A Washington think-tank today said that the findings of U.S. chief weapons inspector in Iraq David Kay (center) did not back earlier U.S. claims of prewar Iraq’s WMD efforts (AFP photo/Luke Frazza). U.S. Misrepresented Iraqi Threat, Says Think Tank By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Starting in 2002, the Bush administration misrepresented the Iraqi WMD threat and may have unduly influenced related intelligence work, scholars from a major think tank here said today. They charged U.S. officials with endeavoring to justify attacking Iraq in the absence of an imminent threat from the country or any demonstrated link to al-Qaeda (see GSN, Jan. 7)...Full Story

Congressman Says Bush Missile Defense System Far From Ready By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The long-range ballistic missile defense system President George W. Bush has ordered operational by October will be less than adequate for effective operation, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee said recently (see GSN, Jan. 7)...Full Story

Qadhafi Plans International Campaign Against Nuclear Weapons Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qadhafi said privately last month that he would begin an international campaign to persuade other countries to abandon efforts to develop nuclear weapons, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Jan. 7)...Full Story

	Thursday, January 8, 2004

Indian Supreme Court Restricts Access to Nuclear Plant Safety Reports The Indian Supreme Court has ruled that access to safety reports on Indian nuclear power plants can be restricted for national security reasons, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Feb. 14, 2003). Two public interest groups had sought access to safety records related to India’s 12 nuclear facilities to verify if adequate safety measures were in place in the event of an accident, according to AP. The court ruled, however, that while civilians had a right to government information, such a right could be subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of national security (Associated Press/Environmental News Network, Jan. 8). Back to top

U.S. Misrepresented Iraqi Threat, Says Think Tank By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Starting in 2002, the Bush administration misrepresented the Iraqi WMD threat and may have unduly influenced related intelligence work, scholars from a major think tank here said today. They charged U.S. officials with endeavoring to justify attacking Iraq in the absence of an imminent threat from the country or any demonstrated link to al-Qaeda (see GSN, Jan. 7). In a new report, Joseph Cirincione, Jessica Mathews and George Perkovich of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace recommend the United States and the United Nations take steps to determine conclusively what was known before the war about Iraq’s weapons, how policy-makers influenced and used intelligence and whether international measures against Iraq before the war were effective. The report consolidates and analyzes unclassified information on intelligence, statements by Bush administration officials and evidence found in Iraq during and since the war. The authors conclude that although Iraq presented a “long-term threat that could not be ignored,” the country’s WMD programs “did not … pose an immediate threat to the United States, to the region or to global security” (see GSN, Oct. 3, 2003). Calling for a revision of the U.S. pre-emption doctrine, the authors write, “In the Iraqi case, the world’s three best intelligence services” ― those of the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel ― “proved unable to provide the accurate information necessary for acting in the absence of imminent threat.” In the absence of such a threat, the scholars say, there was a “dramatic shift between prior intelligence assessments and the October 2002 national intelligence estimate” ― a document often cited by administration officials in the run-up to war ― that, along with other measures, “suggest that the intelligence community began to be unduly influenced by policy-makers’ views sometime in 2002.” Institute for Science and International Security President David Albright said today that administration “pressure” on officials engaged in producing intelligence is proving hard to establish but that “cherry-picking” and exaggerating on the administration’s part are “certainly going on” and that many decisions were rushed in such a way that deep divisions within intelligence agencies were not aired. Albright added that, although the administration may not have exerted undue pressure on initial intelligence assessments, it did at times act to squelch new information that could have undermined established administration policies. “That I know happened.  I watched it happen, actually,” said Albright. Analysts Detail U.S. Misrepresentations, Recommend U.N. Return The Bush administration misrepresented the Iraqi threat in several ways, according to the report: by speaking of a single “WMD threat,” rather than detailing various nuclear, biological and chemical programs, in such a way as to “distort the cost/benefit analysis of the war”; by unjustifiably asserting Iraq would give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists; and by “routinely dropping caveats, probabilities and expressions of uncertainty present in intelligence assessments from public statements.” The authors say Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological programs posed no immediate threat even though the country’s missile program was “in active development in 2002.” They deem it “unlikely” that President Saddam Hussein’s government could have hidden, moved or disposed of the amounts of weapons of mass destruction and missiles Bush administration officials cited, adding that the U.N. inspection process — like sanctions, export-import control and other measures ― “appears to have been much more successful than recognized before the war.” As to alleged links between Iraq and al-Qaeda, the authors write, “There was and is no solid evidence of a cooperative relationship between Saddam’s government and al-Qaeda. There was no evidence to support the claim that Iraq would have transferred WMD to al-Qaeda and much evidence to counter it.” The report calls on the United States to tap personnel and data from U.N. inspection efforts in Iraq as one key to establishing an accurate history of Iraq’s WMD programs. They say the International Atomic Energy Agency and other U.N. WMD-related groups should be brought back into Iraq alongside U.S.-led weapon hunters, adding, “Both the United States and the United Nations should be seriously faulted for the failure to do so to date.” In a telephone interview today, IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky reiterated IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei’s position that “IAEA inspectors should go back to Iraq to complete the job that they began ― that we have the experience and the mandate and the credibility to bring closure to the file.” The report also recommends the creation of an independent U.S. commission to determine what intelligence officials knew about Iraqi WMD programs before 2002 and, depending on the results of the commission’s work, consideration of “professionalizing the post of director of central intelligence”; the elimination of the U.S. “preventive war” doctrine and a new vigilance about actual weapon transfers to terrorist groups; a U.N. secretary general-chartered “after-action report” on inspections in Iraq; and the potential creation by the U.N. Security Council of a permanent inspection agency. Experts Express Concern About War’s Effects on Nonproliferation All in all, the report’s authors suggest, Iraq was not the most logical focus for any effort meant to head off WMD proliferation. “Today,” they write, “the most likely source of a nuclear terrorist threat would be from theft or purchase of fissile material or tactical nuclear weapons from poorly guarded stockpiles in Russia and other former Soviet states. … The security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets, including technology and know-how, is also a major concern.” Nonproliferation Policy Education Center Executive Director Henry Sokolski, however, said insistence on rigorous criteria for acting to curb a perceived threat could ultimately have a negative effect on global nonproliferation efforts. Criticism of how high standards were set, Sokolski said, is a “problematical approach to trying to make headway on the problem in the future.” “You could be for or against the war, for or against an active role for the IAEA, and you’d still have to agree that … the kinds of evidence that one would want” to justify “action short of war ought to be lower than they currently are,” Sokolski said. The former U.S. nonproliferation official nevertheless said the Iraq war had a generally positive effect. “From what I can tell,” he said, “nonproliferation has benefited at least as much as it may have suffered as a result of what we did in Iraq.” Back to top       Qadhafi Plans International Campaign Against Nuclear Weapons Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qadhafi said privately last month that he would begin an international campaign to persuade other countries to abandon efforts to develop nuclear weapons, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Jan. 7). Qadhafi described his plan, which would begin by targeting Iran, in a private conversation held with foreign diplomats and intelligence officers, according to the Times. Qadhafi said that nuclear weapons “do nothing to enhance security” and only block economic development, according to one person present at the conversation. Qadhafi’s shift in strategy, away from acquiring weapons of mass destruction, might have been motivated by a desire to help repair Libya’s economy, according to Western officials. For example, Qadhafi might intend to use the final payment of a $2.7 billion settlement for the 1988 bombing of an airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, as a tool to persuade the United States to ease sanctions, Western officials said. “He realized that Libya was on a path of international isolation and internal stagnation after 30 years of concentrated economic wrecking,” a European diplomat said. “But there is no question that the Lockerbie settlement has set the time frame for his actions. He had to make the announcement on weapons if he was to test how George Bush would respond,” the diplomat added. According to the Lockerbie agreement, the United States has until May to lift sanctions against Libya and remove it from the list of terrorism-sponsoring countries, according to the Times. If the United States fails to do so, then $6 million of the $10 million promised to the families of the Lockerbie bombing will be returned to Libya.  The United States has refused to acknowledge any time constraints on the lifting of sanctions against Libya. Some experts, though, have cautioned against U.S. demands for “concrete steps” from Qadhafi, the Times reported. “I would say that we have still not reached the point of no return for the colonel” in changing Libyan policy, a Western diplomat said (Patrick Tyler, New York Times, Jan. 8). Meanwhile, Libyan intelligence chief Musa Kusa is set to meet with senior British and U.S. intelligence officials in London today to discuss who will be responsible for overseeing the dismantlement of Libya’s WMD programs — the United Nations or the United Kingdom and the United States, according to the London Telegraph. While the United States wants itself and London to take the lead, Libya wants the United Nations to be the main agency, according to senior Western diplomatic sources. Today’s meeting “will show how serious the Libyans are,” a senior Western diplomatic source said. “The real issue is whether the Libyans are prepared to have the kind of inspection regime that the U.S. and Britain think is needed to ensure the lifting of U.S. sanctions and the resumption of diplomatic relations between Washington and Tripoli,” the source said (Anton La Guardia, London Telegraph, Jan. 8). Back to top       United States Removes Team From Iraq Survey Group The Bush administration has withdrawn a 400-member team intended to search for military equipment from the Iraq Survey Group, which is currently searching Iraq for evidence of prewar WMD efforts, the New York Times reported today (see related GSN story, today). The team, known as the Joint Captured Material Exploitation Group, consisted mainly of technical experts and was led by an Australian brigadier, U.S. Defense Department officials said. The team’s efforts included searching sites for missile launchers that could have been used with weapons of mass destruction and U.N-prohibited missiles, and the team was withdrawn from Iraq “because its work was essentially done,” the Pentagon officials said. “They picked up everything that was worth picking up,” an official said. A separate team responsible for disposing of any found biological and chemical weapons, known as Task Force D/E, still remains part of the Iraq Survey Group, according to the Times. Task Force D/E, though, is “still waiting for something to dispose of,” an Iraq Survey Group member said (Douglas Jehl, New York Times, Jan. 8). Back to top       Japan to Sign Export Control Agreements With Hong Kong, Singapore Japan is set to sign bilateral agreements with Hong Kong and Singapore next month designed to prevent indirect exports of dual-use items, Japanese government sources said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 10, 2003). Under the agreements, liaison offices will be established in Hong Kong, Japan and Singapore to monitor suspect exports and Japan will also provide Hong Kong and Singapore with information on manufacturers of dual-use items, according to the Daily Yomiuri. If there is confirmation that a dual-use export will eventually make its way to a country of concern Japan will ask Hong Kong and Singapore to block the export (Daily Yomiuri, Jan. 8). Back to top

North Korea Expected to Allow U.S. Delegation to Visit Yongbyon North Korea will probably allow a private U.S. group of nuclear and foreign policy experts to visit its nuclear facility at Yongbyon, Reuters reported today (see GSN, Jan. 7). The U.S. delegation is expected to be in North Korea until Saturday. Pyongyang will bring the group to Yongbyon because North Korea wants to “show how serious it is about nuclear development,” said a diplomatic source with ties to North Korean officials. “North Korea said it was prepared to let the delegation visit the nuclear facility in Yongbyon, as desired by the delegation, so that it might watch on the spot the completed reprocessing and the switchover made in the use of plutonium obtained,” said a pro-North Korean newspaper in Tokyo (Eckert/Ueno, Reuters, Jan. 8).   Back to top       Germany Drops Charges Against Man Suspected of Aiding Nuclear Smuggling to North Korea A German court dropped accusations against a 33-year-old businessman that he assisted a failed smuggling operation to help North Korea build gas centrifuges for enriching uranium, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, Oct. 15, 2003). In exchange for the dropped charges, Marc Wiese was ordered to pay a $12,680 fine for his “low degree of guilt” in the operation, according to Stuttgart state court spokesman Reiner Skujat (Associated Press/China Post, Jan. 7). Prosecutors accused Wiese and two other men of attempting to ship 214 aluminum tubes through China to North Korea. The primary suspect in the smuggling operation, Hans-Werner Truppel, could be sentenced to 15 years in prison for violating German export regulations and “furthering the production of a nuclear weapon.” Wiese has been called to testify when the court reconvenes Jan. 14 (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Jan. 7). Back to top

U.S. Judge Reverses Ban on Pentagon Anthrax Vaccination Program A U.S. federal judge yesterday lifted an injunction he issued earlier against the U.S. Defense Department’s anthrax vaccination program and told the Pentagon that it could resume mandatory vaccinations for all service members except the six that filed a lawsuit against the program. Last month, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan issued the temporary injunction, ruling that the anthrax vaccine had been used for “an unapproved purpose” because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had determined it was effective only against skin anthrax. Last week, however, the FDA issued a final rule saying that the vaccine was effective against both skin and inhalational anthrax. “Although the timing of the issuance of the rule is arguably highly suspicious, nevertheless, the rule has been issued and the principal reason for the issuance of the injunction has been addressed by the government,” Sullivan wrote in his order issued yesterday. U.S. Defense Undersecretary David Chu late yesterday signed a memorandum ordering the resumption of the anthrax vaccination program, the New York Times reported (Thom Shanker, New York Times, Jan. 8). Mark Zaid, an attorney for the six anonymous plaintiffs that filed the lawsuit against the vaccination program, said that he plans to ask Sullivan to reissue an order blocking mandatory vaccinations because the FDA’s approval of the vaccine was flawed as it was only based on animal research. In addition, Zaid said that he also plans to introduce evidence to show that the military is improperly using the vaccine. While the FDA has determined that the vaccine should be administered though a six-shot regimen over 18 months, the military often administered fewer than six injections, he said (Vernon Loeb, Washington Post, Jan. 8). Back to top

