U.S. Response I:  Firefighters Demand Labor Rights

By Greg Seigle
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The president of the International Association of Firefighters yesterday urged U.S. Senate Republicans to stop the “hypocrisy” of publicly supporting firefighters while simultaneously undermining their efforts to bargain collectively.

“We need our government to ensure we have the training and the resources to prepare our nation’s first responders to defend our communities when the next terrorist attack occurs,” Association President Harold Schaitberger told 800 firefighters gathered for an annual association conference here.

Schaitberger said Senate Republicans have “double-crossed” emergency personnel by denying recent attempts to pass legislation that would provide them the right to negotiate as a group.

Schaitberger vowed to punish Senate opponents such as Minority Whip Don Nickles (R-Okla.) and Senate Republican Party Policy Committee Chairman Larry Craig (R-Idaho), whom he accused of leading a late charge last fall to narrowly defeat the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.  The bill failed to pass after it fell four votes short of the 60 needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, according to firefighter association spokesman George Burke.

The measure would have given firefighters the right to collectively bargain over workplace issues such as hours, wages and working conditions.

“Let me say here and now, Senator Nickles, Senator Craig and all elected officials who demean our profession, attack our union and undermine our agenda — we are coming after you,” Schaitberger said.

“We won’t back down, and we don’t care if the polls or odds are against us.  Win or loss, you will know you’ve been in a fight.  We will make our point, and we will prevail.”

While Schaitberger briefly praised President George W. Bush and Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge for directing an unprecedented $3.5 billion toward first responders in the White House’s proposed fiscal 2003 budget, a thousand-fold increase from this year, he unleashed a blistering verbal assault on lawmakers (see GSN, March 6).

Since Sept. 11, he said, Republicans such as Nickles and Craig have been publicly praising firefighters while also quietly fighting to deny them the bargaining rights offered to most other federal and private U.S. employees.

“For more than three decades, I have heard too many politicians, too many times, pay too much lip service to our profession and pay too little attention to our need for meaningful action to keep our members safe and secure,” Schaitberger said.

“We don’t need any more politicians praying for our lost souls.  We don’t need any more homilies.  We don’t need any more political candidates seeking out photo ops.  We don’t need any more speeches about heroism,” he continued.

“We need our elected officials to cut the crap and take real action.”

Firefighters Seek Hiring Binge

In addition to the right to collectively bargain, the association — which lobbies on behalf of 240,000 firefighters in the United States and Canada — wants the federal government to hire 75,000 more firefighters over the next five to seven years.

The funding for such mass hires should be “completely separate” from the $3.5 billion earmarked for first responders in next year’s budget request, most of which will be needed for preparedness equipment and training for weapons of mass destruction, said Burke, the association spokesman (see GSN, Dec. 11, 2001).

“The greatest need facing the fire service today is adequate staffing,” said Schaitberger.  “At the end of the day, no matter what fancy equipment, training and technology are available to our people, it takes firefighters to go into action” if a WMD incident occurs.

“It is a disgrace that two-thirds of this nation’s fire departments are inadequately staffed,” he added.  “The bottom line is that we need more fire fighters.

“I am sick and tired of hearing that firefighter staffing is only a local issue,” he continued.  “Providing the resources, the money, to help hire firefighters is a federal government responsibility and we are going to make damn sure that Congress accepts and shoulders that responsibility.  Our country would never send its army into battle at two-thirds strength, so why on Earth would they ask our nation’s domestic defenders to operate with inadequate staffing?”

Schaitberger, who served 10 years with the Fairfax County Fire Department in Virginia, said that firefighters are often overlooked in federal budgets that sometimes include bonuses for states or local jurisdictions to hire police, teachers and other public servants.  Congress rarely includes supplemental funds for boosting the ranks of firefighters, he said.

“If it’s good enough to provide federal dollars for more law enforcement, if it’s good enough to provide federal dollars for more teachers, then I’m here to tell you that it’s good enough to provide federal dollars for more of us,” he told the audience, many of whom are fanning out across Capitol Hill today to lobby their respective representatives.

Long Battle Ahead

For decades firefighters and other first responders have waged an unsuccessful campaign to bargain collectively, but now that so much praise and attention has been heaped on them by federal officials after Sept. 11, “our day has come,” Schaitberger said.

Firefighters, he said, are “not going to stop until the Congress and the administration responds” to their demands to collectively bargain and hire 75,000 firefighters.  “We are going to be relentless until we get action on the issues our members deserve. … We will not tolerate equivocation, excuses or cowardice, and we will not take no for an answer.”

There is no law that allows emergency personnel, including firefighters, to collectively bargain, according to Burke.  Schaitberger said they simply want the rights afforded to most other U.S. workers, including most federal employees.

“Even after Sept. 11, two-faced politicians attempted to curry favor with kind words and false praise while undermining our agenda and attacking our character,” Schaitberger said.

At the one-month anniversary of the attacks, Senator Nickles attended a Capitol Hill news conference honoring firefighters.  “At the same moment in time, this same senator had the nerve to work every angle to deny collective bargaining rights to tens of thousands of our members, while gloating over his victory in making Oklahoma a ‘right to work for less’ state,” Schaitberger said.

Senator Craig, Schaitberger said, circulated a policy statement to Senate Republicans a few days before the vote on the bill suggesting they vote against the measure.  He said Craig and others have expressed concern that if firefighters have the right to collectively bargain, they might use this political leverage at inopportune times — perhaps even go on strike in the advent of a WMD attack.

“What rubbish, what trash, what hypocrisy,” Schaitberger said, adding that firefighters would never strike in such a dire instance.

Back to top

Al-Qaeda-Iraq:  Groups Are Tied, Kurdish Sources Say

Kurdish sources say Iraq has direct links to al-Qaeda and has possibly smuggled chemical and biological weapons into Afghanistan, according to an article in the current issue of the New Yorker (see GSN, March 12).

Iranian smuggler Muhammad Jawad said in 2000 he had an assignment from al-Qaeda to smuggle to Afghanistan canisters filled with liquid and attached to refrigerator motors provided by the Iraqi intelligence organization, the Mukhabarat.

Jawad said he smuggled the canisters to Taliban officials at the Afghan border and, on al-Qaeda orders, killed the smugglers who helped him.  Jawad said he did not know what the canisters held but assumed it was a type of chemical or biological weapon.

Kurdish officials said they also could not guess what was in the canisters but said the matter “is something that is worth an American investigation.”

Kurdish officials said Hussein’s regime has had ties to al-Qaeda since 1992 (see GSN, Feb. 8).

Ties Through Ansar al-Islam

Another tie between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi regime, according to Kurdish sources, is through the militant Islamist group Ansar al-Islam, or Supporters of Islam.  The group’s several hundred members include Kurdish Islamists and Arabs who trained in al-Qaeda camps. 

Ansar al-Islam formed with a merger between two groups in September 2001, according to the London-based Arab newspaper Sharq al-Awsat.  Those groups were al-Tawhid, which helped assassinate a prominent Kurdish Christian politician and orchestrated acid attacks on unveiled women, and Second Soran Unit, which had been affiliated with a Kurdish Islamic party.

Three Arabs who trained in al-Qaeda camps oversaw the merger and provided $300,000 for the new group, according to Kurdish officials.

The group now occupies 10 villages in Iraq and has fought with Kurdish resistance movements.  Kurdish officials said the group receives direct funds from al-Qaeda and shelters al-Qaeda members who have fled from Afghanistan, including two men Kurdish intelligence believes are high-ranking al-Qaeda members.

The Kurdish officials also said Hussein’s intelligence service has joint control with al-Qaeda members over the group.  An Iraqi called Abu Wa’el is a key leader in Ansar al-Islam and is also a veteran of al-Qaeda training camps as well as a high-ranking Mukhabarat officer, Kurdish officials said.

“He’s the actual decision maker in the group … but he’s an employee of the Mukhabarat,” said an Iraqi intelligence officer captured by the Kurds.

Kurdish intelligence also has al-Qaeda members in custody, Kurdish officials said.

The Kurdish officials said they have no evidence that Ansar al-Islam has been involved in international terrorism or that Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States.

Iraq and Islamic Extremism

Some analysts consider a close link between the secular Iraqi regime and Islamic extremist groups, such as al-Qaeda, unlikely, although Hussein’s support of secular militant Palestinian groups is well known. 

Since Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, however, Hussein has developed ties with Islamic extremist groups, said Amatzia Baram, an Iraq specialist at the University of Haifa in Israel.  Hussein now supports the Islamist-oriented Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

Other analysts say Iraqi WMD assistance to terrorist groups makes sense, particularly given Hussein’s use of chemical weapons against Kurds and Iranians.

Hussein is “the home address for anyone wanting to make or use chemical or biological weapons,” said Kanan Makiya, an Iraqi dissident and the author of Republic of Fear about the Iraqi regime.  “He’s going to be the person to worry about.  He’s got the labs and the know-how.  He’s hell-bent on trying to find a way into the fight without announcing it” (Jeffrey Goldberg, The New Yorker, March 25).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  NRC Republishes Plant Status Report

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has republished its regular reactor status report online, Reuters reported Friday (see GSN, March 8).

The NRC had removed the report from its Web site after the Sept. 11 attacks to limit public access to information concerning the operating status of U.S. nuclear power plants.  The report was originally schedule to be republished on March 31.  It is unknown why the report was released ahead of time, said an NRC official (Reuters/Yahoo.com, March 15).

The information that is currently available consists only of each facility’s name and the level of power for each of its reactors.  The commission plans to publish full reports with a 28-day delay for general comments and other details, today’s report said (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission release, March 19).

Back to top

China:  U.S. Officials Hope for Arms Control Agreement in April

The United States and China might be able to resolve their arms control differences and sign an agreement as early as late April, U.S. officials said after meeting with Chinese negotiators in Washington last week (see GSN, March 4).

Officials hope to sign an agreement in late April when Chinese Vice President Hu Jintao — who many expect to eventually succeed President Jiang Zemin — visits Washington, Reuters reported.  If officials do not reach a deal in time for Hu’s visit, they might reach one later this year when Jiang visits the United States.

U.S. officials have called on China to crack down on nuclear, chemical, biological and missile exports.  China has said it has the right to complete contracts signed prior to an unwritten November 2000 agreement with the United States to halt exports of ballistic missile technology.  The United States, however, imposed penalties on China, saying it violated the agreement (see GSN, Feb. 21).

China wants the United States to lift the penalties, including a ban on launches of U.S. commercial satellites on Chinese rockets.

Renewed Optimism

In talks last week, top Chinese arms control negotiator Liu Jieyi told U.S. officials that his government is working to stop exports of weapons of mass destruction and missile technology, leading to new U.S. optimism that the two sides can reach an agreement, according to Reuters.

“We had good talks that were far more substantive than the previous talks I had last fall,” said John Wolf, U.S. assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation. 

“We had a good discussion on a variety of nonproliferation issues, especially related to export controls, and not just in the missile area,” Wolf said.  “Liu provided new information.  We’re considering it.  And I suspect we’ll want to talk again.”

Liu said China is working to tighten its export controls, a U.S. official said, adding, “This is new information for us.”

Chinese officials said their country is bringing nuclear export controls “up to compatibility” with Nuclear Suppliers Group standards and bringing chemical and biological export controls in line with Australia Group standards, officials said.

Liu said China will also “take into account fully” the Missile Technology Control Regime requirements, said U.S. officials.

Differences Remain

Areas of disagreement still exist, however.  The two countries have not resolved differences over Chinese “grandfathering” of missile technology contracts (see GSN, Feb. 22).

Last week’s talks provided “hints of clarity, but we were not able to clarify the precise nature of the grandfathering issue that concerns them,” said a U.S. official, adding that at least one contract is in dispute.

The United States has said Chinese statements in support of the November 2000 agreement are not sufficient.  The United States wants a new deal in the form of a written document (Carol Giacomo, Reuters/Yahoo.com, March 16).

Back to top

Iraq:  Officials Offer Limited U.N. Inspections

Iraq will allow U.N. weapons inspectors into the country but only under an agreement that limits the lengths and locations of inspections, Iraqi Vice President Taha Yasin Ramadan said yesterday.  Last week Ramadan had said Iraq would never allow inspectors to return (see GSN, March 14).

“Iraq rejects the return of international inspectors unless the locations to be searched are identified and a timetable is set up and respected,” Ramadan told the London-based Saudi newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, according to the Financial Times.

The United States has said it would only accept unrestricted inspections (see GSN, March 12).  Hans Blix, chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, has said U.N. inspectors (see GSN, March 6) would not set time limits on inspections (Roula Khalaf, Financial Times, March 19).

Yesterday Ramadan also repeated statements that U.N. inspectors are spies and want to update “their information on Iraq so that the next American strike is more harmful and painful than previous ones” (Jordan Times, March 19).

Iraq Campaigns for Support

Ramadan’s offer of limited inspections is part of a campaign to gain support against potential U.S. military action, according to the Financial Times.

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has sent diplomats to several Arab countries in an attempt to gain support.  Hussein wants Arab countries to sign a declaration opposing U.S. policy at an Arab summit next week, the Times reported (Khalaf, Financial Times).

Hussein sent Ramadan to Yemen and Sudan to gain support, the Iraqi News Agency reported yesterday and Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz began a tour Saturday of Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, according to the Jordan Times.

Izzat Ibrahim, Iraqi vice president of the Revolutionary Command Council, visited Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt last week and then continued on to meet with leaders in the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Qatar.

Saadoun Hammadi, Iraq’s parliamentary speaker, said yesterday in Morocco that Iraq would cooperate with the international community to deny the United States an excuse to take military action.

“Many Arab and non-Arab friends have called on Iraq to remove all pretexts for a U.S. invasion … we are happy to cooperate with all countries … to avoid … attacks,” he said (Jordan Times).

Some Arab States Support U.N. …

One of those countries is Egypt, whose President Hosni Mubarak last week urged Iraq to accept inspections (Khalaf, Financial Times).

Kuwait also said Iraq should comply with the United Nations.

“I hope the Iraqi regime could appreciate what would happen to its people if it refused to let the U.N. inspectors in,” Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah said yesterday after meeting with U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney.

… But Oppose U.S. Military Campaign

Although several Arab leaders said Iraq should allow inspectors to return, Cheney, during a recent tour of the Middle East, has failed to gain any significant Arab support for potential U.S. action against Iraq, the Jordan Times reported.  Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt — the primary Arab allies of the United States — all oppose military action.

Even Kuwait, which Iraq occupied in 1990 until the international coalition forces pushed Iraqi troops out in 1991, opposes military strikes against Iraq.

“We will not support this (a strike) against Iraq, not because Iraq is a friend of Kuwait but because the present circumstances are not suitable,” al-Sabah said.  “The Iraqi regime will not be harmed, but the Iraqi people will” (Jordan Times).

Iraq Upstaged by Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

After facing opposition to military strikes in every Arab country he visited, Cheney tried to downplay the disagreements, according to the Washington Post.  Cheney said the United States is concerned about Iraq but added the goals of his trip were many, including developing good relations with the countries.

U.S. officials said Cheney did not intend to focus much on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during his tour, but the escalation of violence in the last few weeks created an obstacle to Cheney’s attempts to gain support for the war on terrorism, the Post reported.

Bahrain Crown Prince Salman bin-Hamad al-Khalifa said Arabs have little interest in confronting Iraq while many Palestinians are dying.

“The people who are dying today on the streets are not a result of any Iraqi action,” he said at a press conference with Cheney Sunday (Alan Sipress, Washington Post, March 18).

U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday acknowledged the Arab position but said he would not allow Hussein to “hold the United States and our friends and allies hostage.”

Cheney said today the United States has not made a decision to attack Iraq (Washington Post, March 19).

Back to top

United States I:  Nuclear Response Considered to High-Explosives Attack

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The United States might consider using nuclear weapons in response to a high-explosives attack against it or its allies, a Pentagon spokesman told Global Security Newswire Friday.

The spokesman, reading from a prepared statement, was commenting to confirm a statement by the top U.S. military official, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Richard Myers, in a television interview earlier this month.

Myers, on March 10, said the administration’s nuclear policy preserves all options for the president if the United States or its friends and allies were attacked “with weapons of mass destruction, be they nuclear, biological, chemical, or for that matter high explosives.”

Asked whether Myers’ statement reflected current policy, Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Michael Humm said:

“We have reiterated the longstanding policy of the United States that we will do whatever is necessary to defend America’s innocent civilian population.  If a weapon of mass destruction is used against the United States, we will not rule out any specific type of military response.”

Policy on Chemical and Biological Weapons Attacks

Myers comment appeared to be the first time an official indicated publicly that high explosives could be considered a weapon of mass destruction, and therefore, could warrant a nuclear response.

In its so-called “negative security assurances” pledge, the United States first in 1978 said it would not use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state unless such a state teamed up with a nuclear power to attack the United States, its interests, or its allies.

The Clinton administration reaffirmed the pledge in 1995, in order to help secure agreement by the world’s non-nuclear countries to indefinitely extend the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, barring them from developing nuclear weapons.

In infrequent comments on the subject, however, Clinton administration officials — such as Defense Secretary William Perry in April 1996 — also said they would not rule out using nuclear weapons in response to a chemical or biological weapons attack.

Reflecting that policy, President Bill Clinton signed a directive in November 1997 believed to include new guidelines permitting U.S. nuclear strikes after enemy attacks using chemical or biological weapons, according to a Washington Post report.

During the Gulf War, the senior President George Bush warned Saddam Hussein he and his country would pay “a terrible price” if he ordered such “unconscionable acts” as chemical and biological weapons attacks.

Defining Weapons of Mass Destruction

Explaining his prepared statement, Humm said high explosives could be considered a weapon of mass destruction (see GSN, Dec. 21, 2001).

“High explosives would fit into the category if they were weapons of mass destruction.  If you could envision a scenario that could include high explosives as weapons of mass destruction, then you can draw your inferences from what I’ve given you,” he said.

Humm said the administration’s policy regarding high explosives is consistent with previous U.S. nuclear use policy.

“This is not a change in policy, it reflects the language of the 1995 U.N. Security Resolution that endorsed negative security assurances but reaffirmed the inherent right of self defense under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, where all states have the right to defend themselves if attacked,” he said in his prepared statement.

It also appears consistent with how the U.S. military formulated its nuclear weapons doctrine after the United States produced its 1995 pledge.

Back to top

CTBT:  Progress Mixed on Organization’s Five-Year Anniversary

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

VIENNA — The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization celebrated its fifth anniversary Sunday, but there is little hope the treaty banning all nuclear weapon tests will enter into force in the foreseeable future.  The multilateral pact faces opposition from the United States and other critical countries.

Nevertheless, treaty proponents, and even some of its opponents such as the United States, continue to fund the organization, helping it to build capabilities it could use if the treaty ever takes effect.  The Bush administration for fiscal 2002 contributed $16.5 million, the largest contribution of any nation.

The CTBTO, with an $84 million budget, continues to build and improve the International Monitoring System, a network of facilities worldwide using various technologies to detect possible nuclear explosions.

Just over 100 seismological, hydroacoustic, infrasound, and radionuclide stations are already in place, monitoring all regions of the globe for evidence of nuclear explosions underground, underwater or in the atmosphere.

Satellite communications are being installed, so far enabling some 80 stations to continuously relay secure data in near real time to Vienna, where it is processed using Sun Microsystems high-performance computers, and forwarded upon request to treaty signatories for scrutiny.

Enough computer memory has been created, 125 terabytes so far, to archive up to 10 years’ worth of collected data for ready retrieval.

The organization also is gradually buying equipment and training for on-site inspection operations.

Annual funding so far has been strong by U.N. standards, usually between 90 and 98 percent of the requested budget, CTBTO Executive Secretary Wolfgang Hoffmann of Austria, told Global Security Newswire yesterday.

“Other organizations have to do sometimes with less than 50 percent, and they still survive,” he said.

Hoffmann is optimistic that by 2007, 321 sensors at 260 stations will be in place and a full complement of on-site inspectors will be equipped to help implement the treaty, although that will require “rising budgets, year after year.” 

Peter Basham, coordinator of the monitoring system, said the organization would need a 10 to 15 percent increase to its annual budget for two or three years, and then could gradually decrease back down to around the $84 million level.

The system, CTBTO experts say, would enable round-the-clock detection of nuclear explosions with yields as low as one kiloton anyplace in the world.

Political Differences

Since 1995, 165 states have signed the document, and 89 have ratified it.

“I think the CTBT is really enjoying global support,” said Austrian Foreign Minister Benita Ferrero-Waldner, at a joint press conference with Hoffmann.

“I can only hope that the nuclear weapon states will honor these commitments,” she added.

While the CTBTO develops the treaty’s monitoring system, certain key political support is lacking for full implementation of the treaty, from the United States in particular.

The treaty cannot enter into force until 13 specific nations ratify the pact, the United States among them.  Other nations needed to ratify include China, India and Pakistan.

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton signed the treaty in 1996, but the U.S. Senate refused to approve ratification and current President George W. Bush has said he has no intention of supporting the treaty.  Bush opposed the treaty during the presidential election campaign, saying it was unverifiable and could undermine U.S. nuclear deterrence.

Bush has indicated he stands by a U.S. moratorium on nuclear testing implemented by his father, President George H.W. Bush, in 1992, but the administration has also signaled it will not rule out testing in the future.  The administration has requested funding to speed up the preparation time for conducting a nuclear test (see GSN, Jan. 8) and has been conducting studies into possibilities for developing new or modified earth-penetrating nuclear weapons (see related GSN story, today).

Hoffmann and other national delegates see U.S. leadership as the key to the winning remaining support for the treaty.

“There is no question that the United States plays a key role … this treaty would not be here without the Americans,” said Hoffmann, noting that the Clinton administration was a leading proponent of the treaty.  “We have to regain U.S. support to get the treaty into force.”

Support Verification

U.S. substantive support for much of the organization continues, said Hoffmann, because the United States, like most other countries, believes the organization’s International Monitoring System serves its national security interests by monitoring countries that might try to secretly test nuclear weapons.

The United States provides key technical support on the monitoring side, a good deal of funding and 37 monitoring stations.

The United States has its own monitoring systems, separate from stations it contributes to the treaty, but they do not provide the extent of coverage the CTBTO system would.

“We can go places where they can’t,” said Basham.  The system, for instance, has monitoring stations in China and Russia.  He said the system should have the Indian Ocean completely covered by early next year.

Since last August, however, the Bush administration has not participated in the on-site inspection program or committees dealing with it, nor has it contributed money for that program or for efforts to promote treaty ratification (see GSN, Nov. 12, 2001).

Without full treaty ratification, Hoffmann said, the CTBTO’s effectiveness will be hampered.

It will not be able to perform on-site inspections of incidents, there would be no clarification procedure for reviewing questioned data and there would be no formal meeting of a council of member states.

The monitoring system, nevertheless, could still provide unprecedented data for detecting and locating potential nuclear explosions, but also possibly for scientific purposes, such as locating earthquakes and volcanoes, said Basham.

“It’s the best environmental monitoring system ever conceived and devised,” he said.  It is “seeing all kinds of things around the world and I bet people will take advantage of it.”

Back to top

United States II:  “Bunker-Buster” Development to Begin

Scientists at U.S. Energy Department laboratories are expected to begin research next month on a “bunker-busting” nuclear weapon, USA Today reported yesterday (see related GSN story, today).

The new nuclear weapons development program will start small, said Everet Beckner, National Nuclear Security Administration deputy administrator for defense programs.  There will be about a dozen weapon designers each at the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories.

The study on the new bunker-busting bomb will probably cost up to $50 million over two to three years, Beckner said.  Energy officials will obtain congressional approval before designing any new weapons, he said.

The Bush administration also plans to reduce the time needed to restart nuclear weapons testing down to months and increase spending on manufacturing sites for nuclear weapons, according to Energy documents.

“The need is clear for a revitalized nuclear weapons complex,” said the recently leaked Nuclear Posture Review (Jonathan Weisman, USA Today, March 18).

It is possible to build a bunker-busting nuclear weapon by modifying an existing bomb, rather than using a new design, said NNSA Administrator John Gordon before a Senate panel yesterday.

“There is no defined requirement for a new weapon at this time,” Gordon said.  “I don’t see anything happening in the immediate future.”

Gordon also told the Senate panel that the current U.S. nuclear arsenal works fine and there is no need to resume testing.

“No identified problems … suggest the need to return to nuclear testing any time soon,” he said.  “Our nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure and reliable.  When we find aging problems, we know what to do about them.  We know how to fix them, and we go out and do that” (Carolyn Skorneck, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, March 18).

Back to top

United States III:  New Development Could Reinvigorate Scientists, Experts Say

The Bush administration’s plans to restart designing and producing nuclear weapons could help U.S. laboratories regain an intellectual edge lost by a lack of nuclear weapon research in the last 10 years, USA Today reported yesterday (see GSN, March 15).

“Nobody wants to work here,” said Tom Thomson, a senior weapons designer at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.  “There’s no sense of mission.”

Starting next month, nuclear weapons scientists will begin designing a nuclear weapon that could destroy bunkers buried deep underground, according to USA Today.  The administration’s proposed fiscal 2003 budget raises U.S. Energy Department funding for nuclear stockpile work to $1.2 billion, up 18 percent.  The Bush administration has also proposed $243 million to rebuild the U.S. nuclear weapons production complex in fiscal 2003.

The Bush administration wants nuclear weapon scientists involved in the new projects to “think more broadly” about current threats and “the present stockpile and whether it’s properly configured,” said Everet Beckner, deputy director of the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton tried to halt intellectual decline among U.S. weapon scientists through programs that evaluated the safety and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons without having to resort to testing, according to USA Today.  Those programs included the world’s largest laser at Lawrence Livermore, expensive non-nuclear explosive facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory and supercomputing initiatives to create better 3-D models of nuclear explosions (see GSN, March 11).

Such programs, however, only slowed down the departure of weapons scientists from laboratories, administration officials said.

“To keep people thinking at the front edge of their intellectual interests, it’s important that they not be constrained to think only in terms of what’s out there, already built,” Beckner said.

The Bush administration’s plans to develop new nuclear weapons carries far more risks than are justified by the benefit of providing new work for scientists, according to some critics.

“Getting nuclear weapons untangled from old Cold War doctrines and putting them on the shelf for use is a huge departure from the past,” said Robert Alvarez, a former Energy Department official.

Developing new weapons also could increase the need for testing, according to USA Today.  Building a new weapon and then not testing it is like designing a new car without turning the ignition to determine if it works, Thompson said.  Recently leaked excerpts from the Nuclear Posture Review also hint that any new weapons might have to be tested (see GSN, March 14).

“While the United States is making every effort to maintain the stockpile without additional nuclear testing, this may not be possible for the indefinite future,” the document said (Jonathan Weisman, USA Today, March 18).

Back to top

Russia:  New Weapons Needed to Counter U.S. Shield, Official Says

Russia should improve its arsenal of nuclear weapons in response to U.S. plans to build a missile defense system, a top Russian lawmaker said yesterday (see GSN, March 18).

“If you build up the shield, we will build up the sword,” said retired Gen. Andrei Nikolayev, head of the Russian parliament’s defense affairs committee.

Russian President Vladimir Putin reacted calmly to U.S. plans to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and begin development of a missile defense system, according to the Associated Press.  Some Russian military officers and diplomats, however, have said a U.S. missile defense shield would reduce the deterrence value of Russia’s nuclear weapons.

Russia must respond to a U.S. missile “umbrella” by “increasing the threat” and creating weapons “capable of penetrating their missile defense,” Nikolayev said (Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press/Washington Post, March 18).

Back to top

Pakistan:  Country Will Not Be First to Conduct Nuclear Test, Musharraf Says

Pakistan will not be the first South Asian country to conduct another nuclear test, Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf said Friday in Tokyo (see GSN, March 14).

“We will exercise full restraint in this regard,” Musharraf said.  “We have offered a no-war pact to India.  We believe in demilitarization of South Asia” (see GSN, March 18).

Pakistan has not violated the missile control regime, Musharraf added.

“We have our own nuclear and missile technology which is completely indigenous,” he said.

Countries should avoid viewing the world in terms of adversarial civilizations, Musharraf said.  Civilizations are “complementary to each other,” he said.  “We should not talk of clash of civilization.  We should not compartmentalize civilizations.  This is a very dangerous concept,” he said.

Musharraf called on the United States, as the world’s only superpower, to play an active role in resolving disputes in the Muslim world, according to the Islamabad News (Islamabad The News, March 16 in FBIS-NES, March 18).

Back to top

Smallpox:  Experts Debate Anti-Viral Drug as Treatment

U.S. health officials are debating whether an anti-viral drug currently used as an AIDS treatment should also be stockpiled for use in the event of a smallpox attack, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, March 15).

The anti-viral drug Vistide, generically known as cidofovir, is currently used to treat some AIDS patients to prevent the onset of blindness.  In test-tube and animal studies cidofovir also has been shown to be effective in preventing smallpox, according to the Journal.

Cidofovir “continues to look good,” said James LeDuc of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases have also offered support for experimental use of cidofovir against smallpox.

Office of Public Health Preparedness Director D.A. Henderson, however, supports containing a smallpox outbreak through vaccination, the Journal reported (see GSN, Feb. 6).  That approach seeks to halt the spread of the disease by vaccinating those who come into contact with an infected person.

The smallpox vaccine does not treat those who are already infected — who could either die from the disease or be left with lasting scars, according to the Journal.  The mortality rate of smallpox is 30 percent, which has caused some researchers to support using cidofovir to complement the vaccine, the Journal reported.

Henderson, who had a vital role in the World Health Organization’s efforts to eradicate smallpox, said he is skeptical about using cidofovir to combat smallpox and he opposes devoting resources to uncertain treatments.

It is “an experimental drug,” Henderson said.  “After an individual comes down with fever and rash, would we be able to treat them?  We’d be better off looking at treating (vaccine) complications,” he said.  “That’s the most prudent way to go about this.”

Cidofovir has other drawbacks besides being experimental, according to the Journal.  It requires intravenous delivery and can do damage to a person’s kidneys if used over a long period.  The drug is also expensive, currently costing $705 wholesale for a single dose.

Cidofovir supporters said Henderson’s opposition to the drug’s use, combined with his clout as head of the Office of Public Health Preparedness, could limit promising research into the drug’s use as a smallpox treatment.

“D.A. did an important thing” in his work with the WHO to wipe out smallpox, said USAMRIID researcher John Huggins.  “But he doesn’t understand anti-virals.  I wish he’d give us a fair shake” (Marilyn Chase, Wall Street Journal, March 19).

Back to top

CWC:  United States Presses for Resignation of OPCW Head

The United States is stepping up pressure to force out the head administrator for Chemical Weapons Convention, Brazilian newspaper O Estado de Sao Paulo reported today.

U.S. officials want Brazilian Jose Mauricio Bustani, director general of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, to resign because of his positions on Iraq and on inspections in U.S. chemical plants, according to O Estado.

According to Bustani’s spokesman Gordon Vachon, who confirmed that the United States had approached the OPCW head and asked him to step down, “The White House didn’t even offer an explanation.”

U.N. sources have said, however, that Bustani has drawn the ire of the United States on two major issues.  For one, he is resisting an attack on Iraq if investigators prove that Baghdad is still producing chemical weapons.  In addition, he insists on adhering “literally” to the OPCW’s mandate, which calls for inspections not only on “hostile” countries but also on nations such as the United States (see GSN, Oct. 5, 2001).

Iraq is one of the major topics for the OPCW’s Executive Council meeting in The Hague, to be held from today to March 22.

According to O Estado, several countries have already backed Bustani.  Brazilian diplomats in Europe are saying pressure on him is becoming an “international scandal” because Bustani was unanimously elected to lead the organization until 2005 (Jamil Chade, O Estado de Sao Paulo, March 19, Global Security Newswire translation).

The Brazilian Foreign Ministry issued a statement yesterday supporting Bustani, saying that he has been “elected and re-elected.”

“As OPCW director general, he is not responsible to the Brazilian government, but to the institution’s members in their totality, enjoying therefore, total autonomy in management and independence in the exercise of his functions,” the ministry said.

“As a member of OPCW, Brazil is not party to the doubts being raised about Ambassador Bustani’s management and has informed other member states of its position,” according to the ministry.

Brazil will vote against any motion to relieve Bustani of his duties, the ministry said, adding that he “deserves” the full support and solidarity of Brazil and other member states in the organization (Lu Aiko Otta, O Estado de Sao Paulo, March 19, Global Security Newswire translation).

According to O Estado, the White House’s latest moves against several senior U.N. officials is “scaring” the international community.

“Washington cannot remove an international official every time a person does not please” the United States, said an African diplomat.

According to experts, the problem is there is no country at the moment that has the power to counter the economic and military power of the United States.  “The United Nations is a reflex of the international power system,” an OPCW official said (Chade, O Estado de Sao Paulo).

Back to top

South Korea:  United States Plans to Sell Three Aegis Systems

The United States plans to sell three Aegis naval defense systems to South Korea, CNN.com reported yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 7).

The estimated cost of the three systems, which can track and shoot down targets such as aircraft and ballistic missiles, is $1.2 billion, according to the U.S. Defense Department.

The sale would “contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by significantly improving the defense capabilities and security of a key defense treaty ally,” the Pentagon said in a notification to Congress (CNN.com, March 18).

Back to top

Nuclear Waste:  Tough Odds for Yucca Mountain Opponents, Senate Survey Says

By Jeff Haws

Congress Daily

A CongressDaily survey indicates that more than one-third of the U.S. Senate already supports establishing a nuclear waste repository at the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada, confronting opponents of the site with steep odds this summer (see GSN, March 14).

Nonetheless, Nevada state officials and the Nevada congressional delegation have mobilized to sway opinion their way, hiring prominent lobbyists from both parties to help campaign against President George W. Bush’s Feb. 15 recommendation that the site be built (see GSN, Feb. 19).

Before that happens, though, Bush’s recommendation has placed the matter before Nevada Republican Governor Kenny Guinn, who “will take until [the deadline of] April 16” to veto the president’s decision, said a spokesman for the governor.

After Guinn’s expected veto, the issue returns to Washington, where the House and Senate have 90 legislative days in which to override the governor’s veto by a simple majority up-or-down vote.

CongressDaily surveyed senators about the project over the past four weeks.  Of 71 senators who responded, 36 have made a solid decision to vote against Guinn.  Another 14 oppose the site, while 21 said they are undecided.

A spokesman for Senate Majority Whip Harry Reid (D-Nev.), however, said foes are confident they will get the votes they need.

“We will veto” the president’s decision on Yucca, Reid’s spokesman said.  “This is one of the most massive decisions in the history of Congress.  If it passes, it will make the pyramids on Giza plateau look like a short-term project.”

As part of the effort to protect Guinn’s upcoming veto, Reid and fellow Nevada Senator John Ensign, a Republican, interviewed and selected lobbyists Ken Duberstein, who was chief of staff under former President Ronald Reagan, and John Podesta, who was chief of staff under former President Bill Clinton, to represent Nevadans.

Reid’s spokesman said the move “helps tremendously” in the effort to convince senators that the Yucca designation is the wrong choice.

Back to top

Radiological Weapons:  Lithuanian Officials Recover Stolen Uranium

Lithuanian law enforcement officials last week recovered 20 kilograms of uranium stolen from a Lithuanian nuclear plant a decade ago (see GSN, March 7).

Law enforcement officials recovered the uranium in the Utena District in eastern Lithuania, according to the Baltic news agency BNS.  The uranium was part of a 270-kilogram cassette that had been stolen from the Ignalina nuclear power plant in 1992, said Ramutis Jancevicius, chief prosecutor of the Vilnius District Prosecutor’s office.

More than 80 kilograms of the stolen Ignalina uranium have been recovered to date, according to BNS (BNS, Mar 16, in FBIS-SOV, Mar. 16).

Back to top