Threat Assessment:  Terrorists More Likely to Use Conventional Weapons, Analysts Say

Terrorists are more likely to use conventional weapons, such as car bombs, in future attacks instead of weapons of mass destruction, USA Today reported today (see GSN, March 27).

Future terrorist attacks will probably resemble the series of car bombings that killed 34 people in Saudi Arabia’s capital earlier this week, analysts said (see GSN, May 15).  Conventional weapons, such as guns and explosives, are easy to obtain and use.  In addition, U.S. officials have said it would be almost impossible to prevent terrorists from obtaining such weapons, which could cause almost as many casualties as an attack using nuclear, chemical or biological materials.

“Yes, al-Qaeda has shown an interest in chemical and biological, as well as radiological, devices,” said Amy Smithson, a terrorism analyst at the Henry L. Stimson Center.  “But those are taller technical orders.  In the case of terrorist activity, the statistics are stark:  It’s bombs, bombs, bombs, bombs,” she said.

Some analysts said the Bush administration and the media were exaggerating the threat of terrorists using weapons of mass destruction. 

For example, the U.S. Homeland Security Department’s Web site has a graphic suggesting that the fallout from the detonation of a “dirty bomb” would cover an area about one-quarter the size of Texas.  Scientists who helped prepare the information included on the Web site, however, have said that the contaminated area resulting from such a blast would probably be much smaller.

While agreeing that terrorists are more likely to use conventional explosives in future attacks, U.S. officials said it is almost impossible to predict just what terrorists might do, thereby requiring preparations for even the most unlikely types of possible attacks.

“One thing we know about terrorists is there is no way to predict what will happen,” said Brian Roehrkasse, spokesman for Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge (Laura Parker, USA Today, May 16).

London Warns of Possible Future Attacks in Saudi Arabia

Meanwhile, the United Kingdom has warned of a “high threat” of further terrorist attacks against Western interests in Saudi Arabia, possibly involving the use of chemical and biological weapons.  The British Foreign Office has advised all Britons to avoid nonessential travel to the region.

“There remains a high threat of further large or small-scale attacks against Western interests in Saudi Arabia,” the official warning said.  “Terrorist attacks could involve the use of chemical and biological materials,” it added (Times of India, May 16).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Ridge Pleased With TOPOFF 2 Exercise

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said yesterday that he was pleased with the initial lessons learned from the “Top Officials 2” (TOPOFF 2) exercise — a simulation of terrorist attacks involving weapons of mass destruction — held this week in Seattle and Chicago (see GSN, May 12).

“If we are going to make our response system stronger, we first have to identify where strengths, as well as weaknesses, exist,” Ridge said during a visit to Chicago’s 911 center for emergency communications.

A full report on the exercise, sections of which may be classified, is expected by autumn, according to the Associated Press.

“It’s information no one wants on the street and available for the bad guys,” said Homeland Security official Don Jacks.

U.S., state and local officials have said a few glitches were experienced during the exercise.  For example, in Seattle, which suffered a “dirty bomb” explosion at the start of the exercise, Mayor Greg Nickels had trouble obtaining an interpretation of the projected radiation plume, AP reported.

“There was no indication of what it meant to be inside the green or outside the green,” Nickels said.  “It was just a big green blob,” he said.

It took one hour to receive an explanation that 4,000 people lived or worked in the “exclusion zone,” where radiation levels were the highest, according to AP.  Based on that information, Nickels ordered a large section of downtown Seattle residents to “shelter in place.”  Nickels said that if the bomb had been real, he would not have wanted to take so long to issue the order (Elizabeth Gillespie, Associated Press, May 16).

In its part of the exercise, Chicago this week has coped with a mock plague attack, according to Agence France-Presse.  The city’s simulated troubles grew yesterday with a collapsed building and an airport disaster involving the collision of an emergency services helicopter with a passenger airliner.

Ridge yesterday praised Chicago’s efforts during the exercise.  “Our initial assessment is that the city has performed well,” he said (Agence France-Presse, May 16).

Back to top

Iraq:  WMD Hunt Could Take Years, Senior Pentagon Official Says

The hunt for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction could take years to complete, U.S. Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith told the House International Relations Committee yesterday (see GSN, May 15).

“I am confident that we will eventually be able to piece together a fairly complete account of Iraq’s WMD programs — but the process will take months and perhaps years,” Feith said.

Coalition forces have so far found no biological or chemical weapons in Iraq, Feith and Lt. Gen. Norman Schwartz, director of operations for the Pentagon’s joint staff, told the committee.  In addition, no definitive conclusions have been reached yet on two recovered Iraqi trailers suspected of being mobile biological weapons laboratories, they said.

Feith’s testimony could be an attempt by Bush administration officials to play down the significance of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, according to analysts.

“Day by day, the administration is trying to lower the expectation of what they will find, as opposed to before the war, when they were trying to raise expectations day by day,” said Jon Wolfsthal, a weapons expert for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Bill Nichols, USA Today, May 16).

Sanctions

Meanwhile, the United States yesterday provided experts from U.N. Security Council members with a revised resolution to immediately remove U.N. sanctions against Iraq, according to the Associated Press.  The experts are scheduled to meet again today.

The revised resolution includes more than 25 changes to address concerns of various council members, said Richard Grenell, spokesman for U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte.  “We think we’ve moved significantly,” Grenell said.

Two of the five permanent council members — France and Russia — have called for only a suspension of sanctions, and not a full removal, because previous Security Council resolutions call for U.N. inspectors to verify that Iraq no longer possesses weapons of mass destruction before the sanctions can end, AP reported. 

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell yesterday appeared to indicate that the United States might support such a move, according to AP.  While the United States prefers the full lifting of the sanctions, “we will look at the idea of initially suspending sanctions,” he said during a press conference in Sofia, Bulgaria.

Following Powell’s comments, both the U.S. Mission to the United Nations and the White House issued statements saying the U.S. position was to quickly end the sanctions (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 16).

“With the regime gone, there is no reason to do anything other than lift the sanctions, so that the Iraqi people can become fully integrated into the global economy,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.  “We believe the sanctions should be lifted as soon as possible, and we intend to pursue a vote at the Security Council as early as next week,” he said (Nicholas Kralev, Washington Times, May 16).

Later yesterday, Powell said the United States wanted to end the sanctions.

“We are going for lifting the sanctions,” Powell said during a flight from Sofia to Germany.  “We want to get 15-0 in the Security Council.  I think a lift is achievable,” he said (Lederer, Associated Press).

German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder today supported a full lifting of sanctions against Iraq, saying the sanctions “make no sense” (Associated Press/New York Times, May 16).

Back to top

South Asia:  Kashmiris Should Begin Dialogue, Pakistani Foreign Minister Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri yesterday proposed that Kashmiris on both sides of the Line of Control that divides the disputed region should begin a dialogue among themselves, in addition to India and Pakistan beginning their own dialogue to reduce tensions (see GSN, May 13).

“I think Kashmiris can actually become the promoters of peace in the subcontinent, because they have a vested interest in peace,” Kasuri said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation after a meeting earlier in the day with national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.  “So we should encourage a dialogue between Kashmiris on both the sides and start a dialogue amongst ourselves.  And whether we like it or not, at some stage they have to be brought into it,” he said.

India and Pakistan have gone to war three times since 1947, and almost fought again last year when an attack by Kashmiri militants on the Indian Parliament in December 2001 led to both sides mobilizing their armed forces for 10 months (see GSN, Oct. 17, 2002).  The disputed region remains a potential flashpoint between the two nuclear-armed nations that requires a solution, according to Kasuri.

“Supposing Pakistan and India decide to forget about Kashmir, because they feel it’s too hard. … Will Kashmiris let things rest?  No, they won’t.  Too much has happened,” Kasuri said.  “So we have to find some solution … in which aspirations of the people of Kashmir are taken into consideration,” he said.

Kasuri yesterday praised the United States for playing a role in helping the two countries move closer to beginning a new dialogue.  A U.S. delegation headed by Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage met with senior officials in both countries last week (see GSN, May 12).

“I think the United States played a very positive role,” Kasuri said.  “I think they there were doing something that is very noble — trying to prevent two nuclear-armed countries from going for mass slaughter,” he said.

Kasuri denied, however, that Washington was attempting to “pressure” the two countries into peace.

“Pakistan and India are two large countries, very large countries.  There’s no question of anybody imposing their will on India or Pakistan.  But we need friends,” Kasuri said.  “What happens is when two people stop talking to each other, you sometimes need friends who will make them talk to each other,” he said.

Pakistan hopes the United States will continue to be involved in the region, Kasuri said.

“We would ask the Americans to remain engaged in South Asia,” Kasuri said.  “And hopefully, a time will come when no external input would be needed for the leaders of Pakistan and India to start talking to each other,” he said.

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Trying to Smuggle Nuclear Gear Through Germany, Officials Say

North Korea’s embassy in Germany is attempting to smuggle “sensitive goods” out of the country, according to a German report released Tuesday (see GSN, May 15).

“One can assume that embassy personnel are still involved in the acquisition of sensitive goods,” the German interior ministry said in an annual report on domestic security.  “Because the previous practice to organize the export of such goods via European third countries is hardly possible anymore due to extensive checks, it is being attempted to carry out such exports via China or Singapore. … Not infrequently, North Korean front companies in China are given as the recipient,” the reports says.

Last month, Germany’s Der Spiegel reported that an attempt was made to ship 22 tons of aluminum tubes to an alleged North Korean front company in China for possible use in Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program.  The shipment was identified and stopped in Egypt, according to Agence France-Presse (see GSN, April 28; Agence France-Presse, May 13 in FBIS-EAS, May 13).

South Korea Paying for Reactor Project

Meanwhile, South Korea has so far spent $850 million to build light-water nuclear reactors in North Korea.  Under the effort, run by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, Japan has spent $323 million on the effort and the European Union has contributed more than $17 million (Yonhap, May 14 in FBIS-EAS, May 14).

Back to top

Russia:  Military Exercise to Involve Simulated Nuclear Attack on U.S., Britain

Russia is expected to conduct military exercises this weekend that will involve simulated nuclear attacks on the United States and the United Kingdom using Russian strategic bombers and submarines, according to Nezavisimaya Gazeta (see GSN, May 14).

The exercise scenario is based on a regional conflict expanding into a wider war, according to Nezavisimaya Gazeta.  The exercise is expected to involve four Tu-160 and nine Tu-95MS strategic bombers, as well as ballistic missile submarines from the Russian Northern and Pacific fleets.  One aspect of the exercises is expected to include an attack on U.S. satellites to blind U.S. military forces and to prevent the use of guided munitions against Russian forces (Igor Korotchenko, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, May 14).

Paving the way earlier this week, two Tu-95 and four Tu-160 strategic bombers, along with ships from the Russian Pacific and Black Sea fleets, conducted joint exercises with the Indian Navy in the Indian Ocean.  During the exercise, the Russian bombers successfully used air-to-surface missiles to attack targets located in the Arabian Sea off the coast of Yemen (see GSN, Oct. 15, 2002; RFE/RL NewsLine, May 15).

Quality of Russian Strategic Officers Increases

The number of officers in Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces has increased for the first time in five years, force commander Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov said Wednesday.

“The proficiency of the RVSN command staff and the general morale of the officers corps allow for successful fulfillment of the main tasks to maintain combat readiness and support troops operation in modern conditions,” he said.

In addition, work is still continuing to equip a missile division based in the Saratov region with new Topol-M missile silo systems, Solovtsov said (see GSN, Dec. 18, 2002; Vladislav Kuznetsov, ITAR-Tass, May 14, in FBIS-SOV, May 14).

Back to top

Iran:  Tehran Capable of “Delivering Deadly Blows” With Biological Weapons, Opposition Group Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — An Iranian opposition group with ties to a U.S.-designated terrorist organization claims Tehran has developed the capability to deliver “deadly blows” using biological weapons (see GSN, May 15).

At a press conference yesterday, representatives from the National Council of Resistance of Iran provided a detailed outline of Iran’s alleged biological weapons program.  The group described an official 2001 Iranian document, the Comprehensive National Microbial Defense Plan, which detailed Tehran’s goals for its biological weapons program, as well as which agencies and centers would be responsible for various research and procurement activities.

The council is the political arm of the Mujahedin-e Khalq, which the U.S. State Department has formally identified as a terrorist organization.  Mujahedin-e Khalq is a Marxist-influenced group that conducted terrorist attacks in the 1970s that killed U.S. military and civilian personnel in Iran, has a long history of attacks against the Iranian clerical regime and advocates a secular government, according to a Federation of American Scientists fact sheet.

Tehran anticipates tripling its biological weapons capabilities within two years, according to council representatives who also provided the names of Iranian officials and scientists — as well as those of research centers and universities — involved in the program.

Iran’s biological weapons efforts have apparently reached the point where Iran could conduct biological attacks today, said council representative Alireza Jafarzadeh.

“Our sources have confirmed that if decided today, the Iranian regime is capable of delivering deadly blows and inflict[ing] massive casualties, human casualties,” Jafarzadeh said.

The council has made its information available to international arms control organizations and to U.S. officials, Jafarzadeh said.  “We urge attention to this matter,” he said.

A U.S. State Department official confirmed today to Global Security Newswire that Washington has received the council’s information.  “We’ve been concerned about Iran’s chem/bio programs for a long time now,” the official said (see GSN, April 11).

While refusing to confirm the council’s descriptions of Iran’s biological weapons efforts, the State official did note the group’s past successes in bringing aspects of Iran’s WMD programs to international notice.

“These guys have been proven to be sort of accurate in the past,” the official said.

Iran today denied the council’s allegations, according to reports.

“I strongly deny that we have biological weapons because we do not need any banned weapons,” according to a senior Iranian official quoted by Reuters.

The council’s presentation described a far more developed and advanced biological weapons program than the CIA described in a report released earlier this month.  The agency’s WMD assessment says Tehran “has capabilities to produce small quantities of BW agents, but has a limited ability to weaponize them.”

According to council representative Soona Samsami, Iran’s biological weapons efforts include a number of components, including the production of anthrax and aflatoxin at the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Imam Hussein University and the weaponization of several biological agents, including anthrax, smallpox, typhoid, plague and cholera.  Iranian scientists are also conducting weapons-related genetic engineering research at the Malek Ashtar University, Samsami said.

The components of Iran’s biological weapons program have been divided among a number of Iranian agencies, including the ministries of defense and intelligence and security, the Armed Forces Command Headquarters and the Revolutionary Guards Joint Command Headquarters, Samsami said.  Coordinating the activities of the various involved agencies is the Armed Forces Command Headquarters’ New Warfare Directorate, headed by senior Revolutionary Guards Commander Nasser Toqyani, Samsami said.

The Iranian Intelligence and Security Ministry has established the Directorate to Assess Weapons of Mass Destruction, which works to illegally obtain foreign WMD-related technologies, especially those related to biological weapons, Samsami said.  She added that the directorate has installed agents in a number of countries to carry out this mission.

Tehran has established within the Iranian Defense Ministry the Special Industries Organization, which is responsible for arming the Iranian military with biological weapons and for procuring biological weapons-related technologies, Samsami said.  She also said the Special Industries Organization has hired experts from China, India, North Korea and Russia to assist Iran’s biological weapons program. 

Iran has also established several research centers under various agencies to conduct biological weapons-related research, Samsami said.  These include the Martyr Meisami complex, headed by the Special Industries Organization, and the Revolutionary Guards Baqiyatollah Research Center, affiliated with unit’s Baqiyatollah Hospital.  The Baqiyatollah center is headed by a man named Karami, who is also a member of Iran’s National Body of Biological Weapons Disarmament Convention, Samsami said.

A key research center in Iran’s WMD efforts is the Sina Industry facility, Jafarzadeh said, describing it as “one of the most important biological and chemical laboratories of the Iranian regime.”  Sina Industry, which has conducted biological weapons tests on animals, uses medical research as a cover for its activities, he said.

In addition, Iran is working to almost quadruple its number of biological experts — from 3,000 to a planned 11,000, Samsami said.

The council received its information on Iran’s biological weapons program by using “human resources” placed within the clerical regime, Jafarzadeh said.  He also highlighted past information the council had obtained through such sources on Iran’s WMD- and ballistic missile-related efforts, such as the existence of a uranium enrichment facility at the Iranian city of Natanz (see GSN, Feb. 20) and the test-firing of a Shahab 4 ballistic missile (see GSN, Oct. 18, 2002).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Lawmakers Question Project Bioshield

U.S. lawmakers yesterday criticized Project Bioshield, the Bush administration’s 10-year, $5.6 billion plan to spur the pharmaceutical industry to produce medicines for bioterrorism agents, United Press International reported (see GSN, Jan. 30).

During a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee, Representative Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) said the $5.6 billion is “chicken feed to this (pharmaceutical) industry.”

Rogers also suggested that the money be allocated each year instead of the decade-long appropriation.  The long-term spending bill removes appropriation power from Congress, he added.

Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said the long-term package was needed to assure drug companies that funding was available to support development of antiterrorism medicines.

Representative Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) questioned the wisdom of focusing the program on several select biological agents, such as anthrax, smallpox and Ebola.

“What if they just do the one thing we don’t have?” Shays asked.  Garry Adams, a veterinarian and associate dean for research at Texas A&M, said the object is to close out avenues for the terrorists, making them go for more and more exotic weapons that are less effective and perhaps harder to handle (Nicholas Horrock, United Press International/Washington Times, May 16).

Back to top

U.S. Plans I:  Former Official Raises Test Concerns; Congress Compromises

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department’s former top testing official yesterday expressed concern that the Pentagon’s key national missile defense system will be insufficiently tested prior to its scheduled first deployment in September 2004.

Meanwhile, Congress appears ready to approve the initial deployment, as House Democrats have negotiated an agreement with Republican colleagues to require full testing after the initial deployment and before any subsequent deployments.

Philip Coyle, the Pentagon’s assistant secretary of defense and director of operational test and evaluation from October 1994 to January 2001, said failed, repeated and cancelled tests have set back development of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, the most advanced U.S. system designed to shoot down long-range enemy missiles.

While the system has undergone 10 integrated flight tests (IFTs) so far, “We’re still really back at about IFT-6” in terms of goals achieved, said Coyle, who now serves as a senior adviser for the Center for Defense Information.

Eight of those tests were intercept tests, and five successfully destroyed mock enemy warheads in space.  The most recent test in December failed, however, and the Pentagon has since disclosed canceling four tests that were planned to take place before the interceptors are scheduled to be fielded in Alaska and California (see GSN, April 18).

Specific Concerns

Coyle voiced concern that the GMD system has not accomplished a successful test at night.  The first attempt to do so was the unsuccessful intercept test last December, and he said it is not clear that there will be another nighttime test before the system is deployed.

“I would think at least you would want to know the system would work at night,” he said, explaining that a darkened target is more difficult to identify by the infrared sensor on the interceptor.

Coyle also said he is worried that the system will not have attempted the more difficult challenge of intercepting a warhead in a geographic location farther from the interceptor launch site at Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific.  Integrated Flight Test-16, which was scheduled to occur weeks before the scheduled deployment but has been cancelled, would have been the first such test.

Coyle also expressed concern that the interceptor might not be tested against a target that is tumbling or one that does not contain a locator beacon.  In addition, he said the interceptor should be tested without receiving certain prior information about the mock warhead target.

“So far, all of the flight intercept tests have been conducted in such a way that the interceptor gets information on the target before it is even launched,” he said.

Fly Before You Buy, After You Buy

The White House announced in December that President George W. Bush had ordered the military to deploy an initial missile defense capability by September 2004 (see GSN, Dec. 17, 2002).  The Pentagon has indicated that Bush’s request will involve operating six missiles at Ft. Greely, Alaska, and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.  Ten more will be based at Ft. Greely in fiscal 2005.

Congress is in the process of authorizing funding for the deployment, which would be unusual because major weapons systems traditionally have not been deployed until they have been proven operationally effective through testing.

Two senior Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee — which on Wednesday approved funding for the deployment as part of $9.1 billion in missile defense funding in the 2004 defense authorization bill — offered an explanation for the approval. 

In a statement, Representatives John Spratt (D-S.C.) and Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) said that, through a compromise with Republicans, the defense bill would require the Pentagon to conduct full operational testing of the GMD system after its initial deployment and before any further deployment.

The House bill, they said, makes clear “that after the initial deployment of 20 ground-based interceptors and up to 20 sea-based interceptors, the Pentagon will rigorously test BMD [ballistic missile defense] systems and comply with initial test and operational evaluation requirements prior to further BMD deployments.”

It “re-establishes a bipartisan consensus on ‘fly before you buy.’  If we are going to spend $9.1 billion per year on BMD, the American people deserve to know whether the systems being deployed will work or not,” they wrote.

Back to top

U.S. Plans II:  Increased Patriot Production Could Cause Problems

By David McGlinchey
Global Security Newswire

A U.S. Defense Department request to increase Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile production could cause problems with the contractor, according to a General Accounting Office report released yesterday (see GSN, May 8).

Four PAC-3 missiles were fired during the invasion of Iraq, according to Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, who said Patriot missiles, including the less-capable PAC-2 version, downed nine Iraqi missiles, although it is unclear how many Iraqi missiles were actually hit by PAC-3s (see GSN, April 16).

The Pentagon decided last October to buy 208 PAC-3 missiles over the next two years, according to the GAO report, Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Major Weapons Programs.  The new order was placed while the Pentagon’s war preparations with Iraq were still in the early stages.

“Because production was not expected to be accelerated to this level this early in production, the contractor must expeditiously find and train qualified personnel,” the report says.

Raytheon is the prime contractor for the PAC-3, while Lockheed Martin is the contractor for the missile segment of the program.  GAO said the new production goals represent “challenges” for the contractors.

According to the report, the increased procurement will require a boost of $239 million in funding for the PAC-3 program.  Patriot missile program officials said the contractors are capable of producing a “consistent and quality product,” the report says.

Flight Tests

The report also noted that none of the four PAC-3 operational tests in 2002 was completely successful.

“According to program officials, there were several anomalies caused by manufacturing practices, software and test hardware.  However, they believe there are no systemic issues and the anomalies have been corrected,” the report says.

A PAC-3 flight test is scheduled this spring to confirm the officials’ assertions.

Airborne Laser

In reviewing other missile defense programs, the GAO also faulted the Airborne Laser program for being underdeveloped.  The program is designed to mount a laser, powered by chemical modules, on an airplane to patrol the skies and shoot down enemy missiles shortly after they are launched (see GSN, March 7).

“Only one of the ABL’s five critical subsystem’s — the aircraft itself — represents mature technology,” the report says.

The other subsystems are the laser itself, a fire control system to direct the laser, a battle management subsystem and a ground control subsystem.  Some components of the guidance system have been tested in simulated environments, but the other three are “low-fidelity” prototypes that have been tested only in a laboratory, the report says.

The Missile Defense Agency now plans to field block upgrades to the airborne laser program in 2004 and 2008 to demonstrate the technologies.  If either of the blocks shows operational utility it may be pressed into service, GAO said.  The technology has so far only provided trouble, according to the report.

“Problems associated with maturing technology have consistently been a source of cost and schedule growth throughout the life of the program,” the report noted.

Back to top