Iraq I:  Iraqi “Intellectual Capacity” Justified War, Official Says

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Iraqi “intellectual capacity” for producing unconventional weapons was sufficient justification for the successful U.S.-led war against the country, a senior Bush administration official said today, addressing criticism that U.S. forces so far have found no illicit weapons there.

In the past year, the administration repeatedly charged Iraq with concealing stocks of chemical and biological weapons — and a nuclear program too — and used those allegations to provide the central justification for the war.

The official, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs John Bolton, spoke here at a luncheon hosted by the National Defense University Foundation.

Explicitly addressing the lack of WMD stocks found in Iraq so far, Bolton said, “There has been a lot of misunderstanding as to exactly what it was we expected to find and when we expected to find it.”

Since the first Gulf War, he said, “The most fundamental, most important thing that was not destroyed [by international weapons inspectors] was the intellectual capacity in Iraq to recreate systems of weapons of mass destruction.”

Bolton said U.N. and International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors “could have inspected for years and years and years and probably never would have found weapons-grade plutonium or weapons-grade uranium.”

“But right in front of them was the continued existence of what Saddam Hussein called the ‘nuclear mujahadeen,’ the thousand or so scientists, technicians, people who have in their own heads and in their files the intellectual property necessary at an appropriate time … to recreate a nuclear weapons program.”

Bolton said the United States was justified in attacking Iraq because of that alleged capacity.

“I think we will find either weapons of mass destruction or evidence that they were destroyed shortly before or during the war,” he said, adding, “but yes, it’s the capability and particularly if you look at biological weapons and chemical weapons that can be manufactured in devastatingly lethal quantities in fairly short periods of time, and can be disseminated by all kinds of means, by terrorist groups or by the … state itself.  It does represent a substantial threat.”

Bolton said he believed Hussein intended to resume a nuclear weapons program at some point and said with respect to chemical and biological weapons, “so much of the capacity is almost inherently dual-use, and it could be established and run really right in the presence of U.N. inspectors and all have been seemingly for legitimate purposes.”

President Expressed “No Doubt”

Just before the war, President George W. Bush cited Iraq’s unconventional weapons possession as justification for U.S. action.

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised,” the president said in an address to the nation.

“The danger is clear:  using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other,” he said.

Secretary of State Colin Powell in February unsuccessfully argued for U.N. authorization of the war by arguing the United States had evidence suggesting massive quantities of chemical and biological weapons and a nuclear weapons program. 

“We haven’t accounted for the botulinum, the VX, bulk biological agents, growth media, 30,000 chemical and biological munitions,” he said.

Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), the administration’s most outspoken critic on the war, said in a much reported speech this week said U.S. forces “so far turned up only fertilizer, vacuum cleaners, conventional weapons, and the occasional buried swimming pool.”

Byrd alleged the administration overstated the threat and possibly misled the American public and the world to justify the war.

“The Bush team’s extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a pre-emptive invasion has become more than embarrassing.  It has raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use of power.  Were our troops needlessly put at risk?  Were countless Iraqi civilians killed and                   maimed when war was not really necessary?  Was the American public                   deliberately misled?  Was the world?” he said.

Byrd alleged the administration had played on U.S. public fears of terrorism generated by the Sept. 11 attacks.

“We were treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein’s direct threat to our freedoms.  The tactic was guaranteed to provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of post-traumatic stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 9/11.  It was the exploitation of fear.”

“What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that Iraq was no immediate threat,” Byrd said.

“Difficult Burden”

Bolton today said the administration has been concerned about “the asymmetric threat from countries that don’t come anywhere close to us in wealth and military capability but have even a limited WMD capability that they may use as a terrorist weapon.”

He said such a capability would not pose a strategic threat to the U.S. military, but could be used in terror attacks against civilians, and said that makes questions on how to eliminate such a threat a difficult question.

“None of these weapons have true military threat to the United States.  They are a threat to innocent civilians, which makes their use particularly unacceptable and which it seems to me imposes a very difficult burden on any president of the United States to make sure that our innocent civilian populations are free from the threat of these weapons,” he said.

Back to top

U.S. Response:  House, Senate Pass Defense Bills; Approve Key Elements of Bush Nuclear Agenda

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives yesterday passed separate versions of the 2004 defense authorization bill, largely approving the Bush administration’s proposals for research and development of new nuclear weapons (see GSN, May 20).

The chambers also approved the administration’s request for an initial deployment of 20 ground-based and 20 sea-based national missile defense interceptors by October 2005, while requiring the Pentagon to begin testing the system for operational performance.

The two versions of the bill, however, differ in a number of ways that will need to be reconciled during a House-Senate conference.  Furthermore, the bills do not reflect the administration’s proposals exactly, as Democrats in both houses with Republican cooperation were able to pass several amendments tailoring the legislation.

Similarities

Both bills approved the administration’s request for $15 million for research of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, a nuclear weapon intended to destroy deeply buried and hardened targets.  That program, already underway, includes the study of potentially using an existing nuclear weapon developed for that purpose in the 1990s.

The chambers, which both approved the administration’s request for a repeal of a 10-year prohibition on research of low-yield nuclear weapons, also approved $6 million for nuclear weapons research in a program called the Advanced Concepts Initiative.  The money could be used for research of new low-yield nuclear weapons intended for potential use also against deeply buried targets, as well as chemical and biological weapons facilities.

Both bills authorized funding to reduce the preparation time for resuming nuclear weapons testing from 32 months to 18 months.

Differences

In a bipartisan compromise, the House bill — but not the Senate legislation — did not authorize the administration’s request to repeal a ban on the development of low-yield nuclear weapons, provoking an expression of disappointment from the White House.

“Maintaining the prohibition on development will hinder the ability of our scientists and engineers to explore technical options to deter national security threats of the 21^st century,” the administration said yesterday in a critique of the bill.

The Senate bill, on the other hand, granted a partial repeal by allowing the United States to develop such weapons, but only with specific Congressional approval.

The Senate bill also differs from the House version in that it requires the same sort of approval for engineering development work on the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator program and for spending on design, development and deployment of hit-to-kill interceptors or other weapons to be deployed in space.  The Bush administration has indicated plans for developing space-based interceptors over the coming decade (see GSN, Jan. 22).

Threat Reduction

Both bills approved in full the administration’s request for money to Pentagon and Energy Department programs to dismantle and secure weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union.

The House bill though, unlike the Senate, did not contain authorization for using Pentagon funds outside the former Soviet Union, which the administration has advocated.

The bill, according to the White House analysis, “would limit the President’s flexibility to apply CTR [Cooperative Threat Reduction] resources to the most pressing nonproliferation challenges in support of the global war on terrorism and would not clarify that DOE has authority to carry out such activities outside states of the former Soviet Union.”

The House bill did, however, contain an amendment introduced by Representative Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) to authorize the State Department to expand existing nuclear material security activities outside the former Soviet Union.

Bush Missile Defense Deployment Approved

Both bills approved the administration’s $9.1 billion request for missile defense programs, including authorization of the White House request for an initial deployment of the national missile defense system by October 2004.

Although the system is still under development and has not yet been proven through operational testing, as major systems normally are before deployment, the administration is planning to deploy an initial element, consisting in part of 10 land-based interceptors by October 2004 and 10 more the following year, as well as 20 sea-based interceptors.

Both Houses also passed Democrat-sponsored amendments requiring the setting of performance criteria for developing missile defense systems that will be evaluated through operational testing.

“Currently, none of the missile defense programs under development, under the Missile Defense Agency, have established performance criteria, meaning essentially there are no standards for when a system reaches any particular milestone or has completed its development.  These standards did exist under the Clinton administration but were removed by the current administration,” said Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.).

The House went a step further, however, requiring that prior to any subsequent deployments the president must rigorously test and comply with initial test and operational evaluation requirements.

Back to top

Iraq II:  Baghdad May Not Have Possessed Banned Weapons, Blix Says

U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix has said he is beginning to suspect that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, the Straits Times reported today (see GSN, May 22).

“I am beginning to suspect there possibly were none,” Blix said in an interview with the German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel.

Instead, Iraq’s evasive behavior could have been a result of ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s fixation with Iraqi honor and his wish to control the conditions by which people could enter Iraq, Blix said (Straits Times, May 23).

Health Survey to Be Conducted Near Tuwaitha

Meanwhile, Iraqi and foreign doctors plan to conduct a major health survey in areas near the Tuwaitha complex, the main site in Iraq’s former nuclear program, after reports of people becoming sick from radiation poisoning after looting materials from the site, the Iraqi Health Ministry announced yesterday.

There is a growing panic over radiation poisoning in the neighborhoods near the site, residents said.

“People are sick now — what is being done to help people right now?” said Bashir Abdul Majeed, a resident of the Mansia village about 20 feet from the Tuwaitha facility (Patrick Healy, Boston Globe, May 23).

Syria Weighs In on Resolution

Syria yesterday said it instructed its U.N. ambassador to register a “yes” vote for a resolution to end sanctions in Iraq several hours after the council had approved the resolution.

The ambassador could not take part in the council’s vote on the resolution because “consultations over the content of the draft resolution were not completed,” the Syrian Foreign Ministry said.  At the time of the vote, the Syrian government was in the midst of a meeting and had requested additional time to reach a position on the resolution, Syrian Deputy U.N. Ambassador Fayssal Mekdad said (Thanaa Imam, United Press International, May 22). 

Back to top

China:  U.S. Arsenal Will Continue to Dominate Beijing’s, Council on Foreign Relations Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — While China is working to modernize its armed forces, including its nuclear arsenal, the United States will nevertheless possess “overwhelming dominance” over China’s nuclear forces in the long term, the Council on Foreign Relations said in a report released yesterday (see GSN, March 5).

The CFR report, Chinese Military Power, examines Beijing’s military modernization efforts and finds that the Chinese military is still at least 20 years behind that of the United States, and is likely to remain behind during the next two decades in terms of military technology and capability.  The United States is also expected to maintain its strong advantage over China’s strategic forces, the report says.

“The United States will continue to possess overwhelming dominance over China’s nuclear forces for the foreseeable future,” the report says.

Beijing’s nuclear arsenal will expand in both size and sophistication over the next 10 to 20 years, the report says.  A major factor driving China’s efforts to improve its small nuclear arsenal is the U.S. intention to develop a national ballistic missile defense system, according to the report.

“China will do whatever it can to ensure that a U.S. missile defense system cannot negate its ability to launch and deliver a retaliatory second strike,” the report says.

In a report released in February, the Henry L. Stimson Center came to similar conclusions as to how U.S. missile defense plans could affect China’s efforts to improve its strategic forces (see GSN, Feb. 13, 2003).  The center warned that, in response to a U.S. missile defense system, Beijing could choose to develop a leaner and more advanced strategic force that could include mobile tactical systems.  The Chinese could also choose to develop more mobile ICBMs and sea-launched ballistic missiles, as well as multiple warhead systems, to develop an “assured minimum deterrence” capability.

Stimson Center senior associate Kathleen Walsh said the CFR report failed to adequately address whether China’s efforts to modernize its strategic forces could also include changes in strategic thinking and policy.  She told Global Security Newswire yesterday that China could be re-examining its policy promising never to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict.  There are already indications that Beijing is considering revising that policy, if only for symbolic reasons, she said. 

How Fast?  What Direction?

There are several factors that could affect the pace and path of China’s military modernization efforts, according to the report.  For example, demands for funding for domestic concerns could help slow the pace of military modernization.  In addition, the North Korean nuclear crisis could also play a role, according to the report (see related GSN story, today).  A nuclear-armed North Korea could prompt Japan to re-examine its security strategies, which could lead Tokyo to pursue nuclear weapons of its own, it says.  In turn, this would have a “major effect” on China’s own military modernization efforts.     

The report also notes the continuing influence of former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, who has maintained chairmanship of the Central Military Commission.  Chinese President Hu Jintao, as well as other new senior Chinese officials, is unlikely to alter the general direction of Chinese strategic policy, at least in the short term, the report says.

Walsh said, however, that there already signs that Hu has begun to move out of the shadow of Jiang, who has seen his influence wane in light of the recent Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) crisis in China and the role of Jiang’s faction in covering up the extent of the epidemic.

In its report, the CFR task force outlined a number of indicators the United States should monitor to gauge the direction and extent of China’s military modernization efforts.  These include “dramatic” increases in the construction and deployment of ballistic missile submarines; major increases in the number of Chinese ICBMs and the development of multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles beyond what is needed for a second-strike capability; and training in the use of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction at the tactical level.

The report recommends that the United States begin military-to-military exchanges with China with the goal of increasing Chinese defense transparency.  In addition, the United States should also seek to reassure China that it is not the intended focus of a U.S. missile defense system and that the United States is not seeking to negate a minimal Chinese nuclear deterrence, it says, adding that separate U.S.-Chinese talks should be held on nuclear strategic security issues.

Back to top

North Korea:  Contentious Talks Continue in Pyongyang

Diplomats from North and South Korea extended their weeklong talks into Friday to hash out disputes over Pyongyang’s nuclear development and economic cooperation, Reuters reported today (see GSN, May 20).

The talks lasted through the night and officials have met for almost two hours today, according to a South Korean pool report from the discussions in Pyongyang.

North Korea is angry at South Korea because of Seoul’s stand with Washington for a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula.  North Korea’s official media sharply criticized South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun’s recent trip to Washington.

North Korea described the trip as “pro-U.S. and flunkyist.”

South Korean spokesman Cho Myoung-gyon said that an economic agreement was near, but the two delegations are involved in a “battle of the tongues” over Roh’s Washington visit.

Pyongyang is also upset about comments by Roh’s national defense adviser Kim Hee-sang, who said that aid to North Korea should be differentiated between the people and the regime.  North Korean officials said the comments are a “string of balderdash” and Pyongyang called for Kim’s dismissal (Paul Eckert, Reuters, May 23).

Koizumi Meets With Bush

Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is scheduled to hold talks with U.S. President George W. Bush today at the president’s Texas ranch.  The two leaders are expected to discuss ways to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons (Mark Magnier, Los Angeles Times, May 23).

Meanwhile, a concerted effort to cut off North Korea’s alleged trade in illegal goods is gaining momentum in Washington, the Financial Times reported.  A blockade, however, will not apply crippling pressure to Pyongyang without Chinese cooperation, according to Scott Snyder, an analyst at the Asia Foundation.

“China quietly increasing customs inspections of North Korean vessels would be more effective than high-profile interdictions by the U.S. and its allies,” he said (Ward/Pilling, Financial Times, May 23).

Back to top

South Asia:  No Peace Talks Soon, India Says

India has no plans to hold peace talks with its nuclear-armed rival Pakistan in the near future, Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes was quoted today as saying (see GSN, May 16).

“When we reach the time for talks (they) will be held, but it is not very close,” Fernandes said, according to the Press Trust of India.

Instead of formal talks, India and Pakistan have focused on confidence-building measures, Fernandes said.  Such measures implemented so far include landing rights for each other’s civilian aircraft and a restoration of ambassadors (Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 23).

Meanwhile, Pakistani Foreign Secretary Riaz Khokar yesterday said his country was willing to discuss formally banning all nuclear tests. 

The two countries are already observing a voluntary testing moratorium, Khokar said during a session of the U.N. Disarmament Conference in Geneva.  “This could be formalized,” he said.

Pakistan is also prepared to discuss several other measures, including the nondeployment of nuclear weapons and a formal agreement on advance notification of ballistic missile tests, Khokar said. 

“It is … important for both India and Pakistan to engage in serious discussions for nuclear and strategic stability in our region,” he said (Reuters/Financial Times, May 23).

Back to top

Iran:  Nuclear Fears Spark U.S. Discussion on Pressuring Tehran

Spurred by fears of a developing Iranian nuclear weapons capability, U.S. President George W. Bush is considering destabilizing the Islamic government in Tehran, Knight Ridder reported today (see GSN, May 22).

Deputies to U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld are pushing for clandestine and explicit efforts to pressure the Iranian government, according to Knight Ridder.  Rumsfeld’s office is also citing alleged Iranian support for al-Qaeda terrorist leaders as a reason to put pressure on Tehran, the officials said.

Officials said that there is no consideration of a U.S. invasion of Iran, but one senior official said “the military option is never off the table” (Warren Strobel, Knight Ridder/San Jose Mercury News, May 23).

Back to top

International Response:  Nuclear Suppliers Group Calls for Increased Vigilance Over North Korea

An organization that establishes export control guidelines for nuclear trade called on the international community today to increase its efforts to prevent North Korea from obtaining controlled items for its nuclear efforts (see GSN, May 19).

Members of the 40-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group agree to follow common export control rules for equipment, material and technology that could be used for the development of nuclear weapons.

“The group again called on all states to exercise vigilance to ensure that none of their exports of goods and technologies contribute to North Korea’s nuclear weapons effort,” the group said in a statement following the conclusion of a weeklong meeting held in South Korea (Agence France-Presse, May 23).

Back to top

Anthrax I:  Suspect Maryland Ponds Remain Open While FBI Considers New Searches

By Greg Webb
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — While the FBI considers whether to drain one or more ponds in a Frederick, Md., forest to search for evidence of the 2001 anthrax attacks, the ponds remain unguarded, potentially threatening the value of any evidence found there in the future, legal experts said this week.

Authorities first searched the ponds in December 2002 as part of the FBI’s Amerithrax investigation into the anthrax attacks.  The forest is less than five miles from the U.S. biological defense laboratory at Ft. Detrick, Md., and near the former home of Steven Hatfill, whom U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has identified as a “person of interest” in the case.

The winter searches reportedly uncovered some discarded laboratory equipment, including what could be a glovebox, a tool to work on dangerous materials while preventing their release.

The Washington Post reported nearly two weeks ago that the FBI had notified local officials that it would begin draining one pond by June 1, but an FBI spokeswoman told GSN that investigators have not decided whether to proceed.

“We have acknowledged that that is under consideration, and no decision has been made,” said Debra Weierman of the FBI Washington field office.

Two visits by GSN to the ponds in the past week showed that they are unguarded and that there are no access restrictions.  Allowing a public notification of where a future search may be conducted is highly unusual, according to former federal prosecutor Judson Lobdell.  In a trial, evidence found in such a search would face great scrutiny, he said.

“The fact that the government told everyone well in advance where it was going to be looking would give a very strong argument to the defense that this evidence ought to be entirely discounted,” said Lobdell, now in private practice in San Francisco.

“Our firm handled a case here in which a similar defense was successful, a criminal case in which some evidence was found in a trash can near where the defendant resided.  But there was public access to that trash receptacle for quite a long time and the argument was made before the jury, and successfully, that it proved nothing that there was some evidence in that trash can.  It could have been put there by anybody,” he said.

Now that the search location has been revealed, Lobdell said, any evidence found in the future would be of limited value at trial unless linked directly to a suspect by physical evidence, such as fingerprints.  The advance notification of the search undermines any argument that evidence recovered from the pond must have been dumped there by Hatfill because it is close to his former home, he said.

Calling the FBI strategy “a little peculiar,” Georgetown University law professor Paul Tague said that as long as any discoveries were firmly linked to an individual suspect, the ponds’ public accessibility would not undermine the value of the evidence.  However, the delay in searching for the evidence could “lead jurors to question the probative worth of the evidence.”

“You almost infer that they don’t think there’s much to be found.  Otherwise, I would have thought they would have searched all of these ponds” by now, Tague said.

Questioning the FBI’s motives in making the advance search notification, Tague said, “Maybe they’re trying to reassure us that they’re doing more work, but at the same time a statement like this strikes one as peculiar because it doesn’t exactly allay my concerns. … Somebody could go and plant stuff or withdraw stuff in some unprotected or unsupervised place.”

The FBI’s Weierman refused to describe the investigators’ strategy for this case or in general.

“Each case is a different case,” she said, “so for me to go and say ‘Well, somebody’s going to go and disrupt or impinge upon our case,’ I’m not going to say that.  I can’t give you a blanket statement because you can’t give a blanket statement when each and every case has its own personality.”

Back to top

Anthrax II:  Palestinian Authority Says Arafat Targeted by Anthrax Letter

Anthrax has been found in a letter received three weeks ago by the office of Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, top Palestinian security official Hani al-Hassan told the Arabic newspaper al-Hayat in remarks published today. 

“The presidential security services submitted the letter to control measures, as usual, before opening it and discovered that it contained powder. ... At first, we did not know what the nature of the powder was, and some time passed before we could analyze it in a safe place,” said al-Hassan, who noted that the analysis indicated the presence of anthrax.

Al-Hassan described the incident as an assassination attempt, calling it the 14th attempt on the president’s life.

“The stamps on the letter showed that it came from an Asian country,” said al-Hassan, adding that mail sent to the Palestinian territories always passes through Israel first and that the Palestinian Authority was “unable to investigate the original source of the letter because of the situation in which it [the authority] finds itself.”

Al-Hassan’s comments came in reply to a question about whether he takes seriously the words of “certain Israeli officials who have spoken of assassinating or isolating Arafat” in the wake of last weekend’s wave of suicide attacks against Israelis (Agence France-Presse/Voila, May 23, GSN translation).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  House Government Reform Panel Approves Bioshield Bill

By Juliana Gruenwald

CongressDaily

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House Government Reform Committee approved legislation yesterday that would provide the government with additional tools to spur the development of vaccines and other measures to protect the United States from a bioterrorist attack (see GSN, May 16).

With little debate, the committee approved the “Bioshield” bill after adopting a substitute version of the measure offered by Government Reform Chairman Davis.  Only two members were present for the bill’s markup: Representative Mark Souder (R-Ind.) and ranking member Henry Waxman (D-Calif.).

In highlighting the need for the legislation, supporters point to the fall of 2001 when letters laced with anthrax were sent to some members of Congress and media outlets.

“The death toll could have been higher if there had not been effective countermeasures to treat that particular form of anthrax,” Souder said.  “Unfortunately, there has been little progress in treatments for other deadly diseases like smallpox, Ebola and the bubonic plague, which affect few, if any, Americans.”

Souder added that private companies have little interest in developing treatments for such diseases because there is little market for such products.

To address this problem, the bill would provide the Health and Human Services secretary with “flexible” tools to sponsor research and development projects aimed at combating bioterrorism and would authorize funding for the purchase of vaccines and other measures developed from such research.  It also would authorize the secretary in emergencies to allow for the use of drugs and other products aimed at combating bioterrorist attacks before the FDA has approved such products.

Among the key changes included in the substitute amendment, which was approved by voice vote, are provisions that would allow the simplified research and development procedures to be used only when the HHS secretary determines there is a “pressing” need for them.  It also would provide interested parties with a limited right to appeal contracting decisions made by the secretary.

Back to top

Smallpox:  Former U.S. Health Official Says Heart Problems Unexpected

More than 50 U.S. smallpox vaccine recipients have suffered from heart inflammation, and a former U.S. health official said the immunization program’s planners did not see the side effect coming, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported today (see GSN, May 21).

During routine smallpox vaccinations in the 1950s and 1960s, technology was not sufficiently advanced to detect the inflammation, according to Michael Lane, the former chief of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s smallpox eradication program.

“I think we just missed these before,” Lane said.  “We just didn’t have the technology to find them,” he added.

The civilian vaccination program has immunized 36,600 volunteers, and the U.S. Defense Department has immunized 430,000 military personnel, the Journal-Constitution reported.  The CDC has reported heart inflammation in 24 civilians and the military said that 27 personnel have experienced the problems (David Wahlberg, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, May 23).

State / City	Number of Immunizations
Alabama	481
Alaska	95
Arizona	39
Arkansas	976
California	1,509
Chicago	56
Colorado	224
Connecticut	634
Delaware	107
Florida	3,623
Georgia	135
Hawaii	181
Idaho	200
Illinois	228
Indiana	765
Iowa	486
Kansas	448
Kentucky	767
Los Angeles County	219
Louisiana	1,107
Maine	39
Maryland	719
Massachusetts	94
Michigan	716
Minnesota	1,475
Mississippi	404
Missouri	1,253
Montana	101
Nebraska	1,457
Nevada	10
New Hampshire	323
New Jersey	657
New Mexico	158
New York City	330
New York	659
North Carolina	1,235
North Dakota	414
Ohio	1,760
Oklahoma	335
Oregon	95
Pennsylvania	198
Puerto Rico	9
Rhode Island	29
South Carolina	859
South Dakota	735
Tennessee	2,429
Texas	4,145
Utah	282
Vermont	121
Virginia	843
Washington	512
Washington D.C.	98
West Virginia	734
Wisconsin	745
Wyoming	409
TOTAL	36,662

Back to top

China:  United States Sanctions Chinese Company Over Aid to Iran

The United States has imposed sanctions on a Chinese company for allegedly aiding Iran’s ballistic missile program, U.S. officials said yesterday (see GSN, July 25, 2002; Dobbs/Kessler, Washington Post, May 23).

The sanctions, which took effect May 9, prohibit the North China Industries Corporation (Norinco) from entering into contracts with the United States or importing goods into the country for two years, according to a notice published today in the Federal Register.  In addition, the U.S. State Department has also suspended all defense-related export licenses for the company (Federal Register, May 23).

The United States has also imposed two-year sanctions on the Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group, an Iranian company (Federal Register, May 23).

While U.S. officials said the sanctions are expected to deprive Norinco of more than $100 million worth of exports to the United States, the Iranian company will suffer fewer financial consequences because it has already been sanctioned and has little U.S. business, the Post reported.  “This is a huge blow” to the Chinese company, an official said.

The decision to impose sanctions against Norinco was the subject of debate for some time within the Bush administration, an administration official said.  Although there has been “excellent cooperation” with Beijing on terrorism and the North Korean nuclear crisis, “this shows the Bush administration still takes the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction very seriously,” the official said.

Overall, U.S.-Chinese relations are strong enough to withstand U.S. complaints about the actions of individual Chinese companies, said James Lilley, former U.S. ambassador to China.

“You don’t have to shut your mouth on their proliferation activities because you want to keep the relationship solid,” Lilley said.  “If you do it right, the decibel count should not get too high,” he said (Dobbs/Kessler, Washington Post).

Norinco so far has no comment on the sanctions, a company spokesman said.  “We will make a statement in a few days,” the spokesman added.

Analysts have said that China’s controls on companies were growing weaker as the country makes the transition to a market economy.

“It will be more and more common for businesses not to comply with government policy.  The international community must understand that,” said Jin Canrong, a professor of international relations at Renmin University in Beijing.  “If they want China to move to a more limited government, then you must accept the end result,” he said (Benjamin Kang Lim, Reuters, May 23).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Russian Official Hopeful For Missile Defense Cooperation

A senior Russian official said yesterday he has “cautious optimism” that Moscow will cooperate with the United States to build a missile defense system (see GSN, May 15).

“It is still too early to talk about the prospects for cooperation, but I can take the risk of expressing very cautious optimism in this regard,” said the official, who is in Washington for meetings with U.S. officials.

Moscow has submitted several proposals to the United States for missile defense cooperation.  “We are hoping for a U.S. response very soon,” the senior official said (David Sands, Washington Times, May 23).

Back to top

United States:  Electromagnetic Radiation Affected Patriot Performance

U.S. military investigators believe that electromagnetic interference played a role in a friendly fire incident involving Patriot missile interceptor batteries during the war in Iraq, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, May 8).

One of the two friendly fire incidents that occurred during the war  involved the downing of a U.S. Navy F/A-18 Hornet by a Patriot interceptor.  The U.S. Army’s investigation into the incident has so far indicated that two Patriot batteries were placed too close to each other, according to the Journal.

While the Patriot’s radar systems are designed to operate somewhat near each other, the two batteries’ proximity caused increased amounts of electromagnetic interference which investigators believe played a role in the incident, the Journal reported.

High-tech military equipment, such as the Patriot interceptor, is tested to determine the effects of electromagnetic interference prior to deployment, according to the Journal.  One person familiar with the investigation described the interference where the F/A-18 incident occurred, however, as “very, very intense.”

“If you look at the intensity of the radiation in that battlefield area, I don’t believe anyone would say that particular environment had been duplicated before,” the source said.

The Army and U.S. defense contractor Raytheon, which produces the Patriot system, are determining whether changes can be made to the interceptor’s computer system to prevent against such an incident in the future, U.S. and industry officials said (Anne Marie Squeo, Wall Street Journal, May 23).

Back to top