United States wants” (Steven Weisman, New York Times, Jan. 30). Meanwhile, U.S. President George W. Bush said yesterday that he was working to avoid the intelligence lapses that marred U.S. assessment of Iraq’s WMD capabilities before the 2003 war. “Look, I’m like a lot of Americans that say, well, if it wasn’t right in Iraq, how do you know it’s right in Iran?” he said in an interview with National Public Radio.  “So we are constantly evaluating, and answering this legitimate question by always working to get as good intelligence as we can.” Bush cautioned that his recent orders to authorize U.S. forces in Iraq to fire on Iranian personnel did not mean that the United States was planning to attack Iran. “This is the kind of thing that happens in Washington. People ascribe, you know, motives to me beyond a simple statement — of course we’ll protect our troops. I don't know how anybody can then say, well, protecting the troops means that we're going to invade Iran,” he said (National Public Radio, Jan. 29). However, tensions between the two countries, combined with a growing U.S. military force in the region, could lead to accidental conflict, the Associated Press reported yesterday. “A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it’s August 1914 all over again,” said a U.S. military officer in Doha, Qatar, referring to the beginning of World War I.  “I really believe neither side wants a fight.” The officer suggested that inflammatory remarks by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would ultimately undermine the president’s political power. “I don’t think Ahmadinejad is very sophisticated.  He’s grossly overplaying his hand,” the officer said.  “The real power base in Iran is starting to lose interest in him.  You can see it.  We should probably let this situation develop, as painful as it can be in the short term.  I think he will soon find himself on the ledge wondering how he got there” (Associated Press/International Herald Tribune, Jan. 29). Back to top

WHO Board Defers Date to Destroy Smallpox The Executive Board of the World Health Organization last week reaffirmed the institution’s goal of destroying the last known stocks of smallpox virus, but recommended deferring a decision on the destruction date until at least 2010 (see GSN, May 30, 2006). The only known samples of lethal strain, known as variola virus, are held in two laboratories in the United States and Russia, where they have been kept since the last case of smallpox infection was documented in 1978.  The World Health Organization has repeatedly decided that these samples should be destroyed, but growing concerns about bioterrorism have led some scientists to urge keeping the samples to use for defensive study. In a draft resolution passed Saturday, the WHO board recommended continuing study of the retention issue with the goal of reaching a consensus of WHO members in three or four years.  The draft resolution is set to be reviewed by the World Health Assembly later this year. The board “strongly reaffirms the decisions of previous Health Assemblies that the remaining stocks of variola virus should be destroyed,” the draft resolution says.  The draft resolution also calls on WHO officials to conduct a “major review” of smallpox research to help a future assembly “reach global consensus on the timing of the destruction of the existing variola virus stocks.”  The recommended date of the decision, however, was not agreed by the board, which included 2010 and 2011 as possible years in bracketed text in the draft resolution (Greg Webb, Global Security Newswire, Jan. 30). Meanwhile, the Australian National University plans an opening ceremony tomorrow for a new national biosecurity center that will study smallpox, among other deadly diseases (Australian Associated Press/ninemsn.com, Jan. 30). Back to top       Planned U.S. Biological Work Illegal, Expert Says Operations planned for a new laboratory at Fort Detrick in Maryland would violate a federal law against the development of biological weapons, the author of the legislation charged last week (see GSN, Jan. 23). The U.S. Army is replacing its Military Institute of Infectious Diseases with a new laboratory that would be a component of a biodefense campus operated by several agencies, the Associated Press reported.  The laboratory is intended to continue research that is only meant for defense against biological threats, according to the Army. However, University of Illinois international law professor Francis Boyle said the Fort Detrick work “will include acquiring, growing, modifying, storing, packaging and dispersing classical, emerging and genetically engineered pathogens.”  Those activities, as well as planned study of the properties of pathogens when weaponized, “are unmistakable hallmarks of an offensive weapons program,” Boyle wrote in comments submitted to Fort Detrick as part of its environmental impact assessment of the new facility. Boyle authored the Biological Weapons Antiterrorism Act of 1989, which President George H.W. Bush signed in 1990.  The professor is a longtime opponent of U.S. biodefense and nuclear weapons programs, AP reported. In 2004, USAMRIID Commander Col. George Korch Jr. acknowledged that research at Fort Detrick might include genetic engineering of organisms in order to make them more lethal.  The intent would be only to ensure that U.S. biodefenses would provide protection against even the deadliest diseases, he said.  Korch cited as examples of possible work the aerosolization of germs and developing new methods of pathogen delivery.  The laboratory’s work would follow federal law and the international Biological Weapons Convention, according to Army officials.  Development, production and stockpiling of pathogen samples is allowed under the national and international rules for defense and protection purposes, they said (David Dishneau, Associated Press/WTOP, Jan. 30). Back to top       Pittsburgh Biodefense Lab to Open Late A biodefense laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh is expected to open no earlier than January 2008, putting it at least a year behind schedule, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 23). “It’s not a simple process,” said Center for Vaccine Research Director Donald Burke.  “We think we’re doing fine now.  We hope to start with one simple project in early ’08.” Delays have been partly caused by installation of special air filters, a cell-counting machine and X-ray equipment, Burke said.  Hurricane Katrina was another contributor, as it caused large increases in the cost of building materials and affected the ability of construction firms to seek new projects, said Mike Kurilla, biodefense research affairs director at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The agency contributed $23.9 million toward the Pittsburgh project.  The money must be used by the end of September 2008. The $29 million laboratory would develop vaccines for pathogens that might be used in acts of bioterrorism, along with diseases such as avian flu, dengue fever and tuberculosis. The facility is one of 13 planned around the country to work against diseases that are in the second tier of lethality.  None have yet opened, though a laboratory at Duke University is expected to begin operations in the next few months, and research should begin later in 2007 at a Colorado State facility. The Pittsburgh laboratory should “probably be the second or third one to open,” Burke said (Mike Cronin, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Jan. 29). Back to top

U.S. Destroys 40 Percent of Chemical Stockpile The United States has destroyed more than 40 percent of its stockpile of chemical weapons, the U.S. Army announced yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 12). Weapons disposal at sites in Maryland and the Johnston Atoll has been completed, and incinerators are operating at five other chemical depots.  Construction has yet to begin of plants that would eliminate weapons stored in Colorado and Kentucky. Under the Chemical Weapons Convention, the United States must eliminate 45 percent of its stockpile — by agent weight — by April of this year and completely destroy the stockpile by April 2012 (see GSN, Dec. 11). “This puts us in a good position to make the 45 percent destruction milestone on or ahead of schedule,” Dale Ormond, acting director of the Army Chemical Materials Agency, said in a press release. Full disposal of U.S. chemical weapons is not expected to occur until 2023 (see GSN, Nov. 21, 2006; U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency release, Jan. 29). Back to top

Iran, North Korea Working on Missiles, U.S. Says A senior U.S. military official said yesterday that Iran and North Korea are working in tandem to develop long-range missile capabilities, the Washington Times reported (see GSN, Jan. 26). Army Brig. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly noted Pyongyang’s failed test launch in July of a Taepodong 2 missile (see GSN, July 5, 2006), and Iran’s development of a space launcher that could help produce an ICBM capable of reaching the United States. “Not only North Korea, but Iran has shown some significant developments in their (own) missile systems,” O’Reilly, deputy director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, said in a speech at the George C. Marshall Institute. “They are working in concert with the North Koreans,” he said.  “They have also made a claim that they are working towards developing a space launch capability, which also would give them an ICBM capability.” An agency briefing slide stated that Iran has a “new intermediate-range ballistic missile or space launch vehicle (SLV) in development,” and that Tehran is “likely to develop an IBM/SLV (and) could have an ICBM capable of reaching the U.S. before 2015.” A new Iranian solid-fuel missile would have a range of 1,240 miles, meaning it could reach various targets in Europe, the Times reported. The presentation yesterday was the first public indication from the Pentagon of Iran and North Korea’s joint missile work. The North Korean Taepodong 2 crashed less than a minute after takeoff in July.  When functioning, the two-stage version of the missile would have a range of 6,200 miles, while the three-stage missile could fly 9,300 miles. “The indications are clear that they are continuing to strive to expand their ballistic missile capability,” O’Reilly said (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Jan. 30). Back to top

U.S. Could Make Missile Defense Offer to India A U.S. defense contractor has informally offered sea-based air and missile defenses to India, the Indo-Asian News Service reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 4, 2006). Lockheed Martin manufactures the Aegis weapons systems that are deployed on U.S. destroyers.  The system tracks airborne threats, including ballistic missiles, and guides intercepting missiles (see GSN, Nov. 28, 2006). The Aegis system could be adapted to use missiles produced in India. “Theoretically yes,” said Lockheed Martin official Royce Caplinger, “but that would depend entirely on the Indian scientists and India’s requirements.” While no formal requests or offers have been made by India or the United States, Caplinger said he was confident Washington would approve any deal. “If you ask for it, you will get,” he said (Indo-Asian News Service/IndiaDefense.com, Jan. 29). Back to top

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rejects Requiring Reactors to Protect Themselves from Air Attacks U.S. nuclear reactor operators cannot be required to protect their plants against being struck by airplanes in acts of terrorism, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ruled yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 9, 2006). The commission unanimously rejected a petition by a Los Angeles nonprofit group calling for structural reinforcement of nuclear reactors or other measures to keep radiation from being released following an aircraft impact, the Washington Post reported. “Nuclear power plants are pre-emplaced nuclear weapons near major cities,” said Daniel Hirsch, president of the Committee to Bridge the Gap.  “They can’t blow up like a nuclear bomb, but they can release a thousand times the radiation of the Hiroshima bomb.  They are the most attractive target for a terrorist to hit in our country.” Commission Chairman Dale Klein countered that, “Nuclear reactors are inherently robust structures that our studies show provide adequate protection in a hypothetical attack by an airplane.” The commission said it is up to the U.S. military and other agencies to prevent air strikes against nuclear reactors.  It noted that reactors must already be prepared for fires or explosions, and that requirements are being heightened for responding to “multiple coordinated groups of attackers, suicide attacks and cyber threats.” Some lawmakers expressed disappointment with the decision.  It “reflects an inadequate industry-influenced approach that sacrifices security in favor of corporate profits,” said Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.). An industry spokesman said that a 2002 computer modeling study determined that a radiation leak would not result from an aircraft strike on a nuclear facility, the Post reported (Steven Mufson, Washington Post, Jan. 30). Back to top       Medical Patients Set Off Radiation Sensors Medical patients who have received treatment involving radioisotopes are setting off the increasing number of sensors around the nation designed to detect radiological “dirty bombs,” Reuters reported Sunday (see GSN, Aug. 16, 2006). Each day, almost 60,000 people are left with minute levels of radioactive material in their bodies following medical treatment or tests.  The material is harmless, but can remain in their system from less than one day to more than three months, tripping alarms along the way. New York City police in November stopped six people who set off sensors while attending the Christmas tree lighting at Rockefeller Center. “All six had recently had medical treatments with radioisotopes in their bodies,” said Deputy Commissioner for Counterterrorism Richard Falkenrath.  “That happens all the time.” Radioisotopes are regularly used in diagnosing and treating cancers and thyroid disorders, assessing heart functioning and scanning of bones and lungs, according to Reuters. Doctors should warn patients treated with radioisotopes that they might trip alarms, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in 2003. There are no reliable figures for how often radioisotope-treated patients are stopped by authorities, said Customs and Border Protection spokesman Zachary Mann.  He said it does not happen regularly at airports. “We hope that people who have radiation detectors are aware of the problem … and that they treat people with respect,” Mann said (Reuters/Yahoo!News, Jan. 28). Back to top       U.N. Chief Formally Announces Restructuring Plan, Disarmament Department Loses Standing The head of the United Nations has proposed downgrading the bureaucratic status of the U.N. Disarmament Affairs Department, but avoided an earlier initiative to consolidate the department with another addressing political affairs, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Jan. 19). Secretary General Ban Ki-moon formally announced his proposal yesterday, saying he wished to convert the disarmament department to an office that would be headed by a special representative instead of an undersecretary general. The move was spurred by a “need for a greater role and personal involvement of the secretary general in the field of disarmament and nonproliferation,” Ban said.  Recent international diplomatic efforts have resulted in few “meaningful outcomes,” he added. The Nonaligned Movement had protested an earlier plan to merge the disarmament and political affairs departments, and Ban’s chief of staff said NAM diplomats had generally approved of the current plan (Alexandra Olson, Associated Press/Boston Herald, Jan. 30). 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.