Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
Activists' News | Nuclear | Depleted Uranium | Military | Police
Alternative Energy Etc. | From Subscribers
NUCLEAR
Ownership of Nuclear Weapons: Whose Prerogative?
New Effort To Control, Track And Negate Potential Dirty Bomb Sources
Sick Nuclear Weapons Workers Overwhelm Energy Department
China Seeks Stolen Radioactive Material
US raps China over Taiwan missile build up
WMD demands threaten Syria-EU trade deal
Pakistan to Share Nuke Probe Evidence
Musharraf forced scientist to retire
AP: Pakistan, Nuclear Black Market Linked
IRAN, RUSSIA ARRANGE TO COMPLETE BUSHEHR
U.S. AVOIDS NPT ISSUE WITH ISRAEL
Building the bomb:
N. Korea lists demands for a nuclear freeze
North Korea Must Include Uranium in Talks, South Envoy Says
Libya decided 10 years ago against developing WMD
Bush Official: N. Korea Buys Nuke Info
Russia cites U.S. action for war exercises
Los Alamