Food Safety:  FDA Releases New Security Guidelines

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration yesterday released new security guidelines for food producers, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Dec. 6, 2001).

The new voluntary guidelines recommend that food producers conduct background checks on employees, protect water supplies, restrict access to sensitive processing plant areas and monitor employees who linger after their shifts end, as well as other measures.  The administration also issued guidelines for importers to help improve the security of food shipments.

“These are essentially best practices that everybody can look at and say, ‘Am I doing as much as I can be doing?’” said Joseph Levitt, the administration’s food safety chief (Associated Press/Ashbury Park Press, Jan. 9).

Back to top

Israel:  Cabinet Allocates $110 Million to Prepare for WMD Attack

The Israeli cabinet yesterday allocated $110 million to protect the country from nuclear, chemical and biological attacks (see GSN, Oct. 2, 2001).  Israel would use the funds to buy mobile identification units and protective equipment for rescue workers and to pay for distributing medicine to the population.  The Israeli defense minister is to oversee the preparations.

An Israeli television network said it learned that Israel was far from prepared to protect its citizens if Iran attacked with nuclear weapons, BBC Monitoring reported (see GSN, Nov. 27, 2001).  The TV station called the cabinet’s decision an insufficient step in protecting the country (Israeli Channel 2 TV/BBC Monitoring, Jan. 9).

Back to top

United States I:  Bush Plan Would Keep Many Warheads Available

By David Ruppe

Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — With Russian nuclear weapons forces projected to wither over the next decade and a half, the United States under a new Bush administration plan is planning to retain a potentially much larger capability.

The Bush plan, resulting from a recently completed Pentagon Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) (see GSN, Jan. 9), would reduce over the next 10 years operational nuclear warhead numbers to somewhere around the level envisioned in the START III negotiations between Russia and the Clinton administration, between 1,700 to 2,200 warheads.

An unclassified U.S. intelligence report released yesterday concluded “unless Moscow significantly increases funding for its strategic forces, the Russian arsenal will decline to less than 2,000 warheads by 2015 — with or without arms control.” 

The Russian reductions will result from resource problems, program failures and weapon system aging, the report says.

But an unspecified number of the 3,800-4,100 warheads projected for U.S. reduction will not be destroyed, but rather, reserved as a “responsive capability,” for possible reintroduction in the event of a change in plans, according to J. D. Crouch, the assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, at a press briefing Wednesday.

“There have been no final decisions made at this point on what the size of our responsive capability would be,” he said.

The warheads would be available to “augment the operationally deployed force,” available for redeployment in a matter of “weeks, months and even years,  [so] that we could respond to changes.”

Crouch cited potential “changes in the security environment that were more adverse than we thought. Technological surprise. Changes in our assumptions about how well we can introduce or field new elements of the triad.”

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters yesterday, the reserved warheads “will be maintained in a non-deployed status as a hedge against unforeseen technical or international events.”

Potentially hundreds of other warheads counted in the U.S. reductions also will not be dismantled, they will be on the sidelines while their submarines undergoing routine overhaul.

Simply De-alerting?

The plan effectively formalizes a November understanding announced but never signed between President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Crawford, Texas (see GSN, Nov. 14, 2001).

It has been criticized by some arms control experts. Ivo Daalder, a senior Brookings Institution fellow and Clinton administration national security official, sees two qualified positives.

“One is, they’re moving unilaterally, though their moving toward the level Clinton had at the Helsinki summit in 1997 — if you ignore their stupid counting rules,” he said.

Second, “all things being equal, it is better to have 2,500 warheads on day-to-day alert status than 7,200, which is what we have currently,” he said.

But Daalder noted many of the permanent reductions were planned seven years ago, while other reductions can be reversed in a matter of days:

“The way they achieved the reductions is by taking down the 50 MX missiles, with 500 warheads, but remember that was announced in the NPR in September 1994. They are converting four Tridents [submarines] to cruise missile carriers, but that was decided in September 1994 in the NPR, and for the rest, they are maintaining the force structure, they’re just downloading weapons…”

It could take “a matter of days,” said Daalder, to reconfigure the B-52H’s and B-2B bombers with nuclear capabilities.

“It’s not that they’re reducing nuclear forces, it’s de-alerting. And they gave the game away yesterday when they said they’re keeping the force structure.”

Crouch drew a distinction between the announced plan and de-alerting. De-alerted weapons “could be brought back up to alert in a few minutes to, you know, maybe a few hours. What we’re talking about is a responsive capability that would take, at the very least weeks, but likely months, and even years to be able to regenerate,” he said.

It “would not be something that you would respond, let’s say, under a tactical threat. It would be a major change in the security environment, for example.”

Like START III

Current U.S. nuclear warhead holdings are said to be around 6,000 as required by the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I).

The never-implemented START II agreement would have brought the number down to 3,500 warheads and the never-concluded START III negotiations were headed toward reducing U.S. warheads down to 2,500.

The Bush administration’s new Nuclear Posture Review, explained Wednesday at the briefing, says the Pentagon will reduce the number instead down to between 1,700 and 2,200 “operationally deployed warheads.”

But depending upon how the warheads are counted, the maximum number could be considered around the 2,500 warheads envisioned for START III.

The term “operationally deployed warheads” has special meaning — it excludes warheads assigned to delivery platforms that are on the sidelines in overhaul.

Crouch indicated the warheads on two Trident submarines, always in overhaul, would not be counted as operationally deployed. Experts say that amounts to as many as 384 warheads, or 192 per Trident.

“We are planning on maintaining a Trident SSBN fleet of 14 submarines. Two of those submarines will be in overhaul at all times, and those submarines will not have missiles available to fire, and they will not be part of the operationally deployed nuclear weapons.”

Not a Formal Agreement

The Bush plan, however, differs from the START agreements in a number of important ways.

Importantly, it is not based on any formal written agreement with Russia, leaving the United States with much greater liberty to revise the plan.

Further, unlike START, the United States is not obligated to reduce its number of nuclear delivery platforms.

While resuming nuclear testing is not currently planned (see related GSN story, today), Crouch also indicated the administration is considering the controversial option of developing new nuclear weapons that could be used for special battlefield operations like bunker busting.

“Now, we are trying to look at a number of initiatives,” he said.

These factors reflect a radically new approach to U.S. nuclear posture and arms control, laid out in the NPR, where the United States will no longer allow a bilateral arms control relationship with Russia to guide its nuclear weapons holdings. Rather it will preserve a range of nuclear capabilities, and reserve capabilities, ostensibly to respond to a range of unpredicted threats.

Crouch confirmed the new plan effectively nullifies arms reduction efforts pursued in correspondence with the START II and START III efforts.

The constraints outlined in START I, however, a fully signed and ratified treaty, will remain in force, Crouch said.

“START I will continue to be in force, and all of its applicable rules, including the verification provisions as well as the counting rules, are still in force,” he said.

The government may feel constrained, at least through January 2005, by any personal assurances Bush made to Putin in Crawford.

Russia, however, may be seeking firmer guarantees. U.S.-Russian officials are to begin meeting Jan. 15-16 to further discuss offensive nuclear arms reductions, Interfax reports (see GSN, Dec. 18, 2001).

Daalder said there can be a hazard in not having a signed agreement with verification measures.

“Without full transparency, without predictability about future commitments you generate suspicion inevitably and therefore you are likely to hedge, to take steps that allow you to protect against the uncertain,” he said.

Back to top

U.S.-Russia I:  Bush to Propose More Nonproliferation Funds

The Bush administration’s increase in U.S. Energy Department funds for nonproliferation programs in fiscal 2003 will include $384 million for fissile material disposition, $235 million for material protection, control and accounting and $133 million for arms control programs, according to a report by the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council.

Bush administration officials have said they will propose funding for Energy Department nonproliferation programs, including programs in Russia, at a higher level for fiscal 2003 than for the previous year (see GSN, Jan. 9). The administration was expected to propose about $1.04 billion for Energy nonproliferation programs in fiscal 2003, compared to a proposal for $750 million in fiscal 2002.

Although for fiscal 2002 the administration had proposed to cut nonproliferation funds from the previous year’s budgets for both the Energy and Defense departments — cuts of $100 million and $40 million, respectively — Congress restored most of that funding (see GSN, Dec. 10, 2001).  Lawmakers also allocated $226 million for Energy nonproliferation programs (see GSN, Dec. 20, 2001) as part of an overall $40 billion emergency supplemental package approved after Sept. 11 (RANSAC report, Jan. 9).

Back to top

U.S. Testing:  White House Says Nuclear Testing Is Future Option

The White House has decided to continue the U.S. moratorium on nuclear testing but retained the right to begin testing again in the future if necessary, spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 9).

“We would never rule out the possible need to test to make certain that the stockpile, particularly as it’s reduced, is reliable and safe.  So [President George W. Bush] has not ruled out testing in the future, but there are no plans to do so,” Fleischer said (White House briefing, Jan. 9).

Money and Time to Resume Testing

Reducing the time required to resume underground nuclear tests would require adding $15 million annually for three years to the Nevada Test Site budget, said John Harvey, director of the Office of Policy Planning Assessment Analysis at the National Nuclear Security Administration.  The Nuclear Posture Review recommended decreasing the amount of time it would take officials to prepare for testing from two or three years to 18 months.

“If we were going to a lower number, from 24 to 36 [months] to say 18 months, for example, it would probably take us two to three years to get to that point,” said Harvey.

John Gordon, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, has testified that 18 months would be a reasonable amount of time to prepare for a test, Harvey said.  Experts have used subcritical experiments to check nuclear weapons since the United States implemented a testing moratorium in 1992 (see GSN, Dec. 18, 2001) .

“We have a very aggressive stockpile stewardship program … We feel confident we can do this without nuclear testing.  But there are no guarantees,” Harvey said.  Problems in the U.S. nuclear stockpile could arise that would require nuclear tests, he said.

Harvey would not say if the White House would add $15 million to its upcoming budget proposal (Tony Batt, Las Vegas Review-Journal, Jan. 10).

Russian Reaction

Meanwhile, Russia has said it supports the U.S. decision to continue the moratorium.  The moratorium is “particularly important as Washington continues to obstinately refuse to ratify the agreement on the complete ban of nuclear tests [the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty],” said Russian foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Iakovenko yesterday.

The importance of nonproliferation efforts and agreements is more important than ever since the United States made the “erroneous decision” to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (see GSN, Dec. 13, 2001), Iakovenko said (ITAR-Tass, Jan. 9).

If the United States renews nuclear testing, Russia would probably conduct tests too, said Mark Urnov, head of the Center for Political Technologies.  Reducing the countries’ nuclear arsenals would probably require testing to determine the reliability and safety of the weapons that remain, he said.  Russia would probably not oppose a U.S. decision to resume tests as long as the United States continues negotiations with Russia to reduce the arsenals, Urnov said (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Jan. 10).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia II:  Reductions Must be Permanent, Russia Says

Russia today said any nuclear warhead reductions must be “irreversible,” in response to the recently released U.S. Nuclear Posture Review that said some warheads might only be stored (see related GSN story, today).

“We believe Russian-American agreements on further cuts in nuclear arsenals must first be radical — down to 1,500 to 2,200 warheads — secondly verifiable and thirdly irreversible,” said Russian foreign ministry spokesman Aleksandr Yakovenko.  “This means strategic nuclear weapons must be cut not only ‘on paper,’” he said.

A senior source in the Russian general staff criticized U.S. plans to remove warheads from Peacekeeper ICBMs.  “Such a contribution by Washington cannot be acceptable — offering 50 Peacekeeper ICBMs and 200 to 300 warheads whose working life has already expired,” the source said.  “It is ridiculous.”

The United States was not attempting to “mislead anybody,” said U.S. Assistant Defense Secretary J.D. Crouch.  He added that it was “a prudent thing to have, in a very uncertain period, some responsive capability” (Reuters/ABC News.com, Jan. 10).

“The relevance of [international agreements on nonproliferation and dismantlement], unfortunately, is growing in the light of the erroneous decision by the United States to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (see GSN, Dec. 13, 2001),” Yakovenko said (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty , Jan. 10).

Back to top

Iran:  Canadian Admits Exports to Iran

A Canadian businessman pleaded guilty Monday to illegally exporting equipment to Iran that could be used to build missiles or develop nuclear weapons, the Vancouver Sun reported today.  Nematollah Helmi pleaded guilty to exporting or attempting to export 16 items on Canada’s export control list, one count of not properly reporting goods and two counts of making false statements on customs declaration forms.  The illegal activities occurred in 1998 and 1999.

Canadian authorities charged Helmi and the Kanira Trade company last April for illegally failing to report the export of certain U.S.-made equipment, including including Pyro-electric sensor detector heads, attenuators and laser splitters.

The equipment has legitimate research and scientific uses but authorities believe they could also be used to develop weapons, the Sun reported.  Authorities did not know if all the goods were actually exported.  Canadian Customs seized 66 pieces of equipment from Kanira Trade in April 1999.

Helmi “was just mistaken about some forms that needed to be filled out,” said Joe Spears, Helmi’s lawyer.  “This was not Middle East trade of weapons, but medical equipment,” said Spears.

Numerous U.S. military parts have passed through Canada to Iran, according to the Sun.  Unlike the United States, Canada does not have an embargo against Iran.

Helmi is scheduled to be sentenced today in the British Columbia Supreme Court (Hall/Fong, Vancouver Sun, Jan. 10).

Back to top

United States II:  Reliability of Batteries In Question

A Missouri manufacturer may have hidden defects in batteries that power guidance systems for U.S. nuclear warheads, CBS News reported yesterday.

“The attitude was ‘regardless of what the test results were, let’s meet the deadline,’” said one employee of the company, Eagle-Picher Technologies.

Defective batteries have been found at the Sandia National Laboratories, where the U.S. Energy Department conducts tests on nuclear weapons, according to CBS.  Last year, leakage was found in batteries made for a test version of the W-78 nuclear warhead.  Batteries were labeled unfit for use when an important chemical powder in the batteries did not meet Sandia’s requirements, suggesting that Eagle-Picher had not made the battery properly, CBS reported.

Sandia premixed chemical powder for the batteries before shipping it to Eagle-Picher, according to CBS.  That powder, however, did not always get placed inside the batteries made for Sandia.  “They mixed and matched them in any batteries they wanted to,” said another employee.

Sandia officials said that while there was a case of the battery powder being switched, there has not been a battery failure in a deployed warhead in three years.  Failures have been discovered before warheads were deployed, according to CBS (CBS News, Jan. 9).

Back to top

Russia:  Former Scientists May Have Helped Rogue States

A former Soviet biological weapons official said some former Soviet biological weapon personnel may have gone to work for rogue states in the 1990s, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 30, 2001).

“When we talk about these rogue states being familiar with biological weapons, that may be due to some participation of ours,” said Igor Domaradskij, former deputy director of the State Research Center for Applied Microbiology in Obolensk, about 85 kilometers south of Moscow.

“I know that in the mid-90s several quite prominent scientists — genetic scientists whom I do not want to name — prepared personnel for Iran,” Domaradskij said.  “But I think that ended several years ago.”

There are about 7,000 former Soviet biological scientists of “critical proliferation risk,” said Amy Smithson, of the Henry Stimson Center.  The United States and other Western countries have tried to address this problem through nonproliferation programs, the AP reported.

One such program, the International Science and Technology Center, works to finance peaceful research for former Soviet scientists so they are not tempted to sell their knowledge and skills to rogue states, according to the AP.  The program conducts 35 research programs at the Obolensk facility and has devoted more than $4 million dollars in salary supplements and other support.

Some former scientists who had left Obolensk returned due to the ISTC’s efforts, said Obolensk’s first deputy director Vladimir Volkov.  Supplements add $20 to $35 dollars per day to the scientists’ pay, which averaged $83 a month at Obolensk last year, the AP reported.

The program has reached about half of the scientists of concern, said ISTC Deputy Executive Director Randall Beatty.

“We know for a fact that a number who had been receiving e-mails from Iran or Iraq or Pakistan are now very sensitive and cut off all communication with these organizations … because they want to be eligible to participate in programs like the ISTC,” Beatty said.

Iranian agents, however, still try to contact scientists from smaller facilities, said a U.S. Defense Department official.  “That effort has not stopped,” the official said.

The ISTC spends about a quarter to a third of its $75 million yearly grant on biotechnology research programs, mainly focused on public health concerns, the AP reported.  Smithson said, however, that the funding needs to be at least doubled or tripled (see GSN, Jan. 9).

“There isn’t sufficient funding in the program yet to keep even the critical proliferation risk bioweaponeers gainfully and peacefully engaged and to help them adjust their skills and add skills that would enable them to become self-sufficient in the commercial marketplace,” she said (Ingram/Shargorodsky, Associated Press, Jan. 9).

Back to top

Anthrax I:  No Confirmed Attack Outside of United States, CDC Says

By Mike Nartker

Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — U.S. investigators have found no evidence that the recent anthrax attacks in the United States extended anywhere outside the United States, sources from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention told Global Security Newswire this week.

During the height of the U.S. anthrax scare, there were preliminary reports of tainted mail being discovered in Kenya (see GSN, Oct. 24, 2001), Argentina (see GSN, Oct. 25, 2001), Pakistan (see GSN, Nov. 2, 2001) and Chile (see GSN, Nov. 27, 2001).  In the Kenya, Argentina and Pakistan cases, however, further CDC testing on the enclosed suspicious substances all came back negative for anthrax, said CDC spokesman Curtis Allen.  The CDC did not test to determine what the substances actually were, Allen said.

The CDC did confirm that the substance included in a letter mailed to a Chilean physician was anthrax, but it was of a different genetic strain than the anthrax used in the U.S. attacks, according to a CDC press release.  The Chilean Ministry of Health is conducting further testing on the strain, Allen said.

Back to top

Anthrax II:  Zimbabwe Charges Opposition Behind Attack

The Zimbabwean government accused opposition forces of sending anthrax-tainted mail to a senior government official, the Chinese Xinhua news agency reported today (see related GSN story, today).

Zimbabwean Home Affairs Minister John Nkomo Tuesday said the Movement for Democratic Change opposition party and its white founders mailed suspicious letters found last week as part of a series of terrorist activities.

The country’s former white regime, led by Ian Smith, created biological weapons to use against rebels in the independence movement during the 1970s, said Patrick Chinamasa, minister of justice, legal and parliamentary affairs, yesterday.

“The people in the Ian Smith regime responsible for creating the virus are still working with the MDC,” Chinamasa said (Xinhua, Jan. 10).

The suspected letters were discovered last week in a post office in the capital of Harare after two postal workers became ill, the Harare Herald reported.  The letters are believed to have been mailed from within Zimbabwe and one was addressed to a senior governmental official.

The Zimbabwean Ministry of Health and Child Welfare said the contents of the letters had been sent to a testing facility.  “Zimbabwe has lots of experience in dealing with anthrax, which means there should be no reason for panicking,” said a government official.  “The powder has gone for laboratory tests and results are expected today” (Harare Herald, Jan. 8, in FBIS-AFR, Jan. 8). 

Back to the Bible

Anthrax, long-feared for its potential as a biological weapon, is a common disease in most parts of the world, especially Africa, the Associated Press reported today.

“Anthrax is not strange.  This has always been here and people get along with it,” said Eliphas Nyamogo, a teacher in Kenya.  “I think it has been much scarier in the United States because it is not something they have had for many years.”

At least 2,000 people last year contracted anthrax from animals, according to incomplete statistics from the World Organization for Animal Health.  Anthrax lives mainly in cattle, sheep and goats and its crossover into humans is an accident of nature, said World Health Organization official Ottorino Cosivi.  Some epidemiologists believe that for every 10 animals infected with anthrax, one person contracts the skin form of the disease, according to the AP.

Anthrax spores can stay in the soil for long periods of time — for decades or even centuries.  Rainstorms can excavate the spores and trigger an outbreak, the AP reported.

“It stays in the soil for so long we can have an outbreak any day,” said Gerhard Schutte, general manager of South Africa’s Red Meat Producers Organization.

Anthrax is likely to be thousands of years old, and some experts believe it might have been responsible for the fifth and sixth of the Bible’s 10 plagues — the death of cattle followed by boils.  “That’s exactly how it happens,” said Maryke Henton, an official at the South Africa Agricultural Research Council (Ravi Nessman, Associated Press/Washington Times, Jan. 10).

U.S. House Office Cleanup

Meanwhile, in the United States, cleanup crews will close the Ford House Office Building most nights this week to decontaminate the building’s mailroom of anthrax, the Associated Press reported today. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency cleanup teams will use a weaker decontamination process than the chlorine dioxide gas pumped into the Hart Senate Office Building to kill spores there, according to the AP (see GSN, Jan. 8).

“We’ve completed remediation, and now we’re using chlorine dioxide liquid and we’re doing continued air sampling,” said EPA spokeswoman Bonnie Piper.  “We don’t have test results on the sampling yet.”

Officials sealed off the Ford building mailroom since tests came back positive for anthrax.  The rest of the building is open to workers during the day, according to the AP.

Test results came back positive yesterday for a minute trace of anthrax in the Office of Personnel Management mailroom, the AP reported.  A swab test conducted there last month detected the presence of a single anthrax spore, far below the amount that would pose health risks, said OPM spokesman Michael Orenstein (John Heilprin, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Jan. 10).

Back to top

United States:  Aberdeen Disposal Plans to be Accelerated

The U.S. Army will destroy the 1,621-ton mustard gas stockpile at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland by the end of the year, three years ahead of schedule, army officials said yesterday.

“After Sept. 11, clearly the army reassessed security measures at the stockpile,” said Kevin Flamm, project manager for alternative technologies and approaches in Aberdeen’s Office of the Project Manager for Chemical Demilitarization.  “The best way to provide permanent security to the community is to destroy the stockpile.”

The mustard gas will still be neutralized as planned using a hot water process, according to the Baltimore Sun.  The army has simplified the gas canister cleaning process and has hired a commercial waste company to treat the neutralization byproduct, Flamm said.

The new disposal plans will eliminate the need for a construction of a complex of buildings at Aberdeen, as per the old disposal plan, Flamm said (see GSN, Dec. 11, 2001).  The planned “igloos,” however, will still be constructed to hold the gas canisters that need to be treated, said Maj. William Huber, commander of Edgewood Chemical Activity.

The new disposal plan will use workers, instead of on-site robotics as previously planned, the Sun reported.  “We’ve made some tradeoffs in risks, but we have not compromised safety,” Flamm said.

The accelerated disposal effort will reduce the overall cost to about $400 million and save the army $200 million, said project spokeswoman Katherine DeWeese. U.S. Army Secretary Thomas White approved the plan last month.  Aberdeen is the first of the army’s eight chemical weapons stockpiles to accelerate its disposal plans, according to the Sun.  Disposal plans at the other stockpiles are to be reviewed, White said.

Maryland state and local officials said they welcome the change.  “I’m glad the army is willing to put the effort into doing it,” said Rick Collins, Maryland Department of the Environment’s waste management administration director.  “I definitely believe there’s a significant risk reduction to the citizens of Maryland by eliminating the stockpile in an expedited fashion” (Lane Harvey Brown, Baltimore Sun, Jan. 10).

Back to top

Russia:  Destruction Plant Tests Equipment

The first of Russia’s proposed three chemical weapons destruction plants began testing its equipment without using any toxic substances, ITAR-Tass reported Tuesday (see GSN, Dec. 7, 2001).

Each component of the plant’s equipment is being tested to see if it meets a wide range of specifications, according to ITAR-Tass.  The plant, located in the village of Gornyy in the Saratov region, is expected to begin operation in June, according to the Saratov region Ministry of Industry.

Federal authorities allocated about $65 million for construction and testing of the plant and for social programs in Gornyy.  An environmental monitoring system is being constructed at Gornyy near the disposal plant and is also expected to be operational by June (Aleksandr Karelin, ITAR-Tass, Jan. 8, in FBIS-SOV, Jan. 8).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  CIA Reports No Major Changes to Missile Threat

By Steve Hirsch

Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON – U.S. intelligence agencies yesterday released an unclassified summary of their latest estimate of the ballistic missile threat to the United States, reporting no major changes in ballistic missile projections from the last such summary, released in 1999.

At the same time, the summary said U.S. intelligence agencies believe it is more likely U.S. territory will be hit with weapons of mass destruction using delivery systems other than ballistic missiles.

One observer remarked on the report’s cautious tone.

The national intelligence estimate, Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat Through 2015, describes new missile developments and the U.S. intelligence community’s projections of possible and likely ballistic missile threats to the United States, overseas U.S. interests and military forces or allies.  The estimate also updates assessments of theater ballistic missile forces around the world, discusses the changing proliferation environment and summarizes forward-based threats and cruise missiles.

The unclassified summary also briefly discusses nonmissile weapons of mass destruction threats to the United States and terrorist interest in chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials, saying intelligence agencies are looking into the matter.

Among the report’s key conclusions are that most U.S. intelligence agencies believe the United States is likely to face ICBM threats from North Korea and Iran, and possibly Iraq, before 2015.  U.S. interests, forces and allies already face a significant threat from short- and medium-range missiles, the report says.

Intelligence agencies also believe that without significant new funding, Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal will drop to below 2,000 warheads by 2015, regardless of arms control measures.

“Although Russia still maintains the most comprehensive ballistic missile force capable of reaching the United States, force structure decisions resulting from resource problems, program development failures, weapon system aging, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and arms control treaties have resulted in a steep decline in Russian strategic nuclear forces over the last 10 years,” the report says.

Intelligence agencies also say China’s ballistic missile forces, aimed mainly against the United States, will increase significantly by 2015 to between 75 and 100 warheads.  The Chinese ICBM force, however, will continue to be smaller and less capable than Russian and U.S. strategic missile forces.

According to Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Sun Yuxi, China will strengthen its defenses “in accordance with its own needs,” Associated Press reported.

“I have no details on the specific report,” the spokesman said, “but I think such matters are merely baseless speculation” (John Lumpkin, Associated Press, Jan. 10).

The intelligence agencies also say North Korea may be ready to flight test its multiple-stage Taepo Dong-2, which could reach the United States with a nuclear weapon-size payload, although Pyongyang last year extended its moratorium on long-range missile flight testing until 2003, assuming negotiations with the United States proceed.

Iran, which has 1,300-kilometer range Shahab-3 medium-range ballistic missiles, is interested in short- and long-range missile capabilities, according to the report, and an ICBM/space launch vehicle system.

“All agencies agree that Iran could attempt a launch in mid-decade, but Tehran is likely to take until the last half of the decade to flight test an ICBM/SLV; one agency further believes that Iran is unlikely to conduct a successful test until after 2015,” the report says.

Despite international sanctions and prohibitions, Iraq wants to have a long-range missile and probably has a “small, covert force” of Scud variants, the report says, and if U.N. sanctions were cut, Iraq would probably spend several years reestablishing short-range ballistic missile capabilities, developing and putting into place solid-propellant systems, and pursuing medium-range ballistic missiles.

Although all U.S. intelligence agencies agree Iraq could test different ICBM variations before 2015 if U.N. prohibitions were withdrawn in coming years, most agencies think that is unlikely, according to the report.  Some, however, think that if the prohibitions were killed, Iraq would likely test an ICBM disguised as a space launch vehicle by 2015, maybe by 2010, if foreign technology were provided.

In addition, the report says several countries could develop a way to launch short- or medium-range ballistic missiles or land-attack cruise missiles from ships or other platforms, a few are likely to do so by 2015.  It also says terrorist and other groups that have threatened or have the capability to attack the United States or U.S. interests have expressed interest in chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials.

The September terrorist attacks have increased intelligence agencies’ focus on the terrorist threat, the report said, “and we are obtaining more information on potential terrorist actions.”

The report says that although nonmissile means of attacking the United States with weapons of mass destruction do not have many of the advantages of ICBMs, these means remain a concern and intelligence agencies think the country is more likely to be attacked with weapons of mass destruction using such means, including ships, trucks and airplanes.

Among the advantages, the report says, are cost, that they can be hidden, are likely to be more reliable than ICBMs that have not been fully tested, would probably be more accurate than new ICBMs during the next 15 years, would probably be better suited for biological warfare agents, and would not be affected by missile defenses.

Joseph Cirincione, director of the Carnegie Endowment’s Nonproliferation Project, noted caveats the intelligence agencies included in the report and pointed to its cautious approach.

The report describes its assessments of future missile developments as “inexact and subjective because they are based on often fragmentary information.”

“Many countries,” the report says, “surround their ballistic missile programs with extensive secrecy and compartmentalization, and some employ deception,” adding that although some milestones, such as flight testing, are hard to hide, “we may miss others.”

“To address these uncertainties, we assess both the earliest date that countries could test various missiles, based largely on engineering judgments made by experts inside and outside the intelligence community, on the technical capabilities and resources of the countries in question, and, in many cases, on continuing foreign assistance; and when countries would be likely to test such missiles, factoring into the above assessments potential delays caused by technical, political or economic hurdles.

“We judge that countries are much less likely to test as early as the hypothetical ‘could’ dates than they are by our projected ‘likely’ dates,” the report said.

Cirincione pointed to the report’s prominent expression of caveats in terming the report cautious and its prominent discussion of the probability of nonmissile threats.

He suggested that that caution could explain why the Bush administration has been relatively low-key about the report’s release.

Back to top

China:  Loral Pays $14 Million to Settle Charges on Illegal Activities

Loral Space and Communications agreed to pay $14 million as part of a civil settlement after the United States charged that the company gave sensitive missile technology to China, company officials said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 21, 2001).  The United States has been investigating the New York company since 1997, when reports arose suggesting the company illegally passed information and violated U.S. export laws, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Loral did not admit any wrongdoing and denied the government charges as part of the settlement.  The company also agreed to spend $6 million to strengthen its compliance with export laws.  The settlement, between Loral and the U.S. State Department, also ended a criminal investigation by the Justice Department.

Meanwhile, the California company Hughes Electronics expected a settlement with the State Department to end a separate investigation into that company’s dealings with China, spokesman Richard Dore said.  The Justice Department also had said it would end its investigation without accusing Hughes of breaking any laws, Dore said.

A State Department official confirmed the agreement with Loral and the negotiations with Hughes.

A House of Representatives committee conducted an investigation into the dealings of both companies in China and said they had knowingly violated U.S. export laws in the late 1990s.  Congress had expressed concern that both companies helped China improve its capability to launch ballistic missiles, the Journal reported (Friedland/Cloud, Wall Street Journal, Jan. 10).

The U.S. investigation into Loral began after a Chinese rocket carrying a Loral satellite exploded in 1996, and Loral conducted a technical investigation into the launch failure.  The company then provided information on the investigation to China, and the U.S. Defense Department concluded the information could have helped China improve its military rockets and missiles, the Financial Times reported.

A Loral employee mistakenly sent the information to China without U.S. approval, Loral chief executive Bernard Schwartz said yesterday, adding that the company had improved its oversight since the incident (Alden/Spiegel, Financial Times, Jan. 10).

Back to top

Radiological Weapons:  FEMA Revises Potassium Iodide Policy

The U.S. emergency planning officials today released revised guidelines for the use of potassium iodide in the event of a radiological emergency, according to the Federal Register (see GSN, Dec. 11, 2001).

Potassium iodide should be stockpiled primarily for nuclear power plant workers and those living within the 10-mile emergency-planning zone around a plant, said the new guidelines from the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee.  Any decision on whether to dispense potassium iodide to the general public, however, should be left up to state and local governments. The new guidelines take effect today.

The committee, part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, recommended that evacuation and in-place shelters are the best ways to protect the general public from a radiation release.

“While there may be logistical difficulties in providing [potassium iodide] to the general public, any distribution scheme should take care to ensure that … distribution does not impede or delay orderly evacuation,” said a committee notice.

Potassium iodide only helps to protect those exposed to radiation from thyroid cancer and does not protect as well as measures that protect the entire body.  Evacuation and shelters can protect the entire body from radiation, including the thyroid gland, the committee said (Federal Register, Jan. 10).

Back to top

Nuclear Waste:  Yucca Mountain Decision Looms

U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham could announce his decision on whether to recommend creating a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada as early as today, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported today (see GSN, Jan. 9).

Abraham’s Press Secretary Joe Davis said late yesterday, however, that he was unaware of Abraham having made a decision.

“There’s nothing in my orbit,” Davis said.  “[Abraham] told the governor that the decision is imminent.  It could be in the next few days.”

Greg Bortolin, a spokesman for Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn, said there had been no word of any decision since Abraham’s visit to Yucca Mountain Monday.  “We have been told the governor will hear directly when such a thing will happen,” Bortolin said (Las Vegas Review-Journal, Jan. 10).

Guinn and other Nevada elected officials had expected to receive a 30-day notification on any Energy Department recommendation, as required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, according to the Associated Press.  Such a recommendation, however, may come as a letter informing Guinn that a recommendation to proceed had been made and would be sent to U.S. President George W. Bush in 30 days, said Traci Scott, press secretary for Senator John Ensign (R-Nev.).

“They could hand a letter to the governor that says ‘this is what our decision is,’ then they can’t do anything else about it for 30 days, at which time they would make their recommendation formal to the president,” Scott said.

Guinn understood, however, that the advance notification would come 30 days before any announcement, instead of merely marking time before the decision was formalized, Bortolin said.

“The only thing I can tell you is that the Department of Energy has promised they would notify the governor directly before they go public with it,” Bortolin said.  “Our understanding is [Abraham] would be telling us that in 30 days, he’ll be making his decision” (Associated Press/Reno Gazette-Journal, Jan. 9).

Getting Ready…

Yucca Mountain managers are preparing new research and finance plans in the eventuality that Abraham recommends the site, an executive on the project said yesterday.

If such a recommendation is made, the Energy Department will need new plans to address budget shortfalls, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing process and still-unresolved technical problems, said Don Pearman, deputy general manager of Bechtel SAIC, managing contractor for the project.

“We’re doing a top-down now,” Pearman said.  “We’re looking forward and coming up with a strategy that will balance the science and the need to move on to design and engineering activities.”

Pearman did not give details on the new plans, but said they would be presented to the Energy Department in March.  Bechtel received “general guidance” from the Energy Department before developing its plan, said Energy Department spokeswoman Gayle Fisher.

“When they come forward with a proposal and a path forward, it’s reviewed by the DOE, and a decision is made to either go or no go,” she said (Steve Tetreault, Las Vegas Review-Journal, Jan. 10).

Back to top