U.S. Response I:  Absence of Terrorist “Chatter” Leaves Threat Level Unchanged Over Holiday

U.S. officials say they have no plans to raise the nation’s terror alert level over the Fourth of July holiday because terrorist “chatter” is low and no specific threats have been made on U.S. interests at home or abroad, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, July 2).

The government also has no plans to issue private warnings to national or local law enforcement agencies as they did one year ago.  Currently, the threat level is at “yellow,” or “elevated.”

“We have no intelligence at this time that leads us to raise the threat level,” said Gordon Johndroe, chief spokesman for Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge.  “We know state and local law enforcement and appropriate federal agencies will have a large presence at all the major gatherings around the country,” he added (David Johnston, New York Times, July 3).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  U.S. to Test Hazardous Material Shipment Technologies

The U.S. Transportation Department’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration announced yesterday the start of a field operational test designed to evaluate the costs and benefits of transportation security technologies to safeguard hazardous material shipments (see GSN, May 6).

The test is set to involve 100 trucks equipped with a variety of existing security technologies.  The test will evaluate the capabilities of technologies such as driver verification, vehicle tracking, off-route and stolen vehicle alerts and remote vehicle disabling in the event of a terrorist attack, according to a Transportation press release.  A prototype test is scheduled to occur later this month, with full-scale testing set to begin in August and to be completed by late 2004, the release said. 

“We must build on our continuous efforts to ensure the security of the more than 800,000 shipments of hazardous materials hauled on U.S. highways every day,” Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said.  “This operational test will help improve security and will help spur innovative technologies for safeguarding hazardous materials in the future,” he said (U.S. Transportation Department release, July 2).

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  Homeland Security Department Issues Interim Maritime Security Regulations

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Homeland Security Department yesterday announced new interim regulations to improve maritime and port security (see GSN, June 5).

The new regulations are expected to affect 10,000 maritime vessels, 5,000 facilities and 40 outer continental shelf facilities, such as tank vessels, large passenger vessels, offshore oil platforms and port facilities that handle dangerous kinds of cargo, according to a Homeland Security press release.  Under the new regulations, vessel and facility operators and owners will be required to conduct vulnerability assessments and develop security plans. 

During a press briefing yesterday, U.S. Coast Guard Chief of Staff Vice Adm. Thad Allen said that while some U.S. port facilities are close to completing their own security assessments, others are lagging behind.

“There are some ports and some industries and some facilities where they were right on top of this after 9/11,” Allen said.  “Others are a little further back.  And it’s going to be a challenge to get everybody kind of on the same piece of music, if you will,” he said.

The regulations set a deadline of Dec. 31 for security plans to be submitted for Coast Guard approval, Allen said.  As of July 1, 2004, all regulated vessels and facilities must have their approved security plans in place, he said.

To provide “flexibility” and to “encourage” innovation, the Homeland Security release said, industry organizations may submit alternative security programs for Coast Guard approval.

The new regulations also require vessels and facilities to implement new security measures based on three scalable security levels.  Such measures could include passenger and baggage screening, security patrols, personnel identification procedures and the installation of security equipment.  The new security levels — yellow, orange and red — are meant to match the national terrorism threat alert levels, Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson said yesterday.

A Coast Guard official said that passenger and body screening would likely only be implemented when the U.S. terrorism threat alert level was at “orange,” or high, and only on certain vessels, the Associated Press reported.

The new regulations require that an individual be designated to be responsible for each vessel or facility’s security program.  In addition, the regulations also outline qualifications for security officers and require all personnel to receive training to be able to implement security plans.

The regulations designate Coast Guard captains of the ports as federal maritime security coordinators with the authority to oversee and direct security activities at ports.  In addition, the regulations also establish area maritime security committees, consisting of members of U.S., state and local agencies, industry representatives and others.  These committees are required to conduct vulnerability assessments and to develop security plants for each of the 361 U.S. ports, as well as an annual security exercise, according to the Homeland Security release.

Under the regulations, certain vessels will be required to install Automatic Identification System equipment, which instantly sends ship information to other ships and to shore-based agencies.  Currently, only a “very small percentage” of ships have such equipment installed, a Homeland Security official said yesterday.  “Pretty much all” international vessels, however, will be required to have AIS equipment installed and operational by the end of next year, the official said.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge praised the new regulations yesterday.

“With 95 percent of our nation’s international cargo carried by ship, port security is critical to ensuring our nation’s homeland and economic security,” Ridge said in a statement.  “The port security measures we are putting in place, both here at home and abroad, are about expanding our capabilities — strengthening a vitally important system with additional layers of defense,” he said.

The Coast Guard has estimated that the costs of improving port security will be more than $7 billion over the next 10 years.  Hutchinson said yesterday that $350 million is expected to be made available this year for port security grants to help offset the costs of the new regulations.  He also said, however, that vessel operators and owners will have to cover the bulk of the costs in conducting their vulnerability assessments.

“There have been some pilot programs, some funding available,” Hutchinson said.  “But it is a shared responsibility, and so there will be a burden that will fall on the private sector,” he added.

The interim regulations, designed to implement the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, were published without prior public comment, Allen said.  Even so, Homeland Security held seven public meetings, with more than 2,100 industry, state and local representatives attending, he said.  The department is now conducting a monthlong comment period, with final rules expected to be published in October and set to go into effect 30 days later, Allen said. 

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Police Say Local Response to Terror Alerts Is Muted

Stretched thin by false alarms and tight budgets, some U.S. police chiefs are increasingly disregarding federal terror alerts, USA Today reported today (see GSN, June 3).

“There is a broad consensus that the (federal alert) system just isn’t effective,” said Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske said.  “It isn’t working,” he added.

Law enforcement officials have complained that the Homeland Security Department raises terror alerts but do not give detailed guidance to local authorities.

“They are frustrated with the lack of specificity in the threat information being passed on, and how they should respond,” said Miami Police Chief John Timoney.  “Personally, I think the alerts serve as a good reminder that the enemy is still out there.  But some (chiefs) are saying they are not going to do anything differently anymore when a new threat alert goes out,” he added.

In Oregon, Portland police went to the second highest alert status — orange — during protests over the planned U.S. invasion of Iraq.  The heightened alert cost the city $1.2 million in overtime costs, USA Today reported.  In May, during another orange alert, the city limited its response and incurred only $6,000 in overtime costs.  In the end, financial considerations and tight budgets could dictate security efforts.

“You take the orange (alert) with a grain of salt,” said Portland Police Chief Mark Kroeker.  “It’s a pragmatic approach mixed with the current fiscal crisis,” he added.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said local law enforcement divisions should pay close attention to alerts issued from Washington.

“God forbid something happens in a major city and you didn’t go up” to a higher alert level, Ridge said last month.  “We can’t mandate it, but at least I am hopeful that under these circumstances that (state) homeland security advisers will think twice about not doing something,” he added (Kevin Johnson, USA Today, July 2).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Ridge Plays Down Report; Says U.S. Will Spend “Billions” on Homeland Security

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said yesterday the United States is “safer and more secure” than ever, playing down a Council on Foreign Relations report released Sunday that claims the country is unprepared to handle another large-scale terrorist attack (see GSN, June 30).

The council said U.S. emergency responders will need almost $100 billion over the next five years to adequately prepare for an attack, requiring federal, state and local governments to triple their current spending on emergency services to meet the funding shortfall.

“It’s fashionable, very appropriately, in the political world to assess how well you’re doing by how much you spend,” said Ridge, who noted that “billions and billions” would be spent in the future to combat terrorism in the United States.  “Across this country, we are safer and more secure,” he added (Thomas Frank, Newsday, July 1).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  U.N. Panel Finds No Iraq-Al-Qaeda Link, But Warns of Al-Qaeda WMD Ambitions

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — The chairman of the Security Council group monitoring sanctions against al-Qaeda and the Taliban said yesterday that while al-Qaeda is still able to function in many countries, the group has seen no evidence of a link between the terrorist organization and the former government Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein (see GSN, May 23, 2002).

Michael Chandler, the chairman of the monitoring group set up under Resolution 1267, told reporters, “Nothing has come to our notice, reported to us … that would indicate links between al-Qaeda and Iraq.  That doesn’t mean to say it doesn’t exist, but as far as we are concerned, the answer is no.”

This morning, Chandler issued a “clarification” on his remarks about the lack of a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda, in an apparent attempt to avoid contradicting the United States.  The report “does not address this issue and the monitoring group has reached no conclusions concerning these matters,” says a statement released to the media.  “Given the nature and intensity of the crisis surrounding Iraq ... and attention being directed to such issues by the Security Council itself, an inquiry by [the group] was considered inappropriate,” the statement says.

The United States argued in justifying the invasion of Iraq that the Hussein government and al-Qaeda were working together.  In particular, Secretary of State Colin Powell, addressing the council Feb. 5, said al-Qaeda was “operating freely in Baghdad.”  This “sinister nexus” between Iraq and al-Qaeda means terrorists “could turn to Iraq for expertise” in producing weapons of mass destruction, Powell said.

Ambassador Heraldo Munoz of Chile, the chairman of the council’s committee on al-Qaeda sanctions, said such a connection “never came to our knowledge before Powell made his statement.  We did not get any information from any state that there is a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq at that point.”

On the other hand, the terrorist group accused of masterminding the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington, as well as numerous other attacks around the world, is still able to function by adapting to the changing political realities, said Chandler and Munoz, who were speaking at a news conference introducing the group’s new report on the effectiveness of the sanctions.  Munoz said the report details “the success of the measures against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.  [However], our progress has yielded new ways for [them] to organize,” he said.  This is a long-term task.”

The report, covering January to May, says, “There were marked successes in the fight against the al-Qaeda network,” including the arrest of members of Osama bin Laden’s “original command team” and the “breakup of cells in a number of countries.”  However, the network “still pose[s] a significant threat to international peace and security,” according to the report, and there is evidence the network “has been able to reconstitute its levels of support” in numerous countries, including Afghanistan.

Panel Concerned About “Third Generation Al-Qaeda”

Of particular concern is the emergence of what the report calls the “third generation al-Qaeda,” terrorists who are operating independently since the al-Qaeda command was driven out of Afghanistan in late 2001.

“The image that is emerging of the network is of a new generation of Islamic fundamental extremism such that al-Qaeda can be viewed both as an organization and an ideology; a ‘Third Generation al-Qaeda,’ which is becoming self-perpetuating,” the report says.  “This makes it all the more difficult to track and disrupt elements of the newly emerging network and reinforces the need for all states with known al-Qaeda elements to clamp down hard on their activities.”

According to Chandler, “The newness of what we are saying is that we are seeing the people who want to carry out attacks and work within the ideology who … never went to Afghanistan, were never part of the element of al-Qaeda as it evolved.”

The first generation, Chandler said, were those who joined bin Laden in Afghanistan in the 1990s.  The second generation are those who joined after “the demise of the Taliban and the dispersion of al-Qaeda,” he said.  The third generation, such as the suspects in the bombings of Casablanca, Morocco, on May 17, were all locals with no ties to the al-Qaeda command, he said.

“Further success in bringing down the al-Qaeda network will require a sustained international effort, with continued and enhanced information sharing and coordination,” Chandler added.  “This is not something any one country is going to do on its own.”

The international efforts to crack down on arms trafficking in general and in strengthening national legislation on exports is having an effect on al-Qaeda, the report says.  However, al-Qaeda is “still able to acquire adequate quantities of weapons and explosives.  Al-Qaeda continues attempts to acquire WMD.”

Al-Qaeda has a “WMD Committee,” according to the report, “which is known to have approached a number of Muslim scientists … to assist the terrorist network with the creation and procurement of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons.”  However, the group says it would be difficult for al-Qaeda to build and deploy a nuclear weapon.  “Of greater concern is the possibility of al-Qaeda acquiring a WMD and/or a delivery means from ‘rogue’ elements or as a result of lax security at a nuclear weapons arsenal,” the report says.

The monitoring group suggests, “In order to reduce the chances of al-Qaeda obtaining a nuclear device, special efforts must be undertaken to insure that all countries which possess nuclear weapons maintain the strictest controls and security regimes at all times. … These regimes should be constantly subject to audit and scrutiny.”  The report says nations should “as the first line of defense against such a threat” join the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM), as well as other relevant treaties such as the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.

The effectiveness of the CCPNM is important because, the report says, “there is a much higher probability that the network will continue its efforts to develop an improvised radiological dispersion device,” in other words, a “dirty bomb.”  The availability of the necessary radioactive material is greater and the technology is easier than for a nuclear weapon, the report says.

In January, the council adopted Resolution 1455, extending the mandate of the monitoring group.  This report is the first one under the new mandate.  The sanctions involve bans on financial transactions and travel by individuals tied to the two groups and an arms embargo against them.  The individuals subject to sanctions are on a list maintained by the council.  The list “is only a small sub-set of the critical membership of the al-Qaeda network,” Chandler said.  “The list should be expanded to take in a much broader set of al-Qaeda members and associates and those who have supported them.”

Former Chechen President Added to Sanctions List

The revised list for the first time includes a Chechen — former President Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev — thus accepting the Russian claim that Chechen rebels are linked to al-Qaeda.

The report says there has been progress in freezing al-Qaeda assets and “progress has also been made in tracking down, inhibiting and incarcerating key financial intermediaries.”  On the other hand, al-Qaeda “continued to exploit loopholes or to develop new technologies to acquire, utilize and distribute funds and logistical resources.”  Those sources include the drug trade, fundraising through businesses and charities and common crime including credit card fraud and cigarette smuggling, according to the report.

The travel ban “as it now stands, is to serve as a political statement” of nations’ commitment not to grant al-Qaeda members refuge, the report says, however, “as a practical matter, few, if any, al-Qaeda members are likely to seek open entry or transit.”  No such cases have been reported to the committee.  There is also no evidence that anyone on the council’s list has attempted to breach the arms embargo, nevertheless, the groups “are still able to acquire adequate quantities of weapons and explosives where and when they need them.”

The report will be published July 11 and the council will review the work of the sanctions committee July 29, Munoz said.

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Several Key States Struggle to Prepare for Terrorism

Budget constraints and little support from government officials have led to a lack of preparedness by several key states should a terrorist attack occur, a New York think tank has concluded (see GSN, May 16).

The Century Foundation commissioned reports on homeland security efforts in Washington, Texas, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

“There is a good deal of uncertainty about financial matters among those working on homeland security,” said the Washington report, authored by Steven Stehr, chairman of Washington State University’s political science department and criminal justice program.

Washington has taken several steps to prepare, including buying $5.9 million worth of equipment for first responders.  Planning for attacks is “problematic,” however, because of scarce resources and a lack of trust between officials, according to the report (Associated Press/The Olympian, June 26).

All four states in the report are generally addressing security issues with a “business as usual” approach, according to Donald Kettl, a University of Wisconsin political scientist affiliated with The Century Foundation.

“Whether because of budget constraints, institutional inertia, insufficient support and incentives from the federal government, or basic shortsightedness, our authors found little evidence that states and localities have significantly improved protections for their residents,” the foundation said (Century Foundation release).

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  House Approves Fiscal 2004 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill

The U.S. House of Representatives voted 425-2 yesterday to approve the fiscal 2004 homeland security appropriations bill, which provides $30 billion for homeland security programs, according to the Los Angeles Times (see GSN, June 16).

The bill would provide the Homeland Security Department with $29.4 billion for operations in the next fiscal year, an increase of almost 2 percent over last year’s funding for the U.S. agencies that were combined to create the new department, the Times reported.  The bill provides:

*         $9 billion for border protection;

*         $5.2 billion for the Transportation Security Administration;

*         $4.4 billion for state and local emergency personnel;

*         $890 million to combat biological terrorism; and

*         $776 million for U.S. infrastructure protection.

House Republicans added an additional $1 billion to the bill — more than President George W. Bush’s initial request — for additional transportation security measures and to help fund first responders, according to the Times.

Bush praised the House “for acting quickly to approve funds for our continued effort to strengthen homeland security and protect the American people” (Justin Gest, Los Angeles Times, June 24).

The funding included in the bill amounts to about $250 in U.S. spending per taxpayer, said House Select Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.).

“Nothing we do is more important,” Cox said.  “It’s an extraordinary amount of money to respond to the post-9/11 world,” he said.

Some House Democrats, however, criticized their Republican counterparts for failing to fully fund homeland security measures while devoting so much funding to Bush’s $350 billion tax cut, according to the Washington Post.

“The problem is we cannot put the resources in the bill today because this Congress, the majority, has decided their No. 1, and virtually their only, priority is tax cuts,” Representative David Obey (D-Wis.) said (Juliet Eilperin, Washington Post, June 25).

The Senate is set to consider its own version of the legislation, but no schedule for doing so has yet been announced (Gest, Los Angeles Times).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  DHS Plans to Localize Color-Coded Warning System

The U.S. Homeland Security Department will revise its color-coded terrorist warning system this summer, the New York Daily News reported today (see GSN, June 3).

The new system will be localized, and the department will have it in place by September, according to Steve Cooper, the department’s chief information officer.  Officials are concerned that repeated nationwide warnings, without an incident, have jaded U.S. residents.

“We recognize that the risk is not uniform,” Cooper said.  “We want to regionalize or localize the alerting mechanism,” he added.

Officials also denied rumors that the country would be placed at an orange level of alert, the second-highest possible, for the July 4 holiday.

“Discussions have not taken place yet regarding the threat level over the July 4 holiday,” said spokeswoman Rachel Sunbarger (James Meek, New York Daily News, June 25).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP