U.S. Response I:  Threat Alert Level System Is Too Vague, Congressional Researchers Say

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The color-coded system used by the U.S. Homeland Security Department to warn of potential terrorist attacks suffers from being too vague and from failing to provide specific information on appropriate protective measures, according to a Congressional Research Service report released last week (see GSN, July 2).

The Homeland Security Advisory System, established last year, uses five color levels to indicate various potential threats — green, representing a “low” risk of attack; blue, representing a “guarded” risk; yellow, representing an “elevated” risk; orange, representing a “high” risk; and red, representing a “severe” risk.  Homeland Security uses information provided by various U.S. agencies, including the CIA, FBI, the National Security Agency and the Defense Department, to set the alert level.

Since the advisory system was launched, the level has been raised from yellow to orange four times, according to the report prepared by Congress’ public policy research service.  Currently, the terrorism threat alert level stands at yellow.

In its report, CRS warned that the advisory system is too vague on the nature of the potential terrorist threat, leading to concerns that the public may begin to disregard it.  Each time the alert level was elevated, officials cited intelligence information as the cause, but offered no specifics, the report says.  In addition, no specific governmental facilities, regions, states or private companies were identified as being at special risk, it says.

CRS has suggested to Congress that it instruct the Homeland Security Department to use the advisory system to provide specific warnings to targeted locations or entities to the extent possible, according to the report.  Homeland Security could also issue general warnings, without using the advisory system, to notify state and local governments and the public, the report says.

For each of the five alert levels, the advisory system provides a set of appropriate protective measures, but these are only identified for U.S. agencies, according to the report.  The system does not recommend protective measures for states, cities or the general public, it says.  The report suggests that Congress should do more to establish protective measures for states, localities and the general public, even through legislation, if necessary.  It warns, however, that a list of general measures may be less effective than those developed by state and local governments themselves.

U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) criticized the advisory system Monday, warning that he might introduce legislation to change the system if the Homeland Security Department does not act.

“The terror alert system may be contributing to the very panic and confusion in our society that the terrorists seek to generate,” Lautenberg said in a press statement.  “What the American people want are serious protective measures, rather than window dressing,” he added.

Lautenberg is the author of an unanimously approved amendment to the fiscal 2004 Homeland Security appropriations bill that would require Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to provide Congress with a list of reforms for the advisory system by late October.

A Homeland Security spokesman said yesterday that the department is “well aware” that the advisory system needs revision.

“We are well aware that it is a brand new program that will need to continually be refined,” Homeland Security spokesman Gordon Johndroe was quoted by the Washington Post as saying.  “Communicating threat information even to security personnel is a new and developing field for this country,” he said.

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Washington Will Position Radiation Equipment in Europe

U.S. and Dutch officials have reached an agreement to position radiation detection equipment at Rotterdam, the busiest port in Europe, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Aug. 6).

The U.S. Energy Department is set to provide the training and equipment, which could arrive in the next few months.  Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is expected to visit Rotterdam today to announce the agreement with Dutch officials.

“Terrorist groups and rogue nations trying to smuggle components for nuclear weapons is a serious threat that must be addressed,” Abraham said (Josef Hebert, Associated Press/Atlanta Journal Constitution, Aug. 13).

Dutch State Secretary for Finance Joop Wijn thanked Washington for the equipment.

“Nuclear terrorism is one of the worst crimes you can imagine.  The Dutch and the U.S. governments share the same goal in combating and preventing it. … We want to make the port of Rotterdam as secure as possible.  Therefore we are glad with the technical support from the U.S.,” he said (Dutch Embassy release, Aug. 13).

Back to top

Iran:  U.N. Inspectors Conducting Environmental Studies

Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency are in Iran today to collect environmental samples, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Aug. 8).

The inspectors will collect water, air and soil samples, which will be sent to Vienna and tested for radioactive traces.  The IAEA is investigating U.S. allegations that Iran is secretly developing a nuclear weapon under the guise of a civilian energy program.

Inspectors conclude their work Thursday, and the testing results will be revealed in a Sept. 8 report from IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei (Agence France-Presse/Pakistan Business Recorder, Aug. 13).

A senior Iranian official, meanwhile, said he expects “positive” results by September over negotiations on the Additional Protocol to Iran’s safeguards agreement with the IAEA.  The protocol would allow the agency to conduct more intrusive monitoring of Iran’s nuclear activities.

“We have had good negotiations with Mohamed ElBaradei and I believe it is possible that, before September, we will have positive results on this matter,” said the country’s nuclear chief, Gholamreza Aghazadeh.  “I think we will assuage international fears and in return, we expect (the international community) to stand by its commitments,” he added.

Aghazadeh said that last week’s visit by IAEA legal experts dealt with “significant” uncertainties, but “the discussions must continue” (Agence France-Presse/Space War, Aug. 13).

Back to top

United States:  Energy Department Might Not Release Disbanded Committee’s Report

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON ð— Weeks after the U.S. Energy Department’s nuclear weapons agency dismissed its independent expert advisory committee, the agency is now evaluating whether to release the principal report by that committee, officials said this week (see GSN, July 30).

“The options are you’ll either get the whole report or a sanitized version, or the report will be withheld as ‘Official Use Only,’” said an Energy Department official who asked not to be identified.

The National Nuclear Security Administration’s 15-member advisory committee finished a report on the agency’s activities this past spring.  The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that reports by such committees be made public.

NNSA officials have refused to release it so far, however, saying it is being scrutinized by the administration’s general counsel’s office.

“Apparently they’re giving it to someone who’s looking over every word.  They’ve brought a specialist in … a special lawyer with an extra large magnifying glass,” the official said.

NNSA’s defense programs office has recommended that the 35-page document be withheld on grounds that information contained in it is “dated” and “sensitive,” the official said.

The freezing of the report and NNSA’s recently reported decision to dissolve the committee in late June have drawn criticism from Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass).

U.S. law requires NNSA to “release copies of any reports, where possible, and send such copies to the Library of Congress,” he said in a July 29 statement.

“When [the committee members] submitted the report, they were originally told it would be publicly released.  Then it was immediately stamped ‘For Official Use Only.’  Now, some year and a half later, [NNSA is] finally deciding to do something about it and it’s undergoing a review from the general counsel’s office,” said Markey spokesman Benn Tannenbaum.

Department Seeks to “Close Itself Off”

Markey, in a July 29 letter to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, inquired why the report had not been released, why quarterly meetings of the committee ended in May 2002 and why the committee was dismissed in June through e-mail rather than through notification in the Federal Register as required by advisory committee act.

“The Advisory Committee was created under the auspices of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which means that Congress and the public must be kept informed about the activities — including disbanding — of the committee,” he wrote.

Markey added that the Energy Department has endorsed legislation passed by the House this year that would exempt it from the FACA requirements.

That, coupled with the dismissal of the committee, he wrote, “suggest that the Department of Energy is seeking to close itself off from any independent outside expert advice regarding its nuclear weapons programs.”

NNSA spokesman Bryan Wilkes said NNSA Administrator Linton Brooks would continue to receive advice from a three-member group called the Nuclear Weapons Council, which consists of the undersecretary of defense for acquisition and technology, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the undersecretary of energy for nuclear security.

“I am uncomfortable with this situation, as the NWC is composed entirely of government officials, and therefore is not really suited to perform the functions of a federal advisory committee,” Markey wrote.

He described the committee, appointed by former NNSA Administrator John Gordon, as “the one forum for honest, unbiased external review of its nuclear policies.”

Controversial Subjects

The committee’s charter required it to evaluate and make recommendations on NNSA activities, including assessments from a policy, performance and scientific perspective of programs, projects and facilities.

Committee members contacted said they did not recall anything particularly controversial about the report.

“I don’t think we were exactly trying to burn the house down or anything.  I think we were trying to work within the system and be constructive.  So I don’t think there is anything terribly earthshaking in the report,” said Ellen Williams, a University of Maryland physics professor.

The committee did, however, review two initiatives the Bush administration is advocating this year that have been politically controversial:  reducing the time needed to prepare for a nuclear test and the Advanced Concepts Initiative, which could include research and development on low-yield nuclear weapons for attacking bunkers and on warheads for destroying deeply buried chemical and biological weapons.

Committee member and University of California at Berkeley professor Raymond Jeanloz said the report, the final version of which he has not seen, might challenge some assumptions the administration has used to argue for those initiatives.

He said, for instance, while administration officials have urged reducing legal restrictions on research and development ostensibly to enable nuclear weapons designers to exercise their skills, the committee found that the initiative mainly involved using old designs.

“Either they’re really going to start working on advanced concepts that are really new designs, in which case it seems like they are pushing toward resumption of nuclear testing if we ever put those designs into stockpile.  Or, alternatively, this whole story about how we need advanced concepts to exercise the creativity of our designers is really a sham,” he said.

Jeanloz said further that the preparation time for resuming nuclear tests was found to be not a question of physical readiness, but rather of diagnosing a suspected problem and developing a test to deal with it.

The committee was told by the national nuclear laboratories that “the nation would be able to perform a test in 3 to 6 months” if the goal was simply to produce an explosion, he said.

“From the labs’ point of view, until they know why they would have to have a test to address some hypothetical technical problem, they don’t know how long it would take them.  So this whole business of a three-year, or a one-and-a-half year, or a half-year delay before they can test is incredibly artificial,” he said.

Jeanloz and other committee members said they have not yet concluded that the NNSA’s delay indicates an attempt to suppress the results of the report.

“I don’t think NNSA is trying to bury things right now.  I think they’re confused, and in a state of confusion, they can end up doing what I think would hurt them in the long run, which is not to release this whole thing,” Jeanloz said.

“At this point, one can say either they are trying to do something illegal or they are just being slow and not being very responsive because that’s their nature.  I just don’t know,” said Sidney Drell, a professor of theoretical physics at Stanford University.

Back to top

North Korea:  Washington Might Offer Economic Concessions

Washington might offer economic concessions to North Korea if Pyongyang abandons its nuclear weapons ambitions, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Aug. 12).

The economic assistance would only arrive after North Korea scrapped its nuclear weapons program, according to a Bush administration official.

“There’s no such thing as you-do-this and suddenly Ed McMahon shows up with a check for $10 billion,” the official added.

The United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia are scheduled to meet in Beijing Aug. 27 to 29 for talks on defusing the nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula.

“There are a lot of ideas being discussed,” said an Asian diplomat.  “The question is how they will be packaged, and in what sequence.  The United States clearly wants its concerns addressed at an early stage, while the North Koreans want their concerns addressed at an early stage,” the diplomat added (Steven Weisman, New York Times, Aug. 13).

North Korea demanded a nonaggression pact from the United States and said it would not agree to an early inspection of its nuclear facilities.

“It is clear that as long as the U.S. insists on its hostile policy toward the D.P.R.K., the latter will not abandon its nuclear deterrent force,” a North Korean spokesman said.  “An ‘earlier inspection’ is impossible and unthinkable before the U.S. abandons its hostile policy against the D.P.R.K.,” he added (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Aug. 13).

Russian officials, meanwhile, held negotiations with North and South Korean diplomats today to prepare for the late August talks.

“We are counting on finding out about the moods of Pyongyang and Seoul and the ideas they intend to put forward,” said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov.  “In a way Moscow is in a better position to do this, since we conduct regular contacts with North Korea,” he added (Steve Gutterman, Associated Press, Aug. 13).

Back to top

CTBT:  Palau Signs Treaty

Palau signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty yesterday, according to the CTBT Organization (see GSN, Aug. 11).  To date, 168 nations have signed the treaty and 104 have ratified it, including 32 of the 44 nations whose ratifications are necessary for the treaty to enter into force (CTBT Organization, Aug. 13).

Back to top

BWC:  Survey Finds Many Nations Lacking Required Treaty Legislation

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Many countries worldwide appear to lack laws to fully implement the 31-year-old multinational treaty banning biological weapons, according to a nongovernmental organization that has published the first comprehensive accounting of such activity.

The London-based group, the Verification Research, Training and Information Center (VERTIC), this week released a database of national implementation legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention.  The group will also release the information to a gathering of official technical experts meeting next week in Geneva to discuss the treaty.

The compilation shows that 31 of the 150 treaty parties, only 21 percent, responded to a VERTIC survey started one year ago.  The questionnaire asked for information about the enforcement measures each nation has adopted to ensure its compliance with the treaty that bans biological weapons development, production or possession.

The number and content of the responses suggest that many countries, mainly those that are less developed, have not passed legislation to ensure that the treaty is fully enforced on their territories, VERTIC Legal Researcher Angela Woodward said.

The nonresponse level was “very high in Africa, quite high in the Americas, and Asia, so our fairly educated guess from similar efforts under other treaties is that a lot of states just won’t have appropriate measures in place, unfortunately,” she said.

Woodward said, though, that many countries may have some laws in place but failed to respond to the survey because of translation issues, neglect or a lack of an office to handle such requests.  Copies of the VERTIC questionnaire were provided in English, Spanish and French, and a new Arabic version has been produced, she said.

The survey uses data from open sources as well, to provide information on implementing legislation for more than 90 countries, she said.

The United States, in particular, has urged other governments to pass such legislation, and an official last year cited comparable statistics for the Chemical Weapons Convention to urge nations to pass implementing legislation for that treaty.

“It’s certainly a very useful thing for them to be doing … because there has not been a comprehensive compilation of the implementing measures,” said a U.S. official praising VERTIC’s effort.

Respondents

Woodward said the majority of states that responded to the survey were Western  industrialized nations, but not exclusively.  Australia, Canada, China, Finland, Russia, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States have responded, while France and New Zealand have not.

Responses also were received from Belize, Colombia, Lithuania, Paraguay, Peru and Saint Kitts and Nevis.  She singled out Saint Kitts and Nevis for producing short, but excellent legislation containing strong law enforcement powers that smaller states might model and for adopting the legislation within three months of the treaty entering into force.

“They were really on the ball,” she said.

Woodward said some countries lacking implementing measures might have concluded that they are not needed because the countries lack a pharmaceutical sector or have never had a biological weapons program.

“That argument isn’t sufficient,” she said, adding that terrorists could choose countries without treaty enforcement powers as safe havens for illicit activities. She noted that U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373, passed in late September 2001, requires U.N. member states to take measures to prevent terrorists and their supporters from acting on their territories.

Woodward said she hopes the VERTIC database will help motivate countries to act.

“The main purpose of our project was to try to raise awareness of the obligation to adopt legislation,” she said.

“We’re hoping at [next week’s] meeting states will consider making their legislation more transparent, increase a willingness to cooperate and share experience … and actually provide assistance to states that request it,” she said.

Back to top

Smallpox:  Panel Says Prepare Smallpox Response, Shun Vaccinations

In a report issued yesterday, a top U.S. scientific panel reiterated its long-standing opposition to widespread, pre-emptive smallpox immunizations (see GSN, July 25).

The Institute of Medicine committee said the vaccine is too dangerous to use before an outbreak, and recommended that U.S. officials instead prepare an efficient and quick response to a biological terrorist attack.

“It does not make sense to give a vaccine with substantial risks against a disease that does not exist — in fact, that could be considered unethical,” said committee Chairman Brian Strom, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania (Elizabeth Olson, New York Times, Aug. 13).

Back to top

Anthrax:  Company Receives Contract to Clean Florida Anthrax Site

A private company has been awarded a contract to decontaminate the former American Media Inc. headquarters in Boca Raton, Fla. — the site of the initial anthrax infections during the 2001 anthrax attacks, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported today (see GSN, Sept. 16, 2002).

The firm, Consultants in Disease and Injury Control, plans to decontaminate the building using a fumigation process and high-powered vacuums to clean surfaces, according to the Journal-Constitution.  The company has also developed its own method of cleaning hard-to-reach areas, such as plumbing fixtures, to make sure all lingering anthrax spores are destroyed.

Real estate developer David Rustine, who purchased the building for only $40,000, said that, once the decontamination is completed, he plans to be one of the first people to walk through the building — unprotected.

“It will hopefully be the cleanest building in Florida, one of the cleanest in the nation,” Rustine said (Greg Bluestein, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Aug. 13).

Back to top

North Korea:  Seized Chemical Could Be Used to Produce Nerve Agent

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Chemicals seized earlier this week from a North Korean freighter docked in the Taiwanese port of Kaohsiung could be used to produce nerve agents, experts told Global Security Newswire yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 12).

On Monday, Taiwanese officials seized more than 150 barrels of phosphorus pentasulfide from the freighter Be Gaehung, according to reports.  The chemical can be used as a precursor in the development of nerve agents, proliferation expert Mark Smith of the University of Southampton told GSN yesterday.  He added that Iraq was known to have used the chemical in its VX program.  The Wall Street Journal reported today that phosphorus pentasulfide could also be used to produce peaceful materials, such as insecticide or motor oil additives. 

Phosphorus pentasulfide is also included on the export control list used by the Australia Group, an informal network of 33 countries that coordinates export controls for dual-use biological and chemical items, Smith said.

While most of the international concern surrounding North Korea’s WMD efforts has focused on Pyongyang’s relaunched nuclear weapons program, the country is also believed to have pursued biological and chemical weapons.  In an April report, the CIA said that North Korea had acquired dual-use chemicals last year for possible use in its “long-standing” chemical weapons program.  The CIA also said that North Korea had produced “a sizeable stockpile” of chemical weapons, such as nerve, blister, choking and blood agents.

The Journal reported today that the Be Gaehung has been allowed to leave Kaohsiung after its captain agreed to leave the chemical barrels behind.  While some reports have indicated that Taiwanese officials searched the ship on the basis of U.S.-provided information, a U.S. State Department official yesterday refused to tell GSN what, if any, role the United States played in the operation.  The official said Monday’s action should not be seen as being country-specific, adding that the United States has long worked to encourage countries to be more aware of suspicious materials passing through their territory.

Back to top

United States:  Incinerator Scheduled to Run Slowly for First Two Months

Army officials plan to operate the chemical weapons incinerator in Anniston, Ala., on a probationary basis until late October, the Birmingham Post-Herald reported yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 11).

When the 30-day “shake-down” period is over, state officials will “examine everything we are doing down to microscopic details,” said Mike Abrams, a spokesman for the Anniston Army Depot.

“After we have proven to all the regulators that in fact things are working as designed and our data is accepted by the state, then we can start in earnest and work at a level that is safe and more efficient,” he added.

The facility was expected to destroy about 15 rockets yesterday, Abrams said, but it could do more.

“We might do as many as 40,” he said yesterday, adding, “There’s a strong possibility but there’s no pressure.

More than 660,000 chemical artillery shells, rockets and mines are stored at the depot, 10 percent of the total current U.S. stockpile, and the Army plans to destroy all of them over the next seven years (Erin Sullivan, Birmingham Post-Herald, Aug. 12).

Back to top

Food Safety:  U.S. Border Inspectors to Receive Increased Training

Beginning this fall, all U.S. border inspectors will receive training in detecting signs of agricultural terrorism, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert Bonner said yesterday (see GSN, July 31).

Currently, only 2,000 out of 18,000 border inspectors are trained to look for suspicious crops or livestock, Bonner said.  In October, however, training for all new inspectors will include agricultural issues, including agricultural terrorism, according to the Associated Press.

“We’re very much committed to protecting American agriculture,” Bonner said, “but we can be more effective” (Gene Johnson, Associated Press/Tacoma News Tribune, Aug. 13).

Back to top