 |
There’s a lot of stuff out there dangling … I think it will come down to package deals and a lot of negotiating that hasn’t been done yet.
—U.S. spokesman David Hamill speaking last night on the prospects for agreement at the Biological Weapons Convention Review Conference which is scheduled to end today in Geneva.
By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire
The contentious Fifth Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention is scheduled to conclude today in Geneva, as treaty parties continue to negotiate improvements to the 1972 treaty into the final scheduled hours (see GSN, Dec. 4)...Full Story 
By Greg Webb
Global Security Newswire
The United States reduced its nuclear forces over the last four months as this week’s Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty deadline approached...Full Story
By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire
Opposition has started to form over a Democrat-sponsored bill in the U.S. Senate to federalize nuclear power plant security forces (see GSN, Dec. 3), sources told Global Security Newswire this week. The bill “reflects a political response to a problem that doesn’t exist,” said Nuclear Energy Institute Media Relations Director Mitch Singer...Full Story
By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire
Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the United States remains unprepared to detect and prevent an act of terrorism using weapons of mass destruction in the nation’s seaports, a panel of experts told a hearing of the U.S. Senate Government Affairs Committee yesterday...Full Story
 |
By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire
Opposition has started to form over a Democrat-sponsored bill in the U.S. Senate to federalize nuclear power plant security forces (see GSN, Dec. 3), sources told Global Security Newswire this week. The bill “reflects a political response to a problem that doesn’t exist,” said Nuclear Energy Institute Media Relations Director Mitch Singer.
The Nuclear Plant Security Act would turn plant security guards, currently licensed and hired by the plants themselves, into federal employees supervised by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The legislation would also require updated threat assessment plans, creation of stockpiles of potassium iodide anti-radiation medicine and enhanced testing of plant security through the use of mock terrorist teams.
NEI, the nuclear power industry’s main lobby, and the NRC have said they disapprove of the bill. “The current system, with coordination of security and safety through a single organization subject to NRC regulatory scrutiny, is clearly preferable,” wrote NRC Chairman Richard Meserve in a letter to Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.), one of the bill’s sponsors.
The NRC criticized the plan for expanding the size and cost of the federal budget. More than 7,000 new guards would need to be hired and each would need to be armed and to undergo background checks and training, the NRC said.
“The training of this force alone would likely overload any federal law enforcement agency’s training capacity,” Meserve wrote.
The legislation would also needlessly expand the role of the government, according to opponents. “The current system works better than a brand-new bureaucracy,” Singer said. Federalizing plant security guards would shift the NRC’s role away from being an independent overseer to being a provider of plant security, according to Meserve. He said the bill would displace the trained guards plants already have and create a two-class system of employees at nuclear plants: those responsible to the plant and those responsible to the NRC. “These separate lines of authority could, in fact, lead to a diminution of the licensees’ capacities to assure safety,” Meserve wrote.
New Terrorist Alert Raises Safety Concerns
Supporters of the Nuclear Plant Security Act, however, have criticized the NRC and plant operators for not providing a uniform level of plant security across the country. Tom Clements, executive director of the Nuclear Control Institute, a nuclear industry watchdog organization, said the recent terrorist attack threat warning issued by Office of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge “asks the question ‘What has been done?’ and the answer is nothing on a permanent basis.”
Although security was heightened and some new measures were enacted at U.S. nuclear power plants after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, no permanent increased security precautions have been taken, Clements said. One example he gave was the placement of U.S. National Guard troops on patrol outside of plants. “It appeared that the National Guard [troops] had been at the gate for window dressing,” Clements said. “[Plant operators] have shown they can’t do the job.”
The NRC and the nuclear plant operators have been too slow on increasing plant security, according to Clements. “Members of Congress got tired of foot dragging by the NRC,” he said. In a press release, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) said that the new bill would “help fill these emergency planning and security gaps, and will also help protect these critically important energy sources and the people who live near them.”
Are Plant Guards Similar to Airport Security Workers?
Supporters of the federalization plan point to the recent move to federalize U.S. airport security workers as a precedent. “If professional law enforcement agents are the right answer for America’s airports [then] surely they are also the answer for guarding America’s nuclear reactors,” said Reid in a statement. “Now more than ever our nation can’t afford anything less than the best protection at nuclear facilities.”
