Canadian Response:  Senate Passes Anti-Terrorism Law

Canadian Governor General Adrienne Clarkson signed Canada’s new and controversial anti-terrorism bill into law yesterday shortly after the Senate passed it (see GSN, Oct. 17).  The House of Commons passed the bill late in November (United Press International, Dec. 19).

The law is intended to bring Canada into closer conformity with its allies after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States, the National Post reported.  Policymakers studied charts comparing Canadian law with laws in the United States, United Kingdom, France and European Union to detect differences (see GSN, Dec. 7).  The result was new legislation that brings Canadian law closer to that of its allies but stops short of some of the more far-reaching steps of the United States (see GSN, Oct. 26), United Kingdom (see GSN, Nov. 20) and France.

The new law does the following:

*         Defines terrorist activity as involving acts of violence or destruction intended to influence government or intimidate the public, similar to U.S. and British law.  Terrorist activity must stem from religious, ideological or political motivation to meet the definition—similar to British law but different from U.S. and French law.

*         Does not ban membership in terrorist organizations, similar to U.S. and French law.

*         Allows authorities to detain suspected terrorists for 48 hours without obtaining a warrant, although they must present the suspect before a judge within 24 hours for a decision on the conditions of release.  U.S. law allows authorities to detain suspected aliens for seven days without charge, and British law allows indefinite detention.

*         Extends the valid period of a wiretap, similar to U.S. law.

*         Allows authorities to require people they suspect may have information about terrorism to answer questions before a judge, but the information cannot lead to charges, and suspects have the right to counsel—unlike U.S. law.

*         Allows the attorney general to overrule court decisions that could disclose certain sensitive information.

*         Includes a five-year sunset clause on new investigative hearings and preventive arrest powers.

Some critics said that while the law did not grant Canadian government as many powers as some of its allies have, oversight in Canada is less stringent than in countries like the United States (Luiza Chwialkowska, National Post, Dec. 19).

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  House Moves to Implement Anti-Terrorism Treaties

The U.S. House of Representatives yesterday approved measures, 381-36, to implement the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. 

The anti-bombing treaty requires parties to prosecute or extradite suspects in bombing attacks.  The United States initiated the act after the 1996 attack on U.S. military personnel in Saudi Arabia.  The U.S. Senate approved the convention in 1999, and it entered into force in May 2001. 

The financing treaty requires parties to prosecute or extradite people suspected of providing or collecting funds for terrorist attacks.  The Senate has approved the treaty, but it has not entered into force internationally.

Several House Democrats who supported the treaties expressed concern that provisions included in the implementation legislation allowing the death penalty for some bombing crimes could make it more difficult to persuade anti-capital punishment countries to send suspects to the United States.

“It’s become a serious problem in terms of our legal relationships with our most steadfast allies,” said Representative William Delahunt (D-Mass.).

The Senate has yet to consider the House legislation (Jim Abrams, Associated Press Worldstream, Dec. 19).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  House Approves EPA Anti-Terrorism Funds

The U.S. House of Representatives Tuesday gave financial support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to combat terrorism.  The House approved legislation that would provide $12 million annually to the EPA to research ways to prevent, detect and respond to terrorist threats to the national water supply infrastructure (Jim Abrams, Associated Press Worldstream, Dec. 19).

The move came on the same day that two dozen representatives from industries and local government agencies said at an EPA forum that they needed more information and funding to counter terrorist threats.

“We need a list of known and emerging contaminants, including biological, radiological and chemical contaminants,” said Ray Riordan, emergency preparedness officer for the [San Francisco] East Bay Municipal Utility District.  Riordan suggested the EPA develop a database on bioterrorism and a model to determine how far contaminants could travel in a water supply system.  U.S. water districts also needed assistance to install detection systems, information on treating poisoned water supplies and funding for studies on where systems are most vulnerable, he said.

The EPA’s fiscal 2002 budget request only asked for $100,000 for drinking water vulnerability studies, said Wayne Nastri, EPA’s western regional chief, who added that state officials should consider moving money into anti-terrorism programs in their 2002 federal grant applications (Kiley Russell, Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service/Contra Costa Times, Dec. 19).

Back to top

Iraq:  Defector Helped Build WMD Facilities

An Iraqi defector said he helped renovate facilities for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as recently as a year ago, the New York Times reported today.

Adnan Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, a civil engineer, worked at several secret sites in Iraq that were used to store and perhaps develop biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, he said in an interview last week in Bangkok.  Weapons facilities were located in private villas, in the rear of government companies, underneath the Saddam Hussein Hospital in Baghdad and beneath fake water wells, he said.

