|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
This weeks Weapons of Mass Destruction stories for Wednesday, July 3, 2002.
U.S. Response: Commercial Satellites to Enhance WMD DetectionBy Bryan Bender Greater access to high-resolution space imagery would assist international arms inspectors, strengthen diplomatic efforts to pressure would-be proliferators and treaty violators, and otherwise improve the ability of governments, international bodies, independent analysts and nongovernmental organizations to examine WMD-related activities around the globe. CIA Director George Tenet last month directed the U.S. intelligence community to utilize U.S. commercial space imagery “to the greatest extent possible” and reserve government-owned spy satellites for the most specialized and sensitive of missions. The intelligence chief called on the community to take “all possible steps to remove any remaining institutional obstacles” to using commercial imagery. The directive is expected to boost the commercial remote sensing industry, which has struggled to find a stable customer base. As a result, it has not realized its potential for advancing global transparency in the decade since increasingly high-resolution space images have become available to the public. “My goal in establishing this policy is to stimulate, as quickly as possible, and maintain, for the foreseeable future, a robust U.S. commercial space imagery industry,” Tenet told the Pentagon’s National Imagery and Mapping Agency in the June 7 directive, a copy of which was obtained by GSN. NIMA Director James Clapper said in an interview with Space News this week that he intends to process this imagery “as quickly as the data collected by U.S. national security satellites.” Greater Availability of Space Imagery Companies such as Space Imaging and DigitalGlobe today operate satellites that take images capable of detecting objects smaller than one meter square — not as precise as government-owned satellites with resolutions measured in inches, but nevertheless highly revealing. When customers request an image be taken of a particular location, at a cost of thousands of dollars, under most circumstances the image is then placed in the company’s archives for sale. Archived images cost substantially less; in the case of Space Imaging’s IKONOS satellite, about $350 each, a recent reduction from $500, according to company officials. “Our hope is there will be more imagery in the archive and that will enable them to sell imagery at a lower cost,” said John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org, an arms control group frequently uses commercial space imagery to conduct independent analysis of suspected nuclear and missile facilities. According to Corey Hinderstein, a remote sensing expert at the Institute for Science and International Security, “the purchase of an image out of the archive is a set amount while tasking the satellite is more expensive. If governments are buying more images and they are showing up in the archives then it may be easier for other governments and nongovernmental organizations to buy the images.” “At a minimum, the fact that the government is keeping these firms viable would be useful and beneficial for anyone who would want to use imagery for broader public policy purposes,” added John Baker, a space policy analyst at the RAND Corporation. Increased Global Transparency Government and private experts envision a variety of benefits to the arms control and disarmament communities. Commercial imagery could be used more frequently by on-site inspectors such as the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, which is now seeking to return to Iraq (see related GSN story, today), or the International Atomic Energy Agency. In inspecting an alleged suspected weapons of mass destruction facility, a satellite image from the previous few days would be useful to determine any recent activities, such as the removal of equipment. “There is no better way of finding your way around if you have an image of the facility,” Pike said. Moreover, the process of disseminating commercial images does not suffer from the same thorny issues of classification as those taken by a government satellite and then provided to an international body such as UNMOVIC or the IAEA. “This is precisely the kind of imagery they would be interested in using because it doesn’t have classification,” Pike said. As a result, a country such as Iraq could no longer accuse the United Nations of complicity with national intelligence agencies for its reliance on their spy photos. “It eliminates an area of contention on both sides,” said Hinderstein. “The inspecting agency can get timely and accurate information when and where they need it, but not from national systems.” Increased use of commercial imagery will build upon what a recent RAND report calls a “growing interest of nongovernmental organizations and multinational agencies in taking advantage of these data to address specific international problems.” This includes, for example, enabling nongovernmental experts to “use commercial satellite imagery to detect and identify, despite highly restricted external access, suspicious facilities that could be part of a nuclear weapon program” or to “understand what transpired at the nuclear test sites at which India and Pakistan conducted a series of nuclear detonations in 1998.” Pike calls this “looking over other people’s shoulders.” By looking through the archived images of a commercial imagery company, he said, one can get a sense of what governments are interested in. “A lot of agencies out there in the United States and other governments know where a lot of these [suspect facilities] are located much more than we do,” he said. “So one strategy has been to look for places that they have a lot of imagery of. If someone like the U.S. government with a lot of money is interested in a particular site, maybe we should be, too.” A recent example of this, he said, is a large amount of imagery taken by the IKONOS satellite of a particular location in Iran. “Very early on, someone bought a lot of Space Imaging photos of secret cities in Russia,” he said. “It will be known if the United States goes out and looks at a site like a South Asian nuclear reactor,” added Baker. Mark Brender, executive director of government affairs for Space Imaging, acknowledges that the growing archive can hint at where the government is looking. “You can map people’s fears,” he said. Public Diplomacy Commercial imagery could also be critical to the success of public diplomatic efforts to force action against arms control violations or illegal developments. It can be used for “illustrative purposes and public diplomacy to highlight something at a controversial Iraqi or Iranian location, for example,” Baker pointed out. “Commercial imagery is a way for a country that doesn’t want to show its national capability to show images to others,” added Hinderstein, noting that commercial imagery was used in negotiations with North Korea to suspend its nuclear program. Despite the U.S. plan to become the commercial remote sensing industry’s biggest customer, experts acknowledge that several unknowns remain that could diminish the trickle-down effect. The United States could exercise its right to classify certain commercial images under the guise of national security or pay to have a certain image kept out of the archive, restricting access of images of the most sensitive sites by keeping them out of public reach. With only special and highly expensive exceptions, however, industry officials say the images will eventually be put in the archive. For example, the United States last year temporarily purchased exclusive rights to IKONOS images of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Except for U.S. bases, all of those images, 470,000 square kilometers, are now available for public purchase.
Iraq: Talks Resume Tomorrow on Returning U.N. InspectorsU.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan traveled to Vienna yesterday where he is scheduled to begin talks with Iraqi officials tomorrow, U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said. Annan has been focusing on returning U.N. weapons inspectors to Iraq, he said (Xinhua News Agency, July 3). Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammad al-Douri promised before heading to Vienna Monday that some progress will come out of the talks, which will mark the third time Annan has met with Iraqi officials since early March, according to the Associated Press. Annan has called on Iraq to come to a “concrete understanding” on returning inspectors to Iraq (see GSN, July 2). Al-Douri, however, said Iraq wants to discuss a larger agenda, particularly focusing on lifting sanctions against Iraq and U.S. threats to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. “Certainly there will be some concrete results,” al-Douri said. “But hopefully we can continue our dialogue to finalize all our issues” (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Ha’aretz, July 3). For further information, see: U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime) U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”) U.N. Office of the Iraq Program
Iraq: Baghdad Continues to Waver on U.N. InspectorsBaghdad has indicated that Iraqi delegates scheduled to meet with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan this week might not give a concrete answer on the whether Iraq plans to allow U.N. weapons inspectors to return to the country, Reuters reported today (see GSN, July 1). A delegation led by Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri is expected to meet with Annan Thursday in Vienna, according to Reuters. Annan has said he wants a “decisive” result to the meeting. “We cannot keep talking forever and I would hope that we will be able to yield some results,” Annan said. “I would want to see a decisive meeting.” Some Iraqi officials, however, have said there is no point in allowing U.N. weapons inspectors to return to Iraq if the United States is set on a regime change. Iraq is ready to readmit the U.N. inspectors “in principle,” but with conditions, said Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammed Aldouri. Iraq first wants answers to U.S. threats, progress on lifting the U.N. sanctions and an end to no-flight zones, Aldouri said. Iraq also wants guarantees that there will be no spies among U.N. inspections teams, he said, adding that Israel must get rid of its nuclear weapons. “We have received some answers to some but not for the most important questions,” Aldouri said. Some analysts have said Iraq has no incentive to readmit U.N. inspectors. Other experts, however, have said the presence of the U.N. inspectors might help delay any type of military action. “It could be their best national defense policy,” said Charles Duelfer, former deputy executive chairman of the U.N. weapons inspection unit (Reuters/New York Times, July 2). For further information, see: U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime) U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”) U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Sanctions Revisions
Iraq: Vienna Showdown Expected Over Outlawed Weapons ProgramsBy Bryan Bender Iraq’s suspected continuing development of weapons of mass destruction — despite U.N. sanctions in place since the Gulf War ended in 1991 — has set the stage for a July 4 showdown in Vienna that will more firmly place Baghdad on a collision course with Washington if it does not agree unconditionally to allow U.N. weapons inspectors to return to Iraq. The U.N. delegation, led by Secretary General Kofi Annan and Hans Blix, executive chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, will seek Iraqi agreement to return international inspectors that were pulled out of the country in 1998 following Baghdad’s refusal to cooperate with the U.N. team. The much-anticipated meeting is expected to have a narrow agenda focusing on the return of weapons inspectors despite Iraq’s desire to also discuss the lifting of sanctions as well as an end to the U.S.- and British-enforced no-fly zones over northern and southern Iraq (see GSN, May 6). Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammad al-Douri said last week he did not believe all issues could be resolved in one meeting and Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri yesterday expressed hope that the meeting would begin a process leading to a comprehensive settlement. “Iraq wants a comprehensive settlement and will not accept partial solutions,” Sabri told reporters in Baghdad before leaving for Vienna. “The Iraqis may try to stall,” said a U.N. official who asked not to be named. The United States, however, has made it clear that further delays are unacceptable and a full accounting of the destruction of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and missiles must be completed before sanctions can be lifted, as required by U.N. resolutions dating back to the Gulf War. “We continue to work with our allies in the international community to get Iraq to comply with U.N. Security Council obligations, including acceptance and full cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said earlier this month. According to U.N. officials, the Bush administration in recent weeks has told Annan that it will veto any deal that makes concessions on the immediate return of inspectors. Annan said earlier this month he was seeking “a decisive meeting” in Vienna. U.N. officials also said other U.N. Security Council members, including Russia and France — who have been sympathetic to Iraq in the past — have sent Baghdad a clear message that it must give in to U.N. demands on inspections without restrictions. “They realize that Bush will move quickly against Iraq if they don’t get what they want,” said one U.N. official. “If the Iraqis want qualifications, the U.S. has said it would veto any agreement. This is a make-or-break meeting. Even the Russians say no restrictions.” U.S. intelligence officials, however, said that Iraq still has much to hide and they have no reason to believe they will cooperate fully. “They are pursuing a WMD program,” said one intelligence official, citing recent intelligence reports. “They are able to get stuff they really want and we can’t inspect,” the official said, citing the opening in recent years of a number of overland routes between Iraq and Turkey, Syria and Jordan, as well as the return of commercial airline flights to Baghdad. “They have an effective deception and denial program and conceal their programs in civilian structures,” the official said. “They don’t have any fissionable material, but if they were to acquire them a nuclear bomb would only be a few years off. And they never lost the brain trust from the chem-bio program. They have maintained the programs and over time made improvements.” Yesterday, the official al-Iraq newspaper reported that Hussein praised military scientists for making a “new and important scientific achievement.” U.N. officials predicted that if the meetings this week fail to reach the desired solution, they could pave the way for U.S. military action against Hussein’s regime. “If they get stiffed, there could be a U.S. attack sooner rather than later,” said the U.N. official, predicting cruise missile and air strikes similar to the four days of air strikes during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998. Moreover, the officials said, Washington could have more leverage than usual at the United Nations, as the United Kingdom will hold the rotating Security Council presidency in July and Washington will preside in August. “What we’re concerned about with Iraq is its intentions and capabilities to develop weapons of mass destruction and the merger of that capability with terrorist groups,” Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham (D-Fla.) said during a hearing last week. The United Nations is ready to move quickly if it gets the green light from Iraq. Blix has said the inspectors’ abandoned weapons monitoring headquarters in Baghdad could be operating within seven to 10 days.
Threat Assessment: Carnegie Book Describes Diminishing WMD ThreatsBy Kerry Boyd Speaking at the launch of a new book analyzing WMD arsenals around the world, Cirincione said there are fewer long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction in the world today than there were 10 years. The Cold War marked the peak of WMD proliferation, he said, and arsenals have declined in quantity and size, largely due to arms reduction agreements between the United States and the former Soviet Union. In the 1990s, only India and Pakistan openly joined the “nuclear weapons club,” making a total of eight nuclear-armed states, but six countries left the club, Cirincione said. According to the book — Deadly Arsenals: Tracking Weapons of Mass Destruction by Cirincione, Jon Wolfsthal and Miriam Rajkumar — Ukraine (see GSN, Dec. 5), Belarus and Kazakhstan gave up their nuclear inheritance after the Soviet Union dissolved. South Africa destroyed the six nuclear weapons that its former apartheid government had secretly constructed, and Argentina and Brazil both halted nuclear weapons programs and signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Since the Chemical Weapons Convention was signed in 1996, many chemical weapons stocks have been destroyed, the authors wrote. Despite delays, the United States (see GSN, June 24) and Russia (see GSN, June 18) are in the process of destroying their chemical arsenals, they wrote. The news on biological weapons is more mixed, according to Cirincione. More than 160 countries have signed the Biological Weapons Convention, and “most of the world’s biological weapons have been destroyed,” the authors wrote. However, there are 12 states today that are suspected of having biological weapons programs. Most are possible research programs — in Egypt, India, Libya, Pakistan, Sudan and Syria — but Iran, Iraq and Russia are believed to have arsenals, and China, Israel and North Korea might also have weapons, according to the book. Finally, the risk that an enemy would launch an ICBM against the United States is also down, the authors wrote (see GSN, March 12). There are 57 percent fewer missiles capable of striking the continental United States today than in the mid-1980s, according to Deadly Arsenals. There are also far fewer intermediate-range ballistic missiles in the world. The number of medium-range missiles has declined, but there is concern that new missile programs in certain countries — although they do not directly threaten the United States — might endanger international stability, the authors wrote. Concerns about proliferation of weapons of mass destruction today are down to a few hard cases that pose a “relatively confined threat,” Cirincione said. His book identifies the Middle East and Northeast Asia as the two major regions where concern over biological and chemical weapons remains high. Fewer Weapons But Higher Risk Although the trend of WMD proliferation is definitely in decline, the risk of actual WMD use has increased, partly due to the risk of terrorist attack, Cirincione said. Countries concerned about proliferation and WMD warfare must work to ensure that the downward trend in WMD proliferation continues and to prevent any “new wave of proliferation” in the future, he said. In Deadly Arsenals, the authors wrote the bottom line on proliferation trends is that “first, the current global situation is dangerous; second, it could have been much worse; and third, the right government policies could make the situation much better.” The Right Policies It is up to countries to continue making progress, Cirincione said. The United States must work to “sustain and even expand” nonproliferation regimes to maintain the trend of diminishing WMD arsenals, the authors wrote. “The regime works,” Cirincione said. Appropriate diplomacy, nonproliferation agreements and controls could help the United States and other countries address the remaining hard WMD cases, the authors wrote in Deadly Arsenals. Active U.S. and international diplomacy might improve relations with North Korea and Iran and decrease concerns about their WMD arsenals (see GSN, June 28). Tensions between nuclear-armed Pakistan and India might pose “the most difficult challenge,” but there is a possibility that negotiators could construct agreements similar to the NPT to ease that situation, the authors wrote. International leaders have been able to prevent certain crises from turning into WMD nightmares in the past, and current leaders should be able to continue to avoid such nightmares if they use the nonproliferation tools at hand, Wolfsthal said. For further information, see: Carnegie Endowment Nuclear Status Map
About Newswire | Contact National Journal | Re-Use Guidelines
HOME | CONTACT US | GET INVOLVED | SITE MAP |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Back to top