The nuclear power industry disagreed with comparisons such as Reid’s. “Harry Reid is not a strong supporter of the nuclear industry,” Singer said, adding that airport security was not called upon to handle the same challenges as plant security forces.
The NRC cited the high levels of training, pay and retention rates among plant security guards as key differences. “There have been no failures in nuclear power plant security of the type that has plagued the commercial airline industry and thus no need for such radical change,” Meserve wrote.
Could Plant Operators be Persuaded?
Some nuclear plant operators may drop their opposition to the legislation, if they would not have to shoulder any projected costs, Clements said.
Money, however, is not the issue, according to Singer. Security efforts make up only a small percentage of a plant’s overall budget and any new measures are not “going to put a big dent in profitability,” Singer said. “If plants aren’t safe, then it cuts into the bottom line,” he added.
Will It Pass?
There has been little publicly stated opposition against the Nuclear Power Security Act among members of Congress, but the industry itself is still ready to fight. “We consider this to be an important issue,” said Singer, “and bad legislation.”
Supporters though, such as NCI, are optimistic about the bill’s chances. Clements noted that in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks there has been an increase in media attention and public awareness regarding nuclear power plant security. “Members of Congress may be very reluctant to oppose this measure, given public sentiment,” Clements said.
By Greg Seigle
Global Security Newswire
China and the United States yesterday agreed to cooperate in combating terrorist groups and the spread of weapons of mass destruction, according to Francis Taylor, U.S. ambassador at large and coordinator for counterterrorism.
The two countries created a financial watchdog group designed to put the squeeze on any individual, group, company or state that supports terrorists or engages in the spread of nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological weapons, Taylor said during a news conference in Beijing.
The United States is also asking China to allow the establishment of a legal attach? office at the U.S. embassy—a cadre of FBI agents that would “greatly improve the efficiency of our law enforcement cooperation,” he said in a U.S. State Department release.
“Certainly the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is a concern for us from a counterterrorism point of view,” Taylor said after FBI, Pentagon and Treasury Department officials met with their Chinese counterparts. “Nonproliferation is a very, very important issue that we discussed and how that fits into the counterterrorism challenge that the world will face in the coming months and years.”
State Department Issues Expanded Terrorist List
In related news, the U.S. State Department yesterday issued a list of 39 terrorists groups to add to its previous list of 43—29 believed to pose the most serious threats and 14 that are also considered dangerous.
The intention of the expanded list, called the “Terrorist Exclusion List,” is to enable U.S. officials to expel from the United States or deny entry any individuals believed to be associated with these groups, according to department officials. Any individual, groups, companies or countries that associate with the 82 known terrorists groups throughout the world could conceivably have their financial assets frozen, officials said.
While none of the 39 newly designated terrorist groups are based in North Korea, Iran or Iraq—countries believed to pursue weapons of mass destruction—four are based in Pakistan, two in Sudan and one in Libya. As of today there is no known link between these groups and the nuclear program in Pakistan or the biological or chemical weapons programs in Pakistan, Sudan or Libya, a State Department official said.
U.S. Senate Republicans yesterday proved they had the votes needed to block a Democratic proposal for $35 billion in anti-terrorism spending exceeding U.S. President George W. Bush’s requested spending limit. Bush had threatened to veto the legislation, attached to this year’s defense bill, if it exceeded the previously set funding limits (see GSN, Dec. 6).
Republicans yesterday had 48 votes against the proposal during two procedural votes, proving that they could delay the bill using a procedure that requires only 41 votes to block a measure that exceeds budget limits. Republicans called on Democrats to end their efforts to approve the funding, but Democrats said they would continue to seek the extra funds. Neither party had the necessary votes to defeat the other party on the issue.
The Democratic plan would exceed Bush’s funding requests for local law enforcement, government laboratories, the Postal Service, airport security, aid to areas hit by the Sept. 11 attacks and other anti-terrorism activities (Alan Fram, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Dec. 7).
Senate Republicans yesterday proposed compromise legislation that would shift funds providing $40 billion for recovery and defense approved following the Sept. 11 attacks. The Republican proposal included $2.3 billion for bioterrorism defense, $7 billion for areas directly affected by the attacks and $5.6 billion for other homeland defense measures. Senate Democrats, however, said the Republican proposal only trimmed the funding the Democrats wanted (Dave Boyer, Washington Times, Dec. 7).
