U.S. Response:  New Regulations Require Background Checks for Hazardous Material Drivers

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON ? U.S. commercial driver?s license holders who want to be authorized to transport hazardous materials will have to undergo federal background checks under interim Transportation Department rules in yesterday?s Federal Register (see GSN, March 26).

Comments are due July 7.

Under the rules, effective immediately, states will be barred from issuing commercial driver?s licenses with a hazardous materials endorsement until the Transportation Security Administration conducts a background records check on the applicant.  The TSA will examine several factors to determine if an applicant poses a security risk, such as residency status and past criminal record.  Illegal aliens or applicants convicted of certain violent felonies within the past seven years will have their applications denied.  The new requirements will apply to the 3.5 million commercial drivers that transport hazardous material cargo, according to a TSA press release. 

Applicants will be able to appeal denials to ensure that the database information is correct.  In addition, applicants found to have committed a disqualifying criminal offense can seek to obtain a waiver if they prove they have been rehabilitated.

The new rules also require states to renew hazardous material endorsements, including background checks, every five years.  States were previously allowed to determine when, if at all, hazardous materials endorsements needed to be renewed.  States will have a Nov. 3 deadline to begin compliance with the new rules, designed to meet provisions of the USA Patriot Act.

Back to top

Iraq:  United States Denies IAEA Access to Tuwaitha Nuclear Complex

U.S. arms control officials yesterday rejected an International Atomic Energy Agency request for access to Iraqi nuclear facilities at Tuwaitha, believed to be the main site in Iraq?s former nuclear weapons program.  Agency officials are seeking to return there to determine what materials may have been stolen during looting, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (see GSN, May 5).

IAEA officials criticized the U.S. decision, demanding access to conduct an ?immediate inspection.?

?If this happened anywhere else in the world, we would demand an immediate inspection,? said agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky.  ?We want an immediate inspection to determine what has been taken.  We also must place new safeguards over the material still remaining,? he said.

Gwozdecky warned that radioactive materials looted from the site could pose both environmental and security risks.

?We are concerned about environmental contamination, people who could have been exposed to the radioactive material, and whether nuclear security has been compromised,? Gwozdecky said.  ?We do not want this material to end up with terrorists,? he added.

Nonproliferation experts also agreed that the possible looting of the Tuwaitha complex was a cause for concern.

?If you wanted to blow the entire operation in Iraq, a good way to do that would be to have haphazard security for known facilities where weapons of mass destruction were developed,? said Michael Barletta of the Monterey Institute of International Studies.  ?It?s one thing to see people looting antiquities from museums.  It?s another to learn that radiological sources may have been taken out of Tuwaitha, the best known atomic weapons site in the entire country,? he said (Carl Prine, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, May 6).

The United States still has not determined if IAEA inspectors will be granted access to Iraqi nuclear sites, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said yesterday.

?We have been in touch with the IAEA.  We?re in touch with them on various issues all the time,? Boucher said.  ?But there is no decision at this point about what role they may or may not play in terms of evaluating and monitoring at this point,? he said.

Boucher refused to comment on reports of looting at Iraqi nuclear sites.  He instead said that coalition forces have worked to secure such sites and the materials they contain.

?Coalition forces have secured the facilities that housed the natural- and low-enriched uranium that was at those sites,? Boucher said.  ?None of this material is usable in nuclear weapons.  All of this uranium would require significant processing in order to be suitable for enrichment for weapons use,? he said (U.S. State Department release, May 5).

Biological Weapons

Meanwhile, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is expected today to claim that the United States has found an Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratory, Defense Department officials said yesterday (see GSN, April 29).

Late last month, U.S. forces captured a truck south of Mosul and they suspected it contained a biological laboratory.  The truck has been determined to contain equipment to produce biological agents, but no such agents were found inside, Pentagon officials said.  Rumsfeld may cite the truck during a Pentagon press briefing today, they said (Jamie McIntyre, CNN.com, May 6).

U.S. forces have also taken into custody Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash, a senior biologist suspected of being highly involved in Iraq?s biological weapons program, according to a Pentagon official.

Ammash, a former dean of the Iraqi College of Women and later of the College of Science at Baghdad University, has long been believed to have been heavily involved in Iraq?s biological weapons efforts, according to the New York Times.  She traveled outside of Iraq several times in the late 1990s to obtain equipment and materials for genetic research, said former U.N. inspector Richard Spertzel. 

?Several defectors have also said that she was involved in the germ warfare program,? Spertzel said.

Nissar Hindawi, a founder of Iraq?s biological weapons program, has also said Ammash was involved in Iraq?s efforts to develop such weapons.  Hindawi said colleagues had told him that Ammash had escaped to Syria prior to the war along with Rihab Taha, another senior Iraqi biological weapons scientist.

U.S. military officials in Iraq would not comment on how Ammash was captured or when she was taken into custody (Judith Miller, New York Times, May 6).

Sanctions

The Bush administration is considering a proposal to unilaterally lift U.S. sanctions against Iraq without a similar move by the United Nations ? a move likely to be opposed by many on the U.N. Security Council, according to the London Independent (see GSN, May 2).

A legal team headed by the National Security Council is examining such a move and its possible ramifications within international law, according to the Independent.  While the United States has called on the United Nations to lift sanctions against Iraq, several Security Council members have said inspectors must first determine if the country is free of weapons of mass destruction.

?If the U.N. embargo drags on too long, we will have to find a way out of that system,? a senior Bush administration official was quoted by the Wall Street Journal as saying (Rupert Cornwell, London Independent, May 6).

The United States is also working to create a ?principal? Security Council resolution that would end sanctions against Iraq and create a ?coordinating? role for the United Nations in Iraq?s reconstruction, the State Department said yesterday.  The first resolution would then be followed by several ?auxiliary? measures aimed at various reconstruction tasks, the department said.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is expected to travel next week to three Security Council members ? Bulgaria, Germany and Russia ? to obtain support for the new resolution, according to the Washington Times.

?We?ve had some discussions of language at this point within the U.S. government and with a few of the other members of the council,? Boucher said.  ?We expect to broaden this discussion in coming days and have discussion with other members of the council as soon as we can, as soon as we can have language for them,? he said (Nicholas Kralev, Washington Times, May 6). 

Back to top

U.S. Response:  New Passive Attack Weapon Could be Used Against WMD Targets

The U.S. Air Force used a new conventional weapon designed to destroy suspected biological and chemical facilities without scattering dangerous materials during the Iraq war, a service official said last week (see GSN, May 5).

The new weapon is called the CBU-107 Passive Attack Weapon and is filled with 3,700 nonexplosive penetrator rods, according to Col. James Knox, area attack program director at the Air Armament Center at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.  The weapon is designed for use against unshielded targets where explosive fills are not needed or are undesirable, such as chemical and biological weapons targets, Knox said.

The new weapon, a modified Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispenser, works the same way as a traditional munitions dispenser but fires the nonexploding rods instead of explosive munitions, according to Aerospace Daily.  The weapon holds 350 14-inch rods, 1,000 7-inch rods and 2,400 2-inch rods.  It was used in combat during the Iraq war after a 98-day, $40 million development program, Knox said.

Knox refused to say how the Air Force used the new weapon in Iraq or how often it was used.  He did confirm, however, that the weapon was used, adding that he has received ?no negative feedback? (Stephen Trimble, Aerospace Daily, May 5).  

Back to top

North Korea:  White House Denies Change in North Korea Approach

After reports that U.S. President George W. Bush had accepted the prospect of a nuclear North Korea and was looking chiefly to prevent nuclear proliferation, the White House yesterday denied its position had changed (see GSN, May 5).

?Our position remains the same, that the United States, as well as the international community, is concerned about North Korea possessing nuclear weapons and transferring nuclear material to others,? said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said that Washington and North Korea?s neighbors are in agreement on the issue.

?We do not want to see North Korea have a nuclear capability,? Powell said.  ?We will continue to work with friends in the region ? Japan, South Korea, China, Russia, Australia and others ? to have a solid front in making it clear to North Korea that it would be in their best interests to remove and eliminate all programs and facilities that they have that would lead to the development of nuclear weapons,? he added (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo.com, May 5).

South Korean officials said President Roh Moo Hyun intends to confirm a united opposition to a nuclear Korean Peninsula when he meets with Bush in Washington May 14.

?The major premise is that Seoul and Washington will not tolerate the North going nuclear, and the two leaders will cement a common position during the summit,? according to a senor officials in Seoul.

Seoul also disputed media reports that the White House had changed its approach to North Korea.

?I don?t think the report represents the position of the U.S. government, and I have never received any notion from Washington to that effect,? said Foreign Minister Yoon Young-kwan (Seo Hyun-jin, Korea Herald, May 6).

South Korea is also developing its own response to the proposal put forward by Pyongyang during talks with the United States in Beijing.  The proposal would dismantle North Korea?s nuclear and missile capabilities in return for steep economic and diplomatic concessions, according to U.S. officials.

?We are drawing up our final stance on the proposal presented by the North and will come up with a unified plan with the U.S. after close consultations,? Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuk said (Korea Times, May 5).

Back to top

South Asia:  Pakistan Proposes a Nuclear-Free South Asia

Pakistan yesterday offered to give up its arsenal of nuclear weapons if rival India did the same (see GSN, May 5).

?If India is ready to denuclearize, we would be very happy to denuclearize,? Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Aziz Ahmed Khan said.  ?We can talk about that, but it will have to be mutual,? he said (CNN.com, May 5).

A Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman said his country?s nuclear weapons program has always been linked to India?s (see GSN, Jan. 30).  ?Our position has been that we were forced into the situation because of Indian nuclear ambitions,? he said.

Pakistan also announced yesterday that it had received a ?positive response? from India after inviting Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to Islamabad (Rory McCarthy, London Guardian, May 6).

While India and Pakistan have made some progress in improving relations, more should be done to reduce tensions between them, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said today, one day before a scheduled trip to the region.

?I think we have got a lot of work to do to continue to lower the temperatures for two great countries, India and Pakistan, to be able to live in peace and stability with each other,? Armitage said in an interview with the BBC.

Armitage praised Pakistan?s offer yesterday to give up its nuclear weapons if India were to do the same, calling it a ?good gesture.? 

?That would be a great sign of enormous progress ... but I think we have to keep our appetites under control,? he said.

Armitage and Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca are expected to arrive in Islamabad tomorrow, according to Agence France-Presse.  They are then scheduled to meet with senior Pakistani officials Thursday, U.S. and Pakistani officials said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 6).

Back to top

Iran:  Bolton Seeks Russian Support for U.S. Position at IAEA Meeting

The United States wants Russia to acknowledge that Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons and to support the U.S. position during a meeting at the International Atomic Energy Agency next month, a senior U.S. State Department official said yesterday (see GSN, May 5).

U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton said he told top Russian officials during a recent meeting in Moscow about U.S. concerns with Iran?s nuclear efforts.  He said he hoped the IAEA would find that Iran had violated its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and that Russia?s support for the U.S. position would help sway the agency into making such a determination.  Recent statements by Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev and Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov appear to indicate that Russia is slowly coming around to the U.S. position, Bolton said (Judith Ingram, Associated Press/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, May 5).

U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin ?have already agreed that it is neither in Russia?s interest nor in America?s interest to have a nuclear weapons-capable Iran,? Bolton said.  The reasons for Russia?s concern ?should be obvious,? in part because Iran is also developing ballistic missiles and ?here in Moscow we?re a lot closer to Iran than I am when I go back to Washington,? he said (David Holley, Los Angeles Times, May 6).

Bolton?s trip to Moscow has been seen as preparation for a Bush-Putin summit scheduled for June 1 in St. Petersburg.  U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is expected to travel to Moscow next week to further prepare for the meeting (Jonathan Wright, Reuters/Yahoo!News, May 6).

Back to top

Iran II:  German Businessman Might Have Prevented Nuclear Smuggling

A German businessman?s instinct about an unusual shipment might have prevented an illegal transfer of nuclear weapons-related electronics to Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, May 5).

Frank Behlke, a German electronics manufacturer, called police in the middle of the night last November about a suspicious order his company had shipped out earlier that evening, and his tip led to a police raid that recovered the 44 high-voltage switches and led to an investigation that continues today.

The switches can trigger sound waves that demolish kidney stones or sterilize food, but also could be used to detonate a nuclear weapon, the Journal reported.

German businesswoman Eva-Marie Hack had ordered 44 switches and had insisted on a Friday that Behlke?s firm deliver them overnight to her German address.  The fact that Behlke usually sold no more than two of the switches each year ? and that German technicians typically don?t work on weekends ? alarmed Behlke, the Journal reported.

?When I saw ?express courier,?? Behlke said, ?I knew the triggers were leaving Germany.?

German intelligence officials said the switches were headed to Iran to be used in a nuclear weapons program.  The same officials estimate that Iran is five years from indigenously developing nuclear weapons.

German customs investigators said that Hack ordered the switches on behalf of Eddie Johansson, a native Iranian with Swedish citizenship.  Johansson probably intended to divert the switches to Iran, according to the Journal.

By ordering the switches for domestic delivery, Hack and Johansson were possibly trying to circumvent export control regulations that require exporters to monitor how their buyers use their dual-use products, the Journal reported.

Zaeim Electronic Industries Co. in Tehran, the alleged recipient of the switches, denied involvement.

?We strongly deny that we have been in the way of acquiring military equipment (or) nuclear,? the company said in a faxed statement.

Hack was held for questioning with an alleged co-conspirator, but she denies any wrongdoing.  Johansson left the country shortly after the raid on Hack?s house, according to the Journal (David Crawford, Wall Street Journal, May 6).

Back to top

CTBT:  Mauritania Ratifies Treaty

Mauritania has ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, it was announced yesterday (see GSN, April 30).  Mauritania deposited its instrument of ratification with the United Nations April 30.  One hundred nations have so far ratified the treaty, including 31 of the 44 whose ratification is needed for the treaty to enter into force (CTBT Organization release, May 5).

The CTBT Organization, which oversees the treaty, yesterday noted progress made in the treaty?s ratification and implementation.  In addition to 100 countries ratifying the treaty, almost half of the regime?s 337 planned International Monitoring System facilities have been constructed, with another 80 under construction or in contract negotiations, the organization said (CTBTO release II, May 5).

Back to top

Smallpox:  United States Allocates $100 Million for Smallpox Vaccinations

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will provide an additional $100 million for state and local health departments this year to implement smallpox immunization programs, according to a press release yesterday from the Department of Health and Human Services (see GSN, May 1).

?Because a smallpox attack is possible, we must prepare our public health workers to quickly respond to protect the American public,? said Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson.  ?This additional money is part of our overall commitment to our state and local partners to build a stronger public health system to care for Americans in the event of any emergency, including a smallpox attack,? he added.

Thompson will send letters to state governors alerting them to the funding available for smallpox immunization, according to the release.

The new funding comes after the Health Department allocated $1.1 billion in public health preparedness funds to states in fiscal 2002 and $1.4 billion in fiscal 2003.

Thompson announced earlier this year that 20 percent of the fiscal 2003 money would be available immediately for public health initiatives, including smallpox immunizations.

The remaining $1.1 billion would be available after states submit work plans and health officials review those plans, according to the release (Health and Human Services release, May 5).

Back to top

CWC:  Most Treaty Parties Have Not Established Required Domestic Measures

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

THE HAGUE ? Although 151 nations have joined the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, less than a quarter of those have adopted domestic measures to comply with the treaty, according to a official U.S. and British estimates circulated here last week at the pact?s first review conference.

By joining the treaty, nations agree to pass and enforce domestic legislation to ensure their compliance with treaty requirements.  Such legislation has been cited by many countries here as a key measure for discouraging terrorists and states from acquiring chemical weapons.

So far, only 55 percent of treaty parties have indicated they have taken any measures to implement the treaty, according to a U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Stephen Rademaker?s opening statement to the conference.  Furthermore, only 26 percent of the parties say they have fully implemented the treaty?s national enforcement requirements, according to a British estimate.

?I believe that this troubling situation undermines the overall effectiveness of the convention to the detriment of all states parties and does little to deter the scourge of terrorism,? said Denis MacShane, the British minister of state for Europe, in his opening statement to the conference last week.  The two-week meeting is scheduled to end Friday.

The conference is trying to complete a political statement and a final document that sets out an action plan for treaty parties to follow until the next review conference in five years. 

Implementing domestic compliance measures and achieving universal membership have emerged as two common goals for most of the delegations here. 

?The Chemical Weapons Convention, first and foremost, aims to prevent governments and other entities from using chemical weapons,? said Rademaker, addressing the conference in a statement.

China and the 82-nation Nonaligned Movement, in a joint statement presented by Malaysia, said ?the CWC and the OPCW [Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons] play an important role in the global antiterrorist efforts ? [and so we] are making every effort in promoting universal adherence to the convention as well as ensuring the implementation of the various provisions of the convention.?

Developing countries account for the majority of those failing to fully implement the treaty, and there appear to be areas of potential disagreement between developed and developing countries on what is needed to meet treaty requirements.

Insufficient Resources, Experience

Reasons that have been cited for the lack of full membership and compliance include a lack of resources and expertise in some developing countries. 

Malaysia, for instance, which acknowledges it is has not fully enacted its domestic measures, currently has just one person responsible for disarmament issues.  Malaysia and many other countries want to comply, said Malaysian delegate Reidzal Abdul Malek, but do not have the experience or resources available for implementing the arms control agreement.

?We are just beginning to learn about these issues,? he said.

A number of countries, including the United States, have said they would provide assistance to help countries implement national legislation.

Aid Sought

In addition, some developing country delegates have suggested that the failure to achieve universal adherence may stem both from a perceived defensive need for chemical weapons by some countries and from a view among poorer countries that the treaty offers little for them while it imposes significant costs.

?It is clear that states which have not yet joined the convention have very specific reasons which relate either to a perception of their own security interests, or a perceived lack of benefit to joining the convention,? said South African Ambassador Priscilla Jana, her country?s permanent representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

She argued that developing states could entice poorer countries with increased assistance provided through the treaty.

?For a region with virtually no history of the use or manufacture of chemical weapons, the focus of the convention is international cooperation and assistance, designed, in part at least, to address the developmental needs of states parties in the field of chemistry,? she said, saying such assistance should no longer be a ?peripheral feature? of the treaty.

Western delegates have said that while the treaty does provide for chemical defense assistance, it is not intended to be an aid program.

Rademaker said national implementation is a ?basic obligation? of treaty membership for every state party and failure is ?intolerable under any circumstances? and ?more troubling in light of efforts of al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations to acquire chemical weapons.?

Export Controls

In another apparent area of disagreement here, the Indian delegation called for Western nations to abolish the Australia Group, an informal arrangement among industrialized nations to coordinate common chemical and biological export rules.  Removing the group?s restrictions would create an incentive for nations to join the treaty, India said.

When the treaty text was finalized in 1992, developing countries believed the treaty would lead to the abandonment of such technology export control regimes, said India?s permanent representative, Ambassador Shyamala Cowsik. 

The 34-member Australia Group is intended to combat chemical and biological weapon proliferation by controlling the transfer of precursor chemicals and dual-use manufacturing equipment.

?This situation needs to be addressed in a forthright manner by the review conference, if the CWC is, in the coming years, to become universal and, more importantly, gain universal acceptance,? Cowsik said.

?This has always been an area of sharply divergent opinion in all the arms control fora,? said the United Kingdom?s MacShane.

?A blanket relaxation or abandoning of monitoring or control arrangements between states parties would both undermine the fundamental object and purpose of the convention, and prevent states parties from meeting their obligations,? he said.

Back to top