Iraq I:  United States Focuses WMD Search on Three-Dozen Sites

U.S. officials have said that U.S. troops in Iraq will focus their search for suspected stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction to about three-dozen priority sites, the Sydney Morning Herald reported today (see GSN, April 14).

The priority sites are scattered throughout Iraq and were chosen from a list of more than 1000 suspect sites, the Herald reported.  The U.S. Army’s 75th Intelligence Exploration Unit, which consists of intelligence officers and scientific experts, is conducting the search, which is expected to take a least a month even with the reduced list of sites (Sydney Morning Herald, April 15).

“To do the first 40 sites, you’re probably talking at least a month and maybe longer, maybe six weeks,” said former U.N nuclear weapons inspector David Kay (George Edmonson, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, April 15).

If ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had been able to maintain WMD stockpiles, U.S. troops should be able to find evidence of them within several weeks, according to weapons experts.

“That’s a time frame that’s reasonable,” said Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.  “By then they should be able to go to the remaining sites they are interested in and should have gotten some serious information from former Iraqi officials and scientists,” he said.

One way the search could be accelerated would be through the use of international inspectors, who would also lend the search more credibility, experts said.  The United States, however, has balked at that idea.

“The Pentagon doesn’t want anyone else involved.  They are mad at (chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans) Blix and (International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed) ElBaradei,” said former U.N. inspector David Albright.  “It’s one thing to be mad at them, but it’s another to delay us knowing that we have weapons of mass destruction under control in Iraq,” he said (Guynn/Pugh, Knight Ridder News Service, April 15).

However, a spokesman for the U.S. Central Command today did not rule out the future involvement of international inspectors.

“Right now our searches are done under military control, and it’s not appropriate to add anyone to that equation,” said Central Command spokesman Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks.  “But when things are found, I think we certainly would intend to keep that as open as possible.  And that’s the way we intend to approach it,” he said (Federal News Service transcript, April 12).

Suspicious Laboratory Equipment Cleared

Meanwhile, U.S. troops yesterday discovered 11 buried containers of laboratory equipment and materials that they thought could be mobile chemical or biological weapons facilities, but additional examination today showed that the materials were for propellants and conventional munitions, CNN reported today (CNN, April 15).

The laboratories were discovered inside 20-by-20-foot containers that could have been attached to trucks or railroad cars, according to the New York Post.  The laboratories could have been used for civilian purposes, or possibly to develop biological and chemical weapons, said Brig. Gen. Ben Freakley (Lathem/Geller, New York Post, April 15).

Australian Aid

Australia plans to send a team of 12 weapons experts to Iraq by next week to aid the WMD hunt, Australian Defense Minister Robert Hill said today.

“The prime minister mentioned last week that the Australian government is prepared to provide a component to a coalition-sponsored group of specialists that will continue that task for some time,” Hill said.  The team will head to Iraq to “make a contribution on Australia’s behalf to ensuring that full benefit is taken in terms of avoiding a threat from weapons of mass destruction in the future,” he said (Sydney Morning Herald II, April 15).

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said he believed Iraq hid its WMD stockpiles outside of Baghdad.

“I think it’s likely that a lot of this material has, over the last few months, been buried, and has been buried out of Baghdad,” Downer said.  “And to find where this material has been buried … we will have to get people to tell us.  It won’t be possible just to, you know, send the army around and try to find these particular sites,” he added (Radio Australia/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, April 15).

Iraqi Scientists

According to experts, the two senior Iraqi scientists who have recently surrendered — Jaffar Jaffar and Lt. Gen. Amir Saadi — are highly knowledgeable.

Jaffar, an Iraqi nuclear scientist, and Saadi, a chemical scientist, “know between the two of them, everything about the country’s nuclear, biological, chemical and missile programs,” Albright said, adding that Jaffar “is the best scientist Iraq ever produced.”

U.S. intelligence officials have confirmed Albright’s assessment of Jaffar, but have said he has not provided much useful information during questioning.  If Jaffar were to cooperate, however, “he could tell us the whereabouts” of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, along with the identities of the countries and groups that provided Iraq with related materials and information, an officials aid.

The two scientists amount to “a very good catch,” said Khidhir Hamza, head of Iraq’s nuclear weapons program until he defected in 1994 (Dana Priest, Washington Post, April 15).

Back to top

Back to top

Iraq II:  U.S. Declares End to Major Combat, Starts Withdrawing Some Forces

In a sign that the war in Iraq is drawing to a close, the U.S. Defense Department yesterday ordered home two of the five aircraft carrier battle groups deployed in the region and reduced the number of airstrikes, officials said (see GSN, April 14).

Even though some “smaller, but sharp fights” are still expected, “I would anticipate that the major combat operations are over,” said Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, vice director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The USS Kitty Hawk will now head back to its home base at Yokosuka, Japan, and the USS Constellation will head back to its home port in San Diego, along with their respective battle groups, officials said.  The number of airstrikes conducted yesterday dropped to below 200, McChrystal said.  In addition, the planned deployment of the U.S. Army’s 1st Cavalry Division has been delayed, officials said.

The United Kingdom, which has about 42,000 troops in Iraq, also said yesterday that it would soon start sending some of its soldiers home (Tom Bowman, Baltimore Sun, April 15). 

The reduced combat operations would also free up U.S. troops to search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, McChrystal said (see related GSN story, today).

“As combat operations begin to slow down … we will have more forces available, and we’ll have a more secure environment in which we can get to these locations more easily,” he said (Robert Schlesinger, Boston Globe, April 15).

Iraqi Gen. Mohammed Jarawi, who led Iraq’s western Anbar sector command and 16,000 Iraqi soldiers, has surrendered today to U.S. forces, Agence France-Presse reported.

“I am ready to help. Thank you for liberating Iraq and making it stable,” Jarawi told U.S. Col. Curtis Potts after signing the surrender agreement.  “I hope we have a very good friendship with the United States,” Jarawi said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo.com, April 15).

Iraqi Opposition Leaders Meet

A U.S. sponsored meeting of Iraqi opposition figures to plan a new government ended today with a promise to meet again in 10 days, according to the New York Times.

At the meeting, which was held at the Tallil air base near the Iraqi city of Nasiriyah, White House envoy Zalmay Khalilzad said the United States had “no interest, absolutely no interest in ruling Iraq.”

The meeting’s participants included Kurdish, Sunni Muslim and Shiite Muslim figures from both inside Iraq and from those who have been in exile.  U.S. officials invited the groups, who were then allowed to select their own representatives for the meeting.

“It’s critical that the world understand that this is only the fledgling first meeting of what will hopefully be a much larger series of meetings across Iraq,” said U.S. Central Command spokesman Jim Wilkinson (New York Times, April 15).

A national meeting, which could occur within weeks, is being planned to determine the interim Iraqi government, according to a senior U.S. official.

A large number of Iraqis, however, have said they would boycott today’s scheduled meeting and that they opposed U.S. plans to place retired Gen. Jay Garner in charge of an interim government.

“Iraq needs an Iraqi interim government.  Anything other than this tramples the rights of the Iraqi people and will be a return to the era of colonization,” said Abdul Aziz Hakim, a leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a Shiite group (Nicole Winfield, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, April 15).

Back to top

Back to top

Iraq I:  Top Scientists Surrender; Hunt for Banned Weapons Continues

Two senior Iraqi scientists believed to have been involved in their country’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction surrendered to U.S. forces and other authorities over the weekend, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, April 11).

Iraqi nuclear scientist Jafar Jafar, believed to have headed Iraq’s nuclear weapons program, surrendered outside of Iraq, U.S. officials said yesterday.  While Jafar is not in U.S. custody, he is being held in an unidentified Middle Eastern country where U.S. intelligence officials have met with him, officials said.

