Iraq I:  United Kingdom Continues Work on Resolution Compromise

The United Kingdom continued its efforts today to create a compromise U.N. Security Council resolution on Iraq that would contain an agreeable deadline for full compliance by Iraq and include a series of compliance “benchmarks,” according to reports (see GSN, March 11).

“We are busting a gut to see if we can get greater consensus in the council,” British U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock, said, adding that he expected a vote on the resolution by Friday.  “We are going to go on talking until we find a way forward through the Security Council together,” he said.

Under the British proposal, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein would have 10 days to demonstrate that Iraq had taken a “strategic decision” to disarm itself of weapons of mass destruction by fulfilling a set of benchmarks.  If Iraq complied, a second phase would begin that would allow more time to verify Iraq’s disarmament, according to the Los Angeles Times.

“There is a two-stage process,” Greenstock said.  “One is to be convinced that Iraq is cooperating, the other is to disarm Iraq completely,” he added.

The six still-undecided nonpermanent council members oppose the 10-day deadline and have instead requested a 45-day deadline.  In a compromise proposal, Canada recommended a three-week window.  The United States, however, is opposed to extending the deadline much past March 17, the date originally proposed in a U.S.-British-Spanish draft resolution circulated Friday, according to the Times (see GSN, March 7).

Possible Benchmarks

Council members are beginning to agree, through negotiations one diplomat described as “gradual, painful and unproductive,” on what benchmarks Iraq would have to meet to show compliance.  Those tests include allowing inspectors to interview Iraqi WMD scientists, the destruction of VX and anthrax stocks and possibly the full destruction of Iraq’s supply of prohibited al-Samoud 2 ballistic missiles.

“We’re talking at the Bush-Blair level, to (France, Russia and China), to the middle six and others,” said a senior diplomatic source close to the negotiations, noting the six undecided Security Council members.  “You get an inch from one side, and you use that to get an inch from the other,” the diplomat said (Farley/Richter, Los Angeles Times, March 12).

Other proposed tests include a public admission by Hussein that he has concealed WMD stockpiles and will now destroy them; full disclosure of Iraq’s drone aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles; and a commitment to give up all mobile biological weapons laboratories, according to Reuters (Reuters/MSNBC.com, March 12).

The United States indicated support for the compromise resolution yesterday, urging the Security Council to vote on it this week.  U.S. officials said, however, that they opposed any extension of the deadline for full Iraqi compliance beyond a few days.

“The vote will take place this week,” said White House press secretary Ari Fleischer.  “There’s room for a little more diplomacy here but not much room and not much time,” he added (Mark Matthews, Baltimore Sun, March 12).

In a paper distributed yesterday, however, the White House said that the Security Council is still divided over any resolution on Iraq and “peaceful disarmament looks less and less likely.”

U.S. President George W. Bush’s frustration with the United Nations has reached the point to where it could lead to long-term effects, White House aides said.

“He [Bush] said it was a test of credibility, and the council passed a resolution that says immediate and complete disarmament but now will not enforce its own resolution,” a senior Bush administration official said.  “It sends a message,” the official added (CNN.com, March 12).

British Politics

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday that the United States could launch an attack on Iraq even without the aid of British troops.

If Blair was unable to commit British forces because of domestic political problems, there were “work-around” scenarios in place that would allow the United States to still proceed, Rumsfeld said (see GSN, Feb. 27).  These scenarios involve the use of British troops in noncombat missions, such as occupying oil fields or humanitarian work, U.S. officials said.

The British government has denied that there have been any talks on British troops not fully participating in a war with Iraq.

“Donald Rumsfeld has got that wrong, we will be actively engaged if we have to be,” said a British government spokesman.  “We continue to work for a second resolution,” he added.

Graham Allen, a member of Parliament who opposes war with Iraq, said Rumsfeld’ comments were a “heaven-sent opportunity” to provide political cover for Blair.

“He has been franker with the British people than the government,” Allen said.  “The cat is out of the bag.  They can do it without us and given Tony Blair the chance to get out of the hole if he wishes,” he added.

The Pentagon has issued a “clarification” statement saying that Rumsfeld did expect the United Kingdom’s full support.

“I have no doubt of the full support of the United Kingdom for the international community’s efforts to disarm Iraq.  In the event that a decision to use force is made, we have every reason to believe there will be a significant military contribution from the United Kingdom,” Rumsfeld’s statement said (Watson/Webster, London Times, March 12).

U.S. officials have said that Washington has allowed the diplomatic process within the Security Council to go on this long to provide political aid for Blair.

“We’re hanging on to diplomacy because of the need to give credence to Blair’s promise to pursue diplomacy as far as he could,” a U.S. official said yesterday.  “It’s not in our interest to have Tony Blair fall as prime minister over his commitment to help us,” the official added (Matthews, Baltimore Sun).

Bush Diplomacy

The Bush administration focused its diplomatic efforts yesterday on five of the six still-wavering nonpermanent council members, involving the use of veiled threats of the consequences of their lack of support, according to U.S. diplomats.

For example, the United States has suggested to Angola that $20 million in annual humanitarian aid might be reduced if it does not support the United States.  U.S. diplomats have also indicated to Chile that the approval of a pending free-trade agreement could be delayed in the U.S. Congress and suggested to Cameroon and Guinea that the United States might not push strongly for those countries to receive loans from international lenders, according to U.S. diplomats.

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus has charged that the White House has threatened a boycott of Mexican goods and services if Mexico does not side with the United States on Iraq.  Fleischer, however, dismissed the complaint, calling it “nonsense.”

Pakistan has been fairly immune to U.S. diplomatic pressures because the United States still needs Islamabad’s help in the war on terrorism, according to USA Today.  Pakistan has indicated that it will abstain on a vote on a new resolution (McQuillan/Squitieri, USA Today, March 12).

U.S. State Department officials said today they believe the United States is only lacking one vote to have the necessary nine for a new resolution to pass.  The United States is now confident it has the support of Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, one official said (CNN.com II, March 12).

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov yesterday reiterated his country’s decision to use its veto if necessary to block the U.S.-British-drafted resolution.  In his comments during a press conference in Tehran, Ivanov did not address, however, the new British compromise proposal.

“Russia is very much against this resolution which is in the works,” Ivanov said during the press conference, held jointly with Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi.  “We will vote against this,” Ivanov added (Reuters, March 11).

U.S. Troops, Experts Train to Recover Iraqi WMD

Meanwhile, the U.S. Army’s 75th Exploitation Task Force has begun training to follow U.S. and allied troops into Iraq to document discovered WMD stockpiles and to recover samples for further examination, according to the Washington Post.

“The objective of this specific task force is to prove to the world what Saddam actually has,” said Army Col. Richard McPhee, who heads the unit.

The unit is made up of soldiers from all four branches of the U.S. armed services, along with British military experts and personnel from several U.S. civilian agencies, the Post reported.

“Everyone understands the importance of this,” McPhee said.  “It’s a great mission,” he added (Mary Beth Sheridan, Washington Post, March 12).

Iraqi Drone

Iraq said today that a recently discovered drone aircraft, which the United States has claimed was meant for use in chemical weapons attacks, was only a model intended for reconnaissance missions.

“It is a prototype,” said Gen. Ibrahim Hussein, director of the Ibn Firnas site, where inspectors discovered the drone.  “It has not reached the stage of production.  It has not the capability whatsoever to carry chemical or biological weapons,” he added (Agence France-Presse, March 12).

Iraqi authorities took journalists to the site in an attempt to prove that the drone was not part of Iraqi WMD efforts.  One Associated Press journalist described the drone as appearing to be constructed from balsa wood and duct tape, with propellers connected to what appeared to be the engines of a weed whacker.

Brig. Imad Abdul Latif, director of the drone project, accused U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell of intentionally misleading the Security Council as to the purpose of the drone.

“He’s making a big mistake,” Latif said.  “He knows very well that this aircraft is not used for what he said,” Latif added (Niko Price, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, March 12).

U-2 Flights

The U-2 surveillance flights currently being carried out over Iraq as part of the inspections regime caused a minor crisis yesterday when two simultaneous flights raised concerns among Iraqi officials, who said they had not been properly informed, according to the Los Angeles Times (see GSN, Feb. 18).

Iraq scrambled fighter aircraft to respond to the second U-2 flight, which was considered suspicious, according to U.S. sources.  An Iraqi official in Baghdad said, however, that the second plane was only monitored and that Iraqi officials telephoned U.N. officials for clarification.

Gen. Hossam Mohammed Amin, the chief Iraqi liaison to the inspectors, called the incident a “technical mistake” by the United Nations and said a U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission official in Baghdad had apologized.

“He promised that the mistake would never be repeated,” Amin said.

U.N. officials denied the apology, however, saying it was not necessary because there is no limit as to how many U-2 surveillance flights can occur at the same time (John Daniszewski, Los Angeles Times, March 12).

Inspections

U.N. inspectors have visited at least one suspect Iraqi site today, according to Reuters.  Inspectors traveled to al-Taji to continue supervising the destruction of banned al-Samoud 2 missiles (see related GSN story, today; Reuters, March 12).

Yesterday, inspectors traveled to at least eight suspect Iraqi sites, according to an International Atomic Energy Agency press release.

UNMOVIC missile inspectors traveled to the Taji Technical Battalion and supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles.  They also traveled to the Waziriyah plant and inventoried destroyed al-Samoud 2 components.

UNMOVIC biological inspectors visited the Kerbala for Canning Foods Co. Ltd in Kerbala.  UNMOVIC chemical inspectors visited three factories owned by the State Company for Battery Manufacturing — two located in Baghdad and one located west of Baghdad. 

Inspectors visited the Mosul branch of the Mesopotamia Seed Company, the IAEA release said.  IAEA inspectors visited the Ur General Establishment, near Nasiriyah (IAEA release, March 11).

For further information, see:

UNMOVIC

IAEA Iraq Action Team

U.N. Resolution 1441

Back to top

Iraq II:  Negative Consequences of War Outweigh Positive Benefits, Report Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — While there will likely be a number of nonproliferation benefits from the United States going to war with Iraq, there are also likely to be significant security costs, warns a report released last week by the Monterey Institute of International Studies’ Center for Nonproliferation.

The report examines several scenarios each for both the favorable and negative consequences of a war with Iraq, but ultimately concludes that the potential negative security benefits of war and occupation outweigh the potential benefits.

“On balance, quashing Iraq’s WMD ambitions by force is an unnecessary gamble whose probable benefits do not warrant taking the inherent risks,” the report says.  “A more effective course of action for reducing mass-destruction terrorism and weapons threats would be to bolster existing constraints on Iraq’s WMD potential,” it adds.

Potential Benefits

The report details several scenarios examining potential positive and negative consequences of a war on Iraq (see GSN, Oct. 29, 2002).  Monterey researcher Michael Barletta authored the report and based the scenarios on a number of underlying assumptions, including Iraq’s possession of biological and chemical weapons, as well as delivery systems; a lack of Iraqi restraint in using such weapons; and an ultimate U.S. victory over Iraq should war occur.

According to the report, the probable benefits of the defeat of Hussein include the fall of his regime, the capture and destruction of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, the prevention of Iraq exporting WMD to other rogue states or terrorists groups, and the experience gained by U.S. troops by learning how to disrupt WMD attacks.

In addition, a successful war with Iraq could result in possibly discovering and later destroying Iraqi smallpox stockpiles, relocating Iraqi WMD scientists to Western countries, and demonstrating the U.S. military’s ability to withstand WMD attacks, thereby dampening the interest of other countries to acquire WMD, according the report.  It also says, however, that is unlikely that a war with Iraq could end state-sponsored terrorism or lead to other rogue states voluntarily ending their own WMD efforts.

Possible Costs

Despite such benefits, even a successful U.S. war with Iraq would have some negative consequences, according to the report.  For example, North Korea would probably exploit the U.S. focus on Iraq to further expand its own nuclear capabilities, Iraqi WMD expertise and knowledge could leak into the hands of other rogue states and terrorist groups through a lack of centralized control and the scattering of Iraqi scientists seeking to avoid war crimes prosecution; Iraqi forces would probably use chemical and biological weapons to inflict at least limited casualties on U.S. troops, and a post-war Iraq would retain at least some WMD expertise and dual-use infrastructure.

It is also possible, though not probable, that war with Iraq could spur Iraqi WMD attacks on Israel, the report says, adding that if such attacks were large enough, Israel could be forced to respond.  The report also warns of post-conflict attacks on U.S. occupation troops, possibly with chemical and biological weapons, and the possibility that other rogue states might accelerate their own WMD programs over fears of potential U.S. pre-emptive attacks.

The report does play down the possibility of some “nightmare” scenarios.  These unlikely scenarios include a post-Hussein Iraq still armed with substantial quantities of WMD; other states, such as China or India, developing their own pre-emption doctrines; and U.S. or Israeli nuclear retaliation against Baghdad.

Before launching an attack on Iraq, the United States needs to consider both the positive and negative consequences of such an attack, according to the report.  It finds, however, that the “disastrous” negative security consequences tip the balance in favor for a more restrained approach.

“In sum, the impending war is a risky venture,” the report says.

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Washington Sanctions Two Foreign Entities

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The United States has imposed sanctions against an Indian company and a Jordanian citizen for proliferation activities in violation of the 1992 Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act, according to an announcement in yesterday’s Federal Register (see GSN, Feb. 19).

The Indian company Protech Consultants Private, Ltd. and Jordanian national Mohammed al-Khatib were found in violation of the nonproliferation act for providing support to Iraq’s biological and chemical weapons efforts over the last few years, according to a U.S. State Department official.  The sanctions, which took effect Feb. 13, prohibit the United States from purchasing goods from or providing an export license to the two entities for two years.

Back to top

Iraq III:  Summary of Inspections

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, 2002.  About 100 inspectors are now based in the country at two facilities in Baghdad and Mosul.  The following chart summarizes some of the inspectors’ recently reported activities.

 

Date	Site	Activity
March 12	Al-Taji	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles (see GSN, March 12).
March 11	Taji Technical Battalion	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles (see GSN, March 12).
	Waziriyah plant	UNMOVIC missile inspectors inventoried destroyed al-Samoud 2 missile components (see GSN, March 12).
	Kerbala for Canning Foods Co. Ltd in Kerbala	See GSN, March 12.
	State Company for Battery Manufacturing-owned factory in Baghdad
	Second State Company for Battery Manufacturing-owned factory in Baghdad
	State Company for Battery Manufacturing plant west of Baghdad
	Mosul branch of the Mesopotamia Seed Company
	Ur General Establishment, near Nasiriyah
March 10	Nehrawan branch of the Mesopotamia State Company for Seed Handling	See GSN, March 11.
	State Establishment for Mechanical Industries in Iskandariyah
	Hiteen State Company
	Al-Tuwaitha	IAEA inspectors reviewed the status of radioactive waste stored at the site and conducted a radiation survey (see GSN, March 11).
	Al-Taji	Inspectors observed the destruction of prohibited al-Samoud 2 missiles (see GSN, March 10).
	Al-Aziziyah Airfield and Firing Range	Inspectors searched for additional R-400 bombs (see GSN, March 10).
	Nahrawan leather-dyeing factory	See GSN, March 10.
March 9	Arabic Gulf Company in Mosul	IAEA release, March 11.
	Al-Taji	Inspectors observed the destruction of prohibited al-Samoud 2 missiles (see GSN, March 10).
	Al-Qa Qaa storage site	Inspectors verified the tagging of al-Samoud 2 warheads and inspected the facility’s solid propellant production plant (see GSN, March 10).
	Al-Fatah Factory of the Karama State Company	Inspectors destroyed mechanical parts of guidance and control assemblies for al-Samoud 2 missiles (see GSN, March 10).
	Al-Aziziyah Airfield and Firing Range	UNMOVIC biological experts supervised the transfer of excavated R-400 bombs to a more secure section of the site (see GSN, March 10).
	Tadmur Company for Tanning and Leather Industry	See GSN, March 10.
	Undisclosed areas northwest of the northern city of Kirkuk.
	General Systems Company in central Baghdad
	Jurf al-Naddaf complex, south of Baghdad	IAEA inspectors conducted a radiation survey at buildings within the complex (see GSN, March 10).
March 8	Taji Technical Battalion	Inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles (U.N. release, March 8).
	Al-Samoud Factory	U.N. release, March 8.
	Al-Qa Qaa	UNMOVIC missile inspectors verified the emptying and tagging of warheads for al-Samoud 2 missiles (U.N. release, March 8).
	Al-Aziziyah Airfield and Firing Range	UNMOVIC biological inspectors supervised the excavation of R-400 bombs (U.N. release, March 8).
	Al-Qa-Qaa sulfuric acid plant	U.N. release, March 8.
	Yellow Corn Workshop/al-Haydaria
	Military factory currently under construction south of Baghdad
	High explosives-related sites south of Baghdad
	Sahal al-Din Company
	Area northwest of Baghdad	IAEA inspectors conducted a radiation survey (U.N. release, March 8).
March 7	Maintenance department of the Mosul railway station	U.N. release, March 7.
	Branch of the Mesopotamia State Company for Seed Handling
	Al-Aziziyah Airfield and Firing Range	UNMOVIC biological inspectors took samples from the remainders of containers used to transport biological agents (U.N. release, March 7).
March 2-March 6	See GSN, March 7.

