Iran:  Front Companies Support Weapons Program, Sources Say

U.S. officials and an Iranian opposition group have said that Iran has used several front companies to acquire materials and assistance to build nuclear facilities secretly, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Dec. 16).

Through the use of such companies over the past five years, Iran has been able to appear to abide by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty while still obtaining materials and equipment needed to produce weapon-grade materials from foreign sources, U.S. officials and other experts said.

“The problem is that Iran is not cheating,” said Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.  “They haven’t broken any rules, and they won’t until they have weapons,” he added.

Funding for two recently disclosed nuclear facilities currently under construction — an apparent uranium enrichment site near the city of Natanz and an apparent heavy water production plant near Arak — does not appear in the official Iranian budget, the opposition group National Council of Resistance of Iran said.  Instead, the country’s main policymaking body, Supreme National Security Council, provided funds directly, the resistance group said.

Iran has used front companies to further hide the construction and purposes of the two facilities, according to the group.  The company Kala Electric has obtained the materials and equipment used for the Natanz site, the group said, adding that Kala Electric officials visited India and China several times last year.  A second front company, Mesbah Energy Co., has conducted similar work to aid the Arak facility, the group said.

Iran has attempted to hide the true purposes of the Natanz and Arak facilities through secrecy and misinformation, said Alireza Jafarzadeh, the U.S. representative of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.  The Natanz facility has been officially described as a desert-eradication project, and provincial authorities have been instructed to withhold the location of the Arak facility, he said.

The existence of the two facilities could be an indication that Iran has built other hidden nuclear sites, said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security.  For example, the Natanz site appears to be too large for a first attempt to build a uranium enrichment plant, suggesting that engineers might have already built a smaller pilot facility, he said.  The Arak heavy water production plant, meanwhile, would only be needed if Iran had a reactor that uses heavy water, which has not yet been detected, Albright said.

“At this point, we have more questions than answers,” he said (Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, Dec. 19).

For further information, see:

NPT Text

States Parties to the NPT (U.N.)

U.N. Background on NPT

Back to top

North Korea:  China Denies Weapons Program Assistance

China today denied reports that it sold North Korea large quantities of the chemical tributyl phosphate, which can be used to extract weapon-grade nuclear materials from spent fuel.  The Washington Times had reported the allegation earlier this week, citing U.S. intelligence sources (see GSN, Dec. 17).

“The report is not worthy of comment at all,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said of the Times account, adding that it is “groundless” (Agence France-Presse, Dec. 19).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Duma Committees Discuss Moscow Treaty Ratification

The Russian Duma’s defense and international affairs committees met Tuesday to discuss the ratification of the U.S.-Russian Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry (see GSN, Dec. 12).  The committees agreed to a procedure aimed to aid cooperation between the executive and legislative branches of the Russian government to accelerate the treaty ratification process, the ministry said in a press release.

Members of the two committees supported ratifying the treaty as soon as early next year, the ministry said (see GSN, Dec. 16; Russian Foreign Ministry release, Dec. 18).

Meanwhile, members of the Russian Parliament are working to add language to the treaty ratification legislation that would give Russia a way to withdraw from the treaty in the event of “extraordinary circumstances,” ITAR-Tass reported yesterday. 

Such circumstances would include substantial U.S. violations of the treaty, the U.S. deployment of a national missile defense system, the buildup of nuclear weapons in countries not affiliated with the treaty and the deployment of nuclear weapons in NATO members, ITAR-Tass reported (Rudakova/Yurkin, ITAR-Tass, Dec. 18). 

For further information, see:

U.S.-Russia Nuclear Reduction Treaty Text (U.S. State Department)

Back to top

International Response:  Nuclear Suppliers Group Amends Guidelines to Combat Terrorism

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

Members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an export control regime that establishes guidelines for nuclear transfers, agreed Dec. 13 in Vienna to amend guidelines to strengthen efforts against nuclear terrorism, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a press release yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 28).

