The USS Lake Erie, shown here firing a Standard Missile 3 in a 2003 test, could take a first shot tomorrow at destroying an errant U.S. spy satellite (U.S. Navy photo). Pentagon Satellite Shot to Use Missile Defense Data Gathering Tools By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department intends to use missile interceptor telemetry to help determine whether its upcoming attempt to destroy an ailing spy satellite on the near edge of space has been successful, a senior official said today (see GSN, Feb. 15). Bush administration officials have said they intend to break apart the nonfunctioning spacecraft before it can tumble back to Earth, because its fuel tank contains a toxic gas that might pose a health threat to anyone immediately near the debris...Full Story

More Nuclear Detectives Needed in Crisis, Groups Say By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire BOSTON — The United States does not have nearly enough “atomic detectives” to deal with a crisis involving a nuclear device, two science organizations said in a report issued Saturday (see GSN, Oct. 11, 2007)...Full Story

North Korea Rejects Uranium Claims, U.S. Says U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said today that North Korea continues to deny operating a secret uranium enrichment program, Reuters reported (see GSN, Feb. 19)...Full Story

	Wednesday, February 20, 2008

More Nuclear Detectives Needed in Crisis, Groups Say By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire BOSTON — The United States does not have nearly enough “atomic detectives” to deal with a crisis involving a nuclear device, two science organizations said in a report issued Saturday (see GSN, Oct. 11, 2007). U.S. national laboratories now have between 35 and 50 nuclear forensics specialists who would provide crucial expertise in tracking the source of a nuclear weapon before or after it is detonated.  At least 10 more scientists are needed under any circumstances and the existing corps would have to be two to three times larger to provide adequate field and laboratory support during an emergency, an experts’ panel said in a document issued jointly by the American Physical Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “We found that while the people involved were the best in the world, there were too few of them in case of an emergency,” working group leader Michael May, former director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, said Saturday during the annual AAAS meeting. An emergency would encompass the detonation of a nuclear device, interception of an operational weapon or discovery of a sufficient amount of material to produce a weapon, one AAAS spokesman said today. Nuclear forensics is “the analysis of nuclear materials recovered from either the capture of unused materials, or from the radioactive debris following a nuclear explosion,” the report says.  It uses a host of disciplines, including nuclear engineering and radiochemistry, to uncover age, provenance and other details of atomic matter. Forensics is one component of a larger program of intelligence-gathering intended to indicate the origin of nuclear material — which is regularly found floating loose — or an entire nuclear weapon — none of which are yet known to have gone missing (see GSN, Feb. 19). Concerns regarding the U.S. forensics corps are not limited to its existing size.  Up to half of the scientists now on the job are expected to retire in the coming 10 to 15 years, while others are likely to move onto other positions in the next decade, the report says.  The pipeline of new scientists receiving the necessary education is also running dry, with a shrinking number of universities offering programs in radio and nuclear chemistry. In order to bring staffing to needed levels, 35 trained scientists must be placed at the national laboratories over the next decade.  That requires long-term funding for university radiochemistry programs and initiatives to increase connections between academic institutions and the national laboratories, according to the report. The panel also urged governments to push past using the existing but limited databases of nuclear material in favor of a larger shared system that would allow quick access by scientists searching for a possible match to material left by a nuclear detonation.  They acknowledged, though, the difficulty of persuading governments or commercial operations to make sensitive information widely available. International technical and operational cooperation would also be key following a nuclear strike, the report says. It calls for a program to develop improved forensics technology both for field investigations and for U.S. laboratories.  The final recommendations promote training exercises to prepare for the response to a nuclear detonation and establishment of groups to review the exercises and to provide expert advice on forensics findings. “In terms of the United States, we believe that international cooperation is vitally important and we would also argue that nuclear forensics helps provide in essence a first line of defense,” said David Smith, a senior nuclear forensics adviser at Lawrence Livermore.  “We would rather not respond to a horrific act of an explosion by emphasizing security of nuclear materials at their source and using nuclear forensics to make sure that they’re not leaking from those sources.” Forensics has a role in a system of deterrence against an act of nuclear terrorism, the report says.  While the risk of being identified might not be enough to prevent terrorists from setting off a nuclear weapon, it could prove more effective in giving second thoughts to states likely to provide the material for an attack, intermediaries who would help facilitate a strike, and the engineers or other technicians needed to make sure it comes off, according to the experts. “Each of these groups has a different motivation and can be stopped by different means,” the report says. The document also posits roles for forensics following an attack, including helping to prevent additional strikes and in identifying the supply chain that allowed for the first incident. May said officials from the National Nuclear Security Administration and other relevant agencies attended meetings of the working group as it prepared the report (see GSN, Feb. 5).  Panel members hope to brief lawmakers and congressional staffers on the findings, he said. Back to top       North Korea Rejects Uranium Claims, U.S. Says U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said today that North Korea continues to deny operating a secret uranium enrichment program, Reuters reported (see GSN, Feb. 19). “They continue to take what they call a principled position that they have not engaged in any uranium enrichment activity,” said Hill, lead U.S. envoy to the six-party talks, who met yesterday with Pyongyang’s top nuclear negotiator. North Korea has always publicly rejected the long-standing U.S. accusation that it operated a clandestine uranium program alongside its known plutonium-based nuclear weapon effort.  Washington has demanded that Pyongyang adequately address the matter in the full nuclear declaration the Stalinist state is required to submit as part of the ongoing process to eliminate its atomic sector. “We have a situation where they have purchased some equipment and have been trying to show us that this equipment is not being used for uranium enrichment,” Hill said during a stop in Seoul.  “We cannot pretend that activities don’t exist when we know that the activities have existed” (Reuters/Washington Post, Feb. 20). Hill has also reaffirmed the U.S. stand that North Korea address its suspected support for a Syrian nuclear program, the Washington Times reported (see GSN, Feb. 8). “We’ve made it abundantly clear to the North Koreans that the issue of nuclear cooperation abroad, whether it’s with Syria or other states — we need to know all about that,” Hill said Friday. North Korean technicians are believed to have been working on a Syrian facility destroyed during a September Israeli air strike.  Senior Syrian and North Korean officials met shortly after the attack, according to Pyongyang’s official news agency.  Syria has denied that the targeted facility was nuclear in nature (Nicholas Kralev, Washington Times, Feb. 20). During the meeting Tuesday, Kim “wanted to make it very clear that they are not at present having any nuclear cooperation with any other country and they will not in [the] future,” Hill said. The North Korean denuclearization process has faltered amid the standoff over the nuclear declaration and Pyongyang’s claims that it has not received adequate rewards for the disarmament moves it has made to date. However, Kim “wanted to make it make it clear that he and his government are prepared to try to make progress to get through this and I told them we are also prepared to make progress on this,” Hill said (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Feb. 20). “We made clear that we are committed to following through on our obligations and that they should know that, as they do their obligations, we will do ours,” he said (Lee Joo-hee, Korea Herald, Feb. 20). Back to top       U.S.-Russian HEU Deal Enjoys Anniversary A 1993 agreement to convert Russian weapon-grade uranium into nuclear fuel marked its 15th anniversary this week, the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration announced (see GSN, April 5, 2007). So far, Russia has blended down 322 metric tons of highly enriched uranium removed from nuclear weapons.  The 20-year plan calls on Moscow to process a total of 500 metric tons. The program entails shipping the resultant low-enriched uranium to U.S. nuclear fuel fabrication facilities and then to U.S. nuclear power plants (see GSN, Aug. 14, 2006). “NNSA has been working with Russia for 15 years to eliminate highly enriched uranium from its weapons stockpile and prevent it from being diverted to unauthorized use,” William Tobey, NNSA’s head of nuclear nonproliferation, said in a release.  “At the same time, about one in 10 light bulbs in America is powered by material that was once in a Soviet nuclear weapon.” To ensure compliance with the agreement, U.S. and Russian inspectors frequently visit facilities in both nations, according to the agency (U.S National Nuclear Security Administration release, Feb. 20). Back to top       Iran Developing Nuclear Warheads, Exiles Claim An organization of Iranian exiles has accused Tehran of operating a clandestine nuclear warhead development program at a missile research site on the outskirts of the capital city, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, Feb. 19). Iran is working on nuclear warheads for medium-range ballistic missiles in its Khojir facility on the southeastern edge of the Iranian capital, said Mohammad Mohaddessin, foreign affairs chief for the National Council of Resistance of Iran. The group has also pinpointed lodging near the facility for North Korean technicians involved with warhead development, he said, adding that the information is current and was prepared over the past several weeks. Mohaddessin yesterday passed evidence that included satellite photography to the International Atomic Energy Agency.  The U.N. nuclear watchdog has confirmed claims made by the group on two past occasions — including information released in 2002 that first exposed an Iranian uranium enrichment program that could assist in nuclear bomb-making efforts — but the agency could not verify another claim by the organization. Neither of the new claims has been independently confirmed.  IAEA officials plan to check them against details from their own investigation into Iran’s nuclear program and would follow up on the assertions “if appropriate,” an agency official told the Journal. Officials in Vienna and Washington have suggested previously that the opposition group — whose parent organization is on U.S. and EU lists of terrorist groups — could receive its intelligence from Israel or another government hostile to Iran.  However, the group maintains its information comes from contacts inside the country. The group said it began work on the new report in December.  It is seeking to disprove a recent U.S. intelligence assertion that Tehran halted nuclear weapons development in 2003. The U.S. intelligence community’s consensus on Iran’s nuclear weapons program has not shifted since the assessment was completed, said Ross Feinstein, spokesman for the office of National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell (see GSN, Feb. 6; Marc Champion, Wall Street Journal, Feb. 20). Meanwhile, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said today that his nation has emerged victorious from the international standoff over its nuclear activities, Agence France-Presse reported. Iran has long rebuffed international suspicions that its nuclear program is aimed at weapons development, insisting it is intended only for civilian energy production. “With the help of God, the Iranian nation with its unity, faith and determination stood and defeated the world powers and brought them to their knees,” he said in a televised address. “If you come up with a new game … you will be facing this same nation,” he warned world powers now debating whether to impose a third set of sanctions against Iran over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment activities (Agence France-Presse I/Spacewar.com, Feb. 20). IAEA officials have obtained enough information on Iran’s nuclear program for an upcoming report to the agency’s 35-nation governing council, former senior Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said in an interview published today. Larijani also criticized the five permanent Security Council members and Germany for drafting the new sanctions resolution against Iran while the U.N. nuclear watchdog investigation was still under way. “It is (the) IAEA that is important to us,” Larijani told the Financial Times.  “We have finished answering all their … questions” (Agence France-Presse II/Google News, Feb. 20). Back to top       EU Estimates Costs of U.S. Cargo Scanning The European Union plans to present U.S. lawmakers next month with estimated costs that European nations would incur if Congress maintains the law requiring scanning by 2012 of all U.S.-bound cargo for nuclear and radiological materials, Lloyd’s List reported (see GSN, Jan. 29). “This has already been signed into law in the U.S., but we will be presenting Congress with our estimate of costs in March,” said one European Commission official.  “We still hope it will not be necessary for this to come into force.” The U.S. law might affect overseas trade while doing little to protect the United States against nuclear and radiological weapons attacks, according to a report by the European Sea Ports Organization, a Brussels-based industry group. “Unless massive public financial support will be provided, which is unlikely to happen in EU member states, the cost of introducing the 100-percent scanning measures will to a large extent be transferred to port users and eventually on shippers trading with the U.S.,” the group said.  “Given that U.S. exporters are not required to have export cargo screened, this action will discriminate against exporters based outside the U.S.,” it added. The law would require seaports outside the United States to separate U.S.-bound cargo, forcing them to set aside limited storage area and possibly creating “delays in the supply chain,” according to the organization. Concerns remain that the radiation detection equipment being deployed at ports might not be efficient enough to handle a full cargo flow or distinguish possible weapons substances from benign radiation sources. The U.S. initiative also fails to address other issues, including which party is responsible for certifying cargo as secure and who would be held liable for the detonation of a weapon shipped in a cargo container. “This U.S. measure would also apply to ports outside Europe.  How on earth would they afford to implement such a system in places like Africa?” said ESPO Secretary General Patrick Verhoeven (Lloyd’s List, Feb. 19). Back to top       Indian Official Presses Nuclear Deal A tentative U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal could falter unless New Delhi’s leadership quickly quells domestic criticism, India’s nuclear envoy said Monday (see GSN, Feb. 12). “While there is no calendar deadline, the level of political uncertainty keeps increasing as time goes on, so [the] sooner (India wraps up the deal) the better,” said Shyam Saran, the government’s lead advocate of the agreement.  U.S. Ambassador to India David Mulford recently warned that the deal would probably be seriously reconsidered by the next U.S. president. The pending agreement calls India to receive access to U.S. nuclear technology and materials in exchange for placing the nation’s civilian nuclear activities under international supervision.  To take effect, India must complete a supervision agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must exempt New Delhi from trade rules that bar it from purchasing key nuclear technologies. Critics in India have complained that the deal would give the United States and the international community too much control over their nation’s nuclear policy.  Some opponents have argued that the deal would restrict India’s ability to conduct nuclear-weapon tests in the future. In a Monday lecture, Saran said India would always retain the right to conduct nuclear tests, and would face international outcry with or without the trade deal. “Irrespective of whether we have an agreement or not, there will be consequences if we test.  We are asking for changes in the international environment, but in the NSG, 43 out of 45 members have signed the [Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty].  To believe that they will not react if you carry out a test is naive,” he said.  “In fact, if we were an NSG member would we have given another country such leeway?  I think not.” Saran urged domestic opponents to consider the deal as a tool to improve India’s access to international markets. “Our objective is not merely to seek the U.S. as a partner,” he said.  “Our objective is to enable India to have a wide choice of partners in pursuing nuclear commerce and high-technology trade” (Times of India, Feb. 19). Back to top       Court Convicts Former Russian Nuclear Chief A Moscow court yesterday found former Russian atomic energy chief Yevgeny Adamov guilty of embezzling $30 million, the Moscow Times reported (see GSN, July 2, 2007). Adamov, who served as Russia’s top nuclear power official from 1998 to 2001, could receive a prison sentence of up to 10 years today following his conviction for fraud and abuse of power. Working with two accomplices, co-defendants Revmir Fraishtut and Vyacheslav Pismenny, Adamov stole more than $30 million in shares from a U.S.-Russian uranium joint venture in 1998 and 1999.  Their actions caused “considerable damage” to the Russian state, said Judge Irina Vasina of Moscow’s Zamoskvoretsky District Court. “I never took a kopek,” Adamov insisted during a trial recess The United States has also charged Adamov of embezzling $9 million from a program for improving Russian nuclear safety, but Russia has opposed his extradition, arguing that Washington would pressure him to surrender Russian nuclear secrets (Natalya Krainova, Moscow Times, Feb. 20). Back to top

Indonesia Backs Death Row for Chemical Weapons Use The Indonesian House of Representatives yesterday backed legislation that would make the development, production or possession of chemical weapons punishable by death, the Xinhua News Agency reported (see GSN, June 14, 2007). Under the bill, punishment for transferring, using, or abetting the use of chemical weapons could range from four years in prison to death.  The bill would also prohibit military use of chemical weapons, according to the Jakarta Post. Owners or managers of a company that misuses chemicals would be charged for the violations.  The Indonesian state could also claim the corporation’s assets, revoke its licenses and shut down its production centers. The legislation permits international inspectors to visit the country under the supervision of an Indonesian team appointed by the national authority for implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention (Xinhua News Agency/People’s Daily, Feb. 20). Back to top       Congress to Hold Defense Department to Chemical Weapons Disposal Schedule, U.S. Lawmaker Says U.S. Senator Ken Salazar (D-Colo.) said Monday that Congress would work to ensure that the Defense Department meets the new 2017 deadline to eliminate its arsenal of chemical weapons, the Pueblo Chieftain reported (see GSN, Jan. 15). Lawmakers set the new schedule last year in the fiscal 2008 defense appropriations bill.  The Pentagon has estimated that chemical demilitarization would not be finished until 2023. Congress intends to provide adequate funding and pressure to meet the earlier deadline, said Salazar, who on Monday toured the Pueblo Chemical Depot (see GSN, Feb. 5). “We need to get the process up and running,” he said.  “I think that pressure will continue and we will make sure we get the job done.” A total of 780,000 munitions filled with 2,611 tons of mustard agent are stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot.  The facility and the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky are scheduled to be the last sites to finish off their chemical stockpiles. Salazar and two other Colorado lawmakers last week submitted legislation requiring that wastewater produced by the chemical neutralization process be treated at Pueblo rather than an off-site location (John Norton, Pueblo Chieftain I, Feb. 19). “By moving ahead with on-site treatment of hydrolysate, DOD will be better able to meet its legal obligation to complete chemical weapons destruction by 2017,” Salazar said Friday. The Pentagon has said it would save $150 million by relocating 8.4 million gallons of waste for treatment and that the material should not be considered a danger during transport, the Chieftain reported.  A citizens’ advisory commission has countered that the plan could face challenges from jurisdictions along the transport route that might increase costs and further delay weapons disposal.  It has argued for construction of an on-site facility (John Norton, Pueblo Chieftain II, Feb. 16). Back to top       Israel Halts Gas Mask Refurbishing Program Incomplete funding has forced the Israeli Defense Ministry to suspend efforts to upgrade 7 million gas masks intended to protect civilians during a chemical or biological weapons attack, the Jerusalem Post reported yesterday (see GSN, July 10, 2007). Israel has already gathered 4.5 million of the masks, but it would need an additional $11 million to complete the project, according to an Israeli television report. When the funding shortfall was reported last November, Israeli defense officials warned that the project would be put off until the end of the decade without additional funds (Jerusalem Post, Feb. 19). Back to top

Pentagon Satellite Shot to Use Missile Defense Data Gathering Tools By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department intends to use missile interceptor telemetry to help determine whether its upcoming attempt to destroy an ailing spy satellite on the near edge of space has been successful, a senior official said today (see GSN, Feb. 15). Bush administration officials have said they intend to break apart the nonfunctioning spacecraft before it can tumble back to Earth, because its fuel tank contains a toxic gas that might pose a health threat to anyone immediately near the debris. The Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency installed special wiring on the Standard Missile 3 to be used for the intercept “because this is more like a test” than a typical use of the weapon, according to the senior defense official, who briefed reporters at the Pentagon on condition of not being named. The missile defense test-monitoring technology “tells you … everything that’s happening,” the official said.  “The instrumentation … will give us even more awareness of the performance and the activities going on.” Military and space experts said last week the Pentagon could potentially gather useful data during the intercept that might support any future U.S. antisatellite missions.  However, Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, rejected that rationale for the anticipated action.  He said the military already has a sufficient understanding of antisatellite operations from tests performed some 20 years ago, and cited the dangerous hydrazine fuel on the spacecraft as the sole reason for the intercept. For the upcoming mission, the Pentagon plans to fire the Navy missile from an Aegis ship in the Pacific Ocean, hoping for a direct hit on the satellite’s fuel tank in its initial shot.  This is the first time the Standard Missile 3 would be launched against a satellite.  The weapon was built to intercept enemy missiles with tactical or regional ranges. To undertake the unusual mission, the Navy modified the interceptor’s heat-seeking sensors so it could better detect the satellite, which would be much cooler than a warhead that had just been boosted through the atmosphere by a rocket, the Associated Press and CNN reported today. If the first shot fails, other attempts could follow by Feb. 29 — or perhaps even later, depending in part on the weather, said the senior official. With the space shuttle Atlantis having landed safely at just after 9 a.m., a first crack at the mission might occur as early as today.  However, that looked unlikely as of this morning because of choppy seas, the senior official said. “The [launch] window we’re talking about here is very precise, only a matter of seconds,” said the official, noting there would be just one possible window each day.  “So you have to be at exactly the right place at exactly the right time, and all criteria have to line up exactly right” for a direct hit to occur. U.S. Strategic Command, based at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Neb., is set to command the satellite-destruction mission. The Joint Space Operations Center at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., led by the Air Force, would coordinate space-based sensor tracking for the intercept.  Additionally, the Army-led Joint Integrated Missile Defense Team in Colorado Springs, Colo., plans to use large, ground-based radars and telescopes to observe the mission. Pentagon officials expect to hit the satellite only during daylight hours, which should make it easier to fracture the fuel tank on the first shot and assess whether the dangerous gas has escaped into space. Pieces of debris generated by the intercept would circle the Earth about every 90 minutes, with more than half of the fragments descending into the atmosphere during the first hours and days following the mission.  “Trying to count the [pieces of] debris, [assess] the size of the debris, where the debris is located as it orbits the Earth — all of that [wreckage] that has not come down — while there [are] parts of it coming down, is difficult,” the official said.  “There’s going to be a lot of ambiguity — where’s the tank in all of this?” The steep challenges following the shot pose “another reason why daylight … is important,” the official said.  “Because if we can get optical sensors, if we can get other [sensors] on it, we get a higher degree of confidence that we understand that the key piece of hardware that we’re after, which is that tank,” has been destroyed, the official said.   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.