U.S. Response I:  FBI, CIA Promise to Share Information

The FBI and the CIA plan to share intelligence information with the proposed homeland security department, the directors of the two agencies told the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee yesterday (see GSN, June 25)

CIA Director George Tenet and FBI Director Robert Mueller said they would share information reports — and most raw intelligence data — with the proposed department when it is created (see GSN, June 26).

“I am committed to assuring that the new department receives all of the relevant terrorist-related intelligence available,” Tenet said.

The CIA would try to classify terrorism-related intelligence at the “lowest possible level” so that it could be shared with the proposed department and even with state and local officials, Tenet said.  The only information the CIA would withhold from the proposed department would be information on its sources and intelligence-gathering techniques, he added.

The recent U.S.A. Patriot Act has allowed the FBI to share information on terrorism with grand jury investigations, and the legislation should also be able to apply to the proposed department, Mueller said (see GSN, October 26, 2001).  Homeland security department officials would probably be included in the FBI’s planned joint terrorism task forces, he said (James Risen, New York Times, June 28).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  U.S. Inspectors Will Operate at French, Belgian Seaports

The U.S. Customs Service will station inspectors at the seaport in Le Havre, France, to inspect cargo shipments destined for the United States, the agency said today (see GSN, June 25).  More than 108,000 cargo containers were shipped to the United States from Le Havre last year, Customs said (Associated Press/New York Times, June 28).

Customs this week also signed an agreement with Belgium to station U.S. inspectors at the Antwerp seaport.  About 115,000 cargo containers were shipped to the United States from Antwerp last year, according to a U.S. State Department press release.

Customs said it is negotiating other inspector-stationing agreements with several additional European and Asian countries.  So far, the agency has agreements to station inspectors at seaports in Canada, Singapore and the Netherlands (U.S. State Department release, June 27).

Back to top

International Response:  U.N. Resolution Has Received Substantial Support

In the nine months since a U.N. anti-terrorism resolution was adopted, 160 countries have reported to the United Nations measures they have taken to reduce support, financing and provision of sanctuary to terrorists, Associated Press reported today (see GSN, May 23).

The U.N. resolution, adopted shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, has jump-started national, regional and international action to combat terrorism, British U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock told the Security Council yesterday.

“To have gotten 160 member states to have responded is actually, I think, remarkable in the U.N. system,” Greenstock said.  “But we will not rest until we have gotten those [remaining] 29 reports” (Associated Press/Ha’aretz, June 28).

States that have not yet filed the reports have not done so because they are unfamiliar with how to implement anti-terrorism measures, Greenstock said.

“It’s a lack of familiarity with the subject that is causing the problem, not an unwillingness to respond,” he said.  “They need the help of experts, they need the help of their regional groups, perhaps, to cover the gaps” (U.S. State Department release, June 27).

The Security Council committee in charge of overseeing the resolution has reviewed the reports of 127 countries so far with the aid of outside experts, according to AP.  A second round of notifications will soon be sent outlining the gaps identified and recommendations on how to better implement the resolution, Greenstock said.

The Security Council committee “does not intend to declare any member state 100 percent compliant” with the resolution because the threat of terrorism is constantly changing and “we believe that there may always be further work to do,” Greenstock said (AP/Ha’aretz).

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  Senate Passes Defense Bill, Rejects Bush Nuclear Agenda

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — In a modest blow to the Bush administration, the U.S. Senate yesterday passed a major defense spending bill without several nuclear weapons policy measures the administration had sought.  In a concession to President George W. Bush, however, the Senate approved the president’s full request for missile defense, but recommended that part of it be used to fight terrorism (see GSN, June 27).

The Senate version of National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2003 differs from the House version, which largely adopted the administration request (see GSN, May 10).  Notably, the Senate refused to authorize researching an earth-penetrating nuclear warhead, developing a nuclear warhead for missile defense or shortening the time needed to prepare for a nuclear test.

“Overall, we did pretty well.  It was not a perfect day, but a pretty good day,” according to John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World, an arms control organization in Washington.

Administration Nuclear Policy Issues

The Senate did not vote to authorize $15.5 million, requested by the administration and approved by the House, for research on a new earth-penetrating nuclear weapon, intended for destroying deep and hardened targets (see GSN, March 19).

The Senate also did not match the House in allowing funds for the Energy Department to reduce the time it needs to prepare the Nevada Test Site for nuclear test, should the United States decide to end its 10-year testing moratorium (see GSN, March 22).

The House provision would reduce the time from 24 to 32 months down to 12 months, as recommended by the administration and suggested in its Nuclear Posture Review.  That change would bring the United States a step closer to resuming testing, a move critics say would force the United States to withdraw from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, thereby undermining the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which is aimed at totally eliminating nuclear weapons.

The Senate also approved an amendment offered by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) to prohibit developing or using nuclear warheads in the missile defense system.

It was reported earlier this year that the administration had asked an independent review panel to evaluate use of nuclear-tipped interceptors in the ground-launched, midcourse interceptor program, which critics argue would be easily stymied by decoys and other countermeasures (see GSN, April 11).

The House Armed Services Committee had recommended research into the concept.

Another potential Feinstein amendment that would have barred deploying missile defense systems before testing was not considered.

The Senate bill also includes language offered by Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) requiring classified and unclassified reports to Congress on the results of each flight test of the ground-based midcourse system (see GSN, March 18).

The bill also contains a provision requiring traditional Pentagon and congressional oversight of missile defense programs, which the Missile Defense Agency had said it would remove (see GSN, Feb. 19).

Missile Defense Funds Restored, But Veto Threat Remains

The $393.4 billion Senate bill restored $814.3 million cut by the Senate Armed Services Committee from the administration’s missile defense request with Levin’s approval.

The administration had threatened a veto if the money was not restored.  As part of a deal to gain Democratic support, the Senate also passed a Levin amendment urging the administration to prioritize the restored funds for terrorism.

The move did not appear to satisfy administration officials, and could prompt a veto if sustained in the House-Senate conference committee.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told a congressional committee yesterday the language would “severely delay” aspects of the programs.  Pentagon officials would recommend a veto if the “burdensome statutory restrictions” survived the conference, Associated Press reported.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s reception was more hesitant.

“There was language and then there was language and then there was a colloquy and a discussion.  And until one gets out the Ouija board and analyzes all that, we won’t know how we feel about it, and therefore we won’t know exactly how we would like to give guidance to the conferees when they get together to try to untangle it,” he said.

Another Veto Question

The bill includes a noncontroversial amendment by Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) to expand Energy Department nonproliferation programs for disposing of fissile materials in the former Soviet Union, and to provide $15 million for a program to address the radiological weapons threat.

Another important issue not related to nuclear weapons that will have to be decided in committee is the question of funding the Army’s Crusader self-propelled howitzer.

Rumsfeld has said he would urge Bush to veto the bill if it includes money for the program.  The House approved money for it, but the Senate voted to authorize the $475.6 million the administration originally requested for the program instead for developing an unspecified future Army combat system.

“My understanding is that the Crusader is out of the bill in the Senate,” Rumsfeld told reporters in the Capitol yesterday. “So, then, they’ll go to conference, and we’ll worry those things through.”

Back to top

International Response:  G-8 Agrees to $20 Billion Nonproliferation Effort

The Group of Eight countries formally agreed yesterday to a plan to provide $20 billion during the next 10 years for WMD nonproliferation programs in the former Soviet Union (see GSN, June 27).

The priorities of the new effort — dubbed Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction — include scrapping chemical weapons, dismantling decommissioned nuclear submarines, disposing of fissile material and employing former weapons scientists, according to a G-8 statement (G-8 release, June 27).

“The Global Partnership will initiate new bilateral and multilateral projects and enhance existing ones,” the U.S. government said.  While the focus will be on projects in Russia, other states, including former Soviet states, could receive assistance. 

Countries outside the G-8 are also invited to participate in the partnership (White House fact sheet, June 27).  Each donor country would set up its own projects in Russia, a senior Bush administration official said (James Gerstenzang, Los Angeles Times, June 28).

The G-8 will create a senior-level group to coordinate members’ activities by monitoring progress and discussing priorities (White House fact sheet).  The G-8 members adopted guidelines “that will form the basis for the negotiation of specific agreements for new projects … to ensure effective and efficient project development, coordination and implementation,” the G-8 statement said. 

According to the G-8 agreement, bilateral and multilateral projects should include “auditing and transparency measures” and should “be implemented in an environmentally sound manner,” provide for high safety levels and include clear milestones with the option to cut funding if milestones are not met (G-8 statement).

Funding

The United States — the driving force behind the agreement — plans to provide $10 billion of the $20 billion over the next 10 years, according to the White House statement (see GSN, May 20).

All the donor countries have several options for financing nonproliferation programs, including swapping Russian debt (see GSN, April 18) for nonproliferation projects (White House fact sheet).

There is no way to guarantee that other countries will raise the remaining $10 billion, U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said.  She added, however, “we’re confident, given the spirit around this global partnership, that the commitments are going to reach into that area.”

The new partnership will bring Europe and Japan much more into nonproliferation and counterterrorism projects that have been mostly a U.S. effort so far (see GSN, May 3), another senior administration official said (Gerstenzang, Los Angeles Times).

U.S. Role

European leaders originally resisted the U.S.-sponsored partnership proposal because of the cost and concerns about financial accountability in Russia, according to the Wall Street Journal.  U.S. President George W. Bush, however, secured Russian President Vladimir Putin’s support for the plan during a private meeting.

Putin agreed to provide European countries with the same monitoring power and protections the United States has for its nonproliferation programs, including full access to Russian sites, audit rights and exemption from taxes and contractor liability, the Journal reported.  With that agreement, the other G-8 countries — Italy, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Japan and Canada — signed on to Bush’s plan (Jeanne Cummings, Wall Street Journal, June 28).

The United States already has several nonproliferation and threat reduction programs in the former Soviet Union, and the new partnership will enhance some of those, according to the White House.  Those programs include: “reducing strategic missiles, bombers, silos and submarines, ending weapons-grade plutonium production, reducing excess weapons-grade plutonium, upgrading storage and transport security for nuclear warheads, upgrading storage security for fissile material, reducing nuclear weapons infrastructure, destroying chemical weapons, eliminating chemical weapons production capability, securing biological pathogens, providing peaceful employment for former weapons scientists, enhancing export controls and border security and improving safety of civil nuclear reactors” (White House fact sheet).

Principles to Deny Terrorists Access to WMD

The G-8 also established six principles to “prevent terrorists or those that harbor them from acquiring or developing” weapons of mass destruction.  Those principles are:

*         Strengthen multilateral treaties and other instruments to prevent WMD proliferation and strengthen the institutions established to implement such agreements;

*         Develop and maintain measures that ensure that the production, use, storage and transport of WMD materials is safe and secure and provide such assistance to countries lacking the ability to secure such materials;

*         Ensure that WMD storage facilities are physically secure and provide assistance to states where facilities lack protection;

*         Implement border controls, law enforcement efforts and international cooperation to detect and interdict attempts to smuggle WMD materials and items and provide assistance to countries that lack appropriate resources;

*         Maintain export controls over items that could be used to develop weapons of mass destruction and missiles; and

*         Work to manage and dispose of fissile materials stocks that are no longer required for defense purposes, destroy all chemical weapons and “minimize” stockpiles of dangerous biological agents (G-8 statement).

For further information, see:

G-8 Summit site

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  House Passes Defense Appropriations Bill

The U.S. House of Representatives yesterday voted 413-18 to pass the fiscal 2003 defense appropriations bill (see related GSN story, today). The House version of the bill would allocate $355 billion for military spending, including $7.4 billion to develop a national missile defense system (Jim Abrams, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, June 27). 

The vote on the bill was the largest in support of military spending in recent years, said Appropriations Defense Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.).  The vote illustrated that even those who previously opposed high levels of defense spending now believed that the military should be a top priority, he said.

“The vote today is a reflection of the public’s strong support for the military,” Lewis said (Carl Hulse, New York Times, June 28).

Back to top

U.S. Response III:  New Department to Manage Nuclear Response Programs

The U.S. Energy Department supports plans to move its emergency response teams and nuclear detection programs to the proposed homeland security department, National Nuclear Security Administrator John Gordon Wednesday told the House Armed Services Committee.

The department’s Nuclear Emergency Support Team, Domestic Emergency Support Team, Accident Response Group and Atmospheric Release Advisory Capability would be transferred to the homeland security department.  Nonproliferation and verification programs would also be transferred, including the Chemical and Biological National Security Program and programs to monitor nuclear smuggling (see GSN, June 27). 

“These programs are a natural fit for the department of homeland security, whose primary mission is the critical task of protecting the United States from catastrophic terrorism,” Gordon said.

Some Energy research programs related to weapons detection systems and WMD attack response would also be moved.  Gordon added that he supports the idea of locating the new department’s main research facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and to create satellite research centers at other national laboratories, Environment and Energy Daily reported.

In cases when splitting programs would be inappropriate or when programs could not be transferred, Energy and the new department would run the programs jointly, Gordon said (Suzanne Struglinski, Environment and Energy Daily, June 27).

Back to top

United States:  Tritium Facility Called Over Cost and Behind Schedule

A new facility designed to produce an essential component for nuclear weapons is running 25 percent over budget and is almost a year behind a schedule, according to a report released yesterday by the Energy Department inspector general (see GSN, Jan. 29).

The Savannah River Site facility was intended to produce tritium, a radioactive isotope that all U.S. thermonuclear weapons require.  The United States has not produced tritium since 1988, even though it decays over time.  The U.S. plan was to meet tritium needs with material from dismantled weapons, but the dismantlement did not proceed as planned in the late 1980s and authorities decided to build a new facility to produce tritium, according to the Washington Post.

Energy planned to build a $401 million tritium extraction facility by February 2006.  The inspector general, however, reported that the program’s cost had increased to $500 million and might not be completed until December 2006.

The delay might create an obstacle to continuing maintenance of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, the report says.   The United States has no other facility to produce tritium, so the “timely completion” of the Savannah River Site facility “is of critical importance,” Inspector General Gregory Friedman wrote.

The report also says the department’s contractor on the project, Westinghouse Savannah River Co., lacked proper documentation.  The inspector general said Westinghouse company managers must provide “sufficient supporting documentation for its current estimates” of costs and alternative strategies by next month (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, June 27).

Back to top

Russia:  Moscow Launches Upgraded Typhoon-Class Submarine

Demonstrating a commitment to modernizing its strategic nuclear forces, Russia launched an upgraded Typhoon-class strategic submarine Wednesday from the Sevmash shipyard in Severodvinsk (see GSN, May 6).

“This is actually a new submarine, fitted with the most up-to-date equipment and weapon systems, to serve for many years,” said Sevmash Director General David Pashayev.

The upgraded Typhoon can reach speeds of 27 knots while submerged and can dive to a depth of 400 meters, according to ITAR-Tass.  The submarine has a crew of 170 and is powered by two nuclear reactors.  The Typhoon also has 20 ballistic missile silos and is considered the largest submarine in the world (ITAR-Tass, June 26 in FBIS-SOV, June 26).

The design of the Dmitry Donskoy submarine places its ballistic missile silos outside the ship’s rigid hull, a design measure intended to improve the crew’s survivability rate in the event of an accident, according to ITAR-Tass.

Russia has no intention of ending upgrades to its sea-based strategic forces, despite the recently signed Moscow Treaty and the U.S. withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, Russian Defense Ministry officials said. 

“We are adhering to our national interests,” said Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov.  “We are building vessels that will ensure Russia’s security under all circumstances” (Interfax/BBC Monitoring, June 27).

For further information, see:

ABM Treaty Text

U.S. Fact Sheet on Withdrawal from ABM Treaty

Moscow Treaty Text

Bush Announces Treaty

U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Arms Reduction Treaty

Back to top

North Korea:  Officials Meet to Discuss Resuming Talks

U.S. and North Korean officials met in New York yesterday to discuss arrangements for resuming high-level talks and sending a U.S. envoy to visit North Korea, according to a senior State Department official (see GSN, June 25).

“We’ve now begun the discussion with them on setting up the talks,” the official said.  “Nothing is set at this point, but we’ll continue to be in touch with them.”

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs James Kelly said last Friday he believed talks would resume “in weeks, not months.”

The United States said in late April it wanted to begin dialogue with North Korea and would send an envoy, but authorities have not announced who would go or when (see GSN, April 30).  Meanwhile, press reports have said the administration is divided on how to deal with North Korea, which President George W. Bush labeled a member of the “axis of evil” (see GSN, June 3).

U.S. envoy to North Korea Jack Pritchard, who many believe would be chosen to go to Pyongyang, met earlier this month (see GSN, June 18) with North Korean Ambassador to the United Nations Pak Gil Yon (Agence France-Presse, June 28).

Back to top

Anthrax:  FBI Investigating About 30 Scientists, Searching Homes

The FBI is concentrating its “Amerithrax” investigation of last fall’s anthrax attacks on about 30 biological weapons experts and has searched the homes of more than 24 people recently — always with the person’s consent, the bureau said yesterday (see GSN, June 27).

Steven Hatfill, a former biological weapons defense scientist whose apartment was searched this week, is on a list of “persons of interest,” but is not considered a suspect, the FBI said.  Hatfill previously worked at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Md., and at the defense contractor Science Applications International Corp.

Authorities became interested in Hatfill because he allowed his security clearance to expire last August, the Washington Post reported. 

“Obviously, he is somebody who had access to anthrax and scientific capability,” an FBI official said.  “That is why we want to look at him — to either remove him from a list of potentials or add him to a list of potentials .... Are we saying he’s the guy, or even a suspect?  No, we’re not” (Gugliotta/Eggen, Washington Post, June 28).

Hatfill Taught Bioterrorism Response Classes

Hatfill has recently been employed at Louisiana State University as part of a U.S.-funded program to train first responders in the event of a terrorist attack that involved biological weapons, the Hartford Courant reported today (see GSN, Feb. 27).

Hatfill has been working at the LSU National Center for Biomedical Research and Training, the Courant reported.  In January, the university received $11.5 million from the Justice Department to train first responders on how to respond to a biological weapons attack (see GSN, Jan. 14).

University officials confirmed that Hatfill’s employment as an instructor.

“When he works here it’s as an adjunct instructor and he develops and teaches his own class,” said Gene Sands, LSU executive director of university relations.  “I can’t tell you right now whether he is being paid by the university” (Altimari/Dolan. Hartford Courant, June 28).

Officials Inform Residents on Brentwood Postal Center Cleanup

U.S. Postal Service and Washington officials yesterday held a meeting to inform neighbors of the anthrax-contaminated Brentwood Road postal center on how the decontamination effort would be conducted (see GSN, June 11).

The decontamination project is scheduled to begin before the end of the summer, but no specific dates have yet been set, said Postal Service Vice President for Engineering Thomas Day.  The start of the project is weeks, and not months, away, he added.

“Safety is more important than time,” Day said.

Officials listed a number of safety measures that will be taken during the decontamination effort, which will use chlorine dioxide gas, according to the Washington Post.  The safety measures include filling the facility with a nontoxic dye to detect leaks, monitoring the area around the facility with high-tech devices and enabling a number of federal and local agencies to provide oversight on the project, the Post reported.

“If we find one spore, we will not open that building,” said Theodore Gordon, the Washington Health Department’s senior deputy director for public health assurance.

Some Brentwood Road area residents, however, said they were not confident that Washington officials could guarantee their safety during the cleanup project.

“We are very concerned about the cleanup,” said Ronnie Thomas, who lives about a mile away from the facility.  “If it’s so safe, you would think they wouldn’t have to take so many precautions to make sure the building is leak free” (Manny Fernandez, Washington Post, June 28).

Back to top