The added provisions, which the United States proposed last year after the Sept. 11 attacks, urge suppliers of nuclear materials and equipment to consider the risks of goods being diverted to terrorist groups and nuclear weapons programs, a U.S. State Department official said today.  The provisions also encourage group members to enhance physical protection of nuclear materials and to support safeguarding activities of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the official said.

The 40 group members negotiated over the new changes smoothly, the official said, adding that the language of the new provisions is to be forward to the IAEA for publication.

Group members also agreed last week to support the IAEA board of governors’ recent resolution concerning North Korea and its alleged nuclear weapons program, the Russian Foreign Ministry said (see related GSN story, today).  The resolution calls on North Korea to continue to comply with its IAEA safeguards agreement and to provide the agency with information on its alleged uranium enrichment program.

For further information, see:

Nuclear Suppliers Group Web site

Back to top

India:  New Delhi to Continue Test Moratorium

India plans to continue a “unilateral moratorium” on nuclear weapons testing, Indian External Affairs Minister Digvijay Singh said today (see GSN, Dec. 3).  His remarks came in response to questions regarding whether experts have suggested resuming tests.  India is not engaged in an arms race with other countries, Singh said (Xinhua News Agency, Dec. 19).

Back to top

North Korea I:  Inspectors Remain at Yongbyon; Russia Determining Its Policy

Even though North Korea has called for the International Atomic Energy Agency to remove seals and monitoring equipment from North Korean nuclear facilities, there are currently no signs that it plans to expel the agency’s inspectors, an agency spokesman said today (see GSN, Dec. 16).

“What the North has so far told the International Atomic Energy Agency is that it wants the agency to unseal and remove surveillance cameras (from the nuclear plant),” agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said.

IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has informed North Korea that he is willing to send agency officials or technicians to Pyongyang or to receive North Korean delegates at the agency’s headquarters in Vienna to discuss monitoring and other nuclear issues, Gwozdecky said (Yonhap/BBC Monitoring, Dec. 18).

Russia Divided on North Korea

Meanwhile, Russia appears to be divided on how to handle the North Korean nuclear issue — hindering U.S. efforts to create a united international front to pressure Pyongyang into abandoning its suspected nuclear weapons programs, U.S. officials said yesterday.

“There is a huge tug-of-war within the Russian government,” a U.S. official said.  “There are many people whose careers depend on integrating North Korea,” while the U.S. policy is one of isolation, the official added.

The internal Russian division was illustrated Monday when U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said that officials worldwide, including in Russia, are “united in calling for a denuclearized Korean Peninsula.”  A few hours before Powell’s comments, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov had said that Russia would not “unite with anyone to pressure North Korea.”

During a visit to Japan this week, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov plans to announce new proposals to ease tensions, Losyukov has said.

“Russia has an approximate list of proposals,” Losyukov said.  “We are prepared to make such steps and we have instruments no other country has — our rather strong contacts with the North Korean leadership,” he added.

The U.S. official expressed optimism that Russia could be persuaded to support the U.S. position on North Korea.

“We are still at the initial stages of working with the Russians on this, and I’m fairly optimistic we’ll be able to bring them on board,” the official said (Nicholas Kralev, Washington Times, Dec. 18).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

North Korea II:  U.S. Alleges 70 High-Explosive Tests Since 1998

The United States believes North Korea has conducted more than 70 high-explosive tests in a suspected nuclear weapons program since 1998 — four years after the creation of the Agreed Framework to freeze such activities, a South Korean official said today (see GSN, Dec. 17).  The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency informed South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Lee Nam-shin of the tests during a Dec. 5 meeting in Washington, according to the South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo.

A South Korean official confirmed that North Korea has conducted high-explosives tests, but could not confirm the number, the newspaper reported (Lee Kyo-kwan, Chosun Ilbo, Dec. 18).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

Russia:  Strategic Missile Forces to End Use of Rail-Mobile ICBMs by 2010

Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces plans to stop using rail-mobile SS-24 intercontinental ballistic missiles by 2010, commander Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov said Sunday (see GSN, Oct. 24).

By 2010, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces will consist of two armies, each with 10 to 12 divisions, Solovtsov said.  The divisions will be armed with Topol-M ballistic missiles and “will probably have no rail-mobile missile systems,” he added (ITAR-Tass, Dec. 16 in FBIS-SOV, Dec. 16).

As of July, Russia had 36 deployed SS-24 rail-mobile ICBM systems, according to a START memorandum of understanding that the United States and Russia exchange twice a year.  Of those 36 SS-24s, 15 are at the Kostroma missile base, nine are at the Bershet base and 12 are at the Krasnoyarsk base.  Russia also had 30 Topol-M missiles deployed at the Tatishchevo missile base, according to the START memorandum (Mike Nartker, Global Security Newswire, Dec. 18).

Back to top

United States I:  Navy Awards Trident Conversion Contracts

The U.S. Navy has awarded contracts to three U.S. defense firms for work to convert four Trident ballistic missile submarines to a non-nuclear, conventional role, the Day.com news service reported today (see GSN, Nov. 25).

Electric Boat, a subsidiary of General Dynamics, received a more than $38 million contract this month.  The company received a $443 million contract last year for design and related support work, according to the Day.

The Navy awarded a $90 million contract to Advanced Information Systems, another General Dynamics subsidiary, for development and support for weapons control systems for the converted submarines.

U.S. defense contractor Northrop Grumman was awarded a contract worth more than $34 million to develop a prototype of a Multiple All-Up-Round Canister for the converted submarines.  The canister is an insert for the submarine’s ballistic missile tubes, which will each hold seven conventional missiles when converted, the Day reported.

Under the conversion plan, two of the Ohio-class submarines — the USS Florida and the USS Georgia — are set to be converted at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Virginia.  The USS Ohio and the USS Michigan will be converted at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Washington (see GSN, Oct. 2; Robert Hamilton, Day.com, Dec. 18).

Back to top

United States II:  NNSA Announces Job Cuts

The U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration yesterday announced plans to reduce its federal workforce by 20 percent, and administration officials said they plan to achieve the mark by 2004 (see GSN, Mar. 29).

The personnel reduction is part of a reorganization that takes effect Friday and aims to remove a layer of the agency’s management, the NNSA said in a press release.  Personnel in the agency’s security forces and the Navy Nuclear Propulsion program will not be cut, the agency said.

“We have worked hard this year to make sure our reorganization is done right.  We will manage the reductions in a way that is fair to our outstanding people, while ensuring that the NNSA of the future will have a world-class business environment that eliminates duplication and micromanagement and provides more effective federal oversight,” said Linton Brooks, the agency’s acting administrator.

The agency is altering the current management system in which site offices report to regional operations offices.  Beginning Friday, site offices that oversee contractor work — which currently report to operations offices in Oakland, Calif., Las Vegas, Nev., and Albuquerque, N.M. — will instead report directly to the principal deputy of the NNSA administrator, the release says.  The plan calls for the NNSA operations office in Oakland to be closed and downsizes the Las Vegas site office, which is to focus on managing the Nevada Test Site.

Albuquerque will become the home of an NNSA service center, which will provide support services to the site offices, the agency said (NNSA press release, Dec. 17).

Agency officials said that they want to achieve workforce cuts through attrition and buyouts.  The 158 employees at the Oakland office will either move to direct oversight jobs at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory or they will relocate to Albuquerque, the Contra Costa Times reported today.  The Albuquerque office, however, will eventually be reduced to 500 jobs from 678 (Andrea Widener, Contra Costa Times, Dec. 18).

Back to top

North Korea:  China Ships Potential Weapons Aid

China recently sold North Korea a large quantity of a chemical that potentially could help engineers make fuel for nuclear weapons, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, Dec. 9).  China shipped the chemical — tributyl phosphate, which can be used to remove weapon-grade material from spent nuclear fuel — earlier this month, according to U.S. intelligence sources (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Dec. 17).

Back to top

Russia:  Stockpiles Called Still Vulnerable

Russian nuclear stockpiles — especially stores of tactical nuclear weapons — remain vulnerable to theft and attack despite millions of dollars in U.S. security aid, the San Jose Mercury News reported Sunday (see GSN, April 29).

Approximately 12,000 portable, tactical nuclear weapons are still in storage in Russia and 3,400 may be ready to use, according to Stan Norris, an expert on U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington (see GSN, May 16; Stober/Sneider, Mercury News I, Dec. 15).

Russian authorities have been reluctant to divulge the number of tactical nuclear weapons in the country, even detaining a U.S. researcher who displayed satellite photographs of storage sites during a 1999 presentation to a Russian think tank.  The authorities have cited the need for secrecy to prevent terrorist attacks, but experts and activists have questioned the effectiveness of security measures to guard the country’s nuclear weapons (Daniel Sneider, Mercury News II, Dec. 15).

Large amounts of U.S. aid have not substantially improved security at Russian sites, even those guarded by the elite 12^th Main Directorate security unit, the Mercury News reported.  For example, while visiting a restricted-access training center northeast of Moscow, a Mercury News reporter accompanied Maxim Shingarkin, an ex-major from the unit, through a hole in the facility’s concrete wall.  Residents of the base’s housing facilities outside the security gates reportedly often use the hole to reach a freshwater source, according to the Mercury News (Daniel Sneider, Mercury News III, Dec. 15).

Shingarkin was kicked out of the military after appearing — supposedly anonymously — in a 2000 television program that revealed his concerns about shoddy nuclear security, the Mercury News reported.  Now working as a Greenpeace activist, he has also led a politician and journalists through a hole into a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant.

“In Russia, all fences have holes,” Shingarkin said (Daniel Sneider, Mercury News IV, Dec. 15).

He participated in drills at a storage facility in central Russia in the late 1990s, but became disenchanted with the military when reports highlighting security weaknesses were suppressed, the Mercury News reported.

“Twenty-five armed people could have penetrated the facility and gotten a weapon,” Shingarkin said of the central Russian facility.  “The storage facilities are under realistic threat to be entered by terrorists,” he added.

Security measures at most Russian nuclear facilities are less effective than those at the training center, Shingarkin said (Sneider, Mercury News III).

Back to top

United States:  Air Force Builds B-2 Shelters on Diego Garcia

The U.S. Air Force has built two maintenance shelters for nuclear-capable B-2 stealth bombers on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, the Washington Post reported Sunday (see GSN, Nov. 7).

An Israeli commercial satellite company photographed the shelters, and U.S. think tank GlobalSecurity.org bought the photo for $200 and posted it on the Internet, the Post reported.

GlobalSecurity.org has also published pictures of the U.S. Air Force’s al-Udeid base in Qatar, which would most likely be used in any attack on Iraq, according to the Post (Vernon Loeb, Washington Post, Dec. 15).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Moscow Treaty Tops U.S. Senate Agenda, but Delays Expected

By Bryan Bender
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee plans to begin hearings next month on the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty with Russia, the incoming committee chairman said last week.

Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who will reclaim the chairmanship when the Republicans retake control of the Senate Jan. 7, told Global Security Newswire in an interview Friday that the Moscow Treaty would be one of his first orders of business. 

Signed by U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin in May, the treaty calls for deep reductions in U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces (see GSN, May 24).

As of last Friday, the committee was scheduled to begin hearing testimony from Secretary of State Colin Powell on the so-called Moscow Treaty as early as Jan. 14, with a vote by the full Senate to approve the treaty planned by the end of the month, according to Lugar’s staff.  Lugar predicted the Senate would complete its deliberations on the treaty “very soon.”

Russian ratification of the Moscow Treaty, however, will probably move more slowly, according to Russian officials.  Putin submitted the treaty to the State Duma for ratification last week (see GSN, Dec. 10) and Bush submitted the treaty to the Senate earlier this year (see GSN, June 21).

The Duma “will take up the ratification issue at the start of the spring session,” said International Affairs Committee Chairman Dmitriy Rogozin.  Several hurdles, however, could prevent Russia from ratifying the treaty next year. 

Speaking Friday in Washington, Rogozin said the Putin administration had not furnished plans for implementing the treaty reductions and domestic politics could also delay the process as December 2003 parliamentary elections near.  Nevertheless, “most of the process” will be completed in 2003, Rogozin predicted.

In coming days, U.S. domestic politics may also affect the treaty ratification schedule.  Incoming U.S. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) is facing a challenge to his leadership and according to a Lugar adviser the leadership question could delay the settlement of Senate organizational issues such as committee structure and budget questions.  The current uncertainty makes concrete planning for early next year virtually impossible, the adviser said.

“Short and Shallow” Debate?

The United States plans to implement the treaty by reducing its number of operationally deployed nuclear weapons to fewer than 2,200 warheads by the end of 2012 and to store many of the reduced warheads.  Russia is expected to do the same, although the treaty does not explicitly say how both sides should shrink their nuclear arsenals, only that they must “reduce and limit” them.

Because the new treaty lacks any verification measures, the two countries will use the existing arms control verification regimes to provide a basis for confidence and predictability in future arms reductions.

Arms control experts said Senate plans for dispensing of the treaty quickly signals that there will be little debate, despite widespread criticism that the agreement is little more than a pledge to de-alert some nuclear weapons, while keeping thousands of weapons in storage.

“I expect the discussion to be short and shallow,” Joseph Cirincione, director of the Nonproliferation Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “Most Republicans want to support the president and most Democrats are too intimidated to point out that this treaty is not much of a treaty.  I expect there will be very little debate.”

He criticized the document for not requiring the destruction of any nuclear warheads and for not being legally binding.  “It’s hardly worth ratifying,” Cirincione said.  “It is so full of loopholes and ambiguities you can’t really call this a legally binding agreement.  It devalues treaties as legally binding diplomatic instruments.”

For example, “what is an operationally deployed strategic weapon?” he asked, “It is not defined in the treaty.  This treaty does not destroy one nuclear weapon.  It provides guidelines for taking them off alert and putting them in storage.”

The result, critics charge, will be U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals that will remain as large in 10 years as they are today.  “No conceivable U.S. military mission in 10 years will require 2,000 100-kiloton weapons ready to fly in 15 minutes notice,” Cirincione said, noting that thousands more warheads would be kept in storage.

Lugar said Russia in particular has said it would like to reduce its nuclear weapons much more substantially.   “The Russians would like to go lower than 1,700 but the dilemma is money,” he said.  “A very substantial new increment is needed,” he said.

“If you’re really worried about nuclear terrorism, this isn’t going to help you,” Cirincione said of the treaty.

[EDITOR’S NOTE:  Richard Lugar is a board member of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, the sole sponsor of Global Security Newswire, which is published independently by National Journal Group.]

For further information, see:

U.S.-Russia Nuclear Reduction Treaty Text (U.S. State Department)

Back to top

Iran I:  United States Links Russia to New Nuclear Facilities

U.S. defense and intelligence officials believe that Russia has provided Iran with most of the equipment and expertise to build two newly disclosed nuclear sites, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Dec. 6).  Satellite photographs of the sites indicate they could be used to develop nuclear weapons, the Institute for Science and International Security said last week (see GSN, Dec. 13).

Russia has been involved “in all aspects of the Iranian nuclear program,” including the newly disclosed sites, a Pentagon official said Friday (see GSN, Sept. 3).  With outside assistance, Iran’s uranium enrichment program could produce enough weapon-grade material to create a nuclear weapon within a few years, but without such aid, it could take until the end of the decade, the official added.

While Russia is a U.S. ally, its aid to Iran could jeopardize U.S. nonproliferation goals, a senior Bush administration official said (see GSN, May 21).

“We are in an uncomfortable position where allies we very much need do not see these proliferation dangers the same way we do,” the official said.  “Every week, that is getting more and more obvious,” the official added (David Sanger, New York Times, Dec. 16).

Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev denied yesterday that Russia has helped Iran build the new sites — called Arak, which reportedly includes a heavy-water production plant, and Natanz, which might include a facility to enrich uranium.  Moscow does plan, however, to continue building a nuclear power reactor at Bushehr, Rumyantsev added (see GSN, Oct. 22; Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press/Yahoo.com).

Iran has violated no international agreements, Rumyantsev said yesterday.  “You cannot assume anything” from the satellite images of Arak and Nantanz, he said (Sanger, New York Times).

U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Friday that the satellite images indicate that Iran has attempted to hide the sites.  There is evidence that the uranium enrichment plant will eventually be located underground, he said.

“Iran clearly intended to harden and bury that facility.  That facility was probably never intended by Iran to be a declared component of a peaceful program,” Boucher said.  “Instead, Iran has been caught constructing a secret underground site where it could produce fissile material,” he added.

Tehran must fulfill obligations under its safeguard agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency, Boucher said, including giving the agency complete information about the design of any new nuclear sites no later than 180 days before starting construction.

“Iran has not accepted that obligation,” he said.  “As a first step, that is something they should do,” he added (U.S. State Department release, Dec. 13).

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Repeats Call to Remove

North Korea Saturday repeated a call to the International Atomic Energy Agency to remove monitoring equipment and seals from all North Korean nuclear facilities (see GSN, Dec. 13).  In letters dated Dec. 12 and Dec. 14, Pyongyang has indicated that it is prepared to act unilaterally to remove the seals and equipment if the agency does not meet its request, according to the official Korean Central News Agency (Korean Central News Agency, Dec. 14).

Seoul and Pyongyang Begin Talks

North Korea and South Korea yesterday began a three-day series of talks that are expected to focus heavily on the North’s nuclear program, according to Agence France-Presse.  The talks were originally scheduled to discuss family reunions and cross-border travel.  South Korean delegates, however, strongly pressed for the nuclear issue to be a main topic.

“I will tell them that peace on the Korean peninsula is threatened by North Korea’s nuclear problem,” said Lee Byung-woong, head of South Korea’s Red Cross delegation.  “I will note that the current situation will not help resolve humanitarian issues between the two sides,” Lee said (Agence France-Presse, Dec. 15).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

Iran II:  Rumyantsev to Sign Spent-Fuel Pact Next Week

Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev is expected to travel to Iran Dec. 22 to sign an agreement ensuring that Tehran will return spent fuel from the Bushehr nuclear reactor to Russia (see GSN, Sept. 20).  The return of the spent fuel has been “a mandatory condition” for Russia’s assistance with the reactor, he said today in an interview with ITAR-Tass.

Rumyantsev said that during the visit he also plans to discuss accelerating construction of the Bushehr plant (see GSN, Sept. 4).  Originally, planners had expected to begin operations by 2005, but Russian specialists have said that the facility could be operable as soon as late 2003, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency.  Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei is expected to conduct a “guest inspection” of the Bushehr plant this month, Rumyantsev said (Islamic Republic News Agency, Dec. 16).

Back to top

North Korea:  Remove IAEA Seals From Nuclear Sites, Pyongyang Says

North Korea called on the International Atomic Energy Agency yesterday to remove monitoring equipment and seals from all North Korean nuclear facilities — a move one step closer to fully resuming the country’s nuclear program (see GSN, Dec. 12).

In a letter to IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of North Korea’s General Department of Atomic Energy, Ri Je Son, announced that his country would lift a freeze today on its nuclear facilities.  Previously, it had agreed to maintain the freeze in exchange for energy assistance under the 1994 Agreed Framework with the United States.

“Accordingly, the IAEA is requested to take necessary measures to remove the seals and monitoring cameras on all of our nuclear facilities,” Ri wrote in the letter. 

“If the IAEA fails to expeditiously take measures to meet our request, we would like to take necessary measures unilaterally,” Ri wrote (Mike Nartker, Global Security Newswire, Dec. 12).

ElBaradei yesterday called on North Korea to act with restraint, saying it is “essential” that the seals and monitoring equipment remain in place.

“It is essential that the containment and surveillance measures which are currently in place continue to be maintained, and that the D.P.R.K. not take any steps unilaterally to remove or impede the functioning of such seals or cameras,” ElBaradei said.  “Any such action would not be in compliance with the requirements of the IAEA-D.P.R.K. Safeguards Agreement,” he added.

ElBaradei has asked North Korea to agree to an urgent technical meeting to discuss how Pyongyang’s nuclear program would progress to full operation and how the IAEA would continue to fulfill its verification requirements under the safeguards agreement (International Atomic Energy Agency release, Dec. 12).

The IAEA inspectors currently inside North Korea have not yet been asked to leave, ElBaradei said today on CNN television.  “I think this is a good sign,” he added (CNN, Dec. 13).

The call to remove the IAEA equipment from North Korean nuclear facilities indicates that Pyongyang is pursuing “illicit activities,” said L. Gordon Flake, a North Korean expert and director of the Mansfield Center for Pacific Affairs.

“The dangerous thing about the request to remove the cameras is, it comes pretty close to a clear admission that they are indeed doing illicit activities,” Flake said.  “If you’re not doing anything wrong ... why do you care about the cameras?” he added (Los Angeles Times, Dec. 13).

U.S. Response

The United States considers the decision to restart nuclear facilities “regrettable,” and is calling on Pyongyang to end its suspected nuclear weapons program, U.S. National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack said yesterday.

“We believe that this announcement really flies in the face of international consensus, that the North Korean regime must fulfill all of its commitments, and in particular dismantle its nuclear weapons program,” McCormack said (Federal News Service transcript, Dec. 12).

Some U.S. officials said that while they are not surprised by North Korea’s decision, it poses a major challenge — albeit one that would be handled after the situation in Iraq had been resolved.

“One rogue state crisis at a time,” a senior White House official said, describing U.S. President George W. Bush’s strategy (French/Sanger, New York Times, Dec. 13).

Japanese Response

Japan announced today that it would attempt to relaunch stalled talks with North Korea.  It is even more important now to restart the talks, which have been stalled since October “to keep this kind of thing from happening,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said (Agence France-Presse, Dec. 13).

Yongbyon Status

North Korea’s 5-megawatt nuclear reactor — which is located 55 miles north of Pyongyang at the Yongbyon complex and cannot generate significant amounts of electricity but can produce weapon-grade nuclear materials — could be started within two months, South Korean sources said.

Other analysts, however, doubted that the reactor is even capable of operating, the Times reported (Los Angeles Times).  For example, the three-story crane used to load fuel into the reactor is broken, said Kenneth Quinones, who helped set up the IAEA inspection program in North Korea in 1994.  If the crane can be repaired, however, the site could begin operations within six months, he said (Doug Struck, Washington Post, Dec. 13).

Even if the reactor could be started, it is too small to produce the electricity needed to get the country through the winter, according to the Los Angeles Times.  “But it can produce plutonium,” an IAEA official said.

North Korea also has two nuclear reactors still unfinished since 1994 — a 50-megawatt reactor at Yongbyon and a 200-megawatt reactor at Taechon.  It would take two years to finish building those reactors, an IAEA official said.

Possible Negotiation Tactic

Some experts have said that North Korea’s decision to restart its nuclear facilities could be a tactic to pressure the United States into entering negotiations.

“Their objective is to get us to negotiate with them,” said Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution.  “They know right now that we don’t want to think about them more than necessary, and not talk to them for a while. ... And here is their one way of saying ... ‘You have to deal with us now,’” he added (Los Angeles Times).

While the United States has indicated its willingness to pursue a dialogue with North Korea, it will not respond to “threats or broken commitments,” McCormack said yesterday.

“The United States has always ... been open to dialogue in principle and was prepared for a comprehensive approach to improving U.S.-North Korean relations before the disclosure of North Korea’s clandestine uranium enrichment program,” McCormack said.  “However, we have to make it very clear that the United States will not enter into a dialogue in response to threats or broken commitments, and we will not bargain or offer inducements for North Korea to live up to the treaties and agreements it has already signed,” he added (Federal News Service).

Joel Wit, a former U.S. State Department official, said North Korea would not respond favorably to a hard-line U.S. position.

“North Korea is not going to capitulate on issues of vital national security for them,” said Wit, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.  “We do have to be tough with them, but we have to use every measure available to us to resolve the situation.  That means at some point we are going to have to sit down with them,” he added (Los Angeles Times).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

Iran:  Photos Show Building at Nuclear Sites, Group Says

According to satellite photographs, Iran is working at two sites to construct nuclear facilities that could be used to develop nuclear weapons, the Institute for Science and International Security said in a report released yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 20).

By interpreting satellite imagery, the institute has determined that one of the sites, located near the city of Arak, appears to be a heavy-water production facility under construction, the report says.  The existence of such a facility increases concerns that Iran might also be building a nuclear reactor moderated by heavy water, ISIS said, adding that no signs of such a reactor have been located.

The Bushehr nuclear reactor, which Iran is currently building with aid from Russia, does not use heavy water, the report says (see GSN, Oct. 22).  Furthermore, Iran’s existing research reactors do not use enough heavy water to justify creating a heavy-water plant, it adds.

Meanwhile, the satellite imagery appears to contradict claims made by the Iranian opposition group National Council of Resistance of Iran, which has said that Tehran is building a nuclear fuel fabrication facility at a site called Natanz, 25 miles southeast of the city of Kashan, the institute said (see GSN, Aug. 15).  Construction at Natanz appears to be for a uranium enrichment plant, possibly employing gas centrifuge technology, the ISIS report says, adding that the facility does not appear to be in operation.

IAEA

Under a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran does not have to open any new nuclear facility to agency inspections until six months before introducing nuclear materials, the ISIS report says (Institute for Science and International Security release, Dec. 12).  

The agency learned of the new facilities in August from satellite imagery, according to IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, and Iranian officials confirmed their existence in September to ElBaradei.  At that time, they invited ElBaradei to visit the sites this week, but that visit was postponed until February, when ElBaradei will visit with a team of technical experts, he said on CNN this morning (Greg Webb, GSN, Dec. 13).

Iranian Response

In an interview with CNN yesterday, Iran’s U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif said that his country is not developing nuclear weapons.

“No.  Absolutely not,” Zarif said in response to a question on whether Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program.  “Iran is a member of the [Nuclear] Nonproliferation Treaty.  We have safeguard agreements with the IAEA.  Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction do not have a place in our defense doctrine.  We have stated that clearly.  And we have shown it,” he added.

Iran has the right to develop a peaceful civilian nuclear program, Zarif said.

“We do have a right to have nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.  And that we have asserted very forcefully,” Zarif said.  “And we will continue to carry out our research and our activities in the area of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes,” he added.

Zarif dismissed suggestions that Iran might be working to develop a clandestine nuclear program.

“There is nothing hidden about it,” Zarif said.  “Because if we wanted to have sort of a clandestine nuclear program, we wouldn’t come out in public and stating it is our right and this is our policy to pursue a nuclear program for peaceful purposes,” he added (CNN.com, Dec. 13).

For further information, see:

NPT Text

States Parties to the NPT (U.N.)

U.N. Background on NPT

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP