Threat Assessment I:  Despite Improvements, U.S. Still Unprepared, Report Says

Despite Bush administration efforts to improve domestic security after the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. infrastructure still remains vulnerable, a report released today by the Council on Foreign Relations says (see GSN, Oct. 25).

“A year after 9/11, America remains dangerously unprepared to prevent and respond to a catastrophic terrorist attack on U.S. soil,” according to the report, prepared by a commission co-chaired by former Senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman.  “In all likelihood, the next attack will result in even greater casualties and widespread disruption to our lives and economy.”

The report outlines a number of remaining security flaws in the U.S. infrastructure, according to the Washington Post.  For example, only a small number of cargo containers entering the United States are searched, posing a risk terrorists could attempt to smuggle in a weapon of mass destruction, the report says (see GSN, Oct. 21). 

An attack on a U.S. port could also cause massive economic damage, the report says (John Mintz, Washington Post, Oct. 25).

“If an explosive device was loaded in a container and set off in a port, it would almost automatically raise concern about the integrity of the 21,000 containers that arrive in U.S. ports each day,” the report says.  “A three- to four-week closure of U.S. ports would bring the global container industry to its knees” (James Dao, New York Times, Oct. 25).

The report also found that U.S. law enforcement personnel and first responder units are unprepared to handle terrorism, according to the Post.  State and local law enforcement officials lack necessary intelligence information because they do not have access to U.S. State Department-prepared terrorist watch lists, the report says. In addition, firefighters and emergency response personnel are equipped with inadequate communications systems and lack the necessary training to respond to a WMD attack (see GSN, Oct. 3).  The U.S. National Guard is also unprepared to respond to a terrorist attack within the United States, according to the report (Mintz, Washington Post).

In an interview, Rudman decried the apparent lack of urgency in responding to the remaining gaps in U.S. homeland security.

“I don’t know what we need in this country,” he said.  “It’s not a question of if” there will be another terrorist attack against the United States, said Rudman, “It’s a question of when” (Vicki Kemper, Los Angeles Times, Oct. 25).

The White House Homeland Security Office yesterday defended its efforts in improving U.S. domestic security, saying the council’s report is out of date and does not recognize the office’s new measures.

“We’ve been actively implementing what we can, while waiting for Congress to act on the president’s homeland security proposals made in February, such as increased funding for first responders, bioterrorism and critical infrastructure protection,” said Homeland Security Office spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

The purpose of the report is not to criticize the Bush administration, but to raise awareness of security concerns, the commission’s leaders said.

“Starting from the point that nobody took any of this seriously (before Sept. 11), the Bush administration has made an adequate start,” Rudman said yesterday.  “But I think [Homeland Security Director] Tom Ridge and his staff have been so involved in process, so distracted by the security alerts and by the pending legislation, that they do have a ways to go. … Our message is, for God’s sake, do it” (Mintz, Washington Post).

Back to top

Threat Assessment II:  FBI Warns on U.S. Rail System

Terrorists could strike the nation’s railway system in a variety of ways, including an attack on rail-borne hazardous material containers, the FBI warned yesterday in a statement (see GSN, Oct. 24).

Information on the threat came from interrogations of al-Qaeda prisoners and recently discovered al-Qaeda pictures of U.S. railroad cars, engines and crossings.  Because there was no specific timeline or location available, the nation’s level of alert remained at yellow (see GSN, Sept. 24).

Terrorists could try to bring a bomb aboard, demolish a bridge, derail a train or pull a vehicle with explosives onto railroad tracks.  The White House Office of Homeland Security sought to reassure U.S. rail passengers.

“The American people should continue to travel our nation’s rails,” said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for chief homeland security official Tom Ridge (Hall/Diamond, USA Today, Oct. 24).

The FBI also expressed concern that terrorists have planned a series of attacks on the global energy and oil industries.  A French oil tanker was attacked off the coast of Yemen earlier this month.

