 |
We have no evidence, no factual evidence, to support the statement that Iraq has, or may have, weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons. Nobody has ever provided this evidence to us. If anybody has this evidence, they should present it to the international community.
—Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, discouraging a U.S.-led confrontation with Iraq.
The United States has told Brazil it would support a Brazilian candidate for U.N. human rights commissioner in exchange for removing Brazilian Jose Mauricio Bustani from his post as head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the Chemical Weapons Convention’s implementing organization, O Globo reported today (see GSN, March 20)...Full Story 
Iraq has asked the United Nations to rule on whether U.S. intentions to facilitate a “regime change” in Iraq — meaning the removal of Saddam Hussein as Iraqi president — are in violation of international law, according to reports today (see GSN, March 20)...Full Story
For the first time the United States will not certify that North Korea is abiding by the 1994 Agreed Framework, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday (see GSN, March 20)...Full Story
 |
The United States and other nations have frozen more than $104 million in terrorist finances since the Sept. 11 attacks, a top U.S. State Department counterterrorism official said last week in a speech to business executives in Chicago (see GSN, March 8).
“Funding is a critical element in large-scale terrorist operations and in the recruiting of supporters. It is the oxygen of terrorism,” Ambassador Francis Taylor, the State Department’s coordinator for terrorism, told the assembled executives. “We — you and I — need to work together to choke it off.”
The United States has frozen about $34 million through Executive Order 13224, which President George W. Bush issued soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, Taylor said. The order covers the assets of 189 known terrorists and terrorist organizations. Additionally, more than $70 million has been frozen internationally by 150 nations, facilitated by U.N. Security Council resolution 1373, Taylor said.
U.S. Hostage Policy
Taylor also outlined the U.S. policy toward the taking of hostages by terrorist groups. The United States will make every effort to obtain the release of U.S. citizens taken hostage, regardless if they are an official or not, he said. The United States would work with local governments if needed, and might attempt to contact representatives of the terrorist group in order to obtain a hostage’s release, he added.
The United States, however, will not pay ransoms or make concessions to terrorist groups in exchange for a safe release of hostages, Taylor said.
“What the U.S. won’t do is pay ransom, encourage the payment of ransom, or make political or other concessions to terrorists that would only encourage more kidnapping,” he said. “Above all, our memory (is) long — we will pursue hostage takers, apprehend them, prosecute them” (U.S. State Department release, March 20).
The Bush administration yesterday ordered all U.S. federal agencies to review their Web sites for sensitive information that could help terrorists build or use weapons of mass destruction, according to the Washington Times (see GSN, Jan. 14).
In a memo to federal agencies yesterday, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card ordered an “immediate re-examination” of all public documents. The agencies must report results to the Homeland Security Office within 90 days.
What Information Will Become Unavailable to the Public
“Government information, regardless of its age, that could reasonably be expected to assist in the development or use of weapons of mass destruction, including information about the current locations of stockpiles of nuclear materials that could be exploited for use in such weapons, should not be disclosed inappropriately,” Card wrote.
Two White House officials provided hypothetical examples of the types of information that might be removed from public sources, such as documents that provide dual-use information on nuclear materials, such as spent fuel rods from nuclear power plants, and information on heating and air conditioning systems that terrorists could use to spread biological agents through public buildings. “Information that points to specific vulnerabilities at nuclear power plant reactors or subway stations, for instance, would also be removed,” one official said.
“There was information that was on different Web sites that was actually being made available for sale that really shouldn't have been out there,” the official said. “For instance, there was a classified report that was generated in the ‘50s and declassified in the ‘70s that talked about how to build a biotoxin factory, and of course that was removed,” the source added (see GSN, Jan 14).
Scientists and Watchdog Groups Express Concern
The White House memo told agencies to consider “the benefits that result from the open and efficient exchange of scientific, technical and like information” when reviewing the public information, but some scientists and organizations expressed concern that the agencies would abuse the authority to remove information from the public realm at the expense of science and democracy.
“A concern about terrorism can be used as a pretext for withdrawing all kinds of information that has little or no national security sensitivity,” said Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists. “And that is something we see happening all over the place.”
A particular point of concern is the White House decision to include in the review “sensitive but unclassified” documents. “It’s potentially a catchall, and it could be an invitation to abuse,” said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, which advocates public access to government information.
“Because it is not defined, it could be used to justify the withholding of almost anything,” he said. “If it is left to the discretion of the individual agencies, they will abuse that discretion.”
Bass expressed concern about the impact on U.S. democracy. “We are moving very rapidly to a shift from basic democratic principles of right to know to one that is based on a need to know. That will have major, major reverberations for our democratic processes,” Bass said. “It will mean that the judgment is placed on the government to determine whether you do have a need to know.”
The government has already removed more than 6,000 documents from Web sites, Aftergood said (Bill Sammon, Washington Times, March 21).
By Michael Steel
National Journal News Service
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed a bill yesterday authorizing $225 million over three years to improve security at U.S. ports (see GSN, Feb. 27).
The measure, sponsored by the committee Chairman Don Young (R-Alaska), ranking Democrat James Oberstar of Minnesota, Representative Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) and Representative Corrine Brown (D-Fla.), passed on a voice vote with no amendments.
“Protecting our ports and maritime transportation system is of critical importance to our nation as the maritime industry contributes $742 billion to the gross domestic product each year and the ripple effects from an attack on one or more of our ports would be felt throughout the economy of the nation,” said Coast Guard Subcommittee Chairman LoBiondo.
Ninety-five percent of the goods that enter the country arrive at seaports, Oberstar said. The bill would give the government the “authority and flexibility” to protect Americans, he said.
Under the bill, $75 million per year will be allocated in grants after the Coast Guard conducts a comprehensive assessment of port vulnerabilities. The Coast Guard will also assess some foreign ports.
The bill would also require a new federal security card be used to enter secure areas of ships and port facilities. An amendment added at the Coast Guard subcommittee markup, which immediately preceded the full committee meeting, made it clear that truck drivers already cleared by the Department of Transportation to carry hazardous materials would qualify for the new card.
A port security bill sponsored by Senator Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.) passed the Senate on December 20, 2001. House committee staff indicated that there are some key differences in the House and Senate bills, but a conference is expected to go smoothly once the House approves its legislation.
No amendments were offered at the markup, but a few members suggested they would work with Young to add provisions before the bill reaches the House floor. Representative Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), for example, would like report language on the Lawrence Livermore National Lab’s contributions to weapons detection. And Representative Nick Lampson (D-Texas) wants to include a role for six state maritime academies.
|
 |
Iraq has asked the United Nations to rule on whether U.S. intentions to facilitate a “regime change” in Iraq — meaning the removal of Saddam Hussein as Iraqi president — are in violation of international law, according to reports today (see GSN, March 20).
Iraqi representatives included the question in a list of 20 questions to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan during talks March 7, according to Reuters (see GSN, March 8). Annan sent the list to U.N. Security Council members Monday and asked for their responses in preparation for a mid-April meeting with Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri al-Hadithi (Reuters/New York Times, March 21).
The second round of U.N.-Iraq talks is expected to take place around April 18, U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said yesterday.
Questions
Some of Iraq’s questions submitted to the United Nations were technical, but “other issues raised by the Iraqis were conditions, not questions,” said a U.S. official.
Iraq asked how long U.N. weapons inspections would last if Iraq allows inspectors to return after their 1998 departure. They also asked whether inspectors could verify that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction have been destroyed, which countries inspectors would come from, how U.S. and British inspectors could be neutral and whether the United Nations could guarantee that inspectors would not be spies (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, March 20).
In addition, the Iraqis also asked whether Iraq would receive compensation for damage from U.S. and British bombing to enforce no-fly zones (Reuters/New York Times).
In the questions, Iraq did not reject the return of weapons inspectors but indicated it would only accept inspections with a limited time period and some type of assurance that they would lead to the end of sanctions, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, March 14).
No Conditions
The United States and some other Western countries have said inspections must be unconditional (Lederer, Associated Press/Yahoo.com).
“The Iraqi questions pose unacceptable conditions, and Iraq must unconditionally admit the entry of U.N. inspectors and give them free and unfettered access,” said a U.S. official (Reuters/New York Times).
“This is just an attempt by the Iraqis to open up a dialogue with the Security Council ... which we’re not willing to get engaged in. There’s no need for dialogue. The Iraqis know exactly what they need to do,” said a U.S. official, according to the Associated Press.
One Year
The U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission could recommend the Security Council suspend sanctions against Iraq within one year of returning inspectors to the country if Iraq actively cooperates with inspectors, said UNMOVIC Chairman Hans Blix.
Blix said he would fire any inspectors spying for a government. Iraq, however, should not have the authority to decide the composition of the inspection teams, he added (Lederer, Associated Press/Yahoo.com).
Russia
Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said Tuesday that Russia opposes any military action against Iraq that does not have U.N. approval (see GSN, Feb. 11).
“Russia is against any attack on a country, be it Iraq or any other country, which bypasses the U.N. Security Council,” Ivanov said.
“We have no evidence, no factual evidence, to support the statement that Iraq has, or may have, weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons (see GSN, March 7). Nobody has ever provided this evidence to us. If anybody has this evidence, they should present it to the international community,” Ivanov added (Deutsche Presse-Agentur/European Internet Network, March 20).
Call for End of Sanctions
Meanwhile, two former U.N. humanitarian coordinators who resigned from the United Nations in protest of sanctions against Iraq placed an advertisement in yesterday’s International Herald Tribune calling for an end to sanctions, Agence France-Presse reported.
Former U.N. officials Denis Halliday and Hans van Sponeck gathered signatures for the advertisement from several world leaders and intellectuals, including U.S. professor Noam Chomsky, South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov and British playwright Harold Pinter.
“We, the undersigned, representing a wide international consensus, demand the immediate lifting of economic sanctions against Iraq,” the advertisement said, describing the sanctions as “a violation of internationally recognized human rights and humanitarian standards.”
The signers also said a U.S. proposal to revise U.N. sanctions to allow more goods exported to Iraq while tightening controls over potential military goods is “a grim perpetuation of a failed policy” (Agence France-Presse/Jordan Times, March 21).
|
 |
For the first time the United States will not certify that North Korea is abiding by the 1994 Agreed Framework, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday (see GSN, March 20).
The move sends “strong messages to North Korea that they need to comply with their international obligations and agreements,” Fleischer said. “The United States is complying, and this is a message to North Korea that it’s important for them to do so as well.”
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell recommended that Bush deny certification because North Korea has not provided enough information to the United States and international monitors, Fleischer said. The three items that need to be certified concern progress on denuclearization, agreed framework compliance and reduction in ballistic missile exports, he said.
The Bush administration, however, has agreed to issue waivers that would allow the United States to fulfill its obligations under the agreement, including a shipment of 500 metric tons of heavy fuel oil to North Korea, Fleischer said (U.S. State Department release, March 20).
The State Department recommended that the waivers be issued as a sign of U.S. willingness to abide by its obligations under the Agreed Framework, said State Department spokesman Richard Boucher.
“Any time we intend to spend money in pursuit of this program, we have to either waive or certify under these three conditions of the law,” Boucher said.
“We have looked at the various areas of certification in the agreement, and we have found that we could not certify them. That is not the same, and we have not said that they are in violation of the Agreed Framework, nor, as I said, are we backing away from our own commitment to implement its provisions.”
One concern that kept the United States from certifying that North Korea is abiding by the Agreed Framework was lack of progress on a program to provide safeguards for the reactor to be built by the United States under the agreement, Boucher said (see GSN, Feb. 14).
“We have felt that process should have begun already,” he said, adding that the International Atomic Energy Agency estimated it would take three or four years implement the safeguards.
“We’re getting to the point in construction where that process, we believe, should be under way,” Boucher said (U.S. State Department transcript, March 20).
Great Britain is ready to use nuclear weapons to retaliate against a WMD attack against its troops, British Defense Minister Geoff Hoon said.
Rogue state leaders, such as Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, could “be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be willing to use our nuclear weapons,” Hoon told the British Parliament Defense Select Committee. “What I cannot be absolutely confident about is whether that would be sufficient to deter them from using a weapon of mass destruction in the first place” (Evans/Brown, London Times, March 21).
Hussein, for example, “has demonstrated in the past his willingness to use chemical weapons against his own people,” Hoon said. With regard to rogue states, “we cannot rule out the possibility that (they) would be willing to sacrifice their own people to make such a gesture.”
Although there is no current direct threat to Great Britain of a ballistic missile attack using weapons of mass destruction, the country could still be hit at some point by a missile launched from the Middle East, Hoon said.
“I am sure Libya has an aspiration to develop a weapon of mass destruction and, equally, would like to purchase the necessary technology to deliver it,” he said (Al Webb, United Press International, March 20).
By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire
Russia Sunday successfully launched a modified version of an SS-19 ICBM that carried two satellites for mapping Earth’s gravity (see GSN, Feb. 27).
Russia converted the intercontinental ballistic missile to commercial use in accordance with the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), said Alexander Medvedev, director general of the Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center. Several Russian missile systems, including the SS-19, were removed from service under START.
“It’s good that they were wise people who included a provision in the treaty which says that a rocket may be destroyed by way of launching it,” Medvedev said.
The addition of upper stage booster rocket called the Briz KM modified the missile for commercial service, Medvedev said. The central part of the Briz booster in the modified SS-19 is the same as that used in the Russian Proton heavy satellite launcher, which makes for better reliability and ease of mass production, he said.
“In other words, we have the same documents for the engines and the central part and they are built by the same technology,” Medvedev said. “It’s the same production line, and you can imagine how much this benefits the country and Khrunichev, of course, when this central part may be used both in the [modified SS-19] and the Proton.”
The two Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites launched on the modified SS-19 will primarily help oceanographers learn more about sea currents that affect the Earth’s climate, according to Aviation Week & Space Technology. They also are expected to better enhance the gravity measurements used by geologists to locate oil deposits under the Earth’s surface.
The two GRACE satellites, which cost $145 million and weigh 950 pounds each, will fly in formation with one satellite 200 miles ahead of the other, Aviation Week & Space Technology reported.
As they orbit the Earth, the distance between them will be measured by sensitive range finders. Changes in the distance between the two satellites will indicate varying changes in the Earth’s gravity levels, according to Aviation Week & Space Technology.
The European joint-venture space company Astrium built the GRACE satellites for a joint German Aerospace Center and NASA project, Aviation Week & Space Technology reported. Khrunichev originally planned to launch the satellites in February, but the flight was delayed. Several other commercial satellite launches have been planned for later this year and 2003.
|
 |
The fiscal 2003 House budget resolution will include $300 million for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to complete facilities improvement projects, House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle (R-Iowa) said yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 5).
Nussle made his pledge to Representative Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) on the House floor after Chambliss told him of the important role the CDC plays in homeland defense and how badly the agency needs to finish upgrades and improvements to its facilities (see GSN, Feb. 8).
“In addition to working in asbestos-laden facilities, many highly trained scientists perform their research in facilities that lack safety features, such as sprinkler systems and adequate electrical and air-flow systems, and, as a result, limit the agency’s ability to recruit and retain the world-class scientists,” Chambliss told Nussle.
Nussle said, “I want to assure the gentleman that the budget resolution will accommodate, as a priority, $300 million for CDC buildings and facilities in Atlanta, Ga.”
A member of the Friends of the CDC, a lobbying organization for the agency, said the he is glad to hear of Nussle’s pledge, but is still cautious.
“While we’re highly encouraged, we realize this doesn’t get the money to us yet,” said Oz Nelson, a Friends of the CDC member and former chief executive officer and chairman of United Parcel Service.
“We’ll start jumping up and down and clicking our heels when that second step is taken,” he said, referring to the congressional appropriations process (Melanie Eversley, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, March 21).
|
 |
The United States has told Brazil it would support a Brazilian candidate for U.N. human rights commissioner in exchange for removing Brazilian Jose Mauricio Bustani from his post as head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the Chemical Weapons Convention’s implementing organization, O Globo reported today (see GSN, March 20).
According to Brazilian Foreign Affairs Minister Celso Lafer, diplomats have informed Brazil that the United States, in compensation for Brazil losing Bustani, is willing to support Sergio Vieira de Mello, head of the U.N. administration in East Timor, for the top position at the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. The current high commissioner, Mary Robinson, is scheduled to end her term in September.
No Confidence
Meanwhile, the United States plans to call for a formal no confidence vote against Bustani today in The Hague at a meeting of the OPCW’s Executive Council, according to O Globo.
Yesterday U.S. Ambassador to the OPCW Donald Mahley passed around an informal motion to the 41 members of the council calling for removal (Berlinck/Fernandes, O Globo Online, March 21, Global Security Newswire translation).
At the opening of the council’s meeting Tuesday, Mahley said that the current OPCW leadership is leading the organization to “collapse.” Calling for Bustani to be “immediately removed,” Mahley said there was no other option to preserve the health of the Chemical Weapons Convention, O Globo Online reported.
Mahley — who, according to O Globo, was a principal U.S. diplomat behind the collapse of the Biological Weapons Convention — mentioned Bustani several times in his statement (see GSN, Dec. 10, 2001). Mahley accused Bustani of poorly managing finances, demoralizing the organization’s staff and “denigrating” the convention’s fundamental priorities — destruction and nonproliferation of chemical weapons.
Bustani responded harshly, accusing the United States of attempting to pressure Brazil and other countries for his removal and criticizing U.S. attempts to control the OPCW — which, he said, put multilateralism and the organization’s independence at risk.
“Much more than ‘management style’ is at play here,” Bustani said, referring to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell’s call for “a change in management style” at the OCPW. “You all know that. The principle that is at the basis of every international organization — its independence and its chief executive — are at risk,” he added (Berlinck, O Globo Online, March 20, Global Security Newswire translation).
West Against the Rest
The Associated Press reported that although neither Bustani nor the United States has mentioned it, the key to the dispute over Bustani’s tenure is the OPCW’s inability to monitor chemical weapons in Iraq, which has not signed the treaty (see related GSN story, today). Bustani’s spokesman Gordon Vachon said Bustani can only try to persuade the country to join the regime (Anthony Deutsch, Associated Press/Washington Times, March 21).
According to the Brasilia daily Correio Braziliense, a clear rift is developing in the council, with an Anglo-European alliance including Australia, Canada and the European Union supporting the United States and mostly developing countries such as Brazil, China, Cuba, India and Russia backing Bustani.
The United States is pushing strongly for an attack against Iraq and against a “negotiated solution,” which Bustani supports, according to Correio Braziliense. Meanwhile, privately Brazil is failing to support Bustani, and he is likely to be forced from office, according to the daily (Correio Braziliense, March 21, Global Security Newswire translation).
Bustani, the organization’s lawyers and his staff have not yet given up the fight. Vachon insisted yesterday that the U.S. move for a no confidence motion is illegal.
“This American piece of paper does not have official status,” Vachon said. “In the organization’s rules, a no confidence motion does not exist,” he added. Bustani said he will only leave office if he is voted down by the full membership of the OPCW (Bernlick/Fernandes, O Globo Online).
According to AP, the United States will need to persuade two-thirds of the 41 executive committee members and all of the 145 members of the organization to back a no confidence vote (Deutsch, Associated Press/Washington Times).
“This American action is obviously intended as a political maneuver, without legal base,” Vachon said.
Vachon also addressed the financial issues raised by U.S. diplomats, blaming the organization’s financial problems on the fact that countries such as the United States are not paying their contributions on time (Bernlick/Fernandes, O Globo Online).
The United States is currently 50 percent behind on its contribution to this year’s budget, according to the AP (see GSN, Jan. 15). Overall, the U.S. contribution to the organization represents 22 percent of its $60 million budget (Deutsch, AP/Washington Times).
“The administrative director of OPCW is an American and has always been an American appointed by the U.S.,” said Vachon. “And it is he who is responsible for the financial situation. How can one explain this?” (Bernlick/Fernandes, O Globo Online).
Public Support from Brazil Continues
Following Mahley’s statements Tuesday, Brazilian Ambassador to the OPCW Executive Council Affonso Emilio de Alencastro Massot gave a speech supporting Bustani. He accused the United States of attempting to undermine “the credibility of an international security regime.”
Jornal do Brasil reported that since Bustani took office at the OPCW, the organization has reduced the volume of chemical agents by 7 percent and reduced standing chemical weapons by 15 percent, according to the Brazilian government. Bustani also succeeded in expanding the organization’s membership from 87 to 145 countries (Jornal do Brasil, March 20, Global Security Newswire translation).
Brazilian daily O Estado de Sao Paulo reported that the Brazilian Congress approved a motion to support Bustani. Additionally, Brazilian Human Rights Secretary Paulo Sergio Pinheiro is planning to strongly criticize U.S. policies with respect to international organizations in statements before the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva, O Estado reported (O Estado de Sao Paulo, March 21, Global Security Newswire translation).
The Czech Republic plans to begin training anti-chemical weapon troops from other countries, Czech newspaper Pravo reported Monday (see GSN, Feb. 27).
“The Czech Republic, the military and the defense industry — which has achieved success in the world in the past — will benefit from such activity,” said Czech Defense Minister Jaroslav Tvrdik. “With the help of our military technical institute, which specializes in the chemical troops, we have drafted a proposal that makes possible complete preparation and training and contains concrete economic indicators.”
Under the plan, non-Czech troops would be equipped with necessary gear and trained in the Czech Republic to learn modern detection techniques, according to Pravo. Several countries already have expressed interest, including Lithuania, Latvia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. The Czech military has already begun a promotions campaign for the plan, with Jiri Sedivy, head of the army staff, having met with the commander of the Kuwaiti Army, Pravo reported.
The Czech military can customize the training depending on the size of the unit needed and can provide expanded capabilities or focus on weapons of mass destruction in general, Tvrdik said.
“If we are asked about a company, a battalion, or a brigade, we will be able to say how much such a unit costs, within which time frame we will deliver the military hardware and within which schedule we are prepared to train the troops in our military system,” he said (Prague Pravo, March 18 in FBIS-EEU, March 18).
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) yesterday said he might not be able to block a vote to overturn Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn’s expected veto of the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain (see GSN, March 19).
Once Guinn issues his veto on President George W. Bush’s approval of Yucca Mountain as the site for a spent-fuel repository, as Guinn has said he will do, the issue goes before Congress. Both houses must overturn Guinn’s veto by a simple majority within 90 days for the project to go forward.
Daschle said he had incorrectly believed he could block the Yucca Mountain plan by requiring a 60-vote majority. He added that he has recently learned about a provision in the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act — the mandate for a U.S. repository — that only requires a simple majority vote (see GSN, March 7).
“When I said in Nevada many months ago that, as long as Democrats were in control, it was not going to be an issue that had much viability, I was not aware that this legislation — when we drafted it decades ago — is under an expedited procedure,” Daschle said, adding that this means any senator can call it to the floor for a simple majority vote.
So far, only two Senate Republicans, John Ensign of Nevada and Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, have come out against the Yucca Mountain plan, Daschle said (Reuters/Washington Times, March 21).
The United States is providing a drug for people exposed to radiation, but the drug is not available in dosages appropriate for children, Andrew Spano, a local official near the Indian Point nuclear power plants in New York, said yesterday. In a letter to U.S. President George W. Bush, Spano said the lack of a children’s dose is hindering efforts to distribute the pill to residents near the plants (see GSN, Feb. 15).
The United States is offering potassium iodide to states with or near nuclear power plants due to concerns that an accident or terrorist attack could release radioactive materials into the atmosphere. The drug prevents the thyroid gland from absorbing radioactive iodine, which causes cancer.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved the sale of potassium iodide at the 130-milligram adult dosage. The FDA suggested lower dosages for children in December: 16 milligrams for newborns, 32 milligrams for one-month to three-year-olds and 65 milligrams for children three to 18 years old. Children are particularly susceptible to the damages of radioactive iodine (see GSN, Dec. 11, 2001).
Spano, the executive of Westchester County where the Indian Point plants are located, said the lack of availability of smaller dosages is creating a problem distributing the drug to those living within 10 miles of a the nuclear power plants.
“We are absolutely frustrated,” he said.
People could break the pills in half or smaller fractions to provide children’s dosages, said Alan Morris, president of Anbex.com, the company that sells potassium iodide to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (see GSN, Feb. 5). Spano, however, said the pills are too small to easily break into portions.
Morris said Anbex plans to seek approval from the FDA to manufacture a 65-milligram dose. The FDA will probably grant approval of smaller dosages in less than two years, said David Orloff, head of potassium iodide regulation at the FDA.
If radioactivity were released, the risk of developing thyroid cancer would be much higher than any potential ill effects from a potassium iodide overdose, Orloff said. Most children, except newborns, would not suffer negative side effects from an adult dosage, Orloff said.
The NRC said 10 out of the 34 states with or near nuclear plants have asked for potassium iodide from the federal government. New Jersey officials said they told the NRC yesterday they would also request the pills, the New York Times reported (Randal Archibold, New York Times, March 21).
|
About Newswire | Contact National Journal | Re-Use Guidelines
© Copyright 2002 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by the National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
HOME | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
|
|
Back to top