“U.S. officials have had access to him and will continue to do so,” a U.S. official said.

The announcement of Jafar’s surrender came one day after Iraqi Gen. Amir Saadi, the chief liaison with U.N. inspectors, surrendered in Baghdad.  Saadi is believed to have been a top scientist in Iraq’s suspected chemical weapons program, according to the Times.

U.S. officials hope Jafar and Saadi will provide information on Iraq’s WMD efforts.

“These are very, very significant,” a U.S. official said.  “They will have extremely valuable insights into where the bad stuff is, how they got it and where the other people are.  The potential is there that these two guys can crack Saddam’s weapons programs for us,” the official added.

The Bush administration might offer Jafar and Saadi amnesty in exchange for both their cooperation and their assistance in obtaining the cooperation of other Iraqi WMD scientists, officials said.

“We did it with Wernher von Braun,” a U.S. official said, referring to the German rocket engineer who helped pioneer the U.S. space program after he led 126 colleagues to the United States in “Operation Paperclip” in 1945.  “These guys can get others to come in,” the official said (Bob Drogin, Los Angeles Times, April 14).

Insider Help Needed

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday that U.S. forces would only be able to find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction with the aid of those who had been involved in such efforts.

“The inspectors didn’t find them and certainly we’re not going to find them,” Rumsfeld said on CBS’s Face the Nation.  “It’s not like a treasure hunt where you run around and dig down and see if there’s a tunnel someplace.  You’ve got to find the people who dug the tunnels, the people who worked in those operations,” he said (Stephanie Ho, VOA News, April 13).

U.S. forces in Iraq have compiled a list of as many as 3,000 suspect Iraqi sites, with teams investigating up to 20 a day, according to U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks.  Iraqi residents and officials are also suggesting additional sites to add to the list, U.S. military officials said.

“There are so many sites, we are not able to get to all of them right away,” a senior U.S. Defense Department official said.  “It’s fair to say there are a lot of places U.S. forces are adding to the list,” the official said (Matt Kelley, Associated Press, April 14).

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday that he was confident U.S. troops would find Iraqi WMD.

“The combat period is over, and we can now turn our attention to finding weapons of mass destruction,” Powell said in an interview with the BBC.  “There’s strong evidence and no question about the fact there are weapons of mass destruction.  We will find weapons of mass destruction,” he added (Andy Geller, New York Post, April 14).

More Suspicious Finds …

Meanwhile, U.S. troops in Iraq have discovered several suspicious finds, according to reports.

U.S. Marines yesterday discovered 278 artillery shells that initially tested positive for blister agent, according to the London Independent.  The shells, found in trailers parked in a schoolyard, will have to undergo further tests for more conclusive identification, the Marines said (Anne Penketh, London Independent, April 14).

Documents have also been found in several of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein’s palaces in Baghdad that have provided more information on Iraqi WMD stockpiles and where they might be stored, according to military sources (Time, April 13).

In addition, U.S. forces in Baghdad yesterday found a trailer filled with Iraqi missiles based on information provided by an Iraqi computer technician, according to VOA News.

After a meeting with residents of Baghdad’s al-Muthana neighborhood, a computer technician told U.S. Marine 1st Lt. Michael Cerroni about a trailer with its doors ripped open that contained four missiles.

“We drove down there, and my jaw just dropped,” Cerroni said.  “Right on the side of a highway.  Anyone with a tractor could just back up and drive away with them,” he added.

The missiles initially appeared to be short-range, Russian-made Frog 7 missiles, Cerroni said.  Further evaluation of the missiles is needed to determine their exact type (Lauri Kassman, VOA News, April 13).

A U.S. military “sensitive site exploitation” team has recently investigated a facility located near the town of al-Qaim and is currently awaiting test results, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Myers said Friday.  Al-Qaim is home to a fertilizer plant that U.S. officials suspect of being part of Iraq’s chemical weapons program and a facility that was used to refine uranium ore (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, April 12).

…But Dead Ends Too

Several prior suspicious finds have turned out to be false alarms, according to the Financial Times.  For example, 14 drums of liquid found at an agricultural compound near the Iraqi town of Hindiyah, which were initially thought to be filled with chemical weapons agents, are now believed to contain pesticide.  Also, earlier reports of discovered chemical rockets have yet to be verified (Mark Huband, Financial Times, April 12).

IAEA Concerned for al-Tuwaitha Security

The International Atomic Energy Agency has asked the United States to properly safeguard radioactive materials stored at the captured al-Tuwaitha complex — the main site in Iraq’s former nuclear efforts — and to limit access to the site, according to an agency press release.

“I have written yesterday to the United States government asking that it ensure the security and safety of all the nuclear material there, which has been under IAEA seal since 1991,” IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said in a statement.  “I indicated that until our inspectors return to Iraq, the U.S. has responsibility for maintaining security at this important storage facility,” he added.

The IAEA has received assurances from the United States that it will provide heightened security for the complex, the agency release said (IAEA release, April 11).

Back to top

Television:  WMD Documentary Series Begins Tonight

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — A four-part television documentary on threats posed by weapons of mass destruction begins tonight with an episode on the history of chemical and biological weapons and the efforts to control them.  Hosted by former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite, the series is being aired on public television stations.

Subsequent episodes will examine nuclear proliferation, threats of WMD terrorism and strategies to confront terrorism. 

Tonight’s episode, “Silent Killers: Poisons and Plagues,” previewed by Global Security Newswire, chronicles the development and use of chemical and biological weapons in the 20th century, and documents efforts to control and eliminate them.

A prominent theme is that governments, beginning with the major adversaries of World War I through the Cold War, viewed chemical and biological weapons as strategically useful.  World War I-era Britain and Germany, World War II-era Japan and Germany, the Soviet Union and the United States, as well as Iraq, were all shown to value the weapons for various reasons.

World War I-era Germany “sought chemical weapons to overcome the stalemate of trench warfare,” said expert Jonathan Tucker.

The horrors of the use of gas, during that war, however, also launched global moral condemnation that stigmatized chemical and biological weapons, and led to an international ban on first use — though not possession — of such weapons, according to the program.

The program recounts Japanese testing and military use of biological agents against China during the 1930s, German testing and use of gas in concentration camps during World War II, U.S. acquisition of the Japanese testing results in a post-War agreement not to prosecute participants for war crimes, and U.S. and Soviet development of agents during the Cold War.

The program also characterizes, however, a growing view that the proliferation of such weapons ultimately posed greater insecurity than security for established nations.

The U.S. view in the early 1970s that the proliferation of biological weapons posed a strategic threat to the United States, and global outrage at Iraq’s use of chemical weapons in the 1980s, respectively led to the signing of global bans on those weapons, the documentary reports.

[EDITOR’S NOTE:  This documentary series is produced by Ted Turner Documentaries.  Turner is the major supporter of the Nuclear Threat Initiative that is the sole sponsor of Global Security Newswire, produced independently by the National Journal Group, Inc.]

Back to top

International Response:  EU Members to Discuss Nonproliferation Strategies

Foreign ministers from the European Union are expected to discuss measures for addressing WMD proliferation during a meeting scheduled for today in Luxembourg (see GSN, Jan. 22).

“Iraq is not the end of the story.  We will have to deal with other countries, such as North Korea,” an EU diplomat said.  “We need a policy.  We cannot allow ourselves to be torn apart again, which the Iraq crisis did to us,” the diplomat added.

One possible measure would be to increase WMD monitoring and information collection, and to improve cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to a six-page document expected to be discussed at the meeting.  The document calls for a re-examination of EU export control systems, and for a greater willingness to impose sanctions on proliferators, the Financial Times reported.  It also raises the issue of the use of pre-emptive action if such sanctions are ineffective.

“Sooner or later, Europe will have to have a debate over pre-emptive strikes,” a diplomat said (Judy Dempsey, Financial Times, April 13).

Back to top

Iraq II:  U.S. Marines Advance Into Tikrit

U.S. Marines today pushed into the center of the Iraqi city of Tikrit, believed to be a stronghold of Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and the last major city not under coalition control (see GSN, April 11).

The U.S. assault on Tikrit was backed by “massive air power,” said Matthew Fisher, a reporter for the Canadian National Post.  Even though U.S. forces appear to be in control of the center of Tikrit, it is unknown if they control the rest of the city as well, according to CNN.com.  An estimated 2,500 Republican Guard troops and Fedayeen Saddam fighters are believed to be deployed in the city.  Iraq tribal leaders have said, however, that Hussein’s clan and Iraqi military units had left Tikrit days earlier (CNN.com, April 14).

In Baghdad today, several hundred Iraqi policemen volunteered to conduct joint patrols with U.S. forces to help bring looting and rioting in the city under control.  Reports of looting in Baghdad have been on the decline due, in part, to new, wider-ranging U.S. Marine patrols (Hamza Hendawi, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, April 14).

New Reports of Russia-Iraq Cooperation

Meanwhile, the London Sunday Telegraph has reported that newly discovered documents in Iraq show that Russia’s intelligence services provided aid to Hussein prior to the war, according to CNN.com.

David Harrison, a Sunday Telegraph reporter, told CNN that he went into the damaged Iraqi Information Ministry headquarters and found documents on Russia’s intelligence aid to Iraq.  Such aid included information on the determination of the United States and the United Kingdom to begin war. 

One of the “choicest” discoveries was a report that Russia had provided to Iraq information from a recorded conversation between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Italian Prime Minister Sylvio Berlusconi last year on London’s willingness to send troops to Iraq, Harrison said.

“The conversation recorded by the Russians — presumably illegally — concerned the sending of troops to Iraq,” Harrison said.  “Tony Blair told the Italian Prime Minister Sylvio Berlusconi he was not prepared to do this while Britain still had troops in Afghanistan ... that this was too soon,” he added.

Russia’s foreign intelligence service refused to comment on the report.  “We do not comment on unsubstantiated and unfounded assertions,” a service spokesman said (CNN.com II, April 13).

Back to top

Iraq I:  U.S. Experts Investigate Possible Weapon-Grade Materials at Nuclear Site

U.S. military experts yesterday discovered preliminary indications that the al-Tuwaitha complex — the main site in Iraq’s former nuclear program — contains stockpiles of weapon-grade materials, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune (see GSN, April 10).

Members of a U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency team conducted a cursory inspection of what has been dubbed the “Yellowcake Facility,” a few hundred meters offsite, and told Marines guarding the facility that they believe it contains plutonium.  Further inspections have been planned.

“We are here to see what’s here,” said U.S. Army Maj. Ken Deal, a member of the team.  “We will determine when a larger team of scientists will show up.  This could take days.  We’ll know later in the week,” he said.

The team has also begun interviewing a former nuclear physicist and an engineer who worked at al-Tuwaitha, according to the Tribune.  The two men said they would show investigators “everything we didn’t show the inspectors” from the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to U.S. Marines.

During the most recent series of international inspections, the IAEA investigated al-Tuwaitha a dozen times, but found no evidence of nuclear weapons efforts.  Some IAEA inspectors said they would be “surprised, but not necessarily shocked” if coalition scientists found evidence of nuclear weapons production at the site (Carl Prine, Pittsburgh Tribune, April 11).

Some officials said yesterday, however, that U.S. troops at al-Tuwaitha might have only discovered stockpiles of low-grade uranium, instead of weapon-grade materials.  An expert familiar with U.N. nuclear inspections in Iraq said it was implausible that U.S. forces had found anything new at the site.  Instead, the Marines had apparently broken U.N. seals meant to ensure that the radioactive materials stored there were not used to produce weapons or stolen, the official said.

Other Suspicious Finds

Meanwhile, U.S. forces in Iraq have also found several other suspicious sites that may be linked to Iraqi WMD efforts, according to reports. 

Soldiers with the U.S. Army’s 101st Airborne Division have found 11 shipping containers filled with sophisticated laboratory equipment buried underground at a chemical plant in the city of Karbala, according to the Associated Press.  A report in the Army Times said the equipment’s sophistication, and the fact that it was buried, has increased suspicions that the plant was used to produce chemical weapons.

U.N. inspectors visited a site near the plant in late February, but did not find the buried equipment (William Kole, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, April 10).

Coalition forces have recently discovered an abandoned Iraqi military prison near the southeastern city of Zubayr that contained discarded gas masks and injectors for atropine, a nerve gas antidote, according to the Washington Times.

U.N. inspectors have no record of the prison, which contains at least two cells that appear to have been recently sealed, according to the Times.  Several rooms have signs saying “chemical storage” and drawings of gas masks and protective gear (Betsy Pisik, Washington Times, April 11). 

A U.S. Marine unit has found a possible mobile biological laboratory near Baghdad, according to FOX News.  Investigators searched what appeared to be a refrigerator truck and found what appeared to be surface-to-air radar equipment.  Further investigation, however, discovered fake side panels that contained an electronic pulley system, open containers and a system to rinse and cool substances without manual help (FOX News, April 11).

About 30 Iraqi missiles have been found near a shopping center in northern Baghdad, according to Agence France-Presse.  The missiles were loaded onto 15 trailers, which witnesses said had been abandoned at the site several days ago (Agence France-Presse, April 11).

U.S., Russian Spies Scour Baghdad

U.S. forces in Baghdad have secured the Iraqi Interior Ministry for later search by the CIA in the hope of finding information on Iraq’s WMD efforts, according to intelligence sources.  Russian newspapers have reported that a unit of the Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki (SVR), the Russian foreign intelligence service, has also been sent to Baghdad to secure the Russian Embassy there for storing Iraqi government archives.  The SVR has denied the reports (London Guardian, April 11).

Annan Reiterates Role for Inspectors

U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan yesterday reiterated his desire to see U.N. inspectors return to Iraq, saying their mandate “is still valid.”

“I think on the question of the weapons inspectors — their mandate is still valid.  It is only suspended because it became inoperable on account of the war,” Annan said in a U.N. press release.  “I would expect [chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans] Blix and [IAEA Director General Mohamed] ElBaradei to be able to return as soon as it is possible and I think they are the ones with the mandate to disarm Iraq, and when the situation permits they should go back to resume their work,” he added (U.N. release, April 10).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  Latest CIA Report Assesses WMD Proliferation; Highlights North Korea

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Using language more explicit than before, a biannual CIA report released yesterday added considerable detail to previous descriptions of North Korea’s chemical and biological weapons capabilities, but did not include a previously mentioned assessment that North Korea may have a small number of nuclear weapons. (see GSN, Jan. 8).

The congressionally mandated assessment covers the first half of 2002 and assesses the WMD threat posed by nations of concern to the United States, including North Korea, Iran, Libya, Syria, Sudan, India and Pakistan.

The report excludes countries already possessing substantial weapons of mass destruction, namely China and Russia, and those “that demonstrated little WMD acquisition activity of concern.”

Cuba, which Bush administration officials have said has a limited biological weapons research and development “effort,” was not included (see GSN, May 7, 2002).

North Korea

For the most part the report repeats previous assessments of other countries’ suspected WMD pursuits, but it does offer new descriptions of North Korea’s capabilities.

The assessment says North Korea began seeking centrifuge-related materials in large quantities in 2001, and that its goal “appears to be a plant that could produce enough weapons-grade uranium for two or more nuclear weapons per year when fully operational.”

The report does not, however, include language that appeared in the previous report:  “North Korea probably has produced enough plutonium for at least one, and possibly two, nuclear weapons.”

Separately, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said yesterday that “there is no clear evidence” to support previous U.S. allegations that Pyongyang has developed nuclear weapons (see related GSN story, today).

In a more explicit description than previously made, the report said North Korea has chemical warfare capabilities that include an ability to produce bulk quantities of nerve, blister, choking and blood agents and during the last half of 2002 was believed to possess “a sizeable stockpile of such agents and weapons, which it could have employed in a variety of delivery means.”

It said, further, North Korea in the latter half of 2002 was believed to have possessed a biological weapons munitions production infrastructure “that would have allowed it to weaponize BW agents and may have such weapons available for use.”

Iran

The report says Iran “has” technology that could support fissile material production for a nuclear bomb, as opposed to the previous assessment that Iran had sought foreign materials and technology for that purpose.

The assessment also states more bluntly than before that Iran “probably maintains an offensive” biological weapons program.  The previous assessment said certain foreign imports have legitimate uses, “but Iran’s biological warfare program also could benefit from them.”

“It is likely that Iran has capabilities to produce small quantities of BW agents, but has a limited ability to weaponize them,” the latest report says.

Libya and Syria

While senior Bush administration officials have recently stepped up charges that Libya is seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction, the CIA report largely repeats its earlier assessment that Libya continues to develop its civilian nuclear infrastructure and to seek technical information on WMD development (see GSN, April 7).

Administration officials also lately have identified Syria as a proliferation concern, but the assessment includes no new information, noting Syrian efforts to increase its civilian nuclear infrastructure.  The report also charges that Syria possesses stocks of the nerve agent sarin and is developing more toxic nerve agents with aid from foreign sources.  The report adds that it is “highly probable” Syria continues to develop an offensive biological weapons capability.

Terrorists

The report says the threat of terrorists using chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear materials “continued to rise.”

“Increased publicity surrounding the anthrax incidents since the September 11 attacks has highlighted the vulnerability of civilian and government targets to CBRN attacks,” it said.

Using more assertive language than previously, the assessment says, “terrorist groups are capable of conducting attacks using radiological dispersal devices.”

Back to top

U.S. Response:  U.S. Representatives Announce New Threat Reduction Proposals

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Several members of the U.S. Congress yesterday chastised their colleagues and the White House for directing insufficient attention to reducing WMD proliferation from the former Soviet Union at an event to promote new bipartisan nonproliferation legislation.

The bill, proposed by Representative Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) and 17 cosponsors, would authorize up to $330 million for nonproliferation efforts aimed primarily at the large quantities of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons material produced by the former Soviet Union and located at sites there (see GSN, April 9).

One measure also would authorize activities to retrieve nuclear materials from civilian nuclear reactors in countries outside the former Soviet Union.

“This Congress needs to wake up.  It is a disgrace that we would … have so many debates about so many issues that mean nothing ultimately to the survival of the world and yet we have had hardly any debate on the floor of the House on this issue,” said House Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security Chairman Christopher Shays (R-Conn.).

“We need to help our Russian colleagues contain this material,” he said.

“The new reality of the threat of nuclear terrorism has been met in Congress with more rhetoric than action.  We intend to change that,” Representative Chet Edwards (D-Texas) said.

“We have had, I would suggest, more discussion on the House floor over the past two years on the renaming of post offices and federal office buildings than we have had on discussions on how to protect Americans from the ultimate nightmare of nuclear terrorism.  That must change,” he said.

Further Steps Needed

Edwards praised the Bush administration for negotiating an agreement last year with other G-8 leaders to jointly contribute $20 billion over 10 years for securing former Soviet weapons of mass destruction.  Half that money would be put up by the United States (see GSN, June 28, 2002).

He added, however, that “small and moderate steps are not enough to protect American families against nuclear terrorism.”

Holding a plastic drinking cup, Edwards said, “God forbid, if a nuclear terrorists detonated just one full cup of highly enriched uranium in an American city, we would lose more citizens in an instant than we have lost in every conflict since the Revolutionary War.”

Yesterday’s event echoed recent criticism of the Bush administration by Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.).  Last month, prior to the start of war in Iraq, Lugar urged the Bush administration to pay more attention to the subject, arguing that nuclear proliferation should be the government’s top priority and that the administration should heed his call to create a senior executive position to manage the varied U.S. nonproliferation efforts (see GSN, March 13).

Edwards said funding to prevent nuclear proliferation comprises less than 1 percent of the national defense budget.  Total funding for such activities through the departments of Energy, State and Defense totals about $1 billion per year.  The defense budget for fiscal 2003 will total about $396 billion, not including $80 billion in supplemental funding now under consideration in Congress to pay for the U.S. military activities in Iraq and other items (see related GSN story, today).

The administration has requested $1.75 billion in threat reduction funding for fiscal 2004.

Skepticism About Certain Funding

House Republicans, including Weldon, have criticized the Pentagon’s Cooperative Threat Reduction program for wasteful spending and an inability to obtain Russian cooperation with some disarmament efforts.

Moreover, Representative Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), in his role as House Armed Services Committee chairman, said at a hearing last month the 12-year-old program has “strayed from its original purpose.”

He said it has moved from “the initial focus on the short-term, high-priority elimination of former Soviet-era strategic nuclear systems, to today’s constantly expanding scope which includes all manner of weapons of mass destruction-related activities, sometimes only tangentially related to the original purpose or to the principle of reducing direct military threats to the United States.”

“If we are to continue to support diverting billions of dollars from the U.S. defense budget for these activities, we must ensure that the investment can be directly traced to an actual tangible reduction in military threats,” he warned.

Critics also have focused in part on difficulties in obtaining Russian cooperation.  General Accounting Office testimony last month said Russia has not always adhered to agreements to pay its share of program costs, nor to always provide access to nuclear and biological sites for security enhancements (see GSN, March 24).

Weldon yesterday argued his proposals would have unprecedented support from key, high-level Russian government officials with whom he has had personal contacts.  The legislation also would expand activities at the Energy Department, which has been less criticized, rather that the Pentagon program.  Weldon also noted that the legislation contains measures intended to improve oversight and reporting of all U.S. threat reduction programs.

At yesterday’s event, the legislation received the endorsement of nongovernmental organizations from a range of political perspectives, including the Nuclear Threat Reduction Campaign, the Heritage Foundation and the Physicians for Social Responsibility.

It’s an “unheard of alliance” of groups, said Weldon.

“They’re trying to sell it from more of a national security point of view, not just from a ‘nonproliferation, gee, nice to have’ point of view.  So they’re really trying to sell it on both sides of the aisle,” said Jon Wolfsthal, a nonproliferation analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Correction:  A related April 9 story incorrectly reported the Nuclear Threat Initiative was among organizations supporting yesterday’s event.  The correct organization was the Nuclear Threat Reduction Campaign.

Back to top

International Response:  Top U.N. Official Challenges View That U.N. Is Irrelevant

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — U.N. General Assembly President Jan Kavan yesterday challenged the pronouncements of many analysts after the United States and United Kingdom launched war on Iraq that the United Nations is irrelevant and ineffective.

In a wide-ranging interview, Kavan said a prominent U.N. role in Iraq now would give “a strong air of legitimacy that the U.N. can confer … for the whole democratization process.” 

“It would be in the interest of the U.S. to have this backing of legitimacy so that they don’t have to battle throughout the post-war reconstruction against suspicions that they are acting as invaders,” Kavan added.  “The UN. should be very actively involved in the post-war situation in Iraq … and not just play a kind of advisory role.” 

Kavan said that while a humanitarian role is important, “The U.N should also play a wider role in participating in decisions leading to a transitional authority and the setting up of a democratic, free and independent Iraq.”  He added, It would be wrong to ignore the wealth of experience and knowledge that the U.N. has.”

Kavan objected to the possibility that Iraq is only the first case of the United States taking pre-emptive action against states Washington considers threats to its security.  No one defended Saddam Hussein’s rule, he said, yet there were widespread protests and criticism against a pre-emptive war “primarily because it didn’t have a U.N. Security Council mandate.”  Removing Hussein, he said, “is a contribution to world stability, but it seems to me that if [the United States] wishes to move against any other country, it would lead to even more protests.  It may not only question the role of multilateral organizations, such as the U.N., it would also politically lead to certain isolation of the United States.” 

Launching other actions without Security Council approval “definitely would establish an entirely new world order, Kavan said.  “The role of the U.N. would be completely changed,” he said, adding that he hoped Washington would “pursue its foreign policy bearing in mind the need to enjoy the support of the international community.”

Kavan also spoke about the status of Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammed al-Douri.  Despite speculation since the fall of Baghdad on Wednesday, there has been no change in Iraq’s diplomatic representation at the United Nations, he said, adding that “no one has questioned the credentials of” al-Douri.  “Until the credentials are questioned and a proper process for determining a new authority are in place,” no change will occur, Kavan said.

While any nation may question al-Douri’s credentials, Kavan said the United States and United Kingdom as occupying powers have no special authority in this case.  “In Resolution 1472, the occupying powers are correctly defined [as being] responsible for the welfare of the citizens” of Iraq, Kavan said.  “But that responsibility … does not say anything about political representation of the country.  Resolution1472 doesn’t touch on it.”  That resolution, adopted unanimously March 28, authorizes the United Nations to begin providing urgent humanitarian aid to Iraq while noting the responsibilities of the occupying powers.

The Arab League earlier this week requested a General Assembly debate on Iraq.  Yesterday, however, the Arab states asked for a postponement of their request.  Any new debate, Kavan said, is likely to center on the United Nations’ post-war role, “not only in terms of providing humanitarian help but also in playing a role in administrative and economic reconstruction of Iraq.”

Trend After Cold War Is Marginalization of General Assembly

Speaking generally about the General Assembly, Kavan said that since the end of the Cold War, there has been a trend to marginalize the assembly and transfer more decision making powers to the Security Council, which he said must be “stopped and reversed.”  He said he would like to see the assembly begin a transformation “towards a proper world parliament.”

Kavan said his goals as president include seeking assembly consensus on two issues:  conflict prevention and follow-up to the Millennium Development Goals.  The presidency of the assembly runs for one year.  Kavan’s term ends in September when the 58th General Assembly begins.

The latter goal will likely be a challenge.  “It’s very difficult to reach a consensus [because] there is great suspicion and distrust, particularly between the developing countries and the rich countries,” Kavan said.

Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals has been “uneven,” he said, adding that the General Assembly should adopt a mechanism “for a coordinated and integrated follow-up” on the goals as well as the conclusions of recent U.N. summits, such as the International Conference on Financing for Development. 

“It makes sense that you do not discuss sustainable development without discussing its financing,” he said.  A comprehensive progress report is due in 2005, Kavan added, but the international community cannot wait for a report that will “almost certainly acknowledge by 2005 that we have not met the goals in many areas.”

“A monitoring system should indicate how the promises and obligations are met or not,” he added. 

Regarding conflict prevention, Kavan said he hopes the General Assembly can adopt a resolution on “the ways and means” to prevent conflict, including addressing the root causes.  “If you want to nip in the bud any armed conflict, then you have to define what constitutes a fertile soil for such a conflict,” he said, such as poverty, lack of democracy, socioeconomic problems and the illegal flow of arms. 

To reach consensus, Kavan said he is working with facilitators from regional groups on the drafting of the resolution. “It’s a cumbersome method but to my mind, it’s the only one which will ensure that if we do agree, then the General Assembly will have no problem.”

Kavan also expressed hope about the International Criminal Court, whose next assembly begins in New York later this month, with the expected selection of Luis Moreno Ocampo of Argentina as prosecutor.  With the judges and prosecutor selected, Kavan said, “I don’t see any reason why the functioning of the ICC should be doubted.”  While several major powers, including Russia and China, are not members of the ICC, the United States is the only one actively working against the court, arguing that the court would be subject to political manipulation.  Those powers “may be in time convinced, by observing the ICC and see[ing] in practice that some of the anxieties and fears are not justified.”  He noted that his own government, the Czech Republic, is one of those holdout states.

Kavan is a former foreign minister and deputy prime minister and currently holds an elective seat in Parliament.  During the Cold War, Kavan was a leading dissident, publishing samizdats, or underground political and literary journals, from exile in London.

Kavan said his activities in the 1980s involved both human rights and disarmament.  He said he supported the arguments made at the time calling for “the utter rejection of nuclear weapons as a means to solve anything, and on the other hand, the [rejection of] violations of basic human rights,” adding that “demilitarization and democratization go hand in hand.”

Today, he said, the network of multilateral disarmament instruments including the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty “is not an ideal situation. … We cannot do miracles, but within the framework of what we have to work with, these efforts are reasonably successful and hopefully will persuade others” to join disarmament agreements.  New policies undermining multilateral arrangements “is an untenable premise,” said Kavan.

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Wartime Funding Bill Remains Stuck in Congress

A wartime funding bill remains stalled in the U.S. Congress, partially because of a dispute over how Iraqi reconstruction funds should be handled, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, April 10).

The overall bill would provide $62 billion for the Defense Department and additional funds for homeland security and U.S. allies.

The White House rejected a compromise between the House of Representatives and the Senate that would send the money to President George W. Bush but designate it to be used by nonmilitary agencies.  Bush administration officials want broad authority on how to allocate the funding.

The bill is also being delayed by a provision that would prevent a German-owned overnight delivery service from carrying U.S. Defense Department shipments.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) added a last-minute provision to the Senate version of the bill that would not allow German-owned DHL Worldwide to carry packages for the Pentagon.  Many House Republicans oppose the provision, which would cause problems for a proposed $1 billion DHL acquisition of a U.S.-based company’s ground operations.

DHL competitors United Parcel Service of America and FedEx are supporting the provision.  The dispute has involved prominent lobbyists and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush — President Bush’s brother — who is concerned that his state could suffer under the provision, according to the Post (Dan Morgan, Washington Post, April 11).

Back to top

Iraq II:  Iraqi Army Corps Surrenders Outside of Mosul, U.S. Forces Begin to Move In

The Iraqi Army’s 5th Corps has surrendered at the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, the U.S. Central Command said today (see GSN, April 10).

“We are confirming that the Iraqi 5th Corps in and around Mosul have agreed to a cease-fire.  Right now we’re in the process of deciding if they’ll become [prisoners of war] or go home or what their eventual outcome will be,” Central Command spokesman Capt. Frank Thorp said.  “They have made the very wise choice of living for the future of Iraq instead of dying for this Iraqi regime,” he said (Associated Press/Yahoo.com, April 11).

The 5th Corps’ surrender opened Mosul to U.S. forces, which were reported to have begun entering the city this morning, according to the New York Times.  Also in northern Iraq, thousands of Kurdish militiamen entered the city of Kirkuk.  To avoid a potential conflict with Turkey, however, control of Kirkuk will soon be transferred to U.S. forces, Bush administration officials said.

Even with the fall of two of Iraq’s main northern cities, scattered resistance persists throughout the country.  For example, near the eastern town of Kut, U.S. Marines said they were facing a force of up to several thousand Islamic militants from a number of Arab countries, including possible al-Qaeda operatives.

“These are the kind of guys who want a one-way ticket to Allah,” an officer said (Patrick Tyler, New York Times, April 11).

U.S. forces in northern Iraq are also preparing to assault Tikrit, a stronghold for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

“A force is being developed to head that way,” said a military official.

The United States currently has deployed in northern Iraq a force of about 1,000 paratroopers and other ground elements, including as many as 1,000 additional troops and some armored vehicles, military officials said.  U.S. commanders are still attempting to determine the level of Iraqi strength defending Tikrit, according to the Boston Globe.

“We are trying to see whether it’s a combination of Special Republican Guard elements, maybe some remnants of other forces, maybe some Baathists, Saddam Fedayeen.  (We are) trying to judge their strength,” U.S. Defense Department spokesman Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal said (Bryan Bender, Boston Globe, April 11).

Meanwhile, Baghdad yesterday experienced its second consecutive day of looting, according to the New York Times.  Bands of Baghdad residents broke into at least six government ministry buildings and set several of them on fire, as well as attacked the homes of Hussein’s two sons — Uday and Qusay — and those of other senior officials.

One Marine officer said he had been asked by Iraqis why his unit had done nothing to stop the chaos, and he told them he had not received orders to do so.

“I tell them the truth, that we just don’t have enough troops,” the officer said (John Burns, New York Times, April 11).

In a videotaped message to the Iraqi people, U.S. President George W. Bush said U.S. forces would help restore civil control.

“Coalition forces will help maintain law and order, so that Iraqis can live in security,” Bush said.

Bush also pledged that coalition forces would withdraw from Iraq once a new government was in place.

“We will help you build a peaceful and representative government that protects the rights of all citizens.  And then our military forces will leave,” Bush said.  “Iraq will go forward as a unified, independent and sovereign nation that has regained a respected place in the world,” he added (Steve Holland, Reuters, April 11).

The United States is planning to hold a meeting of Iraqi opposition figures next week in Nasiriya to help develop an interim government that would work with the U.S. military to run Iraq until a permanent government is established, according to Reuters.

The Pentagon yesterday defended the reputation of one such opposition figure, Ahmed Chalabi, head of the Iraqi National Congress.  U.S. State Department and CIA officials have criticized Chalabi as having little support within Iraq.

“Chalabi is one of a number of Iraqis who have played a significant role ... to calling attention to the plight of the Iraqi people,” U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told the Senate Armed Services Committee yesterday.  “He is not an insignificant figure,” Wolfowitz added.

Chalabi, along with hundreds of INC fighters, recently arrived in Iraq through the aid of the U.S. Air Force.  Wolfowitz denied, however, that the United States was attempting to “anoint” Chalabi as the next leader of Iraq.

“We are ... not trying to anoint him or anyone else as the future leader of Iraq,” Wolfowitz said.  “You can’t talk about democracy and then go around and say we are going to pick the leaders.  We are not singling him out and we are a little puzzled at press commentary that suggests that we are singling him out,” he said (Jonathan Wright, Reuters, April 11).

Al-Douri Leaving His Post At U.N.

Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammed al-Douri told al-Arabiya television today that he is leaving his post, citing U.S. pressure that he said would prevent him from doing his job “with full freedom.”  Arab diplomats said yesterday that al-Douri would go to Baghdad.

“I am leaving because I don’t think there is a possibility for me to work as I want from a country that is militarily invading Iraq, destroying, ravaging and killing,” al-Douri said today.

The envoy met yesterday with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan.  Afterward, neither would comment on the meeting (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, April 11).

Asked whether the United States would seek to have al-Douri arrested, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday, “He is, of course, the ambassador of Iraq to the United Nations.  And unless there is cause provided for why a diplomat would be arrested, he is a diplomat” (Tom Carter, Washington Times, April 11).

Back to top

Iraq I:  United States Offering Reward for WMD Information

The United States is offering rewards to any Iraqi who comes forward with information on Iraq’s WMD programs, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday (see GSN, April 9).

“We’re asking people to come forward and help in this effort,” Rumsfeld said.  “Rewards are available to those who help us prevent the disappearance of personnel, documentation and materials,” he added.

Iraqi officials, technicians and scientists who were involved in WMD programs could face “carrots and sticks” — rewards for helping the United States track down banned weapons, or punishments if they refuse, Rumsfeld said.  “Just to have the opportunity for people to improve their lives and get off a blacklist is important,” he said (Matt Kelly, Associated Press/Salon.com, April 9).

Rumsfeld yesterday also raised concerns that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction might have been transferred to another country or a terrorist group.

“We still need to find and secure Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction facilities,” Rumsfeld said.  The possibility that “some of those materials could leave the country and (get into) the hands of terrorist networks would be a very unhappy prospect,” he said (Pascal Barollier, Agence France-Presse, April 10).

U.S. forces might be able to discover more information on the fate of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction as they consolidate their control over Baghdad, a U.S. Central Command spokesman said today.

“We’ve said a couple of times that we believe that many of the sources of information would be in and around the Baghdad area,” said Maj. Gen. Victor Renuart.  “And so as we move into that area and establish more and more control, we hope to gain access to more and more of the facilities that may yield some of that information,” he said.

Firm U.S. control of Baghdad could also free forces to search other parts of the country in the hopes of finding WMD sites that “are not going to be obvious to the eye,” Renuart said.

“Certainly as you stabilize Baghdad, the force requirements to be in the city will adjust slightly, and I would hope that would give us some additional capability to get out to some of the other outlying areas that may not yet have been visited,” he said (Federal News Service transcript, April 10).

U.S. military officials now believe that Iraq is unable to conduct chemical weapons attacks because its missile systems have been destroyed, according to the Baltimore Sun.  They are concerned, however, that independent Iraqi agents may obtain chemical weapons agents and attempt to use them in a nonconventional attack (Baltimore Sun, April 10).

Al-Tuwaitha Concerns

Meanwhile, U.S. military commanders said yesterday they have increased security at al-Tuwaitha — Iraq’s main nuclear facility.  U.S. Marines, who have occupied the site since Sunday, have entered several bunkers at the site and recorded high levels of radiation, according to reports from embedded journalists.

Such reports have also raised concerns among U.S. and international nuclear experts that the International Atomic Energy Agency seals at the site, placed during years of monitoring, may have been broken, leaving the radioactive materials inside vulnerable to the theft and U.S. forces vulnerable to radiation exposure.

“There is a risk to troops who might enter these secure areas, and there’s a risk of looting that could allow the material to be spread around,” said one nuclear expert close to the IAEA’s Iraq nuclear inspection team.

Coalition forces are familiar with the materials stored at al-Tuwaitha and have increased security to prevent theft, a Central Command spokesman said (Joby Warrick, Washington Post, April 10).

Blix Lashes Out

Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix has criticized the United States and the United Kingdom for rushing into war with Iraq and failing to provide inspectors with enough time to complete their mission (see GSN, April 3).

The United States and the United Kingdom appeared to place a higher emphasis on the approaching Iraqi summer, rather than allowing inspectors to complete their work, Blix said in an interview printed yesterday in the Spanish El Pais newspaper.

“It seemed the high temperature in Iraq came at a point where they needed to launch attacks,” Blix said.  “Unfortunately, the two governments were very impatient during the first days of March, and they didn’t let us finish our job.  A few more months would have been enough to affirm — as asserted by the Americans and British — whether Iraq really possessed the arms,” he said.

Blix criticized U.S. intelligence reports that suggested Niger had sold uranium to Iraq, calling them “absolutely false” (see GSN, March 28).  He also said that the United States itself might be beginning to have doubts that Iraq ever possessed weapons of mass destruction.

“I think the Americans started the war thinking” they would find weapons of mass destruction, Blix said.  “Today, I think they believe less in this possibility,” he added (Elizabeth Bryant, United Press International, April 9).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Nonproliferation Efforts Expected to Continue Despite Disagreement Over Iraq

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Although Russian legislators have delayed approving a U.S.-Russian nuclear arms treaty because they oppose the U.S.-led war in Iraq, such opposition is unlikely to have greater ramifications for U.S.-Russian nonproliferation efforts, experts told Global Security Newswire this week (see GSN, April 9).

They expected the U.S. threat reduction programs — in which the United States funds efforts to dismantle or secure WMD materials in the former Soviet Union — to continue because both countries benefit from the national security improvements.  U.S.-Russian efforts to reduce their nuclear weapons arsenals will also continue, despite the Russian Parliament’s delayed consideration of the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, experts said (see GSN, April 9).

The threat reduction effort is one “where we’re getting something out of it,” said Clay Moltz of the Monterey Institute of International Studies’ Center for Nonproliferation Studies.

Russia appears to have been able to avoid the same levels of political backlash in the United States that have befallen France and Germany, in part, because its opposition to the war was not as vocal, said Charles Pena, director of defense policy studies at the CATO Institute.  Such backlash — especially against France, the staunchest opponent of the U.S.-British efforts last month to obtain new U.N. authority to attack Iraq — reached symbolic highs when the U.S. House of Representatives leadership ordered the House cafeteria to change its menu from carrying “French fries” and “French toast” to “Freedom fries” and “Freedom toast.”

“No one’s talking about banning Russian vodka or Russian dressing,” Pena said.

Pena also described Russia as being a “different political animal” than France or Germany, noting U.S security concerns over Russia’s stockpile of former Soviet weapons of mass destruction.  “We cannot turn our back on Russia,” he said.  Pena warned, however, that there is “always some political fallout” for opposing the United States.

There is more than enough support within the U.S. Congress for the threat reduction programs to ensure that they will remain adequately funded despite current U.S.-Russian friction, Moltz said.  Such support is especially high within the Senate, where Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) heads the Foreign Relations Committee.  Lugar was one of the original architects of the threat reduction efforts and is unlikely to allow any serious funding cuts for the program, Moltz said.

Russia’s stance on Iraq could have more of a potential influence on support for nonproliferation programs among House members, however, according to experts.  There have been previous examples where U.S.-Russian tensions have led to attacks on threat reduction programs in the House, according to David Culp, a legislative representative with the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a nuclear nonproliferation advocacy group.  For example, in the late 1990s, House Republicans attempted to cut threat reduction funding because of allegations that Russia was providing Silkworm antiship cruise missile technology to China, Culp said.  He said that while there has currently been little outright display of animosity toward Russia in the House, the mood in the chamber could best be described as “suspicion.”

The war on Iraq has appeared to have more of an effect on U.S.-Russian relations from the Russian side, particularly with the strategic arms treaty (see GSN, March 26).

“Maybe now is not the right moment psychologically to bring this document up for ratification,” Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said last month.  “If we wait for some time, and concentrate all our efforts on ending the war and switching over to a political settlement (of the Iraq crisis), then at a more quiet moment we can quickly deal with this issue,” he said.

Many experts played down any potential significance in Russia’s decision to delay ratification of the treaty.  Russian President Vladimir Putin decided to delay the treaty’s ratification in order to prevent a negative vote in the Russian Parliament due to the current tense political situation, and not because of a lack of support for the treaty’s aims, Moltz said.  He said the situation would be akin to the Bush administration attempting to have the Senate approve a new arms control treaty while Russia was engaged in heavy fighting in the disputed Chechnya region.

The delay is “part of the fallout from making a decision that not all your friends and allies agree with,” Pena said.

Russia also views threat reductions programs as being in its own national security interests, said Rose Gottemoeller, a senior associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Nonproliferation Project.  Moscow has historically viewed the program as “sacrosanct,” she said.

If the current U.S.-Russian political tensions are going to have any impact on nonproliferation efforts, it will be on the day-to-day level of U.S.-Russian cooperation, such as access to WMD sites, Culp said.  He noted that in 1998, while Russia reacted to U.S. airstrikes on Iraq with a delay in the ratification of START 2, nonproliferation activities did not come to a halt.  Russia is unlikely to shut down current threat reduction projects, he said, but it is also likely that no new projects will begin. 

Russia’s reluctance to expand cooperation with the United States was demonstrated last month when Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev said Russia would not allow international access to some of its nuclear sites, citing national security reasons (see GSN, March 27).  Rumyantsev’s comments came shortly after the release of a U.S. General Accounting Office report that said a lack of such assess has severely hindered U.S. efforts to secure Russian WMD materials (see GSN, March 24).

Ultimately, however, experts were optimistic that whatever tensions might have been caused by Russia’s decision not to support the war in Iraq, it would have little impact on either Washington’s or Moscow’s view of the value of threat reduction efforts.  Charles Curtis, president of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, said a “global coalition” is needed to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists; a coalition of which Russia would be an “essential partner.”  He said he was optimistic that U.S. President George W. Bush and Putin would take advantage of a summit scheduled to held in St. Petersburg in late May to repair the U.S.-Russian bilateral relationship and to re-emphasize nonproliferation efforts.

[EDITOR’S NOTE:  The Nuclear Threat Initiative is the sole sponsor of Global Security Newswire which is published independently by the National Journal Group, Inc.]

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  U.S. Officials Warn Countries on WMD Development

U.S. officials yesterday warned that Washington would not look favorably on countries that are developing weapons of mass destruction, Reuters reported (see GSN, April 7).

“With respect to the issue of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the post-conflict period, we are hopeful that a number of regimes will draw the appropriate lesson from Iraq that the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is not in their national interest,” said U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton

In Rome to meet with Vatican and Italian officials, Bolton singled out Syria, Iran and North Korea (Phillip Pullella, Reuters, April 10).

Elsewhere, U.S. conservative commentators pushed for further military action, Reuters reported.

“It’s time to bring down the other terror masters,” Michael Ledeen, of the American Enterprise Institute, wrote Monday.  “Iran, at least, offers Americans the possibility of a memorable victory, because the Iranian people openly loathe the regime, and will enthusiastically combat it, if only the United States supports them in their just struggle,” he added.

Others suggested that regime change could occur nonviolently.

“I hope we could change the regimes without military force and I would not contemplate using military force in those places,” said Kenneth Adelman, a former Pentagon aide, referring to Syria and Iran.  “The combination of totalitarianism and weapons of mass destruction is a deadly combination for the world,” he added (Arshad Mohammed, Reuters, April 10).

Last Sunday, in an NBC television interview, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said that Syria should “get the message” from the situation in Iraq (Timothy Phelps, Newsday, April 10).

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday that Syria has been helping Iraqis flee from invading U.S. forces.

“We are getting scraps of intelligence saying that Syria has been cooperative in facilitating the move of the people out of Iraq and into Syria,” Rumsfeld said.  “Then, in some cases they stay there and find safekeeping there.  In other cases, they move from Syria to some other places,” he added.

Rumsfeld said that he was not discussing “very senior, senior people” (Charles Aldinger, Reuters, April 13).

Rumsfeld also said he was worried that chemical and biological weapons had been secreted out of Iraq, but he said he had no evidence of that taking place (Wall Street Journal, April 10).

Back to top

Iraq II:  U.S. Forces Take Control of Baghdad

U.S. troops consolidated their control of Baghdad yesterday, capturing the last few remaining government ministry buildings, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, April 9).

As U.S. Army units took control of the main government area of western Baghdad, U.S. Marine forces occupied the eastern residential section of the city, according to the Post.  U.S. forces experienced only scattered and light resistance as they moved throughout Baghdad. 

The capture of Baghdad means the war is now entering into its final phase, a U.S. military officer said.

“Not every area in Baghdad is secure, but the central part of the city, the heart of the city, is secure,” said Maj. Gen. Buford Blount, commander of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division.  “The end of the combat phase is days away,” he said (William Branigin, Washington Post, April 10).

There have also been reports that Kurdish militiamen have captured several northern Iraqi cities, including the key city of Kirkuk, according to al-Jazeera (Al-Jazeera, April 10).

Now that Baghdad has been captured, U.S. forces are preparing to move on the city of Tikrit, a stronghold of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, according to the Washington Times.

“We certainly are focused on Tikrit ... to prevent the regime from being able to use it as a place to command and control, to restore command and control, or to hide,” U.S. Central Command spokesman Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks said yesterday.

Coalition aircraft have conducted large numbers of airstrikes against Iraqi troops deployed outside of Tikrit in advance of the planned attack, U.S. military officials said.  There are more than 10 Iraqi regular army divisions still deployed north of Baghdad, along with one Republican Guard brigade, said Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“They have been subjected to bombing by air power and will continue to be dealt with in that way for some time,” Myers said (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, April 10).

“The Game Is Over”

Iraq’s U.N. Ambassador Mohammed al-Douri conceded yesterday that the war is all but over.

“The game is over,” Aldouri said.  “My hope now is peace, for everybody.  I hope that peace will prevail and the Iraqi people at the end of the day will have a peaceful life,” he said (Evelyn Leopold, Reuters, April 10).

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld warned yesterday, however, that U.S. troops in Iraq could still experience some heavy resistance, even though Baghdad has fallen.

“More people are going to be killed, let there be no doubt,” Rumsfeld said.  “This is not over, despite all the celebrations on the street,” he said (Bob Kemper, Chicago Tribune, April 10).

Today, a suicide bomber in Baghdad seriously wounded four U.S. soldiers (CNN, April 10).

Where Have All the Leaders Gone?

Meanwhile, Iraqi opposition leader Ahmed Chalabi, head of the Iraqi National Congress, said yesterday that he has information that Hussein survived a second recent U.S. airstrike.

In addition to remaining alive, Hussein was able to flee Baghdad for the city of Baqubah, northeast of the capital, Chalabi said.

“We have no evidence they have been killed in that attack,” Chalabi said.  “We know at least that Qusay, his son, has survived and he is occupying some houses in the Diyala area,” he added.

Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as “Chemical Ali” for ordering a 1998 chemical weapons attack on Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq, is also reported to still be alive, Chalabi said (CNN.com, April 9).

Covert CIA and military teams operating in Iraq, as well as surveillance equipment set up to track Hussein and other senior Iraqi officials, all reported yesterday that almost all Iraqi officials have disappeared.

“All of a sudden, all communications ceased and the regime didn’t come to work,” a senior Bush administration official said.  “Even the minders for (foreign) journalists did not go to work,” the official said.

The capture, or death, of Hussein is still a top U.S. priority, according to U.S. officials. 

“In order to come to closure” psychologically, “we need to demonstrate he’s not in control anymore,” a senior administration official said.  “It will make it easier to start afresh,” the official added (Priest/Pincus, Washington Post, April 10).

Rumsfeld yesterday refused to comment on Hussein’s fate, suggesting it was irrelevant.

“He’s either dead or he’s incapacitated, or he’s healthy and cowering in a tunnel someplace,” Rumsfeld said.  “Saddam Hussein is now taking his rightful place alongside Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Ceausescu in the pantheon of failed, brutal dictators — and the Iraqi people are well on their way to freedom,” he said (Goering/Dellios, Chicago Tribune, April 10).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  U.S. Military Funding Delayed in Congress

The U.S. Congress was unable to make progress on a spending bill yesterday that would provide $62 billion to Defense Department operations in Iraq, the Washington Post reported (see GSN, April 4).

The House and the Senate have each approved their own versions of the bill and are now negotiating to resolve differences.  In addition to military funding, the competing bills contain measures for homeland security efforts and provide aid to U.S. allies.

House Republicans said the several Senate measures were not acceptable, but Senate Republicans said they were necessary to get approval for the bill.

“It’s held up on a bunch of extraneous stuff,” said House Appropriations Committee Chairman C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.).

Among other issues, the House objected to an effort by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) to have salmon caught by Alaskan fishermen labeled as organic food.  Other measures added by the Senate include language on grazing rights for Western U.S. cattle ranchers and funding for a dam repair project in Vermont, according to the Post.

Lawmakers cancelled a negotiating session yesterday after House Republicans made it clear they would not accept the amendments.

“I’m just sorry we repealed the law on dueling — I’d have shot a couple of them,” said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska).

White House Budget Director Mitchell Daniels criticized the bill Monday for “restrictions placed on the use of those funds.”

Specifically, the White House is frustrated that the bill prevents the U.S. Defense Department from using $2.4 billion in reconstruction funds for Iraq (Dan Morgan, Washington Post, April 10).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Weldon to Introduce New Threat Reduction Measures

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — A Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives with a reputation for opposing certain U.S. WMD threat reduction spending in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere is planning to propose legislation to create new programs for that purpose potentially worth $330 million.

Representative Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) is planning to announce the new legislation at an event tomorrow featuring speakers from the Heritage Foundation, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Nuclear Threat Reduction Campaign.

Among other measures, the legislation — which Weldon’s spokesman Bud DeFlaviis said has not yet been finalized — would provide money to expand U.S. efforts to retrieve vulnerable nuclear materials from research reactors outside the former Soviet Union (see GSN, April 2). 

The Senate has already approved those measures, with White House support, but House Republicans, reportedly led by Weldon, last year blocked them. 

Energy, Not Defense

Weldon’s proposal is different than previous proposals, however, in that it would provide the authority to the Energy Department to help secure at-risk materials, not the Defense Department’s Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which has received Republican criticism.

A New York Times editorial last year identified Weldon and Representative Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) as leaders of House opposition to allowing Cooperative Threat Reduction activity to operate outside the former Soviet Union and to funding other threat reduction activities.

President Bush “ought to summon Mr. Weldon and Mr. Hunter and tell them to stop undermining programs that protect American security,” the Times editorial said last December.

DeFlaviis said today the congressman’s position had been mischaracterized.

“Congressman Weldon’s record was grossly mischaracterized by the L.A. Times and the New York Times and they gave us very little opportunity to respond and defend ourselves.  He has always held these programs in the highest regard and believes there is an immediate need to bolster these programs,” he said.

The issues, DeFlaviis said, are “something Curt’s been working on for some time and reflect a realization that a need exists.”

18 Initiatives

Weldon’s proposed bill would include 18 initiatives, most of them related to securing weapons of mass destruction in Russia and other former Soviet states.

They include:

*         $35 million to hasten closure of Russian nuclear warhead production and maintenance activities at two of four plants;

*         $60 million for securing materials in the Russia and the former Soviet Union that could be used to make radiological bombs;

*         $40 million to accelerate Russian efforts to blend down highly enriched uranium;

*         $60 million to further Energy Department efforts to help Russia and the former Soviet Union combat illicit transfers of WMD material;

*         $60 million for providing commercial jobs to Russian and other former Soviet scientists, engineers and technicians;

*         $30 million for a “Silk Road Initiative” to aid former Soviet countries participating in antiterrorism efforts; and

*         promotion of U.S.-NATO cooperation on theater ballistic missile defenses.

Russian Cooperation

When criticizing Cooperative Threat Reduction programs in the past, House Republicans have cited problems obtaining full cooperation from Russian authorities and in spending the money effectively.

Weldon’s bill would authorize the Energy Department to conduct an analysis of obstacles to effective implementation of threat reduction and nonproliferation programs in the former Soviet Union.

The bill also would require a “comprehensive” eight-year plan for securing, destroying and preventing the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons in Russia and other former Soviet states.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) has charged both the Bush and Clinton administrations with failing to assign sufficient priority to fighting WMD proliferation and has urged creating a high-level government position for overseeing and coordinating the numerous efforts (see GSN, March 13).

Weldon’s bill would require the president to designate a senior executive branch official to coordinate the chemical and biological nonproliferation programs, and would require that official to be equipped with “sufficient authority and staffing to do the job effectively.”