“Such attacks may be a part of more extensive operations against port facilities and other energy-related targets including oil facilities and nuclear power plants,” the statement said (Deborah Charles, Reuters, Oct. 25).

Back to top

Iraq:  United States Gaining Support in U.N. Security Council

The United States is gaining support among the 10 nonpermanent members of the U.N. Security Council for its draft resolution on a new inspection regime for Iraq, increasing the possibility that the U.S. draft will receive the nine votes needed for approval, according to today’s Washington Post (see GSN, Oct. 24).

The Mexican Foreign Ministry indicated yesterday that it was more supportive of the U.S. resolution, saying in a statement that the United States is “moving closer to the arguments espoused by Russia, France and Mexico.”

Other Security Council members, such as Colombia, that opposed the 1991 Gulf War have indicated that they will now support the United States, according to the Post (see GSN, Oct. 23).  Colombian Ambassador Alfonso Valdivieso said the U.S. resolution “was getting a little bit more support.”

U.S. President George W. Bush has publicly called on council members to support the U.S. resolution to revise and reinstate U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq.

“You have a choice, United Nations, to keep the peace by showing some backbone.  You can be the United Nations or the League of Nations,” Bush said yesterday.  “If the United Nations won’t deal with him, if he refuses to hear the call for peace, the United States will lead a coalition to disarm [Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein.”

Currently, the White House believes it has support for its draft resolution from the United Kingdom, Bulgaria, Singapore, Norway and Colombia.

John Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has said Bush and U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell will persuade Mexican President Vicente Fox at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Conference being held in Mexico to formally support the U.S. resolution, diplomatic sources said.  China, another permanent member of the council, is not expected to attempt to block the U.S. resolution. 

U.S. officials have said they can also persuade two of the three African countries on the council — Guinea, Cameroon and Mauritius — to support the U.S. resolution, which would produce the required nine votes.  Ireland is still publicly undecided on the issue and Syria is expected to oppose the U.S. resolution, the Post reported.

France and Russia

France and Russia, two U.N. Security Council permanent members with veto ability, are still publicly opposed to the U.S. resolution (Colum Lynch, Washington Post, Oct. 25).  While the United States publicly said it would attempt to reach a compromise among the five permanent members, the U.S. efforts to gain support among the nonpermanent members could be an attempt to isolate France and Russia.

“There’s impatience that this has gone on too long,” said a Bush administration official.  “The president has said this has to be dealt with in a matter of weeks, not months.  It’s time to bring in the 10, let them have their say, and bring this to a vote.”

“The clock is ticking, so the U.S. is calling their bluff,” said David Malone, president of the International Peace Academy.  “If it requires a vote that isolates the French and the Russians, so be it” (Michael Jordan, Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 25).

Both France and Russia, however, have cautioned against a quick vote on the U.S. resolution, according to the Associated Press.  The full U.N. Security Council is scheduled to review the U.S. resolution paragraph by paragraph and to give all 15 members an opportunity to comment beginning today, said French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte. 

On Monday, U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed ElBaradei are scheduled to brief council members on their views of the U.S. resolution.

Asked how important Blix’s views are, Levitte replied, “For us, very important.”

Russia also still has some remaining concerns about provisions in the U.S. resolution, Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov said yesterday.

“Russia is also concerned about some provisions in the revised draft which, albeit camouflaged, could be used to justify the use of force against Iraq,” Fedotov was quoted by ITAR-Tass as saying.  “A quick putting of the draft to a vote would be counterproductive” (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Washington Post, Oct. 25).

U.S. officials increasingly believe France will not attempt to block the U.S. resolution on Iraq, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, Oct. 18).  France, however, met with the nonpermanent members of the U.N. Security Council yesterday in an attempt to obtain their support for weakening the language of the U.S. resolution (Lynch, Washington Post).

Both France and Russia have introduced their own new initiatives to the U.N. Security Council, diplomats said yesterday.  Diplomats described the French initiative as a “working paper,” whose sections and language could be worked into, or substituted for, language in the U.S. resolution (William Reilly, United Press International, Oct. 25).

The French initiative lacks language that states Iraq is “in material breach” of its obligations under U.N. Resolution 687 which established the Gulf War ceasefire, according to AFX news.  That language could be seen as approval for immediate military action against Iraq, legal experts said. 

The French initiative maintains language saying that Iraq has been warned it could face “serious consequences” for failing to comply with inspections.  That language, however, has been moved to the end of the resolution, following language that says the U.N. Security Council will be called into session if Iraq still fails to comply.  The repositioning of the language indicates that there is no prior U.N. Security Council approval for military action against Iraq, diplomats said (AFX News, Oct. 25).

Russia’s initiative has been labeled a “draft resolution” and could be seen as a competing proposal to the U.S. resolution, according to UPI.  Diplomats said, however, that the Russian initiative might be more of a gesture than anything of substance.

“I think Russia just threw down its marker,” said a Western diplomat.  “They just wanted to show they were in the game.  I don’t think they really expect to table it” (Reilly, UPI).

The Role of Pragmatism

Many of the smaller, nonpermanent members of the U.N. Security Council are likely to ultimately support the U.S. resolution, over competing French and Russian efforts, according to diplomats.

“At the end of the game, this will be a choice for a lot of delegations between realpolitik and an attachment to principle,” said a European diplomat.  “And it’s true that the Americans are better than the French at twisting arms.”

Many U.N. diplomats remember the case of Yemen, which along with only Cuba, voted against the 1990 U.N. resolution authorizing military action against Iraq to force it from Kuwait, according to the Washington Post.  As Yemeni Ambassador Abdalla Saleh Al-Ashtal cast his vote, a U.S. diplomat reportedly said, “That will be the most expensive ‘no’ vote you ever cast.”  Soon after, Saudi Arabia deported thousands of Yemeni workers and the United States cut off $70 million in foreign aid.

“Those who play the game of principle run the risk of winding up on the wrong side,” said another council member from a country that is planning to vote in favor of the U.S. resolution.  “And I don’t think we want to be on the side of Saddam Hussein” (Lynch, Washington Post).

For further information, see:

UNMOVIC

U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime)

U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”)

U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Iraqi Sanctions Revisions

IAEA Iraq Action Team

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Asserts Right to Possess Nuclear Weapons

In a rare public statement, North Korea today asserted it is “entitled to possess not only nuclear weapons but any type of weapon more powerful than that” and dismissed a number of international agreements including the 1994 Agreed Framework and the 1991 agreement denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula (see GSN, Oct. 24).

The North Korean Foreign Ministry statement blamed the United States for an escalation of nuclear tensions.

“As far as the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula is concerned, it cropped up as the U.S. has massively stockpiled nuclear weapons in South Korea and its vicinity and threatened the D.P.R.K., a small country, with those weapons for nearly half a century, pursuing a hostile policy toward it in accordance with the strategy for world supremacy,” the North Korean Foreign Ministry said.

The United States is also to blame for the nullification of the 1994 Agreed Framework, the Foreign Ministry statement said (see GSN, Oct. 17).  Under the framework, which was prepared following fears that Pyongyang had begun stockpiling plutonium, North Korea agreed to shutter its plutonium production facilities in exchange for two light-water nuclear reactors.

“However, the Bush administration listed the D.P.R.K. as part of the ‘axis of evil’ and a target of the U.S. pre-emptive nuclear strikes,” the statement said.   “This was a clear declaration of a war against the D.P.R.K. as it totally nullified the D.P.R.K.-U.S. joint statement and agreed framework.”

North Korea charged the United States with violating four articles of the framework — by failing to provide the light-water reactors by 2003, by failing to normalize relations with North Korea, by failing to provide formal assurances against the threat or use of U.S. nuclear weapons and by demanding nuclear inspections without required action on the reactor construction project.

U.S. nuclear policy is also to blame for the Joint North-South Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korea Peninsula becoming a “dead document,” North Korea said.  That agreement explicitly prohibits North and South Korea from enriching uranium.

“In the long run, the Bush administration has adopted it as its policy to make a pre-emptive nuclear strike at the D.P.R.K.,” the statement said.  “Such moves, a gross violation of the basic spirit of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, reduced the inter-Korean joint declaration on denuclearization to a dead document.”   

During the U.S.-North Korean summit held in Pyongyang in early October, North Korean officials demanded the right to possess nuclear weapons, as well as “any type of weapon more powerful than that,” to defend itself against the United States — in disregard of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty which North Korea signed in 1985.

“Reckless [U.S.] political, economic and military pressure is most seriously threatening the D.P.R.K.’s right to existence, creating a grave situation on the Korean Peninsula.  Nobody would be so naive as to think that the D.P.R.K. would sit idle under such situation,” the statement said.

“That was why the D.P.R.K. made itself very clear to the special envoy of the U.S. president that the D.P.R.K. was entitled to possess not only nuclear weapon but any type of weapon more powerful than that so as to defend its sovereignty and right to existence from the ever-growing nuclear threat by the U.S,” the statement said.

Nonaggression Treaty

North Korea today also proposed the development of a nonaggression treaty with the United States to help address “security concerns.”  Pyongyang’s proposal, however, is based on three preconditions — U.S. recognition, formal U.S. assurances of nonaggression and a U.S. pledge to “not hinder the economic development of the D.P.R.K.”

“The D.P.R.K. considers that it is a reasonable and realistic solution to the nuclear issue to conclude a nonaggression treaty between the D.P.R.K. and the U.S. if the grave situation of the Korean Peninsula is to be bridged over,” the North Korean Foreign Ministry said.  “If the U.S. legally assures the D.P.R.K. of nonaggression, including the nonuse of nuclear weapons against it by concluding such treaty, the D.P.R.K. will be ready to clear the former of its security concerns” (Mike Nartker, GSN, Oct. 25).

U.S. Has Not Abandoned Framework

The White House does not yet consider the Agreed Framework “dead” and might still continue some of its provisions, such as the delivery of fuel oil to North Korea, a senior U.S. State Department official said today (see GSN, Oct. 22).

“I have not yet used the four-letter word — (and) have no plans to do so, at least at this time,” the State official said.  “No decision has been made.”

While the White House has no interest in negotiating with North Korea for an end to its nuclear weapons program, the administration has not ruled out dialogue, the State official said.

“I’m not ruling out direct contact or direct communications with the North Koreans,” the official said.  “If they call us, we’ll listen, and I hope vice versa.  But that’s not negotiating” (Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, Oct. 25).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

Africa:  Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone Treaty Stalled

A lack of nuclear expertise, difficulties in parliaments and Israel’s nuclear weapons are hampering the progress of Africa’s nuclear weapon-free zone treaty, South African Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad said Wednesday.

By May 22, 50 of the 54 African nations had signed the Pelindaba Treaty — aimed at ensuring a nuclear weapon-free Africa — Pahad told the foreign affairs committee of the South African National Assembly.  However, only 17 of the 28 countries required to bring the treaty into force had ratified it, he said.

Pahad said a lack of nuclear expertise and an inability to pass the treaty through parliaments was hampering the ratification process.  Arab countries in North Africa were also wary of the stalled peace process in the Middle East and Israel’s nuclear capacity (allAfrica.com, Oct. 23).

For further information, see:

Pelindaba Treaty Text

Back to top

Russia:  Submarines Test Fire Ballistic Missiles

Russia test fired two ballistic missiles from submarines in the Sea of Okhotsk and the Barents Sea Oct. 12, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, Oct. 15).

The missiles landed on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia’s Far East and Cape Kanin-Nos in the north.  Russian troops also fired an SS-27 ballistic missile the same day (see GSN, Oct. 17).  The Washington Times previously reported that Russia was planning large-scale nuclear exercises (Gertz/Scarborough, Washington Times, Oct. 25).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Gore Wants New Public Health Legislation

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore said yesterday the United States needs new legislation to protect the nation from biological weapons (see GSN, Oct. 24).

“The strong possibility of a biological weapons attack against the United States demands a new and comprehensive response,” Gore said in a speech at the George Washington University Medical Center in Washington.  “We need a new national defense public health act to responsibly address this imminent threat.”

A Gore adviser said the former — and possibly future — presidential candidate was seeking legislation that would bring more resources to hospitals, enhance the training of health care workers, improve communication between health care facilities and increase the authority of the U.S. surgeon general.  The adviser estimated the first-year cost of the new program would be $10 billion, the Washington Post reported today (Dan Balz, Washington Post, Oct. 25).

Gore also recommended that preventive health services be incorporated into the primary care system and that the United States improve the security of its food and water supplies.

The White House said that President George W. Bush has been addressing the issue of biological terrorism.

“The best way to protect Americans from terrorists and combat the new, emerging threats of the 21^st Century is to confront them and address them head on — and that’s what we are doing,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

McClellan noted that Bush supported and signed legislation to fortify food safety, improve coordination between different U.S. agencies and defend against biological weapons (see GSN, June 12; Will Lester, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Oct. 25).

Back to top

Smallpox:  Russian Smallpox Laboratory Meets International Standards

The World Health Organization today said Russia’s State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology had addressed “all previous recommendations on procedures and safety.”  The determination followed a WHO inspection of the Siberian facility.  The agency routinely conducts inspections at the Russian laboratory and at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, which have the world’s last two official smallpox stocks.

“The team concluded that the facility can safely be used for work with the variola virus (which causes smallpox) provided that current protocols are strictly applied.  The team was also impressed by the dedication and the competence of the work force at the facility,” the WHO said.  It added that a follow-up inspection will take place after a planned renovation of the facility.

WHO members at the U.N. agency’s annual meeting in May dropped a deadline of this year for destruction of the stocks, citing the potential need for research into vaccines and treatment amid fears of bioterrorism (see GSN, May 20; Associated Press, Oct. 25).

Back to top

CWC:  Director General Says Organization ‘Back on its Feet’

By David Ruppe and Scott Hartmann
Global Security Newswire

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which administers the global treaty banning chemical weapons, has returned to good financial health but could soon face budget problems as its activities increase, according to its director.

“While we still are faced in the future with a very lean budget, I’m confident the organization is back on its feet and will be able to cope with future commitments, including the crucial ones on verification and will be able to address the expectations in terms of international cooperation,” said OPCW Director General Rogelio Pfirter in an interview this week with Global Security Newswire.

Pfirter, who assumed the position of director general in July, cited “renewed political support” leading to an increase in the OPCW budget this month and a voluntary contribution of $2 million by the United States as helping to turn things around (see GSN, Oct. 15).

“What I believe is that the present budget does contain sufficient resources for the number of inspections member states want us to make, both on the chemical weapons as well as on the industry sites,” he said.

The organization could find itself short on resources in the future, however, as the destruction activities of chemical weapons stockpiles in Russia are increased, which could result in the expansion of the organization’s monitoring activities, Pfirter said.  Speaking at the United Nations this week, he cited estimates such activities might increase fivefold in “the very near future.”

“Certainly the verification load on the organization will be heavier if all of these facilities come into operation,” he told GSN.  “So member states will have to look I believe inevitably in the future at how to distribute the resources and whether they really will be all the resources we need.”

A recent study by the U.K.-based organization VERTIC concluded OPCW’s resources are devoted too heavily to verification of declared stocks to the detriment of investigations to detect illegal new chemical weapons production (see GSN, Oct. 16).

Pfirter said more attention and resources will be devoted to those inspections in accordance with the recent decision by the conference of the states parties, which this month also approved a “compromise formulation” to fund 60 such inspections.  The conference also decided to rebalance the number of inspections next year to include “more of the relevant installations producing, consuming or processing discrete organic chemicals,” he told the United Nations.

The ability to conduct all field inspections, and the OPCW’s general financial health, however, could depend on the willingness of treaty parties to pay their full dues to the organization, he said.

“There is a renewed political support for the organization.  So, I hope that member states are confident, and that member states will reflect that in terms of coming forward with assessed contributions.”

A Change of Administration

Pfirter, who is from Argentina, succeeded a controversial Brazilian director general, Jose Bustani, who was removed from office in April by a vote of the member states (see GSN, April 23).  A number of major contributing states, including the United States, had withheld dues citing Bustani’s management approach and other issues (see GSN, Jan. 15).

Member states voted last week to increase the organization’s budget by 10 percent and Pfirter said he is planning to initiate a “management review” next week that will examine the organization’s operations during the past five years and seek possible areas for improvement, including finding ways to improve efficiency.

Pfirter said relations with the United States, the organization’s largest contributor, have been good so far during his administration.  Relations between the OPCW and the United States were strained earlier this year during the semipublic U.S. campaign to oust Bustani.

“I think those relations are excellent.  I personally feel very reassured about the support of the United States for the organization,” he said, citing expressions of support received during a recent trip to Washington, the voluntary $2 million U.S. contribution, and his understanding the Bush administration will appoint a permanent representative to the organization.

Ambassador Eric Javits, the U.S. permanent representative to the stalemated Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, will be moving to take the job, according to U.S. State Department officials (see GSN, March 27).

For many in the arms control community, the treaty is considered an important arms control symbol, as it is the single multilateral instrument providing for WMD disarmament, nonproliferation, verification and assistance at the same time.

“The CWC stands as an example of what can be achieved when the political will exists to tackle questions of global concern through the formidable power of an internationally agreed instrument,” Pfirter said Wednesday in an address to the U.N. General Assembly’s First Committee on Disarmament and International Security in New York.

Pfirter “is doing a good job on all accounts,” said VERTIC Executive Director Trevor Findlay, but he anticipated continued differences among treaty parties over how much further OPCW should expand its activities.

“There will be tensions between states that want to keep strengthening the organization and moving it forward and those that think it is doing enough already.”

Universality

The treaty currently has 146 parties and the OPCW is responsible for recruiting uncommitted states until the treaty has the universal membership of all 193 independent countries.

Pfirter said achieving universality “is crucial also to the success of the organization.”

He said the organization has launched a “program of action” in Africa to attract the 17 nonmembers there, and also is working to encourage nonmembers in the Pacific and the Caribbean.

For such countries, he said, “we have to work on demonstrating to them that there is a good case for joining the convention, there are benefits that have to do with peace, security, and international cooperation.”

Pfirter says the Middle East is a special case, where tensions may make it difficult to recruit members.

“The eventual decisions of countries in the Middle East have to do with a much larger problem than chemical weapons themselves and so we look with expectation and a sense of anticipation to that when that happens.  But I don’t think the issue of chemical weapons can be taken in isolation of the overall situation there,” he said.

According to Henry L. Stimson Center release, U.S. government and open source information suggest that more than a dozen countries have active chemical weapons programs, including China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Myanmar, North Korea, Pakistan, South Africa, South Korea, Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Yugoslavia.

Eleven countries have acknowledged existing or former stocks and four of those have acknowledged existing stocks that are expected to be destroyed under the treaty, including India, Russia, the United States and South Korea, the center says.

For further information, see:

CWC Text

OPCW Main Page

CWC States Parties

Back to top

Iraq:  Croatia Captures Ship Headed For Iraq With Scud Parts

Croatia intercepted a ship on its way to Iraq from Yugoslavia this week carrying material suspected to be used for Scud missiles, Reuters reports (see GSN, Oct. 15).

“There is evidence that the military equipment on the seized ship was headed for Iraq,” a police source said.

Croatian authorities brought the Boka Star into the Adriatic port of Rijeka and unloaded 14 containers.  Four of the containers have a powdered substance which authorities suspect is used in Scud missile ignition.

The ship was seized with help from the United States and NATO (Reuters/Boston Globe, Oct. 25).

Back to top