 |
If the biggest university in this country were designing and making the most modern long-range projectiles, our country would be using them and perhaps NATO would never have launched air strikes against us.
—Milos Nedeljkovic, dean of Belgrade University’s school of mechanical engineering, denying U.S. allegations that Yugoslavia has helped Iraq and Libya develop cruise missile technology.
The United States will not hold formal talks with North Korea until the North “completely and verifiably” dismantles its nuclear weapons program, a senior U.S. official said this morning...Full Story 
By Bryan Bender
Global Security Newswire
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department has completed a set of “playbooks” outlining how government authorities should deal with a variety of terrorist and other scenarios involving weapons of mass destruction and mass casualties, according to a senior Pentagon official...Full Story
A senior Russian health official has disputed accounts that emergency medical services were unprepared to address the casualties from a fentanyl-based aerosol used to subdue Chechen extremists in an early morning raid Saturday, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Oct. 31)...Full Story
 |
Senior Russian Atomic Energy Ministry officials met Monday to discuss the security of Russian nuclear sites and facilities, according to Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev (see GSN, Oct. 30).
The meeting focused on the transportation of nuclear fuel to power plants both in Russia and abroad, according to ITAR-Tass. The officials also discussed security measures at foreign nuclear power plants being built by Russian personnel, Rumyantsev said. One such project is the Bushehr plant in Iran (see GSN, Oct. 22).
While Rumyantsev praised the ministry’s efforts to maintain security at Russian nuclear sites, he added that the recent Chechen takeover of a Moscow theater has prompted new security requirements.
The ministry’s security improvement effort “continues at all times and is well funded,” Rumyantsev said. But “the latest developments in Moscow have forced the Russian nuclear industry to bring in considerably stricter requirements for the protection of Russia’s nuclear facilities” (German Solomatin, ITAR-Tass, Oct. 30 in FBIS-SOV, Oct. 30).
New regulations will require international shippers to provide information on U.S.-bound cargo 24 hours before the cargo is loaded at its port of origin, the U.S. Customs Service announced Wednesday (see GSN, Oct. 28).
The regulation stems from the Container Shipping Initiative to identify and investigate high-risk cargo before it reaches the United States. U.S. authorities are trying to strengthen security at the country’s ports, especially from attacks or smuggling involving weapons of mass destruction.
“Terrorists pose an immediate and substantial threat to the global trading system. This threat is not just to American lives, but to American livelihoods as well,” said Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner. “With this rule, Customs can better protect the American people and the global trading system as a whole from the threat of nuclear terror using sea containers.”
The rule becomes effective 30 days after yesterday’s publishing, but the Customs Service has announced it will wait 60 days to begin enforcement (U.S. State Department release, Oct. 31).
|
 |
By Bryan Bender
Global Security Newswire
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department has completed a set of “playbooks” outlining how government authorities should deal with a variety of terrorist and other scenarios involving weapons of mass destruction and mass casualties, according to a senior Pentagon official.
Stephen Younger, director of the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency, said yesterday the series of response plans — first ordered during the Clinton administration — have been approved and are being circulated among key government agencies.
The playbooks are designed to “identify the hard problems” in dealing with a catastrophic terrorist attack, he told a nuclear, chemical, and biological defense conference sponsored by Aviation Week.
Some of these problems include deciding which agency would have the authority to order a quarantine in the event of a biological attack, what happens when conflicting orders are given in the immediate aftermath of an attack, or whether the National Guard, likely to be called in to help restore order, can make law enforcement decisions.
Younger, in providing a WMD threat assessment, said the high probability that terrorists will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons in future attacks makes adequate preparations essential.
“You have to exercise, exercise, exercise,” he said, referring to the need for government agencies, at the federal and local level, to continuously conduct dry runs of a variety of potential terrorist scenarios inside the United States and abroad.
A successful WMD attack, he said, would be a “civilization-changing” event.
Military and Civilian Threats Differ
Younger believes the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction is distinctly different for the military and civilian populations.
In military terms, nuclear weapons pose the greatest threat, Younger said, because no effective defenses remain once a nuclear bomb is detonated in a city or on the battlefield. Nuclear weapons are the ultimate equalizer for a conventionally weaker adversary such as Iraq or North Korea that is seeking to challenge U.S. military primacy, or for groups such as al-Qaeda seeking to defeat U.S. military power.
He expressed his personal belief that in the event of a U.S. military attack, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein would unleash his WMD arsenal against invading U.S. troops. “They will” use chemical or biological weapons on the battlefield, he said.
Domestically, Younger says he worries more about a chemical or biological attack than a nuclear attack. First, he believes that despite widespread security concerns at former Soviet nuclear weapons and facilities, a nuclear weapon is still extremely difficult to acquire or develop. Moreover, terrorists lack the state infrastructure historically required to build a nuclear weapon, he added.
Yet, chemical and biological weapons are much more widely available to potential terrorists seeking to strike U.S. domestic targets, he said.
He cited the unsolved anthrax attacks as an example. “This is someone who knows how to make anthrax as well as it can be made,” he said of the sophistication of the spores and the mail delivery system. It took “great skill” to make and deploy it in a form that resulted in an “explosion” of anthrax spores when the tainted envelopes were opened.
“It was not made in someone’s basement,” he said. Asked if there might have been a state sponsor of the anthrax attacks, Younger said, “We simply don’t know.”
With the proliferation of high-speed desktop computers, developing deadly pathogens will only become easier for nonstate actors such as terrorist groups, Younger said.
On the chemical threat, Younger said the transport of chemicals throughout the United States on a daily basis could be an attractive way for terrorists to acquire WMD materials. For example, he noted that the deadly chemical phosgene — used in a variety of industrial activities — is shipped in 100-ton quantities. “I worry about that,” he said.
He said he worries the least, however, about a radiation dispersal device, or dirty bomb, because it would largely cause panic and economic dislocation rather than a large number of casualties. “They are weapons of terror.”
A Rising Scale of Violence
For the most part, terrorists have not yet unleashed weapons of mass destruction. Younger said some experts believe terrorists have not done so because violent personalities seek the immediate explosive effect of a conventional attack, while others believe they do not want to alienate their constituency.
Younger believes, however, they have not been used because groups such as al-Qaeda are mounting attacks on an ascending scale of violence. The organization strives to make each attack more violent and cause more casualties. Weapons of mass destruction are the next step on that scale, he warned.
Weapons of mass destruction are “the greatest threat to the national security of the United States,” he said.
The United States is preparing to revise its U.N. draft resolution on Iraq to better reflect the views of France and Russia without compromising on key points, a move that will delay U.N. Security Council action until at least the middle of next week, a senior U.S. official said yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 31).
It would take the United States about two days to revise its draft resolution, at which point diplomats would consult with their respective governments, the official said. Discussions on the revised resolution would not occur until next week, with a vote delayed until the middle of next week or later, the Associated Press reported (Barry Schweid, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Nov. 1).
U.N. Debate
Senior British diplomats also have indicated that the Security Council could vote on a new resolution on Iraq within the next two weeks, the Financial Times reported today.
Discussions among the U.S., British, French and Russian foreign ministers are believed to have created enough support for a new resolution that requires the United Nations to “consider” what actions to take if Iraq violates the resolution.
“Activity has been so intense in recent days that you might have thought the French, British and American foreign ministers were Iraq desk officers,” a British diplomat said.
The United States and France, which have often opposed each other during the debate on the resolution, have reduced their differences over its text, according to British officials. French officials, however, said the language was still unacceptable and that France would find it difficult to approve a resolution not also supported by Russia and China.
Lingering differences between the United States and France on the language of the resolution have reached a point where there is less urgency in ending the debate, a British Foreign Office official said.
“The differences in the Security Council have now been narrowed down to such an extent that [U.S. Secretary of State] Colin Powell and [British Foreign Secretary] Jack Straw do not feel we have to pile the pressure on to get the resolution approved this week,” the official said. “We are prepared to let things run for a bit longer” (Blitz/Hoyos, Financial Times, Nov. 1).
For further information, see:
UNMOVIC
U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime)
U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”)
U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Iraqi Sanctions Revisions
IAEA Iraq Action Team
|
 |
The United States will not hold formal talks with North Korea until the North “completely and verifiably” dismantles its nuclear weapons program, a senior U.S. official said this morning.
“It’s pretty hard to see how we can have conversations with a government that has blatantly violated its agreements,” Undersecretary of State John Bolton told a Washington conference on terrorism sponsored by the Hudson Institute. Bolton said North Korea’s suspected uranium enrichment program is “a cause of grave concern” (Barry Schweid, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Nov. 1)
The United States has said it will not block the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, which oversees the Agreed Framework, from proceeding with a shipment of heavy fuel oil to North Korea this month (see GSN, Oct. 31). White House officials said the shipment will be allowed to proceed because officials have not yet decided whether to terminate the shipments altogether.
“There are many aspects to the agreement and we need time to consult with our allies,” a senior State Department official said (Nicholas Kralev, Washington Times, Nov. 1).
North Korean Diplomacy
North Korea’s ambassadors to its two closest allies — Russia and China — spoke out yesterday, rejecting U.S. demands and proposing a nonaggression treaty, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, Oct. 30).
North Korea has a right to develop nuclear weapons in response to U.S. aggression, said Pak Hui Chin, the ambassador to Russia (see GSN, Oct. 25). Pyongyang revealed the existence of its nuclear weapons program when a U.S. delegation visited Pyongyang in early October (see GSN, Oct 17).
“We unambiguously told the U.S. presidential special envoy that, facing a growing nuclear threat from the U.S., we have the right to possess not only nuclear, but even more powerful weapons in order to defend our sovereignty and the right to survive,” news agencies quoted Pak as saying. “If the U.S. tries to crush us with tough policy, we will retaliate to this with super toughness.”
While Pak reserved the right to develop nuclear weapons, he denied that North Korea has actually done so, calling U.S. allegations “groundless.”
Meanwhile, Russia said that it has no evidence that North Korea is developing nuclear weapons, but it admonished Pyongyang for failing to clearly reply to U.S. charges, officials said. North Korea’s recent statements on the nuclear issue have contained “some ambiguity,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov said.
“Such ambiguity is very dangerous, because it leads to mutual suspicions and may negatively influence the situation on the Korean peninsula,” he said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo.com, Nov. 1).
North Korea’s Ambassador to China Choe Kim Su today echoed Pak’s assertion on North Korea’s right to develop nuclear weapons, but he also reiterated calls from Pyongyang to create a U.S.-North Korean nonaggression pact.
“To sign a nonaggression treaty will be the most realistic and rational way to resolve security concerns,” Choe said during a rare press conference (Agence France-Presse, Nov. 1).
North Korea Speaks Out
The Korean Central News Agency, North Korea’s state-owned news service, again charged yesterday that the United States, not North Korea, has violated several international nuclear agreements, including the 1994 Agreed Framework and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
The NPT calls on non-nuclear states to abandon nuclear weapons projects in exchange for assurances that nuclear powers will not use such weapons. The treaty also calls upon the nuclear states to reduce their arsenals, but the United States has decided to stockpile many nuclear weapons for an indefinite period and to develop new weapons, the agency said.
“By doing so, it erased the core of all international agreements on nuclear disarmament, including the NPT,” KCNA said.
The agency also called for a U.S.-North Korean nonaggression treaty, calling the proposal a “realistic and reasonable one.”
“The proposal is a realistic and reasonable one as it is the best measure to bridge over the current crisis. It is also a just proposal because it is aimed to defend the destiny and the interests of the Korean nation, the peace on the Korean Peninsula and the rest of the world,” KCNA said. “There is no reason for the U.S. styling itself the ‘world’s only superpower’ to fail to accept this just proposal if it has no intention to invade the D.P.R.K. [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea]” (Korean Central News Agency, Oct. 31).
U.S. Diplomatic Efforts
The United States also has launched a new round of diplomatic efforts in Northeast Asia, planning three visits by former and current U.S. officials to the region over the next two weeks (see GSN, Oct. 22).
Donald Gregg, a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea is scheduled to visit North Korea Nov. 2-6, according to the Korea Times (Bae Keun-min, Korea Times, Nov. 1).
U.S. Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith is scheduled to begin a two-day visit to Seoul Nov. 6, according to the South Korean Yonhap news agency. While there, Feith is expected to meet with South Korean Defense Minister Lee Jun and Foreign Minister Choi Sung-hong (Yonhap/BBC Monitoring, Nov. 1). U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is scheduled to travel to South Korea Nov. 10-12 to attend an international conference of foreign ministers, according to Yonhap. Powell is also expected to meet with Choi and South Korean president Kim Dae-jung (Yonhap/Korea Times, Nov. 1).
“Fundamental” Differences Between Iraq, North Korea
U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage Wednesday defended the differing U.S. approaches to Iraq and North Korea, which are both feared to possess weapons of mass destruction. There are “fundamental” differences between the two countries, he said (see GSN, Oct. 21).
Iraq has shown itself to be an “unrelenting enemy” of not only the United States, but also its neighbors and Israel, Armitage said during a radio interview. Iraq is working hard to develop weapons of mass destruction and has used them both against its neighbors and its own people, he said.
“On North Korea, on the other hand, you’ve got a country which has had a rough equilibrium or stability on the peninsula for about 50 years,” Armitage said (U.S. State Department release, Oct. 31).
For further information, see:
Agreed Framework Text
KEDO
|
 |
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration yesterday began a month-long public comment period on pediatric tests of smallpox vaccine (see GSN, Sept. 25).
Health officials have proposed tests in which researchers would inoculate 40 children between the ages of 2 and 5 — the first children immunized for smallpox since the 1970s.
Officials presented the opportunity for the public to voice its views after research oversight boards expressed mixed reactions to the tests. Any tests that pose risk to a child and fail to provide benefits require special government oversight.
“It is a very challenging issue because there is no smallpox circulating right now,” said Karen Midthun, FDA’s head of vaccine research. “There is great concern that there be a lot of safeguards for studies being conducted in children.”
One concern is that children might tear the bandage off the inoculation site and spread the live vaccine virus — vaccinia — to family members who are not immunized, but researchers believe they might have solved this problem. The bandage used for children is extremely adhesive, “very, very hard to get off,” Midthun said (Associated Press/Baltimore Sun, Nov. 1).
|
 |
A senior Russian health official has disputed accounts that emergency medical services were unprepared to address the casualties from a fentanyl-based aerosol used to subdue Chechen extremists in an early morning raid Saturday, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Oct. 31).
Crews from 450 emergency teams at the scene carried the antidote — Naloxone — but more was needed, said Igor Elkis, chief doctor of Moscow’s ambulance service.
“At the theater we were prepared to help people suffering from terrorists’ hands … we expected victims of explosion, gunfire,” Elkis said. “When we learned that the gas was used, we sent more Naloxone to the site” (Steven Myers, New York Times, Nov.1).
On Thursday, the city’s hospitals still held 184 freed hostages, of whom eight were in serious condition (Moscow Times, Nov. 1).
Another health official said that confusion about the security situation might have led to a limited medical response. Russian authorities had been listening to the Chechens’ phone conversations and believed a second attack might have been imminent. Medical officials did not want to commit all their resources if another wave of patients was on the way, according to Irina Nazarova, head of the Russian Emergency Medicine Center.
“At any point they could blow up another building, and nobody knew how many victims there would be,” Nazarova said. She also said the medical system acquitted itself well in the situation (Mark Mackinnon, Globe and Mail, Nov. 1).
Reports have continued to surface, however, of the secrecy that surrounded the use of the gas in the early morning raid last Saturday. Rescue workers did not know how much of the antidote to administer, the Times reported today. In interviews with a Russian newspaper, some said they used 5 cubic millimeters while others used 10.
The commandos who pumped the gas into the theater’s ventilation system and stormed the theater did not know what gas they were using, the Times reported.
A doctor who did not want to be named agreed that there was confusion in the medical response and said that hospitals expected gunshots, not gas. Hostages also lacked key first aid assistance in the immediate aftermath of the raid, the doctor said. The alleged confusion, however, was not intentional.
“It wasn’t an evil plot,” the doctor said. “It was just a Soviet mess” (Myers, New York Times).
U.S. authorities have accused an employee at the Deseret Chemical Depot in Utah with tampering with important safety records, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Oct. 11).
David James Yarbrough has been charged in U.S. District Court with one count of making false statements to a government agency, according to AP. He could face up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted.
Officials have accused Yarbrough of falsifying data in work from June 29 to Aug. 16 at the Oquirrh Mountain Facility, where researchers test disposal methods for chemical agents. According to authorities, he knew that systems were operating below approved levels but indicated that air monitoring units were performing at passing levels during baseline tests, AP reported.
Officials indicted Yarbrough after a routine data review indicated inconsistencies, depot spokeswoman Alaine Southworth said. Neither the depot nor its surrounding residents were ever in danger and all air monitoring equipment has worked properly, Southworth said.
Yarbrough yesterday denied the allegations. “I am innocent of the charges,” he said (Associated Press, Nov. 1).
|
 |
Yugoslavia yesterday formally acknowledged it sold military equipment and services to Iraq in violation of the U.N. arms embargo (see GSN, Oct. 31).
“These violations concerned the repair and return of Iraqi jet engines for MiG-21 and MiG-23 fighter jets and providing certain services in military-technical cooperation,” a government statement said. Yugoslavia has promised to prevent further arms sales violations.
Meanwhile, the United States has also alleged Yugoslav companies and experts have been aiding Iraqi and Libyan missile development programs, according to the Washington Post.
U.S. and Croatian officials have said cargo from the Boka Star, seized in Croatian waters last week en route to Iraq from Yugoslavia, contained solid rocket fuel, the Post reported. The cargo had been labeled “active charcoal.”
Some observers suspect Yugoslavia sold Libya military technology ultimately destined for Iraq, according to the Post. The technology was intended to help convert training aircraft into guided cruise missiles (see GSN, Oct. 31).
The United States has also accused Djordje Blagojevic, a University of Belgrade professor, of helping Iraq develop Scud missiles and helping Libya perfect missile guidance systems, according to the Post. Blagojevic has denied the charges, saying, “Only studies are in question here” (Williams/Wood, Washington Post, Nov. 1).
While a dean at Yugoslavia’s Belgrade University vehemently denied that the School of Mechanical Engineering was involved in missile proliferation, another school official said that 33 Libyan students are involved in military, chemical and aeronautic engineering there (see GSN, Oct. 31).
“There are currently 33 Libyan students at the School of Mechanical Engineering. They are working on their Ph.D.s,” said Zoran Stefanovic, chief of the foreign language lecturing program. “Libyan students attend not only military mechanical engineering and aero-engineering, but also some of our other departments.”
The Dean of the School of Mechanical Engineering said recent allegations that the institution is assisting Libya and Iraq with cruise missile technology are “pure fabrications.”
“Professors at the Belgrade University’s School of Mechanical Engineering have not been working on developing turbo jet rocket motors, particularly not for cruise missiles,” Milos Nedeljkovic said. “If the biggest university in this country were designing and making the most modern long-range projectiles, our country would be using them and perhaps NATO would never have launched air strikes against us” (N. Krsmanovic, Belgrade Vecernje Novosti, Oct. 30).
|
 |
The Pentagon plans to delay a previously planned shoot-down test of the U.S. Airborne Laser system because of weight problems on the Boeing 747 that houses the system, a senior defense official said this week (see GSN, Aug. 12).
“We’re still assessing … the fourth quarter of calendar year 2004 as being the shoot-down time frame,” said Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, head of the Missile Defense Agency.
The test of the system’s lethal capacity was originally scheduled for 2003, but documents submitted to Congress in February by the Defense Department indicate that the test is now planned for the end of 2004.
“Basically, the problem we have with the Airborne Last is not that it’s carrying too much stuff, but in one part of the airplane it has too much weight,” Kadish said, referring to the back of the aircraft, which holds the lasers (Laura Colarusso, Inside the Air Force, Nov. 1).
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency has been working to fix the “extremely annoying” glitches that caused failures in flight tests earlier this year on the Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile interceptor, agency director Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish said yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 5).
“We got a briefing from the technical teams a couple of weeks ago that gives me great confidence that we found the root cause of those problems,” Kadish told reporters. “There was nothing major in the design that gives me cause for concern at this point, and (the problems) are relatively straightforward to fix and it requires process discipline.”
Agency officials have steered clear of any “witch hunt” to punish those who might be responsible, Kadish said.
“What we need to and continue to press on is we will fix the processes and we will improve them and make this equipment as good as we can make it, and that’s what we’re doing,” he said. “As far as the mistakes that were made and assigning the blame, that’s not as important as fixing the process.”
Kadish also said that, as some other Pentagon officials have also suggested, he supports accelerating PAC-3 production to build an adequate supply of the interceptors in the event of a war with Iraq (see GSN, Oct. 31). The Defense Acquisition Board was expected to review production plans for the interceptor yesterday.
“My recommendation has been, and will continue to be, buy Patriot 3 as quickly and as fast that we can afford to buy them,” Kadish said (Stephen Trimble, Aerospace Daily, Nov. 1).
Army to Take Over Program
Meanwhile, the U.S. Army will soon take control of the PAC-3 program from the Missile Defense Agency, Army Secretary Thomas White said yesterday. The Pentagon has placed funding for the program in the Army’s fiscal 2003 budget submission. The fiscal 2003 defense appropriations bill, however, places the PAC-3 funds in the agency’s budget (see GSN, Oct. 24; Ann Roosevelt, Defense Week, Oct. 31).
For further information, see:
MDA Basics of Missile Defense
MDA Missile Defense System
PAC-3 Fact Sheet
The Russian State Duma, the lower house of the Russian Parliament, ratified an agreement Monday to lease the Habala radar facility in Azerbaijan (see GSN, Oct. 10). Operators believe the facility, which monitors airspace south of Russia, should reach the end of its service life in 2012, which gives Russia enough time to build its own radar station to monitor the region, according to ITAR-Tass (ITAR-Tass, Oct. 30 in FBIS-SOV, Oct. 30).
|
 |
|
About Newswire | Contact National Journal | Re-Use Guidelines
© Copyright
2002 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.
HOME |
CONTACT US |
GET INVOLVED
|
SITE MAP
|
|
Back to top
