Threat Assessment I:  Al-Qaeda Could Still Strike U.S. With WMD

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

Although nearly 1,000 suspected al-Qaeda-related terrorists have been arrested around the world, and planned attacks were foiled since Sept. 11, the terrorist network might still try to attack the United States with weapons of mass destruction, according to CIA Director George Tenet in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday.

Documents discovered at al-Qaeda facilities in Afghanistan have shown that Osama bin Laden was pursuing a sophisticated biological weapons research program, Tenet said.

The intelligence community also believes bin Laden was seeking to acquire or develop a nuclear device, and al-Qaeda may be pursuing a bomb for disbursing radioactive material, a “dirty bomb.”  The intelligence community remains concerned al-Qaeda might try to use such capabilities in an attack, he said.

“Although the Sept. 11 attacks suggest that al-Qaeda and other terrorists will continue to use conventional weapons, one of our highest concerns is their stated readiness to attempt unconventional attacks against us,” Tenet said.

“Alternatively, al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups might also try to launch conventional attacks against the chemical or nuclear industrial infrastructure of the United States to cause widespread toxic or radiological damage,” he said.

Terrorists could also try to attack U.S. infrastructure through computers, he said.

The U.S.-led war on terrorism has “dealt severe blows” to al-Qaeda and its leadership, said Tenet, but al-Qaeda has not yet been destroyed and it and like-minded groups “remain willing and able to strike us.”

“Al-Qaeda leaders still at large are working to reconstitute the organization and to resume its terrorist operations.  We must eradicate these organizations by denying them their sources of financing and eliminating their ability to hijack charitable organizations for their terrorist purposes,” Tenet said.

Other Proliferation Threats

While Tenet’s testimony, delivered annually before the intelligence panel, covered much of the ground of a recently released CIA-prepared national intelligence assessment, it went further to offer many new conclusions on a number of other suspected weapons of mass destruction concerns around the world (see GSN, Jan. 31).

Tenet expressed an intelligence community concern that a conventional war between India and Pakistan could escalate into a nuclear confrontation and said both countries are developing improved nuclear weapons, ballistic missile and cruise missile capabilities.  He said they might each resume nuclear testing.

Tenet warned that suspicions among Iranian hardliners that the United States “is committed to encircling and overthrowing them [are] a fear that could quickly erupt in attacks against our interests.”

He also warned of the accumulation of chemical and biological capabilities in states of concern and of the possibility that significant nuclear technology transfers are going undetected by the intelligence community.

With respect to nuclear weapons, Tenet cited the difficulty of monitoring and controlling technology transfers, the emergence of new suppliers to covert nuclear weapons programs, and the possibility of illicitly acquiring fissile material.

“All of these can shorten timelines and increase the chances of proliferation surprise,” he said.

Missile technology proliferation also has become a critical concern, he said.

“On the missile side, the proliferation of ICBM and cruise missile designs and technology has raised the threat to the United States from WMD delivery systems to a critical threshold.”

Bilateral Concerns

Tenet reiterated the intelligence assessment’s conclusion that Chinese firms remain key suppliers of missile-related technologies to Pakistan, Iran, and several other countries, despite a November 2000 pledge not to by Beijing.

Tenet also said China remains a competitor that sees the United States as an obstacle to its emerging power.  China remains committed to “developing an increasingly competitive economy and building a modern military force with the ultimate objective of asserting itself as a great power in East Asia,” he said.

Russian conservatives remain suspicious of U.S. intentions, he said, and opposing U.S. development of a missile defense system, Moscow “is likely to pursue a variety of countermeasures and new weapons systems to defeat a deployed U.S. missile defense.”

With implications for the current U.S. policy toward North Korea, Tenet said the country continues to comply with the terms of an agreement requiring it to freeze work on its nuclear reactor program, but he added, “Pyongyang has warned that it is prepared to walk away from the agreement if it concluded that the United States was not living up to its end of the deal” (see GSN, Dec. 5, 2001).

Tenet, however, placed the blame for failed U.S.-Korean negotiations on Pyongyang, rather than on the tougher demands of the Bush administration, as its critics have asserted.

Leader Kim Jong-il's “reluctance to pursue constructive dialogue with the South or to undertake meaningful reforms suggests that he remains focused on maintaining internal control,” Tenet said.

Back to top

Threat Assessment II:  U.S. May be Overstating North Korean Threat, Experts Say

Some experts said U.S. President George W. Bush’s harsh rhetoric toward North Korea in his recent State of the Union address may overstate the threat the country poses, the Los Angeles Times reported today.

In his speech, Bush placed North Korea into an “axis of evil,” along with Iran and Iraq.  “North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction while starving its citizens,” he said (see GSN, Jan. 30).

While not arguing with Bush’s claims, some experts worry Bush will expand the war on terrorism to target North Korea, according to the Times (see GSN, Jan. 30).

“The basic language about having weapons of mass destruction and starving its citizens, well, nobody is going to challenge that,” said Scott Snyder, the Asia Foundation’s representative in Seoul.  “[Instead], it is the nature of the rhetoric, the bombast that is not backed up by any real policy.”

Bush has confused proliferation with combating terrorism, said William Taylor of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“If you want to deal with missile proliferation and missile technology, you can do that, but North Korea is not part of any evil empire connected with the war on terrorism,” Taylor said.

North Korea has not been linked to any acts of terrorism in a decade, but it is still on the U.S. State Department’s list of nations that sponsor terrorism, Taylor said.  Shortly before leaving office, the Clinton administration was examining the idea of removing North Korea from the State Department list as part of an agreement in which North Korea would have been paid to give up its missile sales, the Times reported (see GSN, Jan. 15).

“I’m a Republican, but I’ve got to say that Clinton’s policy on North Korea — constructive engagement and deterrence — was working.  Maybe [it was] their own foreign policy that was successful,” Taylor said (Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, Feb. 7).

Wait and See

South Korean experts said they are examining what measures the Bush administration will take against Iran and Iraq, the other “axis” nations.  The entire Korean peninsula might be heading into a security crisis if the United States takes a harsher stance toward North Korea, some analysts said.

The United States might enact measures such as intercepting North Korea ships to block missile exports, and it might stop work on two nuclear reactors promised to North Korea in exchange for a halt on its nuclear weapons development program, analysts said (see GSN, Dec. 17, 2001).

Such measures, however, might instead increase the tension on the Korea peninsula, said advisers to South Korean President Kim Dae Jung.

“We don’t want war, but the way the U.S. is going might trigger an uncontrollable escalation,” said Moon Chung In, an expert on North Korea and adviser to Kim.  “America is making a big mistake” (Larkin/Hiebert, Wall Street Journal, Feb. 7).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  Iran, Iraq and North Korea Constitute Threat, CIA Director Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — CIA Director George Tenet yesterday outlined the WMD and proliferation threats posed by several countries in Senate Select Intelligence Committee testimony, including the “axis of evil” — Iran, Iraq and North Korea (see related GSN story, today).

“Weapons of mass destruction programs are becoming more advanced and effective as they mature, and as countries of concern become more aggressive in pursuing them,” Tenet said.  He added that the spread of technology and the increased use of dual-use technology have also aided rogue nations’ WMD programs.

Tenet outlined WMD programs of Iran, Iraq and North Korea, as described in a recently released CIA report, to the committee (see GSN, Jan. 31).

North Korea is abiding by the 1994 Agreed Framework, under which it suspended nuclear weapon activities, but has threatened to leave the agreement if the United States does not live up to its side of the arrangement, Tenet said (see GSN, Dec. 5).  Such a move could see resumption of North Korean attempts to develop nuclear weapons.

Iraq has continued to develop an infrastructure it could use to develop weapons of mass destruction, Tenet said.  Iraq has expanded civilian chemical industries in such ways that they could easily be changed over to chemical weapon production, he said (see GSN, Dec. 21).

Tenet added that Iraq also has never stopped attempting to develop nuclear weapons.  Iraq still has a supply of nuclear scientists, past program information and dual-use manufacturing capability that could be used in a restarted nuclear weapon development program, he said.  The immediate U.S. concern was preventing Iraq from acquiring fissile material, Tenet said.

The CIA considers Iran a threat because of its attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction and missile technology, Tenet said.  He added that Iran might be able to produce enough fissile material, on its own, to construct a nuclear weapon before the end of the decade.

