By Bryan Bender
Global Security Newswire
WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush will ask Congress for a 30 percent budget increase for the Energy Department’s nuclear nonproliferation programs around the world, the largest request for nonproliferation funding to date, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said today (see GSN, Jan. 28).
The Bush administration’s fiscal 2004 budget submission, to be delivered to Congress Monday, will request more than $1.3 billion for nuclear nonproliferation programs, Abraham told a luncheon hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (see GSN, Jan. 22). The department last year requested a little over $1 billion, he said.
“This unprecedented level of funding comes just months after our successful effort to establish the G-8’s [Group of Eight] Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction,” Abraham said (see GSN, Dec. 20, 2002).
He said the budget request, combined with the G-8 pledge to add $20 billion for nonproliferation programs during the next 10 years, demonstrates “how far this nation is prepared to go individually and collectively to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials.” The United States has already pledged to fund half of the G-8 program.
Beefing Up Current Efforts and Initiating New Ones
Some of the new budget resources for the coming year will be used to begin securing nearly all of the estimated 600 metric tons of nuclear weapons-usable materials remaining in Russia, a priority Abraham said he hopes to complete during the next few years, “in many cases ahead of previous schedules.”
The increased funding will also help secure an additional 18 sites in Russia housing dangerous radiological materials, collect 225 orphaned or surplus radioactive materials in the former Soviet Union, and boost U.S. funding for the International Atomic Energy Agency’s nuclear safeguards efforts by 17 percent, Abraham said (see GSN, Oct. 23, 2002). The United States will cosponsor an international conference on securing radiological materials along with the IAEA in March in Vienna (see GSN, Nov. 14, 2002).
In the new budget, $110 million will also be used to help spot nuclear proliferation by developing technologies for long-range detection and by improving the ability to identify the origin of nuclear weapons and materials after they might be confiscated or used, Abraham said.
“We will also continue to refine our ability to detect illicit trafficking of nuclear materials at our own borders, and be looking at ways to make those borders even more secure,” Abraham said (see GSN, Oct. 21, 2002).
Meanwhile, a new Energy program will seek to prevent “export control failures” by anticipating where WMD technologies are most vulnerable to theft or illicit transfer, he said.
Russia Top Priority, But Expansion Necessary
Abraham said Russian stocks of nuclear weapons and materials remain the top priority.
With fiscal 2004 funding, the United States plans to begin building facilities for disposing of surplus plutonium from Russian weapons, working to shut down Russia’s plutonium reactors, and implementing a “modest new program” to purchase additional Russian uranium derived from nuclear weapons for use in a strategic U.S. reserve (see GSN, Oct. 4, 2002). In addition, the department hopes to fund efforts to improve security at Russian nuclear sites — including disposing of 1,200 Russian naval warheads — and to strengthen Russian border security.
“The United States and Russia have taken major steps to secure Russian materials, but there is much more to be done,” Abraham said.
Beyond Russia, Abraham said the department would seek to help strengthen regional nuclear security in the Middle East and Asia, through venues such as the Cooperative Monitoring Center at Sandia National Laboratory, which is responsible for understanding the evolving threat and reducing the incentives for states, such as North Korea, to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
The new budget reflects Bush’s comments in last night’s State of the Union address to Congress.
“Today, the gravest danger in the war on terror, the greatest danger facing America and the world, is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons,” Bush said. “These regimes could use such weapons for blackmail, terror and mass murder. They could also give or sell those weapons to terrorist allies, who would use them without the least hesitation.”
“We are strongly supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency in its mission to track and control nuclear materials around the world,” Bush added. “We are working with other governments to secure nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union and to strengthen global treaties banning the production and shipment of missile technologies and weapons of mass destruction.”
The new Energy budget “signals our intention to lead as we move ahead with this long, complex and costly process” of reducing the threat of weapons of mass destruction, Abraham said today.
He said the budget priorities reflect the “10 principles” of nuclear and radiological security that he outlined last fall (see GSN, Nov. 15, 2002).
U.S. President George W. Bush said last night he will send Secretary of State Colin Powell to the U.N. Security Council next Wednesday to present evidence of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs (see GSN, Jan. 28).
Powell will “present information and intelligence about Iraq’s illegal weapons programs, its attempts to hide those weapons from inspectors and its links to terrorist groups,” Bush said during his annual State of the Union address (see GSN, Jan. 29, 2002).
The U.S. evidence is expected to include satellite imagery and photographs that show Iraqi trucks moving materials away from suspect sites shortly before the arrival of U.N. arms inspectors, U.S. intelligence sources told the Chicago Tribune. Powell is also expected to present photographs taken over the last two years that show dump trucks being converted to missile launchers and other vehicles being fitted to transport biological and chemical agents.
“It’s photographic evidence of the shell game the Iraqis have always employed,” a senior U.S. intelligence official told the Los Angeles Times.
The images suggest a “sanitation of sites,” which is supported by intercepted Iraqi communications detailing a concealment operation, the source said (Howard Witt, Chicago Tribune, Jan. 29).
Bush said he would ask the Security Council to convene a special meeting next Wednesday so Powell can make his presentation.
Powell’s presentation is part of the White House effort to increase domestic and international support for possible military action against Iraq, according to the Washington Post. He and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld are to brief House of Representatives members today on Iraq.
Bush and Powell are also to meet with foreign leaders through the week to drum up international support. Bush met Monday with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and is to meet tomorrow with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
Bush is taking an active role in the discussions because it is believed it would be difficult for foreign leaders to deny a direct appeal from him, administration officials told the Washington Post.
Powell met with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw yesterday and is to speak with Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri today.
Bush and Powell are also scheduled to meet with British Prime Minister Tony Blair Friday at Camp David — a session considered to be one of the most crucial meetings, according to the Post.
“All of this now is about waiting for Tony Blair,” said an unnamed Bush administration official. “The meeting at Camp David is incredibly important for what happens next,” the official said.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday a new Security Council resolution authorizing military action against Iraq would be “desirable, but it is not mandatory.” The United States would act even if a new resolution were not approved, he added.
So far, no decisions have been made on the details of any new resolution, including any kind of deadline for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to comply fully with inspections, White House officials said, adding there was little patience within the administration for a long council debate. Options include an early resolution authorizing force, which is considered to be unlikely; agreement to establish a deadline for Iraq after members agree military action is needed, or a decision to merely set a deadline, according to U.S. and diplomatic sources (Glen Kessler/Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, Jan. 29).
Bush’s State of the Union and Iraq
Bush last night lashed out at Iraq for failing to cooperate with inspections, saying Hussein has shown “utter contempt for the United Nations.”
“Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead utter contempt for the United Nations, and for the opinion of the world,” Bush said. “The 108 U.N. inspectors were ... not sent to conduct a scavenger hunt for hidden materials across a country the size of California. The job of the inspectors is to verify that Iraq's regime is disarming. It is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons, lay those weapons out for the world to see, and destroy them as directed. Nothing like this has happened” (White House release, Jan. 28).
Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence sources suspect Iraq is learning the sites inspectors plan to visit in advance, U.S. diplomatic and intelligence officials said yesterday.
It is still unknown how Iraq might be obtaining information on what sites are to be visited, sources told USA Today. Iraq might have bugged the inspectors or found one willing to provide such information. The possibility that Iraq has been able to infiltrate the inspections teams is one reason why the CIA has hesitated at providing inspectors with more intelligence information.
Inspectors have noticed that Iraqis have conducted cleanup operations at sites prior to their arrival, which would be possible with inside information, but such actions have not raised concerns of Iraqi spying, a U.N. spokesman said.
“Clearly we understand that the Iraqis would have a great interest in finding out our plans,” said U.N. spokesman Ewen Buchanan. “We take the best measures we can to protect the data we have and our transmissions,” he added (John Diamond, USA Today, Jan. 29).
Iraqi Cooperation
Iraq is ready to cooperate more with inspectors and to explain the outstanding issues raised by U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix during his Security Council briefing Monday, Iraqi presidential adviser Lt. Gen. Amir Rashid said yesterday.
“We are ready to cooperate more to resolve the issues through technical discussions and other means, said Rashid, a former oil minister and director of Iraq’s military industry.
Iraq is ready to “provide more clarification” on its past chemical and biological weapons programs in order to resolve concerns that Iraqi weapons declarations have been incomplete, Rashid said, adding that compliance with inspectors is “in our interest as a country.”
“We are ready to put extra effort,” Rashid said. “Complete is never complete, as you know,” he added (Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post, Jan. 29).
No Proof of Iraq-Al-Qaeda Ties
Analysts today challenged Bush’s claim last night of evidence that Iraq has aided terrorist groups including al-Qaeda, which was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks against the United States.
Intelligence information shows that Hussein “aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda,” Bush said. “Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own,” he added.
While Iraq has had occasional contacts with terrorist groups, such as al-Qaeda, there is no evidence that the two cooperated on the Sept. 11 attacks or any other operations, unnamed U.S. officials told Knight Ridder News Service.
“We’re saying there’s contacts, there’s channels,” a senior U.S. State Department official said. “We’re not trying to overplay that one.”
The possible evidence centers on the Islamic militant group Ansar al-Islam, according to the news service. Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, an al-Qaeda operative, is believed to have fled to Iraq from Afghanistan last year in order to have a leg amputated and then moved to the northern part of the country, where the group is based (Warren Strobel, Knight Ridder News Service, Jan. 29).
However, United Press International reported that the CIA has been skeptical of any connection between Ansar-al-Islam and Iraq. Instead, UPI suggested another possible link — Abu Wa’il, an al-Qaeda financier who has also funded Ansar al-Islam and is suspected of being in the employ of Hussein (Eli Lake, United Press International, Jan. 28).
No Evidence of Nuclear Program, IAEA Says; Inspections
After two months of inspections and interviews with Iraqi officials, there is no evidence that Iraq is trying to relaunch its nuclear weapons program, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said yesterday.
“Systematic” inspections of eight sites connected by U.S. and British intelligence to Iraq’s nuclear efforts found nothing to support those claims, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei told the Washington Post.
There is also nothing to support U.S. and British claims that Iraq tried to obtain weapons-grade uranium from a source in Niger, ElBaradei said. Even though the IAEA has made a number of requests for additional information, “we haven’t gotten anything specific. Niger denied it, Iraq denied it, and we haven’t seen any contracts.”
The lack of inspectors’ findings did not mean, however, that Iraq had completely abandoned the idea of developing nuclear weapons, ElBaradei said. He blamed Iraq for not providing more “proactive cooperation.”
Maintaining inspections has the best chance of deterring Iraq from trying to relaunch its WMD programs, ElBaradei said.
“We are not getting optimal cooperation,” ElBaradei said. “But still we are inching forward, and we still believe that barring something exceptional, we should be able in a few months to come to a conclusion on Iraq’s nuclear weapons program,” he added (Colum Lynch, Washington Post, Jan. 29).
Meanwhile, U.N. inspectors visited at least 11 suspect Iraqi sites yesterday, according to an IAEA press release. Inspectors traveled to the Ukhaider Ammunition and Missile Storage area, where 12 empty chemical warheads had previously been found, to take a sample from the 12th warhead for further analysis.
Biological teams from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission visited the Saddam Center for Biotechnology Research at Baghdad University, the 7 Nissan stores and the Grain Board of Iraq’s main depot at Taji, the IAEA release said. UNMOVIC chemical inspectors visited the Furat State Company.
UNMOVIC missile inspectors traveled to the al-Harith Missile Maintenance Workshop in Taji to retag SA-2 surface-to-air missiles, which had their tags previously removed in order to conduct maintenance, the IAEA release said. While there, inspectors also removed the tags from other SA-2 missiles scheduled to have maintenance performed on them within the coming week.
IAEA inspectors visited the Nassr industrial machining and foundry facility north of Baghdad and conducted a motorized radiation survey in the Iraqi capital, according to the agency release. IAEA inspectors also visited the College of Science, College of Education and the College of Engineering at the University of Babylon.
Inspectors yesterday were again denied a private interview with an Iraqi individual, the IAEA release said. So far, inspectors have tried to conduct private interviews with 16 people to no avail (International Atomic Energy Agency release, Jan. 28).
For further information, see:
UNMOVIC
IAEA Iraq Action Team
U.N. Resolution 1441
Experts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have conducted hundreds of inspections in Iraq since resuming the post-Gulf War inspection regime Nov. 27. More than 100 inspectors are now based in the country at two facilities in Baghdad and Mosul. The following chart summarizes some of the inspectors’ reported activities.
| Date | Site | Activity | | Jan. 28 | Ukhaider Ammunition and Missile Storage area | Inspectors recovered a sample from an empty chemical warhead previously discovered at the site for further analysis (see GSN, Jan. 29). | | Saddam Center for Biotechnology Research at Baghdad University | See GSN, Jan. 29. | | 7 Nissan stores | | Grain Board of Iraq’s main depot at Taji | | Furat State Company | | Al-Harith Missile Maintenance Workshop in Taji | UNMOVIC missile inspectors retagged some SA-2 surface-to-air missiles at the site and removed the tags from others for maintenance purposes (see GSN, Jan. 29). | | Nassr industrial machining and foundry facility, north of Baghdad | See GSN, Jan. 29. | | Baghdad | IAEA inspectors conducted a motorized radiation survey (see GSN, Jan. 29). | | University of Babylon‘s College of Science | See GSN, Jan. 29. | | University of Babylon’s College of Education | | University of Babylon’s College of Engineering | | Jan. 27 | Az Zubayr Naval Complex | See GSN, Jan. 28. | | Al-Rafah Liquid Engine Test Facility | UNMOVIC missile inspectors observed a static test of an al-Samoud missile engine (see GSN, Jan. 28). | | Al-Majd Center in Amiriyah | UNMOVIC chemical inspectors used a metal analyzer to examine sheets of alloy (see GSN, Jan. 28). | | Taji area | IAEA inspectors conducted a motorized radiation survey (see GSN, Jan. 28). | | Al-Kindi Research and Development Company, near the northern city of Mosul | See GSN, Jan. 28. | | North Refinery Company, near the city of Baji | | Al-Amiriya medicine stores | See GSN, Jan. 27. | | Al-Samoud missile factory in Taji | | Baghdad area | IAEA inspectors conducted a nuclear survey (see GSN, Jan. 27). | | Jan. 26 | National Project to Control and Combat the Cattle Plague in Baghdad | IAEA release, Jan. 26. | | Chest and Respiratory Diseases Institute in Baghdad | | Al-Basil Center, Nahrawan, in Baghdad | | Karama State Company’s Khadhimiya Plant | UNMOVIC missile inspectors held technical discussions with the leaders of the al-Samoud missile project (IAEA release, Jan. 26). | | Hittin State Establishment | IAEA release, Jan. 26. | | Al-Kut Military Hospital | | Baiji underground refinery located between Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul | | Um al-Maarik industrial machining and foundry facility, south of Baghdad | | Salman Pak area | IAEA inspectors conducted a motorized radiation survey (IAEA release, Jan. 26). | | College of Science at the University of Mosul | IAEA release, Jan. 26 | | College of Education at the University of Mosul | | College of Engineering at the University of Mosul | | Jan. 25 | Al-Mamoun | UNMOVIC missile inspectors met with officials of the al-Rasheed State Company at the site (IAEA release, Jan. 25). | | Sumaykah surface-to-surface missile support facility | IAEA release, Jan. 25. | | College of Veterinary Medicine at Quadisiyah University | | College of Education at Quadisiyah University | | Al-Qa Qaa | UNMOVIC chemical inspectors conducted a rebaseline inspection at the site (IAEA release, Jan. 25). | | Storage area of the North Oil Company | IAEA release, Jan. 25. | | College of Education at Tikrit University in Tikrit | | College of Engineering at Tikrit University in Tikrit | | Vicinity of Baghdad | IAEA inspectors conducted a motorized radiation survey (IAEA release, Jan. 25). | | Jan. 24 | Mamoun Factory | IAEA release, Jan. 24. | | Al-Basil Center in the Jadriyah complex in Baghdad | UNMOVIC chemical Inspectors assessed the site’s current activities (IAEA release, Jan. 24). | | Al-Qa Qaa | See GSN, Jan. 24. | | Jan. 17-23 | See GSN, Jan. 24. | |
 |
By David McGlinchey
Global Security Newswire
In the wake of reports this week that the United States is considering — and planning — pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iraq, experts said a nuclear threat might deter Iraq from using weapons of mass destruction, but could also distance the United States from its allies (see GSN, Jan. 27).
When U.S. officials raise the possibility of a nuclear strike “there are things to be gained and things to be lost,” said Michael Levi, director of the Strategic Security Project at the Federation of American Scientists. In a report last year, Levi concluded that there is more to be lost from developing or using new nuclear weapons (see GSN, Nov. 14, 2002).
“The collateral damage is physical and political, and there is no reason to incur it given that the mission can be completed with non-nuclear means,” Levi said.
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is already well aware that the United States has nuclear weapons, but making the threat public will only estrange U.S. allies, he added.
According to a Los Angeles Times report Sunday, U.S. Defense Department officials are preparing contingency plans to use nuclear strikes in the event of a conflict with Iraq. White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card refused to rule out the possibility of a nuclear strike during a Sunday television interview.
“I’m not going to put anything on the table or off the table,” Card said on NBC’s Meet the Press.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer backed up those comments at a Monday press conference.
“The United States’ long standing policy about use of nuclear weapons is that we don’t rule anything in and we don’t rule anything out,” Fleischer said.
There is very little chance the United States will actually use a nuclear weapon in Iraq, according to Robert Nelson, a Princeton University professor and a senior fellow in science and technology at the Council on Foreign Relations. When the issue is raised, however, it causes international concern, he said.
Baker Spring, a Heritage Foundation national security expert, described the chances of a pre-emptive U.S. nuclear strike as “very, very low, but not zero.”
The United States is dangling the threat of a nuclear attack to let Hussein know that U.S. leaders are serious about the current conflict, according to Spring.
“I have no doubt that the administration wanted to make sure Iraq understood that the U.S. will do what it takes to win this war,” Spring told Global Security Newswire.
Card and Fleischer were right to not take a nuclear strike off the table, according to Spring.
“I think that the Card comment, the way he described it, is right. It is not saying that we will necessarily use them, but it’s not saying that we won’t,” he said.
Deterrence
The nuclear option is being threatened to deter Hussein from using his own weapons of mass destruction, analysts said.
“In the first Persian Gulf war, [former U.S.] President [George H.W.] Bush made it clear that the U.S. would not take anything off the table. There are indications from the Iraqi side that it had its intended effect,” Spring said.
An actual U.S. nuclear strike might come in response to an Iraqi attack using weapons of mass destruction, he added.
White House officials indicated that Hussein should consider a possible U.S. nuclear strike before launching such an attack.
“Should Saddam Hussein have any thought that he would use a weapon of mass destruction, he should anticipate that the United States will use whatever means necessary to protect us and the world from a holocaust,” Card said.
These threats, however, are causing unnecessary international damage and provide no real benefit, according to some experts. There is no difference between putting the nuclear threat on the table or taking it off because the United States retains its nuclear capability in either situation, analysts said.
Hussein understands that the United States has nuclear weapons, no matter what U.S. officials say, according to Levi.
“It’s there. How you talk about it matters. Saddam Hussein is going to be deterred by our capability, not what we say,” he said.
Levi acknowledged that there was an argument for deterring Hussein from using weapons of mass destruction, but he asked, “Isn’t this entire war based on the assumption that Saddam Hussein can’t be deterred?”
Collateral Damage
The collateral damage caused by a nuclear strike — and the political damage caused by a nuclear threat — is too great and does not bring any significant advantage to Washington, analysts said.
“It strikes me that our best option is to say nothing,” according to Levi.
The possibility of a pre-emptive nuclear strike is causing intense debate and concern internationally, Nelson said.
“It really starts to chip away at the taboo that nuclear weapons are only supposed to be used to counter nuclear weapons,” he said. Nelson said the United States has always been ambiguous about its nuclear use policy, but “there still has been this sense that they are a weapon of last resort.”
In a Los Angeles Times commentary today, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) agreed that the political fallout would be disastrous.
“By raising the possibility that nuclear weapons could be part of a first strike against Iraq, the administration is only enhancing its reputation as a reckless unilateralist,” Kennedy wrote. “The nuclear threat will further alienate our allies, most of whom remain unconvinced of the need for war with Iraq,” he added.
Experts, including a prominent Republican military adviser, doubted the military benefit of a nuclear strike.
Richard Perle, chairman of the Defense Policy Board and assistant secretary of defense for international security policy during the Reagan administration, said that nuclear weapons are not necessary in Iraq.
“I can’t think of a target of interest in a conflict with Iraq that could not be dealt with effectively by conventional weapons, non-nuclear weapons,” Perle said this week on Fox News Sunday.
Current U.S. precision military technology is extremely effective and reduces unintended collateral damage to civilians, according to Perle.
“So I can’t see why we would wish to use a nuclear weapon,” he said.
If there are reinforced bunkers buried so deeply that the U.S. forces cannot destroy them, nuclear weapons will still not be necessary, according to Levi.
The United States will not be “prevented from winning the war because there will be a few people hiding in a few tunnels that we can’t reach,” he said.
While experts doubt the military benefit gained by using nuclear weapons in Iraq, there could be a clear political benefit in not using them, according to Nelson.
“I think if we came under attack [with chemical or biological weapons] we could gain some political points by only responding conventionally,” he said.
A day after a Japanese nuclear plant reported missing Plutonium sufficient to make 25 nuclear weapons, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said there appeared to be no foul play (see GSN, Jan. 28).
“The agency remains confident in its conclusion that no nuclear material has been diverted from the facility,” IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said.
Officials at the Tokaimura reprocessing plant are using new measurement techniques and to correct the amounts of plutonium they declared, the IAEA said (IAEA release, Jan. 28).
South Korea’s delegation to Pyongyang is to return home today after being spurned by North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Jan. 28).
The delegation achieved “some degree of success” by clearly presenting Seoul’s stance against nuclear weapons on the peninsula, South Korean officials said (Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Jan. 29).
Lim Dong-won, the chief South Korean envoy, carried a letter to the North Korean leader from South Korean President Kim Dae-jung.
“In a verbal message (conveyed through a party secretary), Chairman Kim expressed thanks to President Kim for sending a special envoy with a letter which contained warm-hearted advice,” Lim said. “(The letter) urged the North to come clean about its uranium enrichment program and if it has such a program, it must start the process of resolving the issue by dismantling the program,” he added.
North Korea’s Kim reportedly said he would seriously consider the letter’s advice (Park Chan-kyong, Agence France-Presse, Jan. 29).
Bush Views
In his State of the Union speech last night, U.S. President George W. Bush said Pyongyang is “using its nuclear program to incite fear and seek concessions.”
“America and the world will not be blackmailed,” he said.
The United States is working with South Korea, Japan, China and Russia to solve the nuclear standoff, Bush said. North Korea will only solve its political and humanitarian problems by abandoning its nuclear efforts, he added.
Bush also said that the world must learn from the North Korean situation.
“Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula, and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq,” Bush said (New York Times, Jan. 29).
Russian Offer Rebuffed
North Korea has rejected a Russian attempt to mediate the crisis, United Press International reported today. Moscow had attempted to work toward a solution with the United Kingdom, France, China, the United States, South Korea, Australia, Japan, the European Union and Pyongyang, according to UPI.
“We categorically oppose all attempts to internationalize the nuclear question,” a North Korean statement said yesterday. “The only means for a peaceful and fair resolution of the nuclear question … is direct negotiations at an equal level between North Korea and the United States, face to face at the negotiating table. There cannot be any other way,” the statement said (United Press International, Jan. 28).
European Union foreign ministers agreed Monday to send a top-level diplomatic delegation to Pyongyang to work toward a solution to the nuclear standoff (Europe Information Service, Jan. 29).
U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $595 million contract to produce Trident 2 submarine-launched ballistic missiles, the U.S. Navy announced yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 28). The contract, a modification of a previous one, involves both the production of new missiles and support for those already deployed, the Navy said. The missiles are scheduled to be completed by 2007 (Reuters/Forbes.com, Jan. 28).
Russian military experts have completed a four-day inspection of the U.S. Naval Submarine Base in Bangor, Washington, a Russian Defense Ministry spokesman said Monday. The purpose of the inspection, conducted under the auspices of START, was to confirm information provided at the beginning of the year and compliance with the treaty (Vladislav Kuznetsov, ITAR-Tass, Jan. 27 in FBIS-SOV, Jan. 27).
|
 |
U.S. President George W. Bush called on Congress last night to support a $6 billion “Bioshield” (see GSN, Jan. 22).
“I ask you tonight to add to our future security with a major research and production effort to guard our people against bioterrorism, called Project Bioshield,” Bush said during his State of the Union address.
Project Bioshield would develop new vaccines for diseases such as anthrax, boutlinum toxin, Ebola, the plague and other diseases that could be used as biological weapons.
“We must assume that our enemies would use these diseases as weapons, and we must act before the dangers are upon us,” Bush said (White House release, Jan. 28).
For further information, see:
CDC Frequently Asked Questions About Anthrax
Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax
Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Botulinum Toxin
CDC Basic Information About Botulism
CDC Ebola Fact Sheet
Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Plague
CDC Basic Information
Researchers at U.S. universities are implementing more rigorous security measures as a result of last year’s anthrax attacks and mounting concern over biological weapons, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported this month (see GSN, Dec. 12, 2002).
As of Feb. 7, new regulations will require more than 800 U.S. laboratories, including 285 university-owned facilities, to increase security and regulate access to dangerous pathogens, according to the Chronicle.
The new regulations stem from the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act, which became law in June 2002, the Chronicle said (see GSN, June 12, 2002).
Laboratories must provide federal officials with details on their inventories of deadly toxins and pathogens, but facilities have some flexibility in implementing physical security changes, said Stephen Ostroff, deputy director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Infectious Diseases.
“Every facility is different,” Ostroff said. “Every facility may devise different solutions, meeting their security needs, which may work very well in their facility but may not at the facility five miles down the road,” he said.
The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, for example, designed a three-level approach to safeguard its stockpiles of anthrax and pneumonic plague, the Chronicle reported.
The first level of security is the outer laboratory, to which 100 people have access. To enter, they must swipe identification cards and enter personal identification numbers (PINs), all while being observed by security cameras.
To enter an inner laboratory, where 20 employees have access, they must again use their cards and codes.
The final area is restricted to just four people who must enter in pairs, each person entering another PIN code; this laboratory is where the university keeps its biological stocks. Finally, the select agents are stored in containers protected by combinations and key locks (Anne Marie Borrego, Chronicle of Higher Education, Jan. 31).
U.S. Army biological researchers have come under new security restrictions following the FBI’s anthrax investigation, WorldNetDaily reported today.
“We were told that to even be in a room with the select agents we will have to have a special key and Top Secret clearance,” said a biologist at the Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, a top Pentagon biological weapons research center.
Army biologists are now required to undergo background checks and obtain security clearances before they can work with dangerous pathogens, according to WorldNetDaily. Security clearances were not required previously.
One biologist told the Web daily that the new restrictions were a “knee-jerk” reaction to the FBI’s profiling of suspects in its anthrax investigation. The bureau has publicly focused its investigation into the autumn 2001 attacks on former Army biologist Steven Hatfill (see GSN, Jan. 28).
The FBI also recently administered polygraph tests to several scientists working at Dugway, where FBI engineers have been working to identify the source of the mailed anthrax that killed five people. “They were asked questions about the letters,” the biologist said (Paul Sperry, WorldNetDaily, Jan. 29).
U.S. security officials had 800 gas masks ready at the U.S. Capitol yesterday during President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address, Agence France-Press reported (see GSN, Jan. 28).
The masks were stacked in corridors around the building before Bush’s speech, according to a U.S. House of Representatives press gallery official.
The security measure was accompanied by extensive road closings and a heavy multi-agency law enforcement presence (Agence France-Presse, Jan. 29).
|
|
Back to top