Bush had asked Congress to wait a few weeks and request additional funding next year, saying that time is required to spend funds already allocated. Only $6 billion of the $40 billion in emergency funding has been spent so far, according to the Associated Press. “Many of the costs associated with the response to and recovery from the attacks will not be known for many months and therefore, the agencies will be unable to target additional funds to these needs,” said a White House statement.
Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said if his party was unable to pass the extra funding he could add it to the economic stimulus legislation currently under negotiation. Democrats removed a proposal to attach the anti-terrorism funding to the stimulus bill last month due to disagreements over the proposal (Alan Fram, Associated Press II/Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 7).
Several members of the U.S. Congress introduced a $2.9 billion proposal yesterday in the House of Representatives to improve the country’s ability to prevent and respond to bioterrorist attacks. They said they hoped to bring the bill, drafted by the Energy and Commerce Committee, before the full House as early as next week.
The bill would provide:
* $1 billion for states and health facilities to improve preparedness and train medical personnel;
* $450 million to upgrade Centers for Disease Control and Prevention facilities;
* $1 billion to expand Health and Human Services’ stockpile of medicines and vaccines;
* $100 million to protect imported food; and
* $100 million to protect drinking water.
In addition, the bill would require anyone who possessed one of 36 deadly biological agents to register in a national database
“This is a down payment … a down payment on what we think is necessary to protect this country,” said Representative Billy Tauzin (R-La.).
Senate aides said that around 70 senators have signed a draft Senate bill that would provide $3.2 billion for bioterrorism response. U.S. President George W. Bush has proposed spending $1.5 billion on bioterrorism efforts (Janelle Carter, Associated Press, Dec. 6).
Governmental opponents have blocked proposed antiterrorism laws in the European Union and in the United Kingdom, according to reports today (see GSN, Dec. 6).
During yesterday’s meeting of EU justice and home affairs ministers, Italy blocked an EU plan for a common arrest warrant that would have ended extradition procedures between EU members, according to the London Independent. Italy said the warrant should focus only on terrorism and other serious crimes, and proposed reducing the number of crimes covered by the warrant from 30 to six.
The proposal was dismissed by other EU officials, who were angry since a final compromise on the warrant allowed countries to exempt any crime committed before a set date, which might have been as late as 2004, according to the Independent.
“I don’t understand the reasons for Italian reluctance,” said British Home Office official Angela Eagle. “They have not explained themselves very well. They tried to tear the list apart” (Stephen Castle, London Independent, Dec. 7).
House of Lords Steps In
The British House of Lords yesterday blocked a proposed controversial anti-terrorism law that includes measures giving police great access to public information and allowing detainment without trial, according to Reuters.
The House of Lords voted 227-145 to increase the justification needed by authorities to access private information. The chamber voted 191-117 to allow anyone detained without trial a judicial review.
“The government has shown that … it will not listen,” said Baroness Buscombe, of the Conservative party. “Given the true import of some parts of this Draconian bill, that is very regrettable” (Mike Peacock, Reuters/Globe and Mail, Dec. 7).
|
 |
By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire
Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the United States remains unprepared to detect and prevent an act of terrorism using weapons of mass destruction in the nation’s seaports, a panel of experts told a hearing of the U.S. Senate Government Affairs Committee yesterday.
“The biggest threat in the maritime industry may not necessarily be a rogue vessel slamming into a bridge, but an inter-modal container being used to transport a weapon of mass destruction into the United States, said retired U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral Richard Larrabee, who is director of Port Commerce at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, in a written statement.
America’s 361 sea and river ports handle 95 percent of the country’s international trade. Last year Larrabee’s port alone, the nation’s third largest, handled over 3 million containers, 560,000 autos, and more petroleum products than any other port in the country.
But a surge of security measures since Sept. 11, including the boarding of all vessels in his port, has tapered off, according to Larrabee. He said additional patrolling Coast Guard cutters have shrunk from 20 to one and extra reservists from 1,000 to 100.
“Currently, there are not enough resources in terms of personnel and equipment to maintain that level of security over an extended period within the Port of New York and New Jersey, let alone the rest of the nation,” he said.
Better Information Required
The panelists said there is currently no reliable way to detect and intercept many of the illegal and dangerous people and goods that enter U.S. ports. A presidential commission on crime and security at seaports reported last year that security at seaports generally ranged from “poor to fair,” with few positive exceptions.
Port security could be important to the U.S. war on terrorism as Osama bin Laden is believed to have a multimillion-dollar secret fleet of ships flying a variety of flags, allowing him to hide his ownership and to transport goods, arms, drugs and recruits, according to an Oct. 8 London Times story.
In addition to increasing resources, Larrabee recommended greater international governmental responsibility for verifying the contents of ships at sea. U.S. port authorities must be given better information sooner about ships entering port, he said.
Rob Quartel, chief executive officer of Freightdest Technologies, similarly said countermeasures at U.S. ports need to be preventive, involving screening and possibly inspecting ships’ cargoes in their country of origin.
“If a terrorist device gets to a port in the United States, it’s almost too late,” he said in his written statement.
Further, the roles of federal, state and local authorities must be clarified, said Larrabee, asking, “Who’s in charge?”
A bill introduced this year by Senators Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.) and Bob Graham (D-Fla.), called the Port and Maritime Security Act, is intended to address the commission’s recommendations.
It would improve reporting on crews, passengers and imported cargo, provide more x-ray scanning equipment for the U.S. Customs Service and grant and loan money to local ports for security infrastructure. It was passed by the Senate Commerce Committee, and Hollings hopes it will be attached to a major bill.
|
 |
By Greg Webb
Global Security Newswire
The United States reduced its nuclear forces over the last four months as this week’s Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty deadline approached. Since July 31, the United States has eliminated more than 1,000 nuclear warheads from START accountability, according to an Arms Control Association fact sheet.
Information about the precise disposition of U.S. strategic nuclear reductions emerged yesterday following U.S. and Russian announcements Wednesday that both countries had successfully met the START deadline (see GSN, Dec. 5).
As of Wednesday, U.S. strategic nuclear forces were deployed on 1,238 strategic nuclear delivery vehicles—ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and bombers—well below the 1,600 ceiling called for by the treaty, according to a U.S. State Department release.
On those delivery vehicles was a total of 5,949 warheads, using the treaty’s counting rules, also below the treaty’s 6,000-warhead limit.
ICBMs
On July 31, the United States had 577 ICBM launchers and 2,079 warheads on ICBMs, as counted by START, according to the ACA fact sheet. By Wednesday, those numbers were reduced to 551 launchers and 1,701 warheads, according to a U.S. official.
These reductions were accomplished in two ways. First, the U.S. Air Force destroyed the last 26 Minuteman III ICBM silos as part of a missile base consolidation program. Under that program, 150 Minuteman IIIs were transferred from Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota to converted Minuteman II silos at Malmstrom AFB in Montana. The last missile silo at Grand Forks was destroyed on August 24, according to an Air Force press release. Because those silos counted as three warheads each, their destruction removed 78 warheads from the U.S. total under the treaty.
Second, the Air Force “downloaded” an additional 150 Minuteman IIIs to reduce the number of warheads they carry from three to one. This process, completed at F.E. Warren AFB in Wyoming was formally completed on Oct. 13, according to Rex Ellis, the air base’s treaty compliance specialist. This removed 300 warheads from U.S. ICBMs, which, combined with the reductions that resulted from destroying the silos at Grand Forks, reduced ICBM warheads by a total of 378.
Unchanged in the U.S. ICBM arsenal, according to the U.S. official, are 50 MX missiles, capable of carrying 10 warheads each. Additionally, a single Minuteman II silo (once capable of holding a missile with a single warhead) is now a display item at Ellsworth AFB in South Dakota, but remains accountable under the treaty.
SLBMs
On July 31, the United States had 3,616 warheads deployed on 448 submarine-launched ballistic missiles, according to the ACA fact sheet. By Wednesday those numbers had been reduced to 3,120 warheads on 432 missiles, according to the U.S. official.
These reductions were accomplished in two ways. First, the last submarine carrying Poseidon missiles was decommissioned, according to a U.S. State Department official, removing 16 missiles and 160 warheads from the U.S. arsenal.
Second, the United States “downloaded” all of its Trident I missiles so they now carry no more than six warheads, according a U.S. Navy spokesman Lt. Bill Speaks. These missiles are carried by seven Trident submarines, each capable of carrying 24 missiles, based in Bangor, Washington, said the U.S. official.
In addition, the United States has 11 submarines equipped to carry the Trident II missile, which carries no more than eight warheads, although it was designed to carry as many as 10. Ten of these submarines are based at Kings Bay, Georgia and the 11th is based at Bangor where it recently completed a conversion to carry Trident II missiles, according to U.S. Navy spokesman Lt. Kevin Stephens.
Bombers
On July 31, the United States had 274 bombers capable of carrying 1,318 warheads under START rules, according to the ACA fact sheet. By Wednesday, the U.S. bomber force had been reduced to 255 planes and 1,128 warheads accountable under START, according to the U.S. official.
The U.S. Air Force accomplished these reductions by eliminating 19 B-52 bombers, each of which was counted as carrying 10 warheads, the U.S. official said.
The remaining U.S. bomber force remained unchanged, the official said. It consists of 20 B-2 bombers (accountable for one warhead each under the treaty), 91 B-1 bombers (accountable for one warhead each) and 47 B-52 bombers (accountable for one warhead each).
U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces under START as of Dec. 5
| | Delivery Vehicles | Warheads | | ICBMS | July 31, 2001 | Dec. 5, 2001 | July 31, 2001 | Dec. 5, 2001 | | MX/Peacekeeper (10 warheads) | 50 | 50 | 500 | 500 | | Minuteman III (three warheads) | 526 | 350 | 1,578 | 1,050 | | Minuteman III (single warhead) | 0 | 150 | 0 | 150 | | Minuteman II (single warhead) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | Subtotal | 577 | 551 | 2,079 | 1,701 | | SLBMs | | | | | | Poseidon (10 warheads) | 16 | 0 | 160 | 0 | | Trident I (six warheads) | 192 | 168 | 1,536 | 1,008 | | Trident II (eight warheads) | 240 | 264 | 1,920 | 2,112 | | Subtotal | 448 | 432 | 3,616 | 3,120 | | Bombers | | | | | | B-52 (10 warheads) | 116 | 97 | 1,160 | 970 | | B-52 (single warhead) | 47 | 47 | 47 | 47 | | B-1 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 91 | | B-2 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | | Subtotal | 274 | 255 | 1,318 | 1,128 | | Total | 1,299 | 1,238 | 7,013 | 5,928 |
Sources: U.S. State Department release, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, U.S. officials.
Russian authorities arrested seven men charged with trying to sell weapon-grade uranium (see GSN, Nov. 13), the Russian television network NTV said yesterday.
The men were arrested in Balashikha, Russia, southeast of Moscow. They were caught trying to sell more than two pounds of weapon-grade uranium for $30,000, according to NTV. That amount of uranium is not enough to construct a nuclear weapon, said Alexander Koldobsky, of the Moscow Engineering and Physical Institute.
If the the material is confirmed, it will be the first established theft of Russian enriched uranium, according to the Associated Press. Russian officials in the past have said repeatedly that no weapon-grade nuclear materials have been stolen (Associated Press/Boston Globe, Dec. 7).
 |
By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire
The contentious Fifth Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention is scheduled to conclude today in Geneva, as treaty parties continue to negotiate improvements to the 1972 treaty into the final scheduled hours (see GSN, Dec. 4).
Differences over several important issues, however, threaten to scuttle efforts to produce a final declaration amending the treaty, officials and observers say.
“They may not get a declaration out of this,” said David Hamill, a spokesman at the U.S. consulate in Geneva.
“That would hardly be in keeping with the concerns raised by the U.S. incidents,” president of the conference, Ambassador Tibor Toth, said referring to the anthrax attacks.
Negotiations on a final declaration were expected to continue right up until the end of the three-week, 144-nation conference. As of Thursday night, agreement had been reached on only five of the convention's more important fifteen articles,
In a press conference today, Toth
A major remaining issue between parties has been whether parties would agree to continue regular meetings in the future to try to strengthen the treaty, which has been criticized for having no mandatory verification mechanism. While the United States delegation has said it opposes any continued discussion about a verification mechanism for the treaty (see GSN, Nov. 21), European Union countries had proposed language that might allow such discussions to continue in the future, without specifically saying so.
The Europeans have proposed conducting annual meetings of parties and meetings of governmental expert groups to further discuss means and mechanisms for strengthening the convention. Further, they proposed conducting BWC review conferences like the current one every five years.
“It’s better than nothing, though it doesn’t solve the problem of not having a verification mechanism,” said Oliver Meier, an arms control and disarmament researcher with the nonprofit organization VERTIC. “They’re trying to recast the issue, though I think the implicit purpose is the same.”
The convention does not provide for automatic review conferences, though they have occurred every five years.
A Non-Binding Statement
There has been talk at the conference, said Rissanen in an interview, that the proposals for continuing negotiations could be linked to the U.S. preference for a strong statement on parties’ noncompliance with the treaty.
“They’re might be some bargaining on these two issues,” she said.
The United States has been pushing for controversial language that would charge countries are violating the treaty’s ban on biological weapons possession. U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton, at the start of the conference, accused five countries of having banned biological weapons programs: Iran, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, and Libya, and asked them to end the programs (see GSN, Nov. 20).
It’s difficult when you first accuse countries, name names, and then ask them to admit they have biological weapons,” Rissanen said.
The United States reportedly also proposed additional controversial language, condemning states also for failing to halt biological weapons material transfers and to destroy existing stocks.
In light of serious differences among the participants, Toth said at a Wednesday press conference that there was a possibility no final declaration would be approved “until the last moment.”
Bolton was expected to set the course for the final U.S. position.
“There’s a lot of stuff out there dangling … I think it will come down to package deals and a lot of negotiating that hasn’t been done yet,” U.S. spokesman Hamill said on Thursday.
Investigations Mechanism
In another point of contention, the United States objected to a European proposal for mandatory international investigations of suspicious outbreaks of diseases, alleged biological weapons use and suspicious facilities, according to Rissanen.
The United States opposes subjecting suspicious facilities from inspections, she said, and favors considering complaints and initiating investigations through the U.N. Security Council, where it has veto power.
Rissanen noted that under the U.S. proposal, Security Council members China and Russia also would have veto power, which could be used “to protect themselves from inspections as well as possibly other counties like Iraq.”
Also, a proposal for a common export control regime limiting certain types of equipment was opposed by some developing countries, Rissanen said.
Hope for Verification Regime Persists
The Bush administration shook up the negotiations in July by declaring its opposition to a treaty protocol that would create a mandatory verification regime for investigating banned activities, arguing it would not work against countries of concern but would put U.S. commercial and biological defense interests at risk. That effectively killed negotiations on an enforcement protocol, and other parties have since scrambled to develop other ways to strengthen the treaty and to pursue future negotiations that might produce a binding mechanism.
The United States has not been entirely successful in quashing the verification idea. Parties did agree to include, at least in a first draft of the final declaration released Thursday, language endorsing continued discussion about a binding mechanism.
The draft said the treaty parties would solemnly declare “their recognition of the particular importance of responding to the threat of biological weapons by strengthening the convention, including through binding measures agreed by all state parties.”
Toth said on Wednesday that the fate of the committee which has been meeting for seven years to negotiate the protocol probably would not be addressed in detail in the final declaration. Several delegations were of a mind, he said, that absent an explicit decision to terminate the committee’s mandate, it would continue to meet in the future. But he said there was no consensus to resume protocol negotiations either.
Major proponents of continuing negotiations include Iran and China, leading a Third World camp. Ironically, U.S. officials in recent years have said both countries are suspected of having biological weapons programs.
“The U.S. position allows other states to suddenly pretend they are advocates of a protocol,” said Meier.
European countries expressed regret at the Bush administration’s initial announcement in July that it would oppose a protocol.
During a parliamentary debate in October, the United Kingdom’s Minister of Trade, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean, indicated her government’s strong preference for the protocol and said it is continuing to work with parties to ensure “multilateral negotiations resume at an early stage following the fifth review conference.”
Clayton Lee Waagner, the man believed to be responsible for more than 550 anthrax hoax letters sent to abortion providers, was charged with a federal firearms violation yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 6), according to the Associated Press. Meanwhile, investigators continued work on the tainted letter mailed to U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).
Waagner was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm and ordered held without bond yesterday. If convicted, he could face life in prison, according to the AP. Waagner recently claimed responsibility for mailing the anthrax hoaxes to abortion providers and clinics over the last two months, the FBI said. He said he was surprised that U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft had added him to the FBI’s Most Wanted List, the AP reported. “Ashcroft’s just doing his job,” Waagner said. “I understand he’s anti-abortion also. He’s a good man” (John Nolan, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Dec. 6).
Leahy Letter Similar to Others
A menacing note found in the anthrax letter sent to Sen. Leahy is identical to one mailed, along with anthrax spores, to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), the FBI said yesterday.
The note in the Leahy letter resembled a handwritten note that was photocopied and had the same text as the one sent to Daschle, according to the FBI. The notes read: “You can not stop us. We have this anthrax. You die now. Are you afraid? Death to America. Death to Israel. Allah is great.”
The Leahy letter also contained a large amount of white powder, believed to have billions of anthrax spores, according to the Washington Post. This will give scientists and investigators their first chance to carefully examine what is suspected to be highly virulent anthrax, the Post reported. Testing on the powder to determine its origin could take weeks, the FBI said (Susan Schmidt, Washington Post, Dec. 7).
Federal Reserve Mail Tainted
Some mail delivered to the U.S. Federal Reserve has been contaminated with anthrax, the Washington Post reported today. The shipment consisted of about 100 to 150 letters. It tested positive for anthrax during an examination yesterday in a trailer being used as a temporary mail-sorting center outside the Fed’s headquarters, according to the Post.
The Fed, as requested by the FBI, will continue testing the bin of mail today to determine the extent of the anthrax and find individual pieces of tainted mail, the Post reported. It is not yet known whether any letters in the shipment contained anthrax or if letters were tainted through cross-contamination.
There are no plans to close the Fed’s headquarters or to postpone a scheduled meeting next week of the Federal Open Market Committee, said Fed spokeswoman Michelle Smith. “However, while the investigation is underway, the board has decided to postpone public events for security reasons,” Smith said (John Berry, Washington Post, Dec. 7).
CDC Praised for Anti-Anthrax Efforts
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention epidemiologists prevented hundreds more cases of anthrax during the recent incidents, according to federal officials.
“One thing that strikes me as the unwritten story of this man-made epidemic was the lives saved by the CDC,” said Scott Lillibridge, special assistant to Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson. “They prevented hundreds of illnesses, perhaps more, with good disease detective work,” Lillibridge said. “They stepped up the identification of people at risk and got them onto medication.”
The CDC epidemiologists had to “constantly adjust” as they reacted to changing events in a “deliberate epidemic,” Lillibridge said. “What they did, rising to the occasion, is testimony to their preparedness efforts and their work with the public health infrastructure,” he said. “You’ll never know how many lives they saved, because, of course, you wouldn’t want to replay it” (Jeff Nesmith, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Dec. 7).
The U.S. Health and Human Services Department yesterday announced seven research initiatives to help combat bioterrorism.
“Lethal bioterrorism has become a stark reality, and our ability to detect and counter this danger depends on having reliable, up-to-date knowledge,” said Secretary Tommy Thompson. “Under these new initiatives, the submission, review and funding of this flood of scientific proposals will be expedited so that important research in this area can advance as quickly as possible.”
The new programs are to focus on “Category A” diseases: anthrax, botulism, plague, smallpox, tularemia and viral hemorrhagic fevers (see GSN, Nov. 6). The research is to be performed under the supervision of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is part of the National Institutes of Health.
* According to Thompson, the initiatives are as follows:
* The Anthrax Vaccine Contract will help quicken the development of anthrax vaccines. One area the NIAID plans to focus on is research into a recombinant protective antigen vaccine.
* The Rapid Response Grant Program on Bioterrorism-Related Research will speed the application process for research grants. The program will cut the application evaluation time to five to six months, down from nine to 10 months.
* The Partnerships for Novel Therapeutic, Diagnostic and Vector Control Strategies in Infectious Diseases will aid research into pharmaceutical and diagnostic technology development. The program will also work to encourage partnership between private and public institutions.
* Exploratory/Developmental Grants: Technology Applications to NIAID-Funded Research. These grants are to help researchers on NIAID-funded projects gain access to new genetic imaging and computer technologies. The funding can be used to purchase new equipment or to work with those who already have the needed equipment and knowledge.
* The Small Business Program on Bioterrorism-Related Research will simplify its administrative and review processes.
* The U.S. Based Collaboration In Emerging Viral and Prion Diseases will help create multidisciplinary research groups to work with viral diseases.
* The NIAID Investigator-Initiated Small Research Grants will provide funding for projects that can be completed in less than two years.
The NIAID has been “deluged with calls from scientists who want to help,” said Director Anthony Fauci. “I am often approached by researchers with promising ideas and a desire to contribute to the fight against bioterrorism,” Fauci said. “These new programs will allow us to channel that energy and new thinking toward enhancing our already significant bioterrorism research program” (U.S State Department release, Dec. 6).
|
 |
The United Kingdom and Norway yesterday signed an agreement to help aid Russia in dismantling its chemical weapons stockpile.
Under the agreement, Norway will contribute more than $1 million to the United Kingdom to help fund an electrical transformer needed to operate the Russian disposal plant at Shchuchye (see GSN, Nov. 26).
“I warmly welcome this initiative as a further important step in strengthening international cooperation to destroy chemical weapons,” said Colin Budd, the British ambassador to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. “We look forward to working closely with our Norwegian and Russian colleagues in implementing this assistance” (U.K. Defense Ministry release, Dec. 6).
Previously, Norway donated a similar amount of funding to aid a U.S. project also at the Shchuchye plant (Nordic Business Report, Dec. 7).
|
 |
The United States will pay to scrap Bulgaria’s stockpile of medium range Soviet missiles (see GSN, Dec. 6), Bulgarian officials said yesterday.
Bulgaria had “preliminary assurances” that the United States would fund the dismantlement plan, said Bulgarian Defense Minister Nikolai Svinarov. He also said that he would ask for “good up-to-date armament to be donated as compensation by the United States.”
Svinarov did not give a deadline for the completion of dismantlement, according to the Associated Press. NATO has asked Bulgaria to scrap the missiles, labeling them a safety risk. Bulgaria aspires to join NATO when invitations are offered during a summit next year, the AP reported (Associated Press, Dec. 6).
|
 |
The Senate Appropriations Committee draft report on the fiscal 2002 Defense Appropriations Bill recommended cutting $25 million from the $50 million budget request for a space-based radar program and denied any funding for advanced procurement for a Space Based Infrared Systems (SBIRS) High ballistic missile warning system (see GSN, Nov. 16), saying the program continued to have “poor cost and schedule performance.” The committee recommended $50 million for SBIRS High research and development.
“The committee is concerned that at time when Air Force space programs are generally underfunded and experiencing cost and schedule difficulties, that the Air Force would propose to begin a new start program that is not well defined and for which sufficient outyear funding has not yet been identified,” the report said, adding that some of the proposed activities would have duplicated work in other Defense Department agencies (Frank Wolfe, Defense Daily, Dec. 6).
The committee cut $120 million from the $385 million request for SBIRS Low but included language that would permit U.S. President George W. Bush to add funding for the program from a pot money allocated for missile defense (Kerry Gildea, Defense Daily, Dec. 6).
Meanwhile, Raytheon Missile Systems won a $36.8 million contract to develop laser radar technology that would improve the ability of Raytheon’s Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle to detect a missile outside the atmosphere (Associated Press, Dec. 6).
Russia cautioned the United States yesterday against any unilateral action to scrap the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The Russian warning came in the wake of a successful U.S. test of an interceptor missile on Monday (see GSN, Dec. 4).
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Georgy Mamedov told U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton it would be a mistake to disregard the ABM Treaty, the Russian Foreign Ministry said.
“During the talks, the Russian side once again noted the negative consequences for international stability of any U.S. decision to unilaterally leave the 1972 ABM treaty, which is supported by the vast majority of countries,” a Russian Foreign Ministry statement said. “It would be particularly dangerous given the current international situation” (Reuters/South China Morning Post, Dec. 7).
|
 |
The U.S. Defense Department has been urging approval of a drug that could help protect people from radiation, an issue that has gained increasing attention as concerns have risen that terrorists such as Osama bin Laden could possess radioactive weapons (see GSN, Dec. 4).
The drug, known as 5-androstenediol, is a steroid hormone that allegedly strengthens the immune system. Radiation can kill the immune system, rendering victims susceptible to serious infections. Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals of California owns the rights to 5-androstenediol.
Researchers have only tested the drug on mice so far. In one test it protected 70 percent of mice from potentially lethal radiation. | | |
Back to top
