Threat Assessment:  U.S. Officials See Signs of Possible Attacks

In the past 10 days, U.S. officials have received a surge of intelligence about likely terrorist attacks on the United States, equaling the level of intelligence received immediately prior to Sept. 11, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Nov. 5).

Warnings issued in October — regarding possible attacks on economic targets — are still in effect, according to Homeland Security Office spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

“There is intelligence, while it is general, that has pointed to and raised concerns about our critical infrastructure,” Johndroe said.

Officials said they do not have enough information to raise the terrorist attack alert level from yellow (see GSN, Sept. 24).  A recently released tape, purported to carry a statement by al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, could be a call to action for terrorists, AP reported.

Officials are also looking for signs of potential terrorist attacks on the NATO summit scheduled next week in Prague.  Czech officials have given permission for U.S. aircraft and as many as 250 U.S. military personnel to assist local law enforcement with security at the summit, which U.S. President George W. Bush plans to attend.

Meanwhile, NATO headquarters in Brussels and some European ports have increased their security based on the same intelligence that was available to U.S. authorities (John Lumpkin, Associated Press/Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Nov. 13).

U.S. officials last week issued an intelligence report that said three U.S. oil ports had been under terrorist surveillance, the Washington Times reported.

Islamic terrorists have studied facilities in Philadelphia, Texas and Alaska, U.S. intelligence officials said.  The report did not provide details about the terrorists or explain why they were not apprehended, the Times reported.

Johndroe said he was unaware of this specific report, but said the government knows that al-Qaeda is targeting oil or nuclear facilities.

“We wouldn’t have put out a warning or begun working with industry if we weren’t concerned about an al-Qaeda attack on these facilities” (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Nov. 13).

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  Bush, GOP Leaders Prevail on Key Homeland Bill Provision

CongressDaily

WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush and congressional Republicans finally prevailed in a key battle over homeland security legislation Tuesday, after a partisan brawl that delayed approval of a homeland security department for four months.

The Republicans’ victory came after three Senate moderates, Senators John Breaux (D-La.), Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), said they would support a new GOP proposal on personnel rules for the new department.

Their support broke a stalemate on this issue by giving Republicans the votes they need in the Senate to prevail on the personnel issue this week.  The new measure likely will first see action in the House — possibly today — and afterwards in the Senate.

In a statement, the three moderates said that while they continue to support their own amendment on the issue, the new Republican amendment “represents improvement.”

“In the end, most members of the Senate want to pass homeland security legislation this week,” they said.  “We will vote for this proposal when it reaches the Senate floor.”

Immediately after the trio announced their decision, Democratic leaders in the Senate conceded defeat on the personnel issue and moved to approve the underlying bill by week’s end.

The new measure would add language making it slightly more difficult for the president to waive collective bargaining rights for employees of the new agency in part by allowing a mediator.  Most Democrats and labor unions are expected to oppose the new proposal.

A description circulating on Capitol Hill indicates the bill would allow armed pilots in airline cockpits and would allow a one-year delay in baggage screening.

Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said that while he did not support the GOP employment rules, he would allow a vote on them.

“There may be differences of opinion on different components of the legislation, but there is no disagreement that we need to complete work on this bill,” he said.

The endorsement by Breaux, Chafee and Nelson and the concession by Democrats give Bush a legislative victory a week after he claimed that the GOP’s electoral victories provided a mandate on Capitol Hill.

Although Democrats dispute Bush’s interpretation of the election results, Breaux, Chafee and Nelson said in a statement, “There is no doubt that the supporters of the [GOP amendment] are in a better negotiating position following the elections of last week.”

“It was a good campaign issue for them,” Majority Whip Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said.

Senator Dean Barkley (I-Minn.) voiced his unequivocal support for compromise homeland security legislation being negotiated by lawmakers and White House aides.

“If there is a compromise being worked out in the Senate, you can guarantee that I will support it,” said Barkley, who was sworn in Tuesday.  Barkley spoke at the White House following a meeting with Bush.

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Scanner Increases Security at Thai Port

Thailand’s Laem Chabang port plans to receive an X-ray machine as part of U.S. efforts to more carefully monitor shipments to the United States, the Bangkok Post reported today (see GSN, Nov. 11).

The Post did not indicate whether U.S. inspectors would accompany the X-ray machine, which can reportedly screen a potentially dangerous shipping container in three minutes.  The United States is promoting its Container Security Initiative worldwide (see GSN, Nov. 6).  Officials have previously made arrangements to station U.S. inspectors at ports in China, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Canada (Bangkok Post, Nov. 13).

Back to top

Iraq I:  Baghdad Accepts Return of Inspectors “Without Conditions”

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — Iraq this morning accepted Security Council Resolution 1441 on the return of weapons inspectors “without conditions and without reservations.”  Ambassador Mohammed al-Douri said he had delivered the letter accepting the resolution to the office of Secretary General Kofi Annan this morning (see GSN, Nov. 8).

The nine-page letter, signed by Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, says, “We are prepared to receive the inspectors, so that they can carry out their duties, and make sure that Iraq had not developed weapons of mass destruction.”  Calling the U.S. charges that Iraq has such weapons “baseless” and a “most wicked slander,” Sabri wrote, “There are no true, just, or fair reasons behind the adoption of this resolution.”

According to the resolution, the government of Saddam Hussein had until Friday to accept the conditions for a strengthened inspection regime.  Al-Douri said his government accepted the resolution “despite its bad contents.  We are prepared to receive the inspectors within the assigned timetable.  We are eager to see them perform their duties in accordance with international law as soon as possible.”

The Security Council unanimously on Friday adopted Resolution 1441, which grants weapons inspectors new powers and warns Iraq of “serious consequences” if it does not comply.  The resolution gives Iraq until Nov. 15 to accept the conditions and until Dec. 8 to provide a full accounting of its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs.

Speaking outside the Security Council chambers after briefing the council on the government’s decision, al-Douri said, “We are always opting for the path of peace ... to protect our country, to protect the region against the threat of war, which is real.”  He added, “We do not have any mass destruction weapons so we are not worried about the inspectors when they come back.” 

“Iraq is clean,” said al-Douri.

China’s Deputy Ambassador Zhang Yishan said the Security Council “welcomes this correct decision by the Iraqi government and would like to see 1441 implemented fully and effectively.” 

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Threat Reduction Lacks Political Will and Coordination, Report Says

By Bryan Bender
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Poor political support, an uncoordinated strategy and inadequate funding are severely hampering U.S. and Russian efforts to secure and eliminate former Soviet weapons of mass destruction, a forthcoming report says.

The lapses threaten to leave vast WMD stockpiles at risk of theft, according to the report, Reshaping U.S.-Russian Threat Reduction, which is to be released tomorrow by the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The report pulls together the findings of numerous U.S., Russian and European nonproliferation experts, both in and out of government, and identifies a series of common obstacles that they have said are impeding efforts to address perhaps the most serious security threat of the modern age.

“The inability or refusal of these countries to correct these problems threatens to leave vast stockpiles of nuclear and chemical weapons and biological agents vulnerable to acquisition by terrorists, rogue states and black marketeers,” the report concludes.

Click here after Nov.13 to see the report.

Lack of Political Will

For starters, the report’s authors contend that the necessary political support to ensure successful threat reduction efforts is missing from the current global environment.  Sustained support by political leaders and the expenditure of political capital is critical.  “However, truly robust political support for threat reduction is very rarely demonstrated and is often more rhetorical than real,” the report says.

The lack of adequate political support has resulted in funding limitations and restrictions, bureaucratic battles and delayed implementation of particular programs.  The report urges Russia in particular to improve the overall environment for threat reduction by improving in several areas, including financial transparency, facility access and legal protections.

“The technical nature of much of the threat reduction work, the complexity of its implementation, the intangibility of some of its objectives, its cost and intrusiveness, bureaucratic inertia, the stigma that much of threat reduction is still foreign aid and the still unsettled nature of Western-Russian relations all cut into political support,” the report says.

Lack of a Coordinated Strategy

Further hampering U.S.-Russian cooperation on nonproliferation efforts is the need for a comprehensive strategy, according to the report.  As the threat reduction agenda has expanded over the past decade — to include scores of U.S. agencies, other governments and ministries and international and nongovernmental organizations — the growing number of programs have not been integrated in any cohesive strategy, the report says.

“There is a need to develop a comprehensive strategy that integrates all of these efforts and provides some overall direction and prioritization,” the report says.  Such a strategy would go a long way in improving the effectiveness of threat reduction programs and more quickly reduce proliferation risks.

Evidence of the lack of strategy includes the absence of a central coordinator inside the U.S. administration to oversee all threat reduction activities; the need for organized and streamlined congressional oversight over U.S. programs; and the little discussion to date about how these programs can be expanded outside the former Soviet Union to other countries considered proliferation risks.

More Money Needed

One key factor in improving U.S. and Russian nonproliferation efforts will always be money, according to the authors.

“Over $1 billion a year is being made available for international threat reduction programs,” the report says.  “Still, there are a number of efforts that could accelerate progress if additional funding were made available.”

These include redirecting weapon scientists, eliminating additional quantities of highly enriched uranium, implementing plutonium disposition programs, ending production of weapon-grade plutonium, converting research reactors that currently use highly enriched uranium and improving border, export and customs controls, according to the report.

“Additional funding could also allow for expanding the scope of threat reduction,” the report says.  “The paths forward for financing major activities are unclear and largely depend on a higher degree of political support than currently exists,” it says.

The recent pledge of $20 billion over the next decade by the Group of Eight economic powers is one possible solution, as is the proposal to exchange Russian debt to the West for nonproliferation efforts.

Remaining Threats

The report’s authors are quick to highlight the substantial progress that has been made over the past decade to reduce the threat of Russian weapons and technologies.  On the other hand, they also provide a stark reminder of the enormous effort that lies ahead for the world’s governments to fully reduce the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Russia and elsewhere.

“Although significant progress has been made in key areas, more remains to be done in reducing the dangers posed in all of the [Russian] weapons complexes,” the report says.

For example, roughly half of the weapon-grade nuclear material in Russia remains inadequately secured, the painstaking destruction of tens of thousands of chemical weapons has just begun and much remains unknown about past biological weapons activities.

On the nuclear question, as many as 40,000 scientists are looking for work, while only 40 to 50 percent of the work to secure Russian nuclear material is completed, according to the report.

Meanwhile, up to 7,000 scientists in the Russian biological weapons complex are now seeking new employment, according to the report.  “There is a particular concern about the former Soviet biological weapons complex,” it says. “The security of existing pathogen libraries, the past scope of work, the current whereabouts of BW and BW-related experts, and the future disposition of the … biological weapons capability are all critical concerns within the threat reduction agenda.”

“One significant political problem is that there is no baseline understanding of the old Soviet BW complex and its full range of activities,” the report adds.

Meanwhile, the thousands of chemical weapons in Russia provide their own proliferation challenge.  “The key proliferation dangers in the chemical weapons (CW) complex are the security of the existing weapons, brain drain, and the inability to destroy the existing stockpile,” the report says. 

In addition, the Russian missile complex is also a potential proliferation concern.  Some scientists reportedly have been assisting other countries considered proliferation risks and comparatively little has been done to transition these scientists to other employment, according to the report.

One proposal included in the report for strengthening threat reduction would be to more directly tie such efforts to arms control treaties.  “New agreements such as the Moscow Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty currently have no relation to threat reduction, but threat reduction could be instrumental in facilitating the implementation of these treaties in the future and these linkages should be explored.”

Back to top

International Response:  Annan Says Need Never Greater for United Nations

By Steve Hirsch
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan last night cited threats of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism as indications that the world has rarely needed the United Nations as much as it does now, and cautioned that the underlying causes behind those problems cannot be ignored.

Annan made the comments at a dinner at which he received the United Nations Association of the United States International Visionaries Award.

“The threats and challenges we face require as never before multilateral cooperation if they are to be dealt with successfully — cooperation in areas such as weapons of mass destruction and terrorism; cooperation of the kind we have just witnessed in the negotiations leading to the resolution on Iraq adopted last Friday,” he said (see GSN, Nov. 8).

He called Friday a “very good day” for the United Nations, one that “showed what a central role the U.N. can — and must — play in the quest for a world free from weapons of mass destruction.”

“In short,” he said, “the U.N. played its proper role as the only universal instrument of global cooperation.”

He also cited the U.N. role in the broad fight against terrorism.  Annan called terrorism a “global threat with global effects,” and said the United Nations “has an indispensable role to play in providing the necessary legal and organizational framework within which the international campaign against terrorism can unfold.”

While terrorism “must never be excused,” he said, “so must genuine grievances never be ignored.”

“True, it detracts from the justice of a cause when a few wicked men commit murder in its name.  But it does not make it any less urgent that the cause is addressed, the grievance heard, the wrong put right,” he added.  “Otherwise,” he said, “we risk losing that most central of wars — the war for the hearts and minds of much of mankind.”

As the United Nations works against terrorism in coming months and years, he said, “we must act with equal determination to solve the political disputes and longstanding conflicts which generate an atmosphere conducive to support for terrorism.”

“To do so is not to reward terrorism or its perpetrators; it is to deny them the opportunity to find refuge or recruits, in any cause, any country.  Only then can we truly say that the war on terrorism has been won,” he said.

Back to top

Iraq II:  U.S. Officials Brief U.N. Inspectors

U.S. officials recently shared intelligence information on Iraq’s suspected WMD programs yesterday with the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission in preparation for possible inspections, the Baltimore Sun reported today (see GSN, Nov. 8).  The U.N. Security Council and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, have requested that countries share any information they have on Iraqi weapons programs (see GSN, Nov. 12).

U.S. officials said they believe they have identified a few sites that would test Iraq’s willingness to allow unfettered access to inspectors.  For example, Iraq’s Special Security Organization — an intelligence agency led by President Saddam Hussein’s son, Qusay Hussein — offers significant opportunities for inspectors, according to the Sun.

“It’s more a matter of a half-dozen [sites] where, if [UNMOVIC chief Hans] Blix is aggressive, he will bring it to a head quickly and expose Iraqi deception,” an official said (see GSN, Oct. 30; Matthews, Bowman, Baltimore Sun, Nov. 13).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Collapse Illustrates Difficulties of WMD Protection

An incident during a Pentagon press briefing yesterday illustrated one of the major concerns in planning for war in Iraq — the effect of the desert heat on U.S. soldiers wearing chemical and biological protective suits (see GSN, July 18).

U.S. Army Sgt. Kerrethel Avery fainted under the heat of television lights while wearing a full protective suit for a media event, United Press International reported.  Moments before Avery fainted, another member of the Army’s Technical Escort Unit, which is trained to identify enemy chemical and biological agents, had explained to the assembled journalists that the unit’s members are accustomed to working in the suits, even under extreme conditions.

“I’ve never felt anything like that light before,” Avery said after the briefing.

After Avery was revived and escorted away from the briefing, officials told the other unit members, who also were perspiring, to unzip their suits and stand at ease, according to UPI.

Unit member Capt. Regan Edens said he had worn the suit in temperatures as hot as 137 degrees Fahrenheit.

“It’s tough but it’s nothing we can’t handle,” he said.

New Army protective suits for chemical and biological weapons are lighter and more durable than previous versions, but still they have some flaws, according to UPI.  For example, Newsday reported last week that the carbon lining in the suits could break down when exposed to sweat.  For that reason, the suits are expected to be replaced every 45 days, according to military officials.

Unit team leader Lt. Col. George Lecakes said, however, that he is confident that the suits provide good protection.

“I can tell you with 100 percent confidence they will protect my life,” he said.  “There’s no doubt whatsoever,” he added (Pamela Hess, United Press International, Nov. 12).

Back to top

North Korea I:  Pakistan Probably Gave Nuclear Aid Recently, Officials Say

The Bush administration has evidence that Pakistan aided North Korea’s suspected nuclear weapons program as recently as three months ago, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Oct. 21).

Publicly, the United States has said that while Pakistan aided North Korea’s nuclear weapons efforts in the past, it had cut off assistance after the Sept. 11 attacks.  The White House believes, however, that Pakistan continued to exchange technical nuclear information, and possibly materials, in exchange for missile components until this summer, White House and congressional sources said.

White House officials refused to comment on the evidence.

“Let’s put it this way:  There were still shenanigans going on three months ago,” a Bush administration official said.

Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf has provided assurances that he is ending all suspicious trade with North Korea, and U.S. officials believe he wants to stop the nuclear aid, according to the Post.  The U.S. officials said they question, however, how much control Musharraf has over the Pakistani entities doing business with Pyongyang.

“In the end, we may find he is only partially truthful,” an official said.

Pakistan’s suspected involvement in North Korea’s nuclear weapons program could put the Bush administration, which considers Islamabad an ally, in a difficult position, the Post reported.  Under U.S. law, if the president determines that a country has provided nuclear enrichment equipment, materials or technologies without international safeguards, the United States must impose sanctions, accordin to the Post.  The United States imposed such sanctions on Pakistan in 1979, but U.S. President George W. Bush waived them last year after Pakistan agreed to aid the war on terrorism (see GSN, Oct. 30, 2001).

Instead of calling on Pakistan to provide full information on its transactions with North Korea, U.S. officials said they have noted the new evidence, according to the Post.  They believe Pakistan understands that future violations will not be tolerated, the Post reported.

It will be difficult for the United States to understand the scope of North Korea’s suspected nuclear weapons program without knowing what kind of aid Pakistan might have provided, several experts said.

“We have asked North Korea to verifiably dismantle its nuclear enrichment program,” said Robert Einhorn, former U.S. assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation in the Clinton and Bush administrations.  “How will we know if North Korea has done that unless we know precisely what Pakistan has transferred to North Korea?” he added (Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, Nov. 13).

Back to top

North Korea II:  Tanker Awaits KEDO Meeting Tomorrow

International officials are expected to decide tomorrow whether to allow a tanker traveling from Singapore to deliver its oil shipment to North Korea as called for under the 1994 Agreed Framework (see GSN, Nov. 12).

In the meantime, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), which oversees international energy assistance to North Korea, has ordered the Sun River, a naval tanker loaded with 47,000 tons of heavy fuel oil, to travel at slower speeds, according to the Los Angeles Times.

“The ship is sailing at a very slow speed in the international sea awaiting further instructions,” Koo Byong-sam, a Seoul-based KEDO official said yesterday.

Representatives from the United States, South Korea, Japan and the European Union are expected to decide on the fuel shipment during a meeting tomorrow in New York.  The United States funds the oil shipments while South Korea and Japan fund the construction of two light-water nuclear reactors, which KEDO agreed to build in exchange for a freeze on North Korean nuclear activities.  The three countries are expected to have an equal say at tomorrow’s meeting, the Times reported.

“There is no vote,” said South Korea’s KEDO representative Chang Sun-sup.  “We will make a decision by consensus,” Chang said.

South Korean officials said they expect the United States to ultimately permit this month’s fuel oil shipment to be delivered, postponing a decision on whether to continue further energy assistance for at least another month.  If the oil is not delivered, however, Pyongyang could interpret the move as a provocation, said Lee Jong-seok, a North Korean specialist at the South Korean Sejong Institute.

“If the ship is stopped, it will cause huge damage.  We are entering winter, and the North Koreans need the oil desperately,” Lee said.  “They will interpret the decision as meaning that the United States is bent on destroying North Korea.  It will escalate the risk of military confrontation,” he added (Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 13).

North Korean Threats

North Korea has threatened to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and to expel international nuclear inspectors if the United States decides to end the fuel oil shipments, diplomatic sources close to Pyongyang said.

North Korea “would prepare to ditch the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if oil shipments were halted,” said one source.  “If the delivery of fuel oil was halted then Pyongyang would most likely remove or expel International Atomic Energy Agency monitors from the nuclear complex at Yongbyon,” the source added (Khang Hyun-sung, South China Morning Post, Nov. 13).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

NPT Text

States Parties to the NPT (U.N.)

Back to top

BWC:  States Dispute Plan for Future Meetings

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

GENEVA — Negotiations at the resumed fifth annual review conference of the Biological Weapons Convention continue to hang in the balance, as member states quarrel over a proposal to meet annually for the next three years (see GSN, Nov. 11).

Delegations are disagreeing over recommendations to change language in the plan that might allow members to discuss topics that U.S. officials have said they are opposed to discussing, diplomats and observers said.

The review conference, which meets every five years, serves as a forum for treaty parties to discuss and modify the treaty and other tools to address the proliferation of biological weapons.  Experts and diplomats said they are concerned that this meeting might now end without any common declaration of intentions or plans to prepare for the next conference.

This week’s meetings were scheduled when the review conference could reach no decision last year and conference Chairman Tibor Toth called for reconvening the meeting one year later (see GSN, Dec. 10).  The next full review conference is scheduled for 2006.

Toth, who authored the draft conference decision that is now under consideration, has been shuttling between two groups of countries passing messages and trying to encourage consensus.  One U.N. source described the activity as “pingpong” diplomacy.

If at some point Toth believes he has achieved consensus, a general committee would be convened to consider forwarding the plan to a final plenary meeting.  If no state speaks up in opposition, the plan would then be adopted.

“Western Group” Adamant Against Changes

The Toth plan calls on treaty parties to discuss five subjects involving possible national and international controls for discouraging proliferation and use of biological weapons.  Virtually every state is believed to support such meetings.

Nevertheless, some developing states, part of a group known as the Nonaligned Movement (NAM), are pressing for certain changes to the proposal that would allow for a broader range of subjects to be considered. 

A collection of developed states known as the Western Group, on the other hand, continues to push for approving the plan strictly as it is written.  The United States has supported that position, diplomats said, and one Western diplomat said all group members support it.

“It is a view that is shared by all,” the diplomat said.  “We have been unwilling to countenance any change” to the Toth proposal, the diplomat said.

U.S. Concerns

Some NAM members, including Iran, have argued for introducing the language into a key phrase specifying the subjects that might be discussed at the annual meetings, diplomats said.  Such language would open the door to discussing treaty issues not specifically identified in the draft decision.

The U.S. delegation reportedly opposes such a change over concerns that it might allow discussions to create an inspections mechanism for the treaty, which the Bush administration opposes.  U.S. officials declined to discuss their positions until a resolution is achieved.

Some NAM members have also proposed another change that might allow discussion of export control regimes.  That might lead to discussions at the meetings on separate Australia Group restrictions, which limit transfers of certain biological and chemical technologies to developing countries, said Ed Hammond, co-director of the Sunshine Project.

Some NAM members have complained that the United States should not be allowed to dictate the terms of the process or proposal, diplomats said.  Others complained that “the way the topic has been framed is meant to accommodate U.S. sensitivities and nobody else’s,” the U.N. source said.

“It’s not clear whether they [the NAM] have difficulty in accepting the proposal based on substance or on procedural grounds, as it was presented as a ‘take it or leave it’ proposition,” said Alexander Kelle, a research associate at the University of Bradford.

Western diplomats said nonspecific language regarding the topics of discussion could cause the annual meetings to be occupied with debates over the agenda rather than substance.

Time a Possible Factor

There is a general concern among participants that if discussions become protracted the United States may walk out and effectively end the conference.  Toth has been trying to convince member delegations that “his proposal represents one shot,” said the U.N. source, to “keep the United States involved in the process.”

At a September meeting, U.S. officials told Western Group members that they preferred an extremely short meeting at this resumed conference and no further meetings until 2006 (see GSN, Sept. 6).

The fact that U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control Stephen Rademaker is involved in these negotiations, observers said, suggests the administration has reconsidered its opposition to holding annual meetings.

A Second Best Alternative

While possibly all treaty parties are believed to support Toth’s proposal in some form, most also see it as a second-best alternative to creating a legally binding protocol that would create an inspections mechanism to investigate treaty compliance.

U.S. officials indicated before the review conference opened last November they were withdrawing U.S. support from just such a protocol that had been negotiated over a seven-year period. 

All non-U.S. Western Group states still favor adopting a protocol to create such a mechanism, but are unwilling to do so without U.S. participation, according to a Western group diplomat.

Oliver Meier, an Arms Control Association analyst following the proceedings here, said states now have maneuvered themselves into positions where they are unable to address substantive issues. 

“The Western Group is holding the line of the Americans and not moving at all. In the nonaligned movement, there are deep divisions about how and whether to address substantive issues and to approve the proposal that is on the table.”

“The real danger is if such empty exercises in diplomatic procedure are continued over the next three years and such mechanisms not used to talk about real issues, this convention runs the danger of becoming more and more irrelevant,” Meier said.

Back to top

Anthrax:  Postal Officials Postpone Brentwood Fumigation

The U.S. Postal Service has decided to wait to fully decontaminate the anthrax-tainted Brentwood Road postal facility in Washington because technicians have found cracks in the plastic piping that was to carry the toxic decontaminant, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Oct. 7).

The cracks were found last week among 7,000 feet of piping that was to be used to pump chlorine dioxide gas into the facility, postal officials said.  The cause of the cracks is still unknown, but officials think they occurred during the regular course of manufacturing, delivery or on-site handling, said Postal Service spokeswoman Kristin Krathwohl.

Officials plan to replace the damaged section of the piping, according to Krathwohl.  The remaining sections have been examined and no additional leaks were discovered, she said.

The piping cracks caused postal officials to delay a planned Nov. 9 test of the fumigation procedures and equipment and to postpone the full decontamination of the facility, which Postmaster General John Potter had hoped would begin at the end of the week, the Post reported.  Officials might conduct the test Saturday after replacement piping is installed, postal officials said.  While no new date for the full fumigation has yet been set, officials said they anticipate a delay of approximately one week.

“We are doing constant quality-control assurance testing and reviewing, and we are going to do this safe and right, not fast,” Krathwohl said (Manny Fernandez, Washington Post, Nov. 13).

For further information, see:

GSN Anthrax Attack Chronology (Dec. 12, 2001)

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax

CDC Frequently Asked Questions About Anthrax

Back to top

Iraq:  Disapproval of Atropine Reverses Previous U.S. Policy

Although the Bush administration has said it is concerned about Iraqi purchases of atropine, a drug that can be used as an antidote to nerve gas, U.S. officials on a U.N committee that monitors Iraqi imports have approved most of the purchases, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, Nov. 12).

Since 1997, Iraq has ordered more than 3.5 million atropine doses, according to U.N. records.  It is possible that Baghdad might want to use the drug to treat its own troops when launching a chemical attack against an enemy force, U.S. officials said.  U.S. suspicions grew last month when the United Nations approved a purchase of 1.5 million atropine doses, according to the Journal.

The United States previously has appeared convinced, however, that the Iraqi atropine purchases have been meant for civilian use, the Journal reported.  With U.S. support, the U.N. sanctions committee approved an Iraqi purchase of 1 million doses in 1998 and another transaction for the same amount in 2001, according to U.N. records.  U.N. investigators found evidence that health officials in Iraqi provinces received the drug from the 2001 purchase, said Hasmik Egian, a spokesman for the U.N. Iraq program.

“It is true that these are medical supplies and they have basically gone through the sanctions committee without questions,” a U.S. official said.  “But at any given moment, it’s reasonable to ask why they need this much,” the official added (David Cloud, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 13).

Back to top

Czech Response:  Kuwait Offers to Pay Czechs

Kuwait has offered to pay for all of the 250 troops of the Czech chemical warfare unit to remain in the emirate for another year, potentially expanding current plans for only 50 Czech soldiers to stay, Ceske Noviny reported yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 22).

Czech officials are aware of the Kuwaiti offer to keep the entire contingent in place but they have not indicated whether they plan to accept the proposal.  The soldiers, who have been stationed in Kuwait since March, are trained to protect other forces from weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, April 30).

“Kuwait has offered the possibility of fully financing the unit,” Czech Defense Minister Jaroslav Tvrdik said.

To save money, Czech officials originally intended to repatriate 200 of the soldiers with the possibility of returning them to Kuwait on 48-hour notice.  Kuwait is considering purchasing the troops’ equipment and training its own specialists, Ceske Noviny reported (Ceske Noviny, Nov. 12).

Back to top

British Plans:  London Supports Joint System With United States

The United Kingdom might soon need to protect itself with a missile defense system, British Defense Minister Geoff Hoon said yesterday, indicating support for U.S. development of such a system (see GSN, Nov. 11).

The United Kingdom might find itself the target of rogue states armed with ballistic missiles, and if nuclear deterrence fails, then officials would need a backup defense against the missiles, Hoon said during a speech to the Foreign Policy Center in London.

“We have a new problem — of the rogue state with a limited but dangerous capacity,” he said.  “It is in the interests of all responsible states to confront this,” he added.

The United Kingdom is considering joining the United States to develop a missile defense system to protect both countries and perhaps all of Europe, Hoon said.

“There may come a day when we need to decide to add a further capability to our current range of responses by acquiring missile defenses for the U.K. and for Europe as a whole, in the way the U.S. has already decided,” he said (Michael Evans, London Times, Nov. 13).

Hoon’s comments are likely to be seen as a sign that the United Kingdom plans to agree to U.S. requests to use British air bases as part of the U.S. missile defense system, according to the Financial Times.  Hoon also dismissed concerns that the development of a missile defense system would result in a new arms race, saying there is “no evidence that this has happened or is happening” (Jean Eaglesham, Financial Times, Nov. 13).

Back to top