Back to top

Iraq:  Report Asks If White House Lied on Nuclear Evidence

By David McGlinchey
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — A report released Monday by a nuclear study institute here questions whether the Bush administration has been lying about evidence of Iraqi nuclear weapons to build support for a war (see GSN, Sept. 19, 2002).

In his address to the U.N. Security Council Feb. 5, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said Iraq had attempted to buy high-strength aluminum tubes to use as centrifuge rotors to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, but that assertion has been questioned by U.S. and international experts.  Iraqi officials have said they were attempting to buy rocket tubes.  Powell was repeating a charge made previously by U.S. officials, including President George W. Bush.

“A critical question is whether the Bush administration has deliberately misled the public and other governments in playing a ‘nuclear card’ that it knew would strengthen public support for war,” according to The CIA’s Aluminum Tubes’ Assessment: Is the Nuclear Case Going Down the Tubes?, by David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on the report.

Powell has defended his claims, but last Friday International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said there is no evidence that the aluminum tubes were destined for a nuclear program (see GSN, March 7).

“After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq,” he said.

To make its case, the White House is “ignoring technical evidence and pushing flawed analysis” from the CIA, the ISIS report says.

Despite extensive White House efforts to use the tubes as evidence, nuclear experts and interested officials have widely dismissed the Bush administration’s charges, Albright told Global Security Newswire.

“The administration case is not holding up,” he said.  The report says that the CIA analysis of the tubes “is viewed as atrocious and deceptive by many experts on centrifuges and Iraqi rockets.”

White House Evidence

Powell told the U.N. Security Council that Iraq ordered tubes with a “progression to higher and higher levels of specification, including in the latest batch an anodized coating,” which serves as a protection to corrosion, according to the report.

The problem with Powell’s supposedly damning evidence is that “you don’t anodize centrifuges,” Albright said.

“A well known unclassified fact is that anodization is not necessary for a centrifuge.  However, anodization is a common practice in military and commercial equipment to protect against weather and the environment.  For example, bicycle handlebars are anodized,” the report says.

According to Albright, the anodized layer is just one example of the White House continuing to push its arguments in the face of contrary analysis and refusing to answer technical criticism of its allegations.

“They present information, you debunk it, and they just ignore it,” Albright said.

Albright also accused the White House of keeping the technical arguments away from those who view it with a skeptical eye.  He said that he has no way of knowing if the alleged White House deception is intentional but the possibility is troubling.

“This case serves to remind us that decision-makers are not above misusing technical and scientific analysis to bolster their political goals,” the report says.

Back to top

Iran:  Agreement to Return Spent Russian Fuel Still Unsigned

Although Iranian officials announced yesterday that Russia would begin delivering nuclear power plant fuel in May, the two countries have not yet signed a deal to ensure that spent nuclear fuel from the Bushehr nuclear facility would be returned to Russia, Knight Ridder reported today (see GSN, March 11; Soraya Nelson, Knight Ridder/Philadelphia Inquirer, March 12).

Iran still intends to return the spent fuel to Russia, according to Iranian officials.

“We get 3 percent enriched uranium from Russia as fuel, and we should send back the waste fuel after keeping it for one year in Iran under special conditions,” said Abbas Sedqkerdar, head of nuclear security at Bushehr (Russia Journal, March 12).

An Iranian official at the site also denied charges that Iran had violated the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty by testing uranium hexafluoride in centrifuges without giving the International Atomic Energy Agency the requisite 180 days notice, Knight Ridder reported (see GSN, March 10).

“Our colleagues are not so unprofessional that they would flout the NPT with inspectors present,” Sabouri said.  IAEA officials recently visited Iran to look over the developing nuclear effort (Nelson, Knight Ridder/Philadelphia Inquirer).

The Bushehr facility will have three cameras and two telephone lines linked to IAEA headquarters in Vienna.  Iran’s other nuclear sites do not have such technology because the IAEA has not yet specified what kind of monitoring it wants, according to Sabouri.

Sabouri also discussed Iran’s decision not to sign the Additional Protocol to its IAEA safeguards agreement, which would allow spot inspections.

“They say we should accept more commitments.  Fine, then come build reactors for us,” he said (Nelson, Knight Ridder/Philadelphia Inquirer).

“We do not want to increase our commitments in the face of sanctions that are currently imposed on us for obtaining nuclear technology,” Sabouri added (Fathi, New York Times).

An Iranian nuclear scientist said the plutonium produced by the Bushehr plant would not be usable for nuclear weapons.

“The plutonium obtained consists of (a mix of) plutonium-239 and -240.  And it’s extremely difficult to separate them because Iran doesn’t have such an advanced technology to do so,” said Rasul Sediqi.

Some nuclear experts said, however, that nuclear material containing plutonium-240 could be used to make weapons.

“This provides Iran with a source of weapons material, if they have the facility to reprocess the fuel and separate the plutonium,” said Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Ali Dareini, Associated Press/USA Today, March 12).

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei is scheduled to report Monday to the IAEA board of governors on Iran’s nuclear efforts, although it is not certain what he will tell them, according to the Moscow Times (Moscow Times, March 12).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Officials Sign Agreement to Close Plutonium Plants

Washington and Moscow have signed an agreement to close the three remaining Russian plutonium plants over the next eight years, according to U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham (see GSN, March 6).

“This will bring us to the end of production of weapons-grade plutonium in Russia,” he said.

Abraham signed the agreement with Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev.  The United States, which halted its own plutonium production in 1990, agreed to put $400 million toward building fossil fuel plants that will replace the plutonium plants’ energy output (AFX News, March 12).

The agreement was signed in Vienna during the International Conference on Security of Radioactive Sources (see GSN, March 11; Pravda, March 11).

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Calls For Direct Negotiations

North Korea called today for direct talks with the United States and said Washington is “evading its responsibility” for the current nuclear crisis (see GSN, March 7).

U.S. efforts to establish multilateral talks are “aimed to evade its responsibility for authoring the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula.  This issue should be solved between the D.P.R.K. and the U.S. [because] it is none other than the U.S. that poses a nuclear threat to the D.P.R.K.,” according to a statement from the state-controlled Korean Central News Agency.

The statement said that the idea that North Korea poses a threat to the United States is a “far-fetched assertion” (Korean Central News Agency, March 11).

The Pentagon announced yesterday that it is dispatching as many as six F-117A stealth aircraft to South Korea for the “Foal Eagle” joint military exercises with Seoul’s armed forces.

“These defensive exercises are not related to current world events and are not meant to be aggressive or threatening,” said Air Force Staff Sergeant Aaron Cram, a spokesman for the 49th Fighter Wing at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico (Charles Aldinger, Reuters/Boston Globe, March 12).

In addition, the United States has sent the USS. Carl Vinson, an aircraft carrier, to the region to participate in the exercises.

“The U.S. should not boast its military muscle,” KCNA said.  “The D.P.R.K. has self-defensive national defense capacity powerful enough to beat back any formidable enemy at a single stroke,” it added (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo.com, March 12).

Back to top

Anthrax:  Scientists Unveil New Method to Determine Origin of Spores

By analyzing water residues in anthrax spores, investigators might be able to determine the source of anthrax used in potential future biological terrorism attacks, according to research presented yesterday by a group of CIA-funded scientists to a biological defense conference in Baltimore (see GSN, Feb. 21).

In their research, the scientists measured the minuscule amounts of certain hydrogen and oxygen isotopes that exist in various ratios in water supplies from different locations throughout the United States, according to the Baltimore Sun.  These isotopes remain in anthrax spores grown using the water, even if they are dried into powder, the Sun reported.