The Iraqi National Congress, which seeks to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, arranged Saeed’s interview, and U.S. intelligence officials were trying to verify his claims, the Times reported.

If accurate, the information indicates Iraq has continued repairing weapons of mass destruction facilities after U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998, the Times reported.  It could strengthen the Bush administration’s efforts to force Iraq to admit weapons inspectors (see GSN, Dec. 19).

Crack Proofing

Iraq has built extra chemical, biological and nuclear facilities in case some weapons or materials were discovered or attacked, Saeed said.  Some extra facilities remained unused for years.  Saeed said he had visited at least 20 sites that were related to chemical or biological weapons.

Saeed’s work usually involved preparing empty rooms for research.  The Iraqi government hired his company to fill cement cracks in floors and walls, inject cement walls and floors with chemicals to prevent corrosion and line rooms with pastes to prevent leaks and improve decontamination efforts, the Times reported.

After an accident in a biological facility in Baghdad in 1997, Saeed repaired a chipped floor, he said.  Although the room was empty when he arrived, he had to wear a rubberized suit, a gas mask and booties.  There were pipes that moved fresh air into the room, he said.  The facility had been bombed in 1993, but was rebuilt.

Saeed also worked on underground facilities disguised by empty water wells on farms in the Baghdad area.  Part of his job was to seal ventilation pipes in the ground next to the wells.  Lead-lined containers were stored in the 20 such facilities that he visited, he said.  He did not know what was in the containers, but he assumed the contents were radioactive.  “Why else use the lead?” he said.

Hussein’s presidential palaces also stored weapons of mass destruction, Saeed said.  He fixed a small crack in the ceramic wall of a tunnel in a secret underground structure between two presidential sites in Radwaniya, he said.

Saeed also had information about sites he had not personally visited.  He said workers showed him biological materials from a laboratory underneath the Saddam Hussein Hospital in Baghdad and told him the conditions under which it was stored to ask if the material could still be used, since its expiration date had passed.  He did not know whether the laboratory was a storage facility or whether scientists conducted research there.

Laundering Equipment, Contaminating Prisoners

Saeed’s knowledge of Iraqi weapons activities appears to extend beyond observations of the facilities he visited.  He said Iraq used certain companies to purchase equipment with approval from the United Nations and then secretly divert it to weapons of mass destruction programs, Saeed said.  A construction business based in Cologne, Germany, called Leycochem, was one such company, he said.  Leycochem denied the claim and said its sales to Iraq had received U.N. approval.

Saeed has also told representatives from the Iraqi National Congress that Iraq had tested chemical and biological agents on Shiite and Kurdish prisoners in 1989 and 1992.  The congress helped Saeed flee Iraq.

Credibility, Concerns

Saeed’s information seems “plausible,” said Richard Butler, former head of the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq (see GSN, Nov. 30).  UNSCOM had already suspected several of the sites Saeed mentioned, Butler said, adding, “It rings true what this man says about underground wells and tunnels.”

Saeed’s claims match up with other reports about Iraq’s programs, said Charles Duelfer, former UNSCOM deputy chairman.  “The evidence shows that Iraq has not given up its desire for weapons of mass destruction,” Duelfer said.

An Iraqi National Congress representative said he had been in the army with Saeed and trusted him.

U.S. intelligence officials, however, have been skeptical of defectors in the past, due to concern they might embellish information to make themselves appear more valuable and receive protection in the United States or other countries, Butler said.

U.S. intelligence officials have interviewed Saeed twice, U.S. experts said yesterday.  His information appeared to be reliable and important, the experts said.  The CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency refused to comment on Saeed.

Saeed’s Escape

Iraqi authorities arrested Saeed last January on what he called false fraud charges and imprisoned him in Hakamiya, where political prisoners are held, the Times reported.  He bribed his way out of jail in the summer and fled Iraq with the help of the Iraqi National Congress (Judith Miller, New York Times, Dec. 20).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia I:  Close to Agreement on Access to Closed Cities

By Greg Seigle

Global Security Newswire

The United States and Russia have tentatively agreed on terms to allow foreigners unprecedented access to Russia’s 10 closed nuclear cities, senior U.S. Energy Department officials told Global Security Newswire yesterday.

The accord currently under review by both U.S. and Russian authorities is expected to be approved soon and to provide the rules for access for U.S. or other foreign officials with business in the closed cities, said Steve Black, acting director of the National Nuclear Security Administration’s office of nonproliferation and international security.

“I’ll be blunt.  We have an operational challenge right now and that’s our access to some of these nuclear cities,” said Black, who led a delegation of NNSA officials that last week returned to Washington from Moscow.

“We just came back with an initialed agreement—initialed because it’s been returned to the governments for review,” Black continued.  “We’ve had some difficulty recently getting into some of the [closed] cities because the Russians have said ‘we don’t have an access agreement.’ We went to Moscow recently and we came back with a draft agreement, which I think would be acceptable, ultimately, to both sides.  And then we’ll see if the problem is solved.  I believe it will be.”

Nuclear Cities Initiative

Helping the Russians downsize their nuclear weapons facilities—the maintenance of which has been a drain on the sluggish Russian economy—has been a key goal of the Nuclear Cities Initiative, an NNSA-sponsored program designed to convert much of Russia’s nuclear facilities into civilian commercial ventures. The goal is to downsize the nuclear weapons complex while also providing jobs for displaced workers, particularly scientists, laboratory technicians and other skilled factory workers.

“You can’t create in Russia what wouldn’t be there anyway—that is a market,” Black said. “If the Russians are bound and determined to not permit the elements of a free market to flourish, there’s nothing we can do to change that.  And we also can’t introduce market distortions.  So what we’re trying to do is develop the infrastructure—the business training, the capitalization potentials, all sorts of investment opportunities for Western businesses and Russian businesses for that matter—that will make it possible for businesses to start and flourish in a Russian environment.”

The accord lays down the provisions for access for U.S. government officials, non-government analysts, laboratory personnel and U.S. or foreign business partners with investments in the cities, Black said.

The agreement being forged by U.S. and Russian officials is expected to not only regulate access for Western companies, but also for U.S. officials.  “This is like the overall set of administrative actions for access,” Black said.  “It includes recurring access to managed projects as they’re being worked and it includes a provision for exploratory access as well, which is important.”

The accord is key to determining whether investors will be willing to pour money and resources into the closed cities, which offer a wealth of human resources and industrial infrastructure in return, sources said.

Individual Firms to Negotiate Terms

Under terms of the accord, non-Russian companies that start up businesses within Russia’s closed cities would be able to negotiate their own access—a provision demanded by companies interested in investing in the cities, which serve as the industrial base for Russia’s massive, far-flung nuclear weapons complex, Black said.

Currently access to the cities is extremely limited, making it very difficult for companies interested in starting businesses in them to become established.

“For the longest time it was kind of a ‘build it and we’ll let you in’ [approach by the Russians],” said John Rooney, associate deputy administrator for two NNSA work programs in Russia.  “[The] problem was getting in to start building it, so it was a chicken-and-egg routine.  I think what [Black] brought back in this arrangement was one that allowed for both—allowing for the determining what should be built and then allowing to build it after you determine what both sides agree upon.”

Black agreed, saying the changes are for the better.

“So, for instance, [if] a Western business needs to get to a production line in Russia that has been shut down because of a malfunction of some sort … They should be able to visit their [facility] in 24 hours or 48 hours,” Black said.  “They should be able to negotiate themselves for that access with the Russian partner.

“The Western partner will negotiate its own terms, because one company might be happy to do it in a week or another company might need 24 hours,” he added.  “The Russians expressed their willingness to negotiate [with companies] separately.”

Past Difficulties

Access into the closed cities, which are managed by the Russian Ministry of Atomic Energy (MinAtom), has been tightly restricted due to various layers of government bureaucracy, sources said.  Agencies that must give approval for travel in and out of the cities include the Ministry of Defense and the Federal Security Bureau, the latter of which sometimes makes outsiders wait 30 to 45 days for permission, sources said.

“It’s not that MinAtom has authority on its own to grant access—I don’t know what that is, that is a Russian security constraint,” Black said.  “But they will work it from their end.”

Security concerns, Black noted, are “part of the reason why [MinAtom] wants to submit the initialed document to their government for approval … Presumably they are getting their own [government] agencies to buy into the agreement, including whatever [the] security apparatuses require.”

First Contract in September

To date the only Western company planning to start a factory in one of the closed cities is Germany-based Fresenius, the largest provider of dialysis products and services in the United States.  The company signed a contract in September to convert a nuclear facility into a plant that produces kidney dialysis equipment.  The key stumbling block in getting the factory converted and running has been access, Black said.

Fresenius plans to set up its dialysis plant at Avanguard Electromechanical Plant, a nuclear weapons complex that was built in 1949 as the first Russian facility to manufacture nuclear weapons on an industrial scale.  Avanguard is located in the closed city of Sarov (formerly Arzamas-16), 450 kilometers east of Moscow.

“I would like to be confident that [the accord] would work, and the Russians will be forthcoming in granting this access when we need it, but… it remains to be seen,” Black said, adding that he is “cautiously optimistic” that regular and timely access will be allowed in the near future.

Analyst Reaction

The accord has not circulated among analysts yet, but one informed of it today also expressed cautious optimism.

“On the face of it [the accord] sounds like a step forward,” said Michele Flournoy, director of the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

“In the short term I think a lot of [Russians] are thrilled to get paid,” Flournoy noted.   “Russia needs to grow a high-tech industrial base … This links to much broader issues that Russia’s struggling with.”

The clause in the accord for Western companies to negotiate their own access to the closed cities could leave the door open to differential treatment and perhaps to the need for bribery, which has long been a common business practice in Russia, sources speculated.

“If [the Russians] don’t grant the access, they aren’t going to get the investment,” Black said.  “I don’t believe this sets up an environment for bribery.”

Back to top

U.S.-Russia II:  U.S. Congress Keeps Nonproliferation Funds

By Kerry Boyd

Global Security Newswire

Negotiators from the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives allotted $226 million this week for Energy Department nonproliferation programs. 

The compromise legislation, which reconciles different versions of the fiscal 2002 defense appropriations bills from each house, is expected to be passed by Congress soon—the Senate could even vote today, said Steve LaMontagne, of the Council for a Livable World Education Fund (see GSN, Dec. 14).  The legislation that the Senate passed in early December included an attached emergency supplemental package that allocated $226 million for Energy Department nonproliferation programs, but the House bill, passed in November, did not (see GSN, Dec. 10).

LaMontagne said the $226 million would be divided as follows:

*         $120 million for material protection, control and accounting

*         $78 million for nonproliferation, verification, research and development,

*         $15 million for the Russian transition initiative,

*         $10 million for international nuclear safety and

*         $3 million for program direction.

Negotiators also gave $403 million to the Defense Department’s threat reduction programs for the former Soviet Union, an amount that had been included in both the Senate and House versions (see GSN, Dec. 19).

Back to top

United States I:  Navy Conducts Final Trident I Missile Test

The U.S. Navy successfully fired three Trident I (C-4) submarine-launched ballistic missiles Tuesday from the U.S.S. Ohio submarine off the Florida coast.  The launches concluded a series of tests that began in the 1970s to monitor the safety and performance of the Trident I missiles, which the Navy plans to retire in 2005.  The more modern and accurate Trident II (D-5) missiles will replace the Trident Is, according to a release from Lockheed Martin.

The Trident I, with a range of 4,000 nautical miles and the capacity to carry eight nuclear warheads, is currently deployed on six Ohio-class strategic submarines in the Pacific Ocean.  The Trident I missiles are the oldest continuously operated fleet ballistic missiles the Navy has ever used, according to Lockheed Martin.

The missile has had an 89 percent success rate, according Tom Morton, vice president of strategic missile programs at Lockheed Martin Space Systems, which makes the missiles.  “Lockheed Martin is extremely proud of the performance record of the Trident I (C-4) missile,” he said (Lockheed Martin Space Systems release, Dec. 19).

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate-House conference committee for the fiscal 2002 Defense Appropriations Bill (see GSN, today) approved $365 million for a program to convert four Ohio-class submarines, that now-carry Trident Is, into conventional cruise missile carriers (Frank Wolfe, Defense Daily, Dec. 19).

Back to top

United States II: Group Questions Pentagon Interest in Low-Yield Nukes

The Pentagon study on destroying deeply buried targets, including those holding weapons of mass destruction, indicated a lack of enthusiasm for developing specialized nuclear weapons for that purpose, according to the Federation of American Scientists (see GSN, Dec. 19).

The FAS assessment was made in spite the report’s conclusion that “nuclear weapons have a unique ability to destroy both [chemical and biological weapon] agent containers and CBW agents …. The current nuclear weapons stockpile, while possessing some limited ground penetration capability and lower-yield options (not yet certified [for military use]), was not developed with this mission in mind.”  Click here to read unclassified portion of the Pentagon report.

The U.S. Congress ordered the study last year and asked the Pentagon for its views on modifying existing U.S. law, which prohibits the development of low-yield nuclear weapons.  The study, however, did not weigh in on the issue (FAS release, Dec. 19).

“They were basically invited to request this weapon and they didn’t,” said Michael Levi, an FAS strategic analyst. 

Only high-level political leaders at the Pentagon are interested in developing “bunker-busting” nuclear weapons, Levi said.  The operational staff doesn’t want to deal with the complicating factors that nuclear weapons entail.

“Nobody wants the president’s permission before they bomb a cave,” Levi said.

The same goals of destroying buried bunkers holding chemical and biological weapons could be accomplished in well-coordinated attacks using existing conventional weapons, Levi said. (Greg Webb, GSN, Dec. 20).

Back to top

United States III:  Energy Department Shuts Down Hanford Reactor

The U.S Energy Department yesterday said it would close the Fast Flux Test Facility on the Hanford nuclear reservation in Washington.  The department has spent nearly $500 million keeping the facility on standby since 1992, the New York Times reported.

According to the Times, the facility was built to test components for a full-scale “breeder” reactor—a type of reactor that produces more nuclear fuel than it consumes.  Congress canceled the full-scale reactor program in 1983 after spending $4 billion.

The Hanford test facility, however, remained functioning another nine years before it was placed on standby, and has since been maintained in working condition, the Times reported. More than $1 billion has been spent on the test reactor.

Congressional members from Washington and local business leaders tried to find another use for the Hanford facility, including the production of tritium for nuclear weapons (see GSN, Oct. 3). Another proposal was to produce medical isotopes, but Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said there was no market for the isotopes, and it would cost $2 billion to refit the reactor even if there were buyers.

“Million and millions of dollars that could have gone for public health and safety was lost as the Department of Energy went on this scavenger hunt trying to find a mission for this boondoggle,” said Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who has worked on efforts to shut down Hanford and clean up radioactive waste there (see GSN, Dec. 12).

Some nuclear experts had debated the idea of using the reactor to destroy surplus plutonium taken from nuclear weapons, according to the Times.  Nuclear weapons opponents, however, said it would be better to mix the weapon fuel with contaminants to ensure it would never be used in a weapon again (Matthew Wald, New York Times, Dec. 20).

Back to top

Iran:  Russia to Continue Peaceful Nuclear Assistance to Iran

Russia could increase its assistance to Iran’s nuclear power program, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Losyukov told the Russian Duma yesterday.

“Russia’s willingness to take part in implementing the plans for the development of the Iranian nuclear power industry might in the future grow into new contracts on building new nuclear power plants,” he said.

Russia would comply with its international nonproliferation agreements and International Atomic Energy Agency requirements while providing assistance to Iran, Losyukov said.

The Duma was holding hearings on the ratification of a Russian-Iranian treaty to frame the fundamentals of the countries’ relations (Moscow Interfax news agency/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, Dec. 19).

Russia is not assisting Iran with developing missile technology or creating similar weapons, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said in Brussels yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 5).

“Peaceful cooperation in the nuclear sphere is developing successfully between Russia and Iran, and it is fully in line with international standards of nonproliferation,” he said.  “In any case, the reactors which Russia supplies to Iran are fundamentally no different from those to be built in North Korea by the U.S.A. and other countries,” Ivanov said (ITAR-Tass/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, Dec. 19).

Back to top

CTBT: Central African Republic Signs Treaty

The Central African Republic signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 20).  Two sites participating in the treaty’s verification system are located in the Republic. 

To date, 165 nations have signed the accord and 89 have ratified it, including 31 of the 44 nations whose ratifications are required for the treaty to enter into force (CTBTO release, Dec. 19).

Back to top

Anthrax:  Critics Attack Vaccine Treatment Plan

Opponents of a U.S. plan to offer the anthrax vaccine as a post-exposure treatment method yesterday criticized the vaccine’s safety and the lack of information as to who should be inoculated (see GSN, Dec. 19).

U.S. Representative Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), who held hearings last year on the vaccine, said it was dangerous for people “to take a vaccine that hasn’t been approved by the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] and that was made in a plant that hasn’t been approved either.”

After the Shays hearings, the House Government Reform Committee released a report that criticized the “preposterously low adverse report rates,” issued by the Defense Department.  The Pentagon did not monitor safety adequately and had an “institutional resistance to associating health effects with the vaccine,” the report said.

U.S. Postal Service officials said that without information from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, they would be unable to advise postal workers on whether to take the vaccine.

“I am disappointed and frustrated,” said Azeezaly Jaffer, vice president for public affairs for the Postal Service.  “I don’t know what is best for me and my health,” Jaffer said.  “If I cannot come to a resolution on what is best for me, you can guess how frustrated my employees are” (Rosenbaum/Stolberg, New York Times, Dec. 20).

Washington Mayor Anthony Williams yesterday released a statement saying district officials were not recommending vaccinations.  “After discussing this issue at several scientific meetings, and the careful review of the scientific data, and absent a recommendation from the CDC, the District … affirms its previous public health advisory which recommends strict compliance with the 60-day course of antibiotics,” Williams said.

“As such the District Department of Health does not recommend investigational post-exposure prophylactics with anthrax vaccine at this time,” he said.

Bailus Walker, a professor of public health and policy at Howard University in Washington, said the government’s method of handling the anthrax incidents has reinforced long-held suspicions.

“There is a long-standing, deeply ingrained concern in the black community about being used as guinea pigs,” Walker said.  “As much as we try, we have not been able to remove from the minds of the black community the Tuskegee episode… We confront it almost monthly as we try to get blacks to participate in clinical trials.  This just feeds it.”

U.S. Officials’ Response

CDC Director Jeffrey Koplan yesterday described who might want to consider taking the vaccine as post-exposure treatment, according to the Washington Post.  Such people include those who were near tainted mail, those who had contact with any of the five people who died from anthrax and those who were in contaminated buildings, Koplan said.  “Those are the individuals at higher risk who may want to consider these more aggressive options,” he said (Connolly/Goldstein, Washington Post, Dec. 20).

Lt. Col. John Grabenstein, deputy director for clinical operations of the Pentagon’s Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program, defended the safety of the vaccine.  “We have conducted 18 human safety studies—short and long term—retrospective and prospective,” Grabenstein said. “In aggregate, what they show is anthrax vaccine has a side effect profile similar as that of other vaccines.”

Severe allergic reactions are visible in 1 per 100,000 people, Grabenstein said.  Up to 16 percent of those inoculated may experience rashes, 14 to 25 percent may experience headaches, 12 to 15 percent may experience joint aches and close to a third may experience muscle aches, according to military researchers.  Those inoculated have also said they felt painful stinging and burning at the inoculation site, the Washington Post reported.

In response to claims that the vaccine has other, more serious side effects, Grabenstein said, “lots of people are confusing ‘it happened after vaccination’ with ‘it happened because of vaccination’”(Shankar Vedantam, Washington Post, Dec. 20).

BioPort Inspections Completed

Food and Drug Administration officials yesterday said they had finished inspections of laboratories at BioPort, the only U.S. manufacturer of the anthrax vaccine.  The company had successfully addressed most of the agency’s complaints, FDA officials said (see GSN, Nov. 21).  BioPort will not be fully licensed until the FDA next month completes inspections of another company contracted to decant the anthrax vaccine into vials, FDA officials said.

BioPort has been trying to obtain U.S. approval to ship the anthrax vaccine it produces, according to the Associated Press.  BioPort has produced the vaccine since 1988, but has been unable to ship since failing federal inspections in 1999 and 2000, the Associated Press reported.

The future corrections required by the FDA were minor compared to violations found in previous inspections, said BioPort President Bob Kramer (Associated Press/London Guardian, Dec. 20).  

Genetic Findings Might Not Solve Investigation

Some scientists said too little is known yet about the genetic makeup of anthrax to be able to differentiate one sample from another, the Associated Press reported yesterday. 

“It’s a race against time to get enough genetic information to make these matches precisely,” said Jill Trewhella, bioscience division leader at Los Alamos National Laboratory, which is assisting in the anthrax spores genetic fingerprinting effort (see GSN, Dec. 19).  “We want to catch the person.”

Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, of New York State University, said they key to the case would probably involve determining a motive, rather than scientific analysis.  FBI investigators are examining political and ideological motives for the attacks, as well as possible financial gain, such as someone involved with an environmental cleanup company, a law enforcement official said (Laura Meckler, Associated Press, Dec. 19).

Anthrax spores used at the University of New Mexico are likely identical to the spores used in the attacks, a university spokesman said.  The university expects its anthrax samples to be tested soon for a genetic match with the mailed spores, said university spokesman Sam Giammo.  “We would be very surprised if it didn’t match perfectly,” Giammo said.

The university’s anthrax samples came from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease, which also sent out samples to five other laboratories, according to the Albuquerque Journal.  The university did not use in its research the finely milled version of anthrax found in the tainted letters, Giammo said (Jackie Jadrnak, Albuquerque Journal, Dec. 19).

Russia Offers Help

Russian scientists have developed a new anthrax vaccine that they are prepared to offer to the United States, Valentin Pokrovskii, president of the Academy of Medical Sciences, said Tuesday.  The new Russian vaccine only requires two injections, as opposed to six for the U.S. version, Pokrovskii said.

Russia is also ready to send its stockpiles of anthrax vaccine and spore samples to the United States, said Health Minister Yurii Shevchenko.  “If the terrorist origin of the anthrax cases in America is proved, all of us should be ready for a mass vaccination of the population,” Shevchenko said (RFE/RL Newsline, Dec. 19).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  New Detection Methods in Development

While terrorists have shown through the recent anthrax incidents that they are capable of launching small-scale biowarfare attacks, experts believe a determined group could carry out a much larger biological assault, according to the December issue of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Alumni Association Technology Review.

“The level of sophistication that went into the World Trade Center attack, if applied to a chemical or biological attack, could produce an effective effort,” said Harvard University chemist George Whitesides.  “It is technically feasible.  Whether it is politically or operationally feasible, and at what scale, we don’t know.  Nonetheless, we will have to prepare for the possibility, because we need an insurance policy.”

In order to combat this threat, researchers are working on new equipment to detect biological warfare agents as well as new information-gathering methods and treatments according to the Review (see GSN, Dec. 12).

Detection Technology

The U.S. Defense Department plans to introduce a new truck- or ship-based detection system within the next few months, said Calvin Chue, a microbiologist at the Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies at Johns Hopkins University.  The system would continuously monitor the air for biological warfare agents through the use of a laser system and advanced software to screen airborned particles.  When the system detects something suspicious, a detector mixes an air sample into a solution and tests for 10 different pathogens, the Review reported.

Researchers are also developing sensors with DNA chips that could screen for a larger number of pathogens, according to the Review.  The chips carry small fragments of DNA from microbes that could be used as biological weapons.  The fragments would be able to detect if the agent is present through binding to any complementary pathogen DNA in a sample. 

DNA chips are already in use, but currently require a full laboratory of equipment, the Review reported.  “If we could shrink those down in a portable, fieldable unit, you could look at hundreds of organisms, potentially in 10 to 15 minutes,” Chue said.

Information-Gathering Methods

Researchers are looking at new means to collect information from hospitals and physicians to determine if a biological attack has been launched, according to the Review. 

The process is called biosurveillance, and was used during the inauguration of U.S. President George W. Bush, the Review reported.  The Pentagon and local and state health agencies gave patient-query sheets to hospitals, military clinics and aid-stations along the inaugural parade route and near the sites of inaugural balls.  Computers monitored incidents of complaints of several key symptoms of possible biological warfare agents for patterns that might indicate an attack.  There was brief concern when a surge of flulike symptoms was noticed at military clinics, but it turned out to be just the flu, according to the Review.

Physician and informatics researcher Kenneth Mandl, along with researchers at MIT, developed a computer system that uses emergency room intake information to monitor and track the frequency of symptoms expected during a biological weapons attack, according to the Review. 

Mandl’s system links information from many medical facilities, a task complicated by the fact that different facilities use different systems and ways to gather patient information, the Review reported.  Even so, “it’s an important public health measure to take,” Mandl said.  “Most likely the way this will eventually happen on a large scale is when it becomes a mandated reporting obligation.”

New Treatments

Whitesides and Harvard Medical School microbiologist John Collier are working on a potential anthrax treatment, according to the Review. Early studies have shown the treatment effective on rats exposed to anthrax toxin, the Review reported.

Anthrax produces both a toxin and a protein that creates a doughnut-shaped hole in the target cell to allow access for the toxin, according to the Review.  Whitesides and Collier’s new treatment works by blocking the doughnut-shaped hole from the toxin.

Collier said he plans to conduct future tests with anthrax from military facilities.  “There is a lot of activity right now in putting together a biotech company that will work closely with government agencies to develop this rapidly,” he said (David Talbot, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Alumni Association Technology Review, December 2001).

Back to top

Libya:  Qadhafi Agrees to Sign Convention

Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi told Dutch diplomats he is ready to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention, the New York Times reported today.

Qadhafi’s decision came after meeting with several high-profile intermediaries, including former South African President Nelson Mandela and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, according to the Times.  It would open Libya’s alleged extensive underground chemical weapons facilities to inspections for the first time, the Times reported.

Brazilian diplomat Jos? Bustani, who heads the treaty’s implementing organization, said yesterday he had received a private commitment from Libya to sign the agreement in coming weeks.

“I can confirm that this process has been cleared by Qadhafi, so it is a matter of time,” Bustani said.  “I believe the Libya development is very important, because by acceding to the convention and opening its chemical industry for inspection, that will have an impact all over the Middle East.”

Bustani said he had been working to bring Libya “into the fold” over recent years, if only to goad other Arab countries, which have said they will sign the convention only when Israel signs the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.  Sudan and Jordan have recently signed the convention, but Egypt, Syria and Lebanon have not, according to the Times.

Libya is believed to have stockpiled 100 tons of chemical warfare agents at two facilities, the Times reported.  “Libya’s chemical weapons program is considered to be its most successful effort in weapons of mass destruction,” said Joshua Sinai, a consultant and specialist on Libya (see GSN, Nov. 20).

Sinai said Libya’s signing of the convention would be “a significant and welcome development.”  The United States, however, would have to demand “complete access” to the advanced Libyan underground facilities, he added (Patrick Tyler, New York Times, Dec. 20).

Back to top

Russia:  U.S. Will Jointly Audit Stockpile Programs

New plans announced yesterday would increase cooperation between Russia and the United States on efforts to destroy Russia’s stockpile of chemical weapons.  The chairman of Russia’s primary auditing agency, Sergei Stepashin, and David Walker, head of the U.S. General Accounting Office, agreed that the two countries would jointly audit the management program for the Russian stockpile, Stepashin said.

Auditors would examine how U.S. funds are used in the program and the efficiency of destruction equipment, the Washington Times reported.

“As Russia has about half of the world’s chemical weapons stocks, this is an issue that’s important not just for us but for world security,” said Stepashin, a former Russian prime minister.

The Russian management program is scheduled to receive $200 million from the United States in 2002 but could need up to $15 billion before the last of the weapons are destroyed in 2012, the Times reported (see GSN, Dec. 7).  The U.S. Congress in August lifted a two-year block against funding for the program, and Russia is hoping the United States will grant $2 billion to help move the program forward, Stepashin said (see GSN, Nov. 26).

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney has agreed to form a joint working group to consider the program’s financing over the next decade, Stepashin said.  Stepashin has also proposed that Russia could pay for most of the program if a corresponding amount of its $67 billion Soviet-era debt could be forgiven (David Sands, Washington Times, Dec. 20).

Back to top

Czech Republic:  Parliament Approves Anti-Chemical Deployment

Both chambers of the Czech parliament yesterday approved a request from the United States to deploy anti-chemical warfare troops to Kuwait (Associated Press, Dec. 19).

Including a medical troop, the deployment will total 400 troops, said Milos Titz, deputy chairman of the Chamber of Deputies defense and security committee (see GSN, Dec. 17).

“[The contingent of troops] might be deployed at a U.S. base in Kuwait where it would have logistics support,” Titz said. The annual cost for the operation could total about $33 million, he said (Prague CTK, Dec. 18 in FBIS-EEU, Dec. 19).

Back to top

Europe:  Russia Calls for Continental Shield

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov yesterday said it was crucial to increase the dialogue on the creation of a European missile defense shield (see GSN, Dec. 18), since “nonstrategic ballistic missiles” could fall into the hands of terrorists.

The Russian initiative for the creation of a European missile defense shield could be “a kind of insurance against possible future risks,” Ivanov said.  A European shield “should be a universal one, i.e., be capable of intercepting all types of targets, ranging from aerodynamic ones, including cruise missiles, to nonstrategic ballistic missiles,” Ivanov said in a speech to the Belgian Royal Higher Institute for Defense.

“If the situation were to develop unfavorably, terrorists could get their hands on nonstrategic ballistic missiles, which a fairly large number of countries are now developing,” he said.

Ivanov added that terrorists, however, probably could not make a “concerted effort” towards the development of ballistic missiles because of the technical and economic demands involved.  “It does not seem likely that third-world states could develop intercontinental missile systems, now or in the near future,” Ivanov said (ITAR-Tass/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, Dec. 19)

Back to top

U.S. Plans:  Contractors Will Share $300 Million for Cancellation

Defense contractors involved in the now-canceled U.S. Navy Area Theater Missile Defense Plan will share $300 million in termination fees, a Defense Department official said Tuesday (see GSN, Dec. 17).

The fees would be split among Raytheon, United Defense, Orbital Science Corp. and L-3 Communications, the official said.  Lockheed Martin, which developed the Aegis radar system and was also involved in the missile defense project, would probably not receive a portion of the fees since the radar system is in use, the official said.

Raytheon Executive Vice President Tom Culligan said the Navy had been satisfied with the process of the Area Theater Missile Defense program and had paid Raytheon 80 percent of a milestone award it was eligible to receive last month.

“The Navy said we were moving to a schedule, and we thought we were moving to a schedule, and that’s why we were so surprised by the decision to cancel,” Culligan said.  “Why this happened I don’t know” (Ross Kerber, Boston Globe, Dec. 19).

Back to top