U.S. Response:  Pentagon Cancels Online Futures Market Project

The U.S. Defense Department yesterday canceled a plan to create an online futures trading market that would have allowed people to speculate on the likelihood of various types of terrorist activities, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, July 29).

Tony Tether, director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which was overseeing the project, said in a statement that “it simply did not make sense to continue” the project “in light of the recent concerns surrounding” it.

The project, called the Policy Analysis Market, would have allowed people to deposit funds into accounts and then win or lose money by predicting various crises, such as a North Korean missile attack, in an attempt to anticipate events.  The initial registration of up to 1,000 participants was set to begin Friday, with trading to have begun Oct. 1, according to the Post.

The determination to cancel the program was echoed by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who told a Senate hearing that he had first learned of the project by reading the newspaper.

“I share your shock at this kind of program,” Wolfowitz said.  “We’ll find out about it, but it is being terminated,” he said.

Wolfowitz also sought to defend DARPA, saying it “is brilliantly imaginative in places where we want them to be imaginative.”

“It sounds like maybe they got too imaginative in this area,” Wolfowitz added.

Wolfowitz’s comments resulted in harsh words from Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), according to the Post.

“I don’t think we can laugh off that DARPA program,” Boxer said.  “There is something very sick about it.  And if it’s going to end, I think you would end the careers of whoever it was who thought that up,” she added (Graham/Loeb, Washington Post, July 30).

Back to top

International Response:  Security Council Committee Urges Greater Compliance With Counterterrorism Measures

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — The chairman of a U.N. Security Council sanctions committee said yesterday that while progress has been made to ensure that al-Qaeda and the Taliban cannot operate in various countries’ territory, some nations — including those where the two groups are likely to be operating — have not met their counterterrorism obligations (see GSN, Feb. 21).

Ambassador Heraldo Munoz of Chile, the chairman of the committee monitoring the sanctions against al-Qaeda and the Taliban, told the council, “Recognition of the possible presence of al-Qaeda or those associated with the network within its territory appears to be a stigma to some states.  Consequently, detailed information concerning the activities of al-Qaeda … is not being presented to the committee.”

Resolution 1267 of October 1999 imposed sanctions on Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda for their alleged roles in terrorist acts, including the bombing of U.S. embassies in East Africa, and on the Taliban for harboring al-Qaeda.  Countries are supposed to enforce a travel ban, a freeze on financial assets and an arms embargo against individuals and groups on a council list of suspected members of the two groups.  Munoz chairs the council’s committee that monitors compliance with 1267 and Resolution 1455, adopted in January 2003, which tightened the sanctions on the two groups.

Resolution 1455 requires countries to submit reports on the implementation of the sanctions.  However, only 64 countries — “barely 30 percent of the membership of the United Nations” — have submitted those reports, Munoz said.  “Individuals or entities associated with al-Qaeda are believed to be active in some way in a significant number of the states that have not yet submitted a report,” he added.

He did not name the countries he was referring to.  The council’s tally of submissions show that Afghanistan and some neighboring countries, as well as other countries where the al-Qaeda may be operating, including Indonesia, have not submitted reports.  However other countries where the network may be present, including Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Pakistan, have submitted reports.

U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte said, “We emphasize that states unwilling to implement their obligations, whatever the reason, must be encouraged and, if necessary, pressured to do more.  The international community cannot allow intransigence by some to be the weak link that undermines our shared counterterrorism efforts.”

Munoz added that “if there are significant absences in the reporting” on implementing sanctions, then “the committee will have no choice but to reflect this reality as it prepares its year-end” report to the council.

A primary tool in combating al-Qaeda — interrupting its finances — is proving to be difficult, Munoz said.  “Al-Qaeda has a built-in resilience and flexibility, which is contributing to its survival as a global network,” he said.  “This, in turn, encourages support of the network among elements of the population in many countries, producing sympathy for the ideology, new recruits to the movement and funding.”  Informal banking systems and the use of charities and aid groups as conduits for illegal funds continues, he said, therefore “states must be encouraged to ensure effective measures are put in place to stop such humanitarian activities from being, in any way, abused by al-Qaeda operatives.”

Munoz, as well as the ambassadors of Colombia and India, linked terrorist financing to the illicit drug trade, saying there is ample evidence of drug trafficking around the world financing a variety of terrorist organizations.  Mu¤oz said that “funds may easily get to the al-Qaeda network” through the Afghan opium trade.

Back to top

Iraq I:  Bush Takes “Personal Responsibility” for State of the Union Address

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush suggested today that he was ultimately responsible for his January State of the Union address, which included the now-disputed claim that Iraq sought to obtain uranium from Africa (see GSN, July 29).

Earlier this month, the White House acknowledged that the claim should not have been included because evidence used to support it — documents that purported to show an attempted Iraqi purchase of uranium from Niger — were fraudulent.  Since then, CIA Director George Tenet and deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley have publicly taken responsibility for the address and the claim.

Today, however, Bush indicated that he was assuming responsibility for the State of the Union address and defended the U.S. intelligence used to develop it.

“I take personal responsibility for everything I say, of course.  Absolutely,” Bush said during a press conference outside the White House.  “I also take responsibility for making decisions on war and peace.  And I analyzed a thorough body of intelligence, good, solid, sound intelligence that led me to come to the conclusion that it was necessary to remove [former Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein from power,” he said.

National security adviser Condoleezza Rice has also come under increasing criticism for failing to take more responsibility for the inclusion of the Africa uranium claim in the State of the Union.  Hadley has said that he and Rice received memos from the CIA in early October 2002 saying U.S. intelligence on the claim was weak.  Yesterday, U.S. Representative Henry Waxman called on Rice to explain whether she had read those memos and to release them (see related GSN story, today).

Bush offered strong support today, however, for his national security adviser.

“Dr. Condoleezza Rice is an honest, fabulous person, and America is lucky to have her service.  Period,” Bush said.

During the press conference, Bush brushed aside questions concerning criticism of his administration’s handling of U.S. prewar intelligence on Iraq’s WMD efforts, saying instead:  “You know, look, in my line of work, it’s always best to produce results, and I understand that.”

Bush did note, however, the importance of producing evidence of such programs, which he said was needed to “placate the critics and cynics about [the] intentions of the United States.”

“I’m confident that our search will yield that [evidence] … that Saddam had a weapons program,” Bush said.

It will take time to produce such evidence though, he warned.  “It’s going to take time for us to gather the evidence and analyze the mounds of evidence, literally the miles of documents that we have uncovered,” Bush said.

Back to top

Iraq II:  U.S. Representative Targets Rice in African Uranium Controversy

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — U.S. Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) called on national security adviser Condoleezza Rice yesterday to explain whether she knew of doubts over the validity of the now-disputed claim that Iraq sought to obtain uranium from Africa before the claim was included in U.S. President George W. Bush’s January State of the Union address (see GSN, July 24).

Earlier this month, CIA Director George Tenet took responsibility for the CIA’s approval of Bush’s address and the inclusion of the Africa uranium claim (see GSN, July 17).  Blame began to shift to the National Security Council, however, after reports that a CIA expert on weapons of mass destruction had told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that NSC nonproliferation director Robert Joseph had pressed for claims that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium from Niger and from other African countries to be included in the State of the Union (see GSN, July 18).

Last week, deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley took responsibility for allowing the African uranium claim to be included in the State of the Union, according to reports (see GSN, July 23).  Hadley said he had received two memos from the CIA on Oct. 5, 2002, and Oct. 6, 2002, saying that intelligence on Iraq’s attempts to purchase uranium in Africa was weak, but had forgotten them during the preparation of the address.

“I should have asked that the 16 words be taken out” of the State of the Union address, Hadley was quoted by the New York Times as saying.  “I failed in that responsibility,” he added.

In a letter to Rice, Waxman, the top Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, asked whether she had read the Oct. 5 memo sent to Hadley or the memo sent the following day, which Hadley said had been addressed to both him and Rice.  Waxman also called on Rice to declassify and release the two CIA memos.

Waxman also urged Rice to explain what actions, if any, she took after a key piece of evidence that supported the African uranium claim — documents that purported to show an attempt by Iraq to purchase uranium in Niger — became discredited.  In March, International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed ElBaradei publicly announced that his agency had determined that the documents were, in fact, forgeries.

Waxman asked Rice to describe if she had any discussions with Hadley or other NSC or White House officials over how the Nigerien documents had been analyzed.  Waxman also asked Rice to describe if any other investigation into the documents was conducted.

“The statutory purpose of the National Security Council is to give the president accurate advice on important national security matters such as Iraq’s efforts to obtain nuclear weapons,” Waxman said in his letter.  “It is difficult to imagine that you would not have taken this breakdown in the process seriously and asked for a full investigation of the matter,” he said.

Back to top

U.S. Response:  State Department Warns of Violations to Nonproliferation Regimes

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The United States believes that a number of countries, including Iran, North Korea and Syria, have violated their international nonproliferation obligations, according to a U.S. State Department report recently submitted to Congress (see GSN, June 5).

Covering 2001, but released only late last month, the report was prepared by State’s Verification and Compliance Bureau and it examines both U.S. adherence to its arms control commitments and the compliance of other nations with various multilateral nonproliferation agreements.  While the United States has made “some errors” in meeting its treaty obligations, it is generally in compliance with all of its international arms control obligations, the report says.  It warns, however, that some states have violated their nonproliferation obligations and have developed — or are currently pursuing — WMD programs.

The United States believes that several parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, most notably Iran, are conducting activities in violation of their treaty obligations, the report says (see GSN, July 29).  In addition, the report found that North Korea was in violation, as well.  North Korea’s current status as an NPT member, however, has been in dispute since early this year when Pyongyang announced its withdrawal from the treaty (see GSN, July 29).

The report also says that while China is believed to be “seriously prepared” to implement its treaty obligations, the United States is still concerned about Beijing’s commitment to nuclear nonproliferation.

According to the report, a number of states participating in the Biological Weapons Convention are conducting activities not in compliance with their treaty obligations.  For example, the report says that Iran is believed to have developed an offensive biological weapons program, in violation of its treaty obligations, and that North Korea has a “dedicated, national-level effort” to develop a biological weapons program, and may have already done so (see GSN, May 16). 

The report also says that China may have maintained some elements of the biological weapons program it began in the 1950s and that Cuba (see GSN, March 13) and Libya (see GSN, June 23) may have developed smaller, limited biological weapons programs.  In addition, Russia is believed to have maintained an offensive biological weapons program based, in part, on unconfirmed reports of weapons research activities and concern that work on biological agents beyond defensive needs is being conducted at select Russian facilities, the report says (see GSN, March 24).

While Syria is not a member of the BWC, according to the report, the United States believes Damascus is developing a biological weapons program that would violate the convention if it were a member (see GSN, July 16).

Washington also believes that China, Iran and Russia — in addition to violating the BWC — are conducting activities in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, according to the report.  It also says that Sudan has launched a chemical weapons research program designed to develop an indigenous production capability and has continued to seek foreign assistance in developing such weapons — both of which violate its CWC obligations.

Besides examining compliance with the three main international WMD nonproliferation regimes, the treaty also examined Chinese and Russian compliance with the Missile Technology Control Regime, which seeks to reduce missile proliferation by establishing common export-control regulations among members. 

Even though China is not an MTCR member, it agreed in 1992 to abide by the regime’s “guidelines and parameters,” the report says.  The United States has found, however, that China has provided missile-related items and assistance to several countries of concern, such as Iran, Libya and North Korea, it says, adding that such activities “call into serious question China’s stated commitment to controlling missile proliferation” (see related GSN story, today).

China’s missile-related exports are the “most significant proliferation concern” Washington has with Beijing, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance Paula DeSutter said last week (see GSN, July 28).

While Russia is an MTCR member, Washington is concerned about Moscow’s efforts to crack down on Russian companies engaged in missile proliferation activities, the report says.  It also says that Russia plays down the role of private companies in proliferation, believing instead that the limited capabilities of states of concern will prevent them from developing weapons of mass destruction.

“That view is shortsighted and dangerous,” the report says.

U.S.-Russian Arms Control Agreements

The report also examined U.S. and Russian compliance with two arms control treaties developed during the Cold War — the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.  While the United States believes it has complied with all of the treaties’ obligations, Russia has noted several compliance concerns, the report says.

Under the INF Treaty, all U.S. and former Soviet ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range between 500 and 5,500 kilometers were to be destroyed, along with all related equipment.  Russia has expressed concerns over U.S. compliance with the treaty regarding certain procedures used during past inspections in the United States, as well as the treaty status of specific missiles and a silo test launcher, the report says.  After examining the concerns, the United States has determined that it is in full compliance with the treaty, it says.

For its part, the report says, Washington has found no compliance issues with INF treaty members.

Russia has also raised concerns regarding U.S. compliance with START, according to the report (see GSN, July 24).  Most of the Russian concerns have been related to the treaty’s verification regime, such as concerns over inspection procedures, flight tests of sea-launched ballistic missiles and telemetry, the report says.  Russia has also raised “a few substantive disagreements” with the United States over the equipping and positioning of heavy bombers and the nature of some ICBM launchers, it says. 

The United States has been able to resolve most of the Russian concerns related to START compliance through the Joint Compliance and Inspection Commission, the report says.  It adds that the United States has determined that it is in full compliance with the treaty.

Washington has found that Russia — along with Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine — are in compliance with START’s strategic offensive arms central limits, and that Russia has complied with the treaty’s ceilings, the report says.  While no new compliance issues related to the accountability of ICBMs, SLBMs or heavy bombers were raised during the period covered by the report, the United States and Russia have expressed differing views over how to count road-mobile missile launchers under the treaty, it says.  The report adds that U.S. inspectors have had difficulties in ascertaining whether Russian missiles are equipped with no more re-entry vehicles than the number of warheads attributed to them.

“Russia’s implementation of the START Treaty with respect to achieving the central limits is treaty compliant,” the report says.  “Notwithstanding this achievement, a number of compliance issues remain unresolved,” it says.

Back to top

North Korea:  South Korea Rejects Security Council Intervention

South Korea’s foreign minister yesterday dismissed U.S. efforts to bring the nuclear standoff on the Korean Peninsula to the U.N. Security Council (see GSN, July 29).

“I think it better for us to resolve this outside the U.N. framework,” Yoon Young-kwan said.

Yoon said that Security Council efforts would only dissuade North Korea from abandoning its nuclear ambitions.  He acknowledged, however, that a North Korean response to U.S. proposals on peace talks has been unhurried.

“The timing of the answers seems to be a little slower than we expected,” he added (Ward/Mallet, Financial Times, July 30).

A South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman said, however, that Seoul was not opposed to U.N. involvement but was wary of the timing of such a move.  The issue has not caused a rift between the United States and South Korea, according to Kim Sun-heung (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, July 30).

U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton is scheduled to hold talks today with South Korean officials on the nuclear crisis (Seo Hyun-jin, Korea Herald, July 30).

According to a top South Korean foreign policy adviser, however, North Korea’s demands for a nonaggression treaty could hamper peace negotiations.  Washington is not likely to provide Pyongyang with such a treaty, said Ban Ki-moon, a presidential adviser on foreign policy (Soo-jeong Lee, Associated Press, July 30).

The United States is developing a proposal to calm North Korea’s security fears, but it will only put the idea forward during multilateral talks, Reuters reported.

“The United States is preparing a ‘concept paper,’ but it will only be shown to North Korea at five-nation talks,” a senior Japanese official said today (Teruaki Ueno, Reuters, July 30).

Back to top

Iran:  Tehran Will Make Additional Protocol Decision After Experts Visit

Iranian officials will wait until after they meet with legal experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency before deciding if they will agree to the Additional Protocol, which would allow for intrusive monitoring of Tehran’s nuclear activities, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, July 29).

The experts are expected “in the next few days,” Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi said.

“After these people come to Iran and we listen to their reason and justifications, then we will decide whether to sign the IAEA’s Additional Protocol,” he said.

IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming confirmed that the legal team is expected to travel to Tehran in the first week of August (Farhad Pouladi, Agence France-Presse, July 30).

Israel, meanwhile, is telling U.S. officials that Iran is increasing its efforts to develop a nuclear weapon, Reuters reported.

“It must be made clear to these countries that their evil deeds cannot continue,” Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said at a press conference yesterday with U.S. President George W. Bush (Reuters/Planet Ark, July 30).

The United States, meanwhile, is pressuring Tokyo over potential Japanese involvement in oil field development in Iran, Kyodo News Service reported.  At energy talks between Washington and Tokyo, U.S. officials expressed concern over a proposed deal — in which a Japanese company would develop a large untapped Iranian oil field — at a time when Iran is under pressure to sign the Additional Protocol (Kyodo News Service/BBC Monitoring, July 30).

Back to top

United States I:  NNSA Shuts Down Nuclear Weapons Advisory Committee

The U.S. Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration has decided to shut down an official advisory committee formed to evaluate the agency’s efforts to research new nuclear weapons, Energy Daily reported today (see GSN, July 17).

U.S. Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.) yesterday announced the decision to end the committee and criticized the NNSA for not announcing the move itself.  He indicated that the NNSA’s decision to shut down the committee was an attempt by the Bush administration to prevent oversight of White House plans to create new types of nuclear weapons, according to Energy Daily.

In a letter to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, Markey said he was “uncomfortable” with the decision to end the committee.  The move leaves only the Nuclear Weapons Council, made up of active officials from the military, Energy and the Defense Department, responsible for reviewing U.S. nuclear weapons policy, he said.

“This complex and important mission demands outside guidance unbiased by institutional preconceptions and preferences,” Markey said.

NNSA officials did not respond to requests for comment, Energy Daily reported (George Lobsenz, Energy Daily, July 30).

Back to top

United States II:  Y-12 Plant Operator Releases Results of Investigation Into Fire

The operator of the U.S. Energy Department’s Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn., said yesterday that a mixture of calcium, water and depleted uranium was responsible for an April 15 fire at the plant, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, May 22).

The mixture created steam and heat during an experiment conducted in a sealed glove box, which resulted in excess pressure and caused an explosion, plant operator BWXT said.  The explosion allowed air to enter the glove box, which resulted in the uranium spontaneously igniting, the company said (Associated Press, July 30).

Back to top

China:  United States Sanctions Chinese Corporation

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The United States has sanctioned a Chinese company for allegedly engaging in missile technology proliferation activities that could help contribute to a program to develop a WMD-capable ballistic missile, a U.S. State Department official told Global Security Newswire today (see GSN, July 28).

Under U.S. presidential executive order, Washington has decided to sanction China Precision Machinery Import/Export Corp., according to a notice published today in the Federal Register.  Earlier this month, the company — which a State official described as a “notorious missile proliferator” — was sanctioned under the Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000 for transfers that could have contributed to Iran’s WMD or ballistic missile programs. 

The sanctions, which have been imposed on an indefinite basis and are effective beginning today, prohibit Washington from entering into contracts with, or provide assistance to, the company, as well as prevent it from exporting goods to the United States.  In addition, all defense-related U.S. exports to the company and all transfers of U.S.-origin defense articles from foreign countries to the company are prohibited.  Similar sanctions were imposed on several Russian entities in the late 1990s, the State official said.

Last week, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance Paula DeSutter cited Chinese ballistic missile-related exports as the “most significant proliferation concern” the United States has with China.  Appearing before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, DeSutter said China needed to do more to crack down on so-called “serial proliferators.”

DeSutter also said that China needed to take the issue of missile proliferation itself more seriously.

“The Chinese government appears to view missile nonproliferation, at least in part, not as a goal in and of itself, but as an issue that needs merely to be managed as part of its overall bilateral relationship with the United States,” DeSutter said.

Back to top

U.S. Plans:  MDA Uncertain How to Spend Possible Additional Funds

The U.S. Missile Defense Agency does not know what it would do with $200 million provided by the Senate Appropriations Committee, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, July 14).

The funding — directed toward the national missile defense facility at Alaska’s Fort Greely — is above and beyond what what the agency requested to build 16 interceptors at the base, according to agency spokesman Chris Taylor. 

Currently the money is only in the Senate bill and it must survive a House-Senate conference committee to reach the Defense Department.

“From the ‘one-sentence’ description provided by the committee, it is very difficult to ascertain just what the intent of the Congress is for these funds,” Taylor said.  “We expect that the conference report may provide further clarification,” he added.

Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) proposed the extra funding in the fiscal 2004 defense funding bill, according to AP.  Stevens, however, said that the Pentagon asked for the money (Associated Press/Anchorage Daily News, July 29).

Back to top