Helen Kreuzer-Martin, a University of Utah biologist and lead author of the study, said FBI agents involved in the bureau’s investigation into the autumn 2001 anthrax attacks have consulted her research team about their methods, but have not provided an anthrax sample from the attacks for testing.  The bureau might have used similar techniques on its own to trace the water used to produce the spores used in the attacks, she said.

While the method cannot determine the exact location where anthrax spores might have been produced, it can be used to rule out many locations, according to the Sun.

“It’s not foolproof,” Kreuzer-Martin said.  “But if the terrorist used water from the tap, we could tell a lot about where the spores were grown.  We could say, for example, the spores were not grown in Iraq, they were not grown at Dugway Proving Ground (in Utah), but they could have been grown in Chicago,” she added (Scott Shane, Baltimore Sun, March 12).

New Anthrax Vaccine

Meanwhile, the U.S. biotechnology company Vical Inc. has said it wants to begin human testing of its new anthrax vaccine by the end of the year (see GSN, Feb. 3).

Vical executives presented data Monday indicating that the vaccine, produced with genetic anthrax material, is effective in preventing rabbits from contracting inhalational anthrax.  The vaccine was previously found to be successful in protecting mice.

The company plans to request permission from the Food and Drug Administration to test the vaccine, which would only require two injections as opposed to the current six-shot vaccine, on humans.  Vical executives and FDA officials are currently discussing whether the results of the rabbit and mice tests support human testing or if additional tests on monkeys would be needed first, said company head Vijay Samant (Paul Elias, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, March 11).

Canada Re-Examines Anthrax Tests

The Canadian Defense Department has asked Donald Avery, a history professor at the University of Western Ontario, to re-examine the country’s history of testing anthrax as a biological weapon, according to the Globe and Mail.

One reason for the request is to determine what exactly happened during a series of secret anthrax tests conducted by British, Canadian and U.S. researchers in the 1940s and 1950s to determine if any live spores still remain.  Canadian defense officials are particularly concerned about reports that scientists used live anthrax during experiments conducted at the Canadian Forces Base Suffield in southern Alberta, Avery said.

“They were very concerned about the allegations that have been made about the open-field testing of anthrax during the Second World War, and possibly afterwards,” Avery said.  “And for understandable reasons,” he added, “because those anthrax spores could still be there” (Graeme Smith, Globe and Mail, March 12).

For further information, see:

CDC Frequently Asked Questions About Anthrax

FBI Amerithrax Investigation

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax

GSN Anthrax Attack Chronology (Dec. 12, 2001)

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Preparing Ballistic Missile Test, Second Cruise Missile Test Failed

U.S. intelligence officials have said North Korea is preparing to test-launch another missile, possible a Taepodong 2 long-range ballistic missile, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, March 10).

Recent satellite photographs taken of a North Korean base revealed activity that indicated possible missile test preparations, the officials said.  The activity is being closely monitored amid concerns that the test could involve a Taepodong 2, an official said.  Such a test would unquestionably end North Korea’s missile testing moratorium, which began in 1998.

“There aren’t indications of an imminent launch, but it is something they might well do,” one U.S. official said.  “It’s certainly a possibility,” the official added.

Pyongyang is expected to make a prior announcement before the next missile test, the intelligence officials said.  Such an announcement could be issued as early as today, they added.

Meanwhile, North Korea’s Monday test of an anti-ship cruise missile failed when the missile did not fly properly due to a guidance system problem, the officials said.  The missile, a North Korean version of the Chinese-made HY-2 Silkworm, flew about 80 miles before falling into the Sea of Japan.  The missile normally has a range of about 100 miles (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, March 12).

Back to top

Iraq:  Baghdad Destroys Three Al-Samoud 2 Missiles

Iraq today began destroying an additional three prohibited al-Samoud 2 missiles, according to Reuters (see GSN, March 6; Reuters/MSNBC.com).  Yesterday, Iraqi technicians destroyed three missiles, bringing the total of al-Samoud 2 missiles destroyed to date to 55.  Iraq also destroyed yesterday nine warheads for the missiles, one al-Samoud 2 launcher and some propellant tanks (International Atomic Energy Agency release, March 11).

Back to top