India and Pakistan are both seen as attempting to further develop their nuclear weapons programs, Tenet said.  Both countries may not be finished with nuclear testing and may not be able to deploy more advanced weapons without testing them, he said.

Missile Threat

“The proliferation of ICBM and cruise missile design and technology has raised the threat to the United States from weapons of mass destruction delivery systems to a critical threshold,” Tenet said (see GSN, Jan. 10).  Iran and North Korea, as well as possibly Iraq, could be able to target the United States with an ICBM by 2015, he said (see GSN, Jan. 10).

North Korea has continued to sell entire missiles to other countries, as well as production technology, materials and information, Tenet said.  The money generated from these sales has helped North Korea further develop its WMD and missile programs, which in turn provide new products to sell to rogue states, such as Libya, Syria and Iran, he said.

Back to top

Iraq:  U.S. and Russia Discuss Revising Sanctions

U.S. and Russian officials met yesterday in Geneva to discuss revising U.N. sanctions against Iraq (see GSN, Jan. 18).  The discussions focused on implementing “smart sanctions” — removing purely civilian goods from the list of goods whose trade is restricted by U.N. sanctions and aiming sanctions at “preventing the regime from rearming,” said a U.S. official.

“The goods review list clearly benefits the people of Iraq,” the U.S. official said.  “The United States will continue to work with Russia and other Security Council members during the next four months to agree on any appropriate refinements to the goods review list.”

The talks, which followed meetings in Moscow last December, were expected to end today.  Russia has advocated an end to the sanctions (see GSN, Jan. 16), while the United States and the United Kingdom have tried to implement “smart” sanctions, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Jan. 11).  Russia and the United States reached a temporary compromise last November (Alexander Higgins, Associated Press/Moscow Times, Feb. 7).

As part of that compromise, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution in late November that renewed the oil-for-food program until May 30, 2002, and called on the council to adopt a goods review list focused on blocking Iraqi imports of potential military goods (see GSN, Nov. 30, 2001).  Iraq can currently import food, medicines and certain other goods to repair infrastructure under the oil-for-food program (see GSN, Jan. 14).

The United States and Russia still disagree on the sanctions, a Russian official said Monday.  “It is hard to expect results from this round of talks.  Most likely we will need another meeting.  Reaching agreement is proving very difficult,” the official said, but added that Russia hopes the two countries can reach a deal by the summer.

U.S. and Russian officials will decide whether to hold later discussions after this session, U.S. spokesman Dave Hamill said (Agence France-Presse/Jordan Times, Feb. 7).

U.S. Might Act Alone

Meanwhile, the United States remains committed to changing Iraq’s leadership and is willing to take unilateral action, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell told the U.S. House International Relations Committee yesterday.

“We still have a U.S. policy of regime change because we believe [Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein should move on and that the Iraqi people deserve better leadership ... Regime change is something the United States ... might have to do alone,” Powell said (U.S. State Department release, Feb. 6).

U.S. President George W. Bush is “examining a full range of options” regarding Iraq, Powell said.  He refused to say if Bush is considering military action or economic and diplomatic measures.

“How to do it?  I would not like to go into the details of the options,” he said, but added Bush is considering “the most serious set of options that one might imagine.”

Most Arab countries and some U.S. allies have expressed concern about possibly aggressive U.S. intentions regarding Iraq (see GSN, Feb. 6).

Iraq Continues to Pursue WMD, Must Allow Inspectors to Return

Powell said Iraq is still trying to develop nuclear weapons and the country is a year or more away from attaining that goal (see GSN, Feb. 6).  Iraq must allow U.N. weapons inspectors to return, he said (Barry Schweid, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Feb. 7).

“Saddam remains a threat,” CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Select Intelligence Committee yesterday.  “Iraq continues to build and expand an infrastructure capable of producing WMD … Iraq retains a significant number of nuclear scientists, program documentation and probably some dual-use manufacturing infrastructure that could support a reinvigorated nuclear weapons program,” Tenet said (U.S. State Department release, Feb. 6).

“Let the inspectors in, but without conditions,” Powell said.  “We don’t trust you, and that’s why we need inspectors, and that’s why they have to be free to do it any way that they think is appropriate to establish that you are not conducting the activities that we suspect you of, which you claim you are not doing,” he said.

Powell and Tenet testified a week after Bush said in his State of the Union address (see GSN, Jan. 30) that Iraq, Iran and North Korea form an “axis of evil” (Todd Purdum, New York Times, Feb. 7).

Back to top

Russia:  Anti-Shield Developments Likely, Official Says

Russia is likely to attempt to develop countermeasures to defeat a U.S. missile defense shield, CIA Director George Tenet said yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 1).

“Moscow is likely to pursue a variety of countermeasures and new weapons systems to defeat a deployed U.S. missile defense,” Tenet said during testimony before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee (see related GSN stories, today).

Tenet also said Russian sales of weapons of mass destruction and missile technologies to other states could provide funds to develop countermeasures to a U.S. missile shield (see GSN, Nov. 13, 2001).

“Russia appears to be the first choice of proliferant states seeking the most advanced technology and training,” he said.  “These sales are a major source of funds for Russian commercial and defense industries and military research and development” (Agence France-Presse, Feb. 7).

Back to top

United States:  Bush Proposes Funds for U.S. Plutonium Conversion

The U.S. Energy Department’s Savannah River Site in South Carolina would receive $384 million to convert weapon-grade plutonium into mixed oxide (MOX) fuel for nuclear reactors, according to President George W. Bush’s budget proposal for fiscal 2003 (see GSN, Jan. 28).

The amount was higher than South Carolina politicians expected, according Representative Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who said he had hoped for $300 million.  “By proposing $384 million, they’ve gone beyond the marker,” Graham said.  “I think it shows they’re very serious.”

Tom Clements of the Nuclear Control Institute, however, questioned whether the site would receive the money.  “I still think the program is on shaky ground,” he said (Michelle David, The State/Nuclear Control Institute, Feb. 5).

Where to Send Unsuitable Plutonium?

Meanwhile, the Energy Department does not have a place to store some of the plutonium left over from nuclear weapons production at Rocky Flats, Colo., that is not pure enough for conversion into MOX fuel at the Savannah River Site, according to Energy spokesman Pat Etchart.  Without a storage site, authorities may not be able to close Rocky Flats by 2006 as scheduled.

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has said the department would not send plutonium that could not be converted to South Carolina, because South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges has refused to store the waste in his state out of concern it may stay there permanently.

The waste is too radioactive to send to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, New Mexico (see GSN, Dec. 6, 2001).  Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) said the Energy Department told him last week that the Rocky Flats waste would not go to New Mexico.

“We’re optimistic that we’ll find a solution that will keep us on track,” Etchart said (Associated Press, Feb. 7).

Savannah River May Get Less Cleanup Money

Although the allotment for MOX production is unexpectedly high, the Bush budget plan proposes a reduction in environmental cleanup funds for the Savannah River Site, according to the Augusta Chronicle.  The proposal would allot $961 million for the site’s environmental management account in fiscal 2003 — $103.3 million less than this year. 

Bush Proposes $800 Million for Expedited Cleanup Programs

The site’s operators would have the option under the Bush proposal to bid for part of $800 million allotted for expedited Energy Department nuclear cleanup programs (Brandon Haddock, Augusta Chronicle, Feb. 6).

Bush’s proposal would require states to renegotiate environmental cleanup agreements with the Energy Department to clean polluted nuclear sites on an accelerated schedule in order to receive part of the $800 million.

“To access this account, a site and DOE will have to reach agreement on an expedited schedule that shows measurable gains and accountability ensuring that site more resources,” said Abraham.

The Bush budget said several previous Energy Department cleanup programs had failed and wasted money, including a project at Savannah River to separate the most dangerous materials in leaking tanks from moderately dangerous chemicals.  Authorities spent $500 million on the project, only to eventually acknowledge it had failed. 

“Many sites are behind schedule for cleanup.  Completion costs are escalating.  Compliance agreements, signed before the breadth of problems was known, make it difficult to effectively manage the program,” the Bush proposal said.  Administration officials said the new plan would be more effective and reduce costs.

Critics Say Bush’s Plan Would Lower Environmental Standards

Several experts, however, expressed concern that expedited cleanup programs would lower environmental standards.

“It appears they just want [to] save money with little concern for environmental standards.  They may lower the costs, but there’s no indication it’s going to meet high environmental standards,” said NCI’s Clements.

“The $800 million fund to accelerate cleanup seems like an invitation for states to settle for lax standards that would leave considerable amounts of radioactivity in the soil … There have been several ‘accelerated’ cleanup proposals already, and they stress expedient short-term approaches, like capping dumps or cementing wastes, which often create worse long-term problems,” said Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research.

Critics of the plan also said states would have to compete, and sites that are active, like Savannah River, could lose out to sites that no longer operate, like Rocky Flats.

“If this means we can get a commitment from the administration to clean up high-level waste at SRS, this could work out.  But we are concerned that this may work to the disadvantage of sties that have ongoing missions,” said Andy David, spokesman for Senator Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.) (James Hammond, Greenville News/Nuclear Control Institute, Feb. 4).

The Bush proposal is only the beginning of the budget process for next year.  Congress must approve the budget and could increase or decrease Bush’s proposed funding (Haddock, Augusta Chronicle, Feb. 6).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Moscow Welcomes U.S Change on Arms Reduction Pact, Officials Say

Senior Russian officials yesterday said they welcome recent comments from the Bush administration that offensive strategic arms reductions proposed last year could be made through a legally binding agreement (see GSN, Feb 6).

On Tuesday, U.S. State Secretary Colin Powell said that the arms reductions proposed by U.S. and Russian Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin could be made legally binding, a shift from previous U.S. views.

Powell’s comments could help pave the way for the two countries to draw up an agreement before Bush’s planned visit to Moscow in May, said Col. Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, first deputy chief of staff of the Russian armed forces (Michael Wines, New York Times, Feb. 7).

“Washington’s readiness to draw up a legally binding document on strategic offensive arms suggests that reason is gaining the upper hand in our relations,” Baluyevsky said.

“Under these conditions we shall be able to prepare an agreement which will suit both sides and will be met with understanding by the international community.  It is precisely these decisions that the latter expects from the two top nuclear powers,” he said (Interfax/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, Feb. 6).

Some analysts, however, said it is unlikely that any arms reduction agreement would be crafted that soon.

“Even if there’s a political agreement for a treaty — such as there was for the [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty II] — it would still takes many months for a group of experts to do all the paperwork,” said defense analyst Pavel Felgenhauer.

“Those who worked on the START I and START II treaties say it takes at least a year to hammer out the details,” Felgenhauer said.  “The small print is the most important part.  Arms agreement treaties are full of appendices pertaining to each type of weapon, each warhead and delivery system.  The verification process also has to be agreed on.  That takes a lot of working out” (Gregory Feifer, Moscow Times, Feb. 7).

Differences Still Remain

Significant differences still remained between the United States and Russia that would have to be negotiated before any agreement could be reached, experts said.

There is yet no agreement between the two countries over the issue of making any reductions irreversible, said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association.  He added that there is also no agreement on a verification system for any reductions.

Additionally, the United States does not agree with the Russian idea that any reductions should be tied to U.S. plans for a missile defense shield, Kimball said.

“The Bush administration will at all cost avoid any limits on missile defenses,” he said.  “The Russians’ bottom line is that they want to establish a kind of firebreak between where we are today and some future deployment of weapons in space, which they view as an even greater threat” (Wines, New York Times, Feb. 7).

Policy Shift?

Experts said they were unsure how much Powell’s comments reflect a change in the U.S. stance on strategic arms reductions.

“One would like to hope that this is the first symptom of a warming [in the U.S.-Russian relationship] after the cooling off that was felt previously,” said Andrei Ryabov of the Moscow Carnegie Center.  “I think conclusions can be drawn only after … some concrete proposals have been made and after there has been a real discussion of those proposals.”

“The question is how much Powell’s words are an expression of his personal view, as opposed to that of [U.S. Vice President] Dick Cheney, [National Security Adviser] Condoleezza Rice or [Defense Secretary] Donald Rumsfeld,” Felgenhauer said. 

Powell’s remarks could instead be seen as more targeted toward other countries, Markov said.

“It’s a real concession that shows America’s readiness to more or less play by the rules,” he said.  “It assuages concerns about American unilateralism.  The world was very concerned about Bush’s desire for only an informal arms control agreement” (Feifer, Moscow Times, Feb. 7).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Bioterror Expert Criticizes CDC, NIH for Poor Communication

By Greg Seigle
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health must drastically revamp the way they do business if they are to best utilize the record amounts of funds being poured into their bioterrorism programs, one of the nation’s leading bioterrorism scholars said yesterday.

Both the CDC and the NIH need to dramatically improve their communications with outside doctors and scientists — and key government officials — to best protect the United States from any biological attacks, Tara O’Toole, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies, told Global Security Newswire.

Singling out the CDC for an “absolutely terrible” response to the anthrax epidemic last fall, when four anthrax-laden letters seriously infected 18 people and killed five, O’Toole said the CDC is “not big enough” to handle the responsibility of coordinating preparations for a biological weapons attack (see GSN, Dec. 21, 2001).

“I know there aren’t enough human resources to create a plan, much less implement one,” said O’Toole, who in recent months has briefed a host of leaders, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, on the major gaps in the public health care system.

O’Toole accused both the CDC and the NIH of being small, tightly knit organizations that rarely open up to outside circles — contentions denied by their officials.

“We’re going to need a [wide-scale plan] to get the new talent in the system.  We need an immediate infusion of seasoned professionals,” said O’Toole, a former Clinton administration health official.  “I hope we do it fast enough so we don’t spend a truckload of money and not go anywhere and get discouraged.”

The medical community is suddenly being swamped with funds — this year’s federal budget is pouring about $2.2 billion into various bioterrorism prevention and protection programs, and White House officials want to almost triple that amount for fiscal 2003.  The NIH’s Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases is slated to receive $1.7 billion of the funds proposed for next year, a $1.4 billion jump from this year, and the CDC is due to collect $1.6 billion for its bioterrorism programs alone — $661,000 less than this year (See GSN, Feb. 6).

“We need to restructure organizations and create new organizations,” O’Toole said. “We need a 21^st century medical system.  Simply refurbishing the [existing] system won’t do.”

The current medical system is based on a 1930s model, which resulted from former President Franklin Roosevelt’s efforts to improve living conditions during the Great Depression.  In 1988 the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine issued a report highly critical of the system, but no major changes resulted.

O’Toole said that when the 1988 report came out the public health system was “glued together with Scotch tape, and since then things have grown worse.”

New Information Network Needed

The United States needs a new national information network that scientists, doctors and researchers can not only tap into, but also use to send vital information in times of emergency, O’Toole said.

Any such information network “needs some national guidance — and it can’t come from CDC,” she said. “The CDC is not prepared to go big picture very fast.”

During the recent anthrax outbreaks the CDC “did an awful job of allowing outside information” into its inner circle, O’Toole continued.  “The political community was out of the loop during the early stages … and there was no clear process to identify the ‘science problems,’ as I call them.  They didn’t get better as events unfolded.”

During the beginning of the anthrax attacks, Canadian researchers discovered that when an envelope containing anthrax spores was opened, the spores dispersed more widely and in much higher numbers than previously believed, according to the Wall Street Journal.  The study also found that if tainted envelopes were not completely sealed, they could pose risks to postal workers who handled them (see GSN, Dec. 12, 2001).

The microbes “were going all over the room” of the Canadian researcher and “the CDC apparently wasn’t aware of that until very late in the process,” O’Toole said.

Outside bioterrorism experts “did not get called in until later in the game,” O’Toole said, and then only for “last minute” conference calls during which “it wasn’t clear who was in charge. Even those conversations were chaotic.”

CDC officials refused several opportunities to comment the past couple days, leaving spokeswoman Sharon Hoskins to say she was unaware of any such problems.

NIH Doesn’t Escape Criticism

Early this week, top NIH officials met with what Anthony Fauci, director of NIH’s Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, called “a very elite group of ad hoc advisers” to determine the research initiatives the institute will pursue with the more than $1.7 billion the White House is seeking.

NIH plans to spend $441 million for basic research into anthrax and smallpox, and how the human body reacts to them, Fauci said.  Another $592 million would go towards the research and development of vaccines and drugs to prevent and treat those diseases, he said.

Fauci said $195 million would be slated for clinical research, with an additional $520 million used to build special facilities to conduct the research with the deadly agents.

O’Toole said Fauci and NIH officials merely met with “the feds” and that the group is approaching the threat of bioterrorism by only preparing for anthrax and a couple of other infectious diseases such as smallpox.

“That’s wrong.  We’re talking about a thinking enemy,” O’Toole said, arguing that NIH should research a wider range of deadly diseases that could be launched against the United States.

Concerning the $592 million earmarked for drug research and development, “NIH does not develop vaccines and antidotes.  Private industry does,” O’Toole said.

Fauci disagreed, however, saying that NIH is involved in “several” of the six or seven steps it takes to develop a new vaccine or antidote.  “We develop the product and then partner with industry” to mass-produce and market it, Fauci said.

Rethinking Research Resources

Regardless of who develops drugs and antibiotics, both the CDC and the NIH should be more open to outside expertise, O’Toole said.

“The NIH needs to think about getting new people into this” bioterrorism research, she said.  “A lot of scientists have some great ideas and will help in the near term, but they don’t want to deal with NIH’s lengthy and laborious grant process,” which can take several months.

Fauci said that the NIH is utilizing its “remarkable accelerated review process,” an expedited grant approval sequence used for research into AIDS and certain cancers.  “We rely very heavily on outside expertise, blue-ribbon panels and such,” he added.

O’Toole, however, said, “NIH is going to have to rethink how to solicit research and allow outside information …. To get top scientists in this game they need to make sure the money’s going to stay and won’t dry up in a year or two.”

The infusion of money is unlikely to go away soon — in Congress there is talk of adding to the $6 billion President Bush has requested for the bioterrorism field for 2003.  Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson has said the record funding merely represent a “down payment” on future expenditures.

“I’m surprised and pleased. They’re finally putting their money where their mouth is,” O’Toole said.  “We’re definitely going to need sustained investments over the next several years, at least a decade.”

She added, however, “the science community will have a hard time absorbing so much money while taking a new direction …. We really need a strategy for some of these investments so we come out with come tangible results.”

Back to top

Anthrax:  Senate Staff May be Sick from Decontamination Measures

Scores of U.S. Senate staff members have complained of health problems that, some have said, might have resulted from the processes used to decontaminate mail and offices of suspected anthrax, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Feb. 4).

In a briefing yesterday, Senate officers told staff members that 73 people have complained of headaches, eye irritation and skin rashes after handling irradiated mail (see GSN, Jan. 30).  Senate workers attempted at the briefing to learn more about possible causes for the problems.

“The doctors and scientists running the meeting said everyone who is having ill health effects should go to the Capitol physician’s office and be examined, but they also said, ‘Well, it’s flu season,’” a Senate aide said.  “There was a strong implication that the mail should not be making people sick, but then people were complaining that it is.”

Last week, the General Services Administration issued a warning to federal workers that handling irradiated mail could cause minor health problems.  The warning also said, however, that treated mail contains no radioactive substances and emits no radiation.  According to the warning, workers can reduce risks by wearing nonlatex gloves, having coworkers with the least sensitive skin open mail, opening mail in a well-ventilated area and washing hands and using a moisturizer after handling mail.

Sixteen employees of Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) have complained of health problems such as headaches and burning eyes resulting from a “very heavy odor” of chlorine, the senator said yesterday.  Specter’s office is in the Hart Senate Office Building, which was fumigated with chlorine dioxide gas to kill anthrax spores there (see GSN, Jan. 23).

Environmental Protection Agency Ombudsman Robert Martin requested the test results from the EPA that indicated when the Hart building was safe to reopen, according to the Post.

Daily tests inside the building since Jan. 1 found no concentrations of chlorine dioxide above 100 parts per billion, which is the federal workplace safety standard, said Richard Rupert, the EPA on-site coordinator for the Hart building.  More advanced tests conducted last week found no concentrations above five parts per billion, the Post reported.

“We haven’t seen any chlorine dioxide to have a link” to the reported health concerns, Rupert said.  “There is no pattern” (Spencer Hsu, Washington Post, Feb. 7).

“Amerithrax” Investigation Developments

The FBI is expecting genetic testing will help investigators to reduce the list of laboratories that contain stocks of anthrax similar to that used in the attacks, and then the agency will be able to better focus its investigative efforts, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, Jan. 22).

“We can get very focused and very aggressive,” said a senior law enforcement official.

Once the number of possible sources is narrowed down, the FBI will likely use lie detector tests and subpoena employee records to conduct handwriting comparisons on them and the envelopes and letters used in the attacks, the official said.

“When we get the science done, we’re going to bring back the police work and move forward, the official said.

The FBI has also requested tests on other biological properties of the anthrax and chemical analysis on the powder found in the letters, according to the Journal.  About 10 laboratories are working on these analyses, said a senior FBI official.

FBI officials said, however, that genetic testing alone would not provide the smoking gun in the “Amerithrax” investigation into the attacks (see GSN, Jan. 24).

“I don’t think anyone is holding their breath that that alone will solve this case,” said a senior FBI investigator.

“It may not lead you to a person, although it will narrow the universe,” a high-ranking law enforcement official said.  “Then from there, we can take some very affirmative steps” (Schoofs/Fields, Wall Street Journal, Feb. 7).

Cipro Resistance Increasing

A recent study found that a salmonella strain has developed resistance to the antibiotic Cipro, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Dec. 19, 2001).

The study, to be published tomorrow in the New England Journal of Medicine, was conducted on 501 samples taken from patients at two Taiwanese hospitals.  Researchers found that in 2000, none of the samples were resistant to Cipro, while last year 60 percent were resistant to the drug.

Since the anthrax attacks late last year, researchers have been concerned that the broad use of Cipro, which is effective against anthrax, could build up a resistance in pathogen strains, according to the Associated Press (AP/New York Times, Feb. 7).

Back to top

Iran:  Military to Improve Shahab-3

Iran plans to increase the accuracy of the Shahab-3 missile and “double its explosive power within the acceptable levels of international rules and systems” but does not intend to develop the missile further, said Iranian Defense Minister Adm. Ali Shamkhani in a recently published Tuesday.

“On the technical side, we are now concentrating on making this missile more accurate and increasing its speed, on reducing the time needed for reusing and preparing it for launch and on increasing its … explosive power,” Shamkhani said, adding that the missile’s range of 1,300 kilometers is sufficient to defend the country.

Iran Not Interested in Nuclear Weapons

“We are in fact not interested in acquiring [nuclear weapons] at all and will not seek to acquire them,” Shamkhani said, despite U.S. and Israeli statements to the contrary (see GSN, Feb. 6).

An Iranian nuclear weapons arsenal would pose a threat to its neighbors and damage regional relations, he said.  “That is what is preventing us from seeking such types of nonconventional weapons … We in Iran are fully convinced that we should not seek nuclear weapons … for any reason whatsoever, despite the threats against us,” he said.

Iran does not seek to acquire nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union republics, China or North Korea, Shamkhani said (see GSN, Jan. 22).

“Iran basically opposes the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the world and demands the establishment of a zone free from nuclear weapons,” he said.

Iran does have close ties with China, Shamkhani said (see GSN, Jan. 24).  “We have close and deep relations of friendship with China.  Strengthening them is one of our strategic aims, and expanding them will not pose a threat to any other country in the region,” he said (Umar al-Zubaydi, London Al-Sharq al-Awsat, Feb. 5 in FBIS-NES, Feb. 6).

Back to top

North Korea:  Long-Range Engine Tests Increased, Officials Say

North Korea has increased testing of engines that could be used to power long-range ballistic missiles, said South Korean officials yesterday, citing U.S. sources (see GSN, Jan. 15).

“North Korea has tested a new engine every year to extend its missile range since it fired a Taepo Dong missile in August 1998,” said a South Korean government source quoted by the Yonhap news agency.

The United States obtained information through an intelligence satellite that North Korea had tested a long-range missile engine several times last year, according to Yonhap.  The United States gave South Korea satellite photos of the latest tests, according to the Chosun Ilbo newspaper (Agence France-Presse, Feb. 6).

Back to top