Congressman Says Bush Missile Defense System Far From Ready By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The long-range ballistic missile defense system President George W. Bush has ordered operational by October will be less than adequate for effective operation, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee said recently (see GSN, Jan. 7). In a phone interview with Global Security Newswire last month, Representative John Spratt (D-S.C.) said several crucial elements of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system would not be fielded on time because they have not achieved sufficient technological development. “We don’t have the essential components yet in hand of a ground-based system,” he said. In December 2002 Bush directed the military to deploy an initial missile defense capability by October 2004, which would include six missile interceptors in Alaska and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. While it appears that the interceptors are on track to be fielded by the deadline, the Missile Defense Agency has indicated that other system components will not be ready and that alternatives will be used. “They’ll deploy something in Alaska and claim it’s a protective system, but where’s the X-band radar? Where are those crucial systems for detection, tracking, and discrimination” of enemy missiles and warheads, Spratt asked. “You can put something out there and you can claim we can do it with [existing missile detection sensors] and you can claim its adequate for the threat that we’re facing, but it’s a long way from what everybody thought was necessary for a minimal system,” he said. Problems Cited Spratt said that U.S. efforts to develop new space-based infrared systems (SBIRS) for target detecting and tracking have “got lots of problems to work out.” “We aren’t there yet, I don’t think, with the adequacy of detection and the tracking that we need,” he said. For the scheduled initial operations, the system is expected to use Defense Support Program satellites already operating for early warning missions. The agency plans to put the first two Space Tracking and Surveillance Systems, formerly known as SBIRS-Low, into space around 2007 to participate in testing. The difference between the Defense Support Program satellites and STSS satellites is “orders of magnitude,” said John Pike of Globalsecurity.org. Defense Support Program satellites “basically lose the target after burnout,” he said. Spratt also said he was aware of “real problems” with a missile interceptor booster rocket under development by Lockheed Martin to replace a temporary booster that has been used in testing. Two boosters are being developed, the other by Orbital Sciences. The Orbital booster, expected to be used in the initial fielding, is scheduled for its first integrated flight test early this year, while the Lockheed booster is scheduled for that testing in fiscal 2005, Aerospace Daily reported today. Spratt also expressed concern that added thrust provided by the new boosters might challenge the mechanism that joins the booster to the interceptor's kill vehicle. Key Radar Spratt called the existing Cobra Dane radar that will be used for closely tracking enemy warheads in space a “poor substitute” for the X-band radar under development, adding, “it faces the wrong way.” A General Accounting Office report in September said the Cobra Dane radar, operating for other missions, had not been tested in a “relevant flight environment” and that there are no plans for using it in an integrated flight test through fiscal 2007. The Missile Defense Agency also faces challenges from its decision to base the X-Band radar at sea, on a platform possibly stationed on the North Pacific, according to Spratt.  The GAO said the radar is scheduled for completion in 2005 but lacks realistic testing in a sea-based environment. It said severe wind and sea conditions “may affect the radar’s functionality” and said the radar might be so tested by October 2006. “I think we’re a long way from having a truly up-and-ready ballistic missile defense system,” Spratt said. Sea-Based Spratt said development of the sea-based boost-phase missile system the administration also plans to field in 2005 is in its early stages and could prove an extremely difficult task (see GSN, Dec. 12, 2003). A fundamental challenge to the concept, he said, is posed by the possibility of an enemy firing an ICBM away from the sea-based interceptor. For example, North Korea could choose to launch a missile over China instead of the Sea of Japan. “A boost-phase system requires that you be able to locate your missile intercept system very close to its intended target. However, if this system is coming out of China and much of its trajectory is coming over land, a boost-phase system simply cannot get there in time,” he said. Spratt dismissed efforts to develop a space-based interception capability, saying an adversary could disable it too easily. “The problem you’ve got for space-based systems is any country that can build a ballistic missile can build an [antisatellite system],” he said. Despite Spratt’s concerns, he praised Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish for managing the pressures of the job. “Kadish has got a tough job and I respect the job he’s done of trying to keep it on a level track,” he said. Back to top       Lockheed Missile Defense Booster Test Set for Tomorrow The U.S. Missile Defense Agency is planning to test launch tomorrow a missile interceptor booster rocket developed by defense contractor Lockheed Martin, Aerospace Daily reported (see GSN, Dec. 17). The Booster Verification-5 test has been delayed repeatedly by technical difficulties and accidents. The latest delay came last month, when a Dec. 15 test date was pushed back by equipment malfunctions. Both Lockheed Martin and Orbital Sciences are developing boosters for the U.S. Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. The Orbital Sciences version has experienced fewer setbacks and will be used at least initially when the missile defense effort is launched later this year (see related GSN story, today). A Defense Department spokesman said the December delay was caused by a faulty set of circuit boards in the booster. Lockheed disputed that explanation, saying that the problem was in the ground support equipment (Marc Selinger, Aerospace Daily, Jan. 8). Back to top       Canada Moves Toward Missile Defense Cooperation Canada is poised to take a major step toward joining the U.S. national missile defense effort with high-level meetings and exchanges, Canada’s Globe and Mail reported today (see GSN, Sept. 11, 2003). Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and U.S. President George W. Bush are scheduled to hold their first bilateral meeting soon, the Globe and Mail reported. U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Canadian Defense Minister David Pratt are also set to exchange letters that will allow the sharing of classified missile defense information between the two countries. “We’re looking to signal interest to the Americans beyond just discussions, to actual mapping-out negotiations for a Canadian participation,” a senior Canadian official said yesterday. Canada is pushing to include the missile defense effort within the existing joint framework for the North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD) pact, according to another Canadian official. “That placement is … very important,” the official added. A final decision on Canadian participation in the missile defense effort is not expected before the next Canadian election, which will probably take place in the spring (LeBlanc/Fagan, Canada’s Globe and Mail, Jan. 8). Back to top       MDA Awards Miniature Kill Vehicle Contract to Lockheed The U.S. Missile Defense Agency yesterday awarded a miniature kill vehicle missile defense contract to defense contractor Lockheed Martin (see GSN, July 28, 2003). The contract — which seeks to produce a system that would confront enemy missile warheads and their decoys with multiple interceptors — could be worth up to $768 million over an eight-year period. Lockheed will receive an initial payment of $27 million, the Defense Department announced. The final miniature kill vehicle system “will be capable of engaging multiple midcourse targets from a single launcher, adding firepower and robustness to midcourse defenses,” according to a Pentagon announcement (Defense Department release, Jan. 7). The system is designed to replace Raytheon’s single-missile interceptor system and has grown out of concerns that multiple warheads or decoys could defeat the planned U.S. missile defenses. “This is the next-generation model of missile defense,” said Doug Graham, vice president of Lockheed Martin Space Systems. He said the MKV is a “potential game-changing capability for missile defense.” The Pentagon said, however, that Raytheon’s system is the planned form of national missile defense. “Raytheon’s kill vehicle will be used for a long time,” said MDA spokesman Rick Lehner (Jonathan Karp, Wall Street Journal, Jan. 8). Back to top

Bush Administration Seeks Rapid Appeal Hearing for “Dirty Bomb” Case The Bush administration announced yesterday that it plans to quickly file an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Jose Padilla, who was arrested in 2002 over allegations that he was involved in a plant to detonate a “dirty bomb” within the United States, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, April 2, 2003). In a brief filed to the court on a separate case, Solicitor General Theodore Olson said that he would file an appeal by Jan. 20 of a ruling by a U.S. federal appeals court last month that the government either charge Padilla with a crime or release him. Since his arrest in Chicago, Padilla has been detained as an “enemy combatant,” the Post reported. Olson also said in his brief that he would contact Padilla’s lawyers to establish a schedule that would allow the Supreme Court to hear oral arguments in the case by the end of April and issue a ruling before the court adjourns in early July, the Post reported (Charles Lane, Washington Post, Jan. 8). Back to top       No Scientists Armed With Radiation Detectors in Baltimore Last Month, Official Says A U.S. Homeland Security Department official has said that Energy Department scientists equipped with radiation detectors were not deployed in Baltimore last month, contrary to a recent Washington Post report, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Jan. 7). The Energy Department scientists were sent, though, to the other four cities mentioned in the report — Las Vegas, Los Angeles, New York and Washington, the official said. The scientists were dispatched to the four cities to search for evidence of possible radiological weapons because of terrorism concerns. Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley said that his city has used its own radiation-detection equipment since 2002 to monitor large-scale public events (Brian White, Associated Press/ Baltimore Sun, Jan. 7).   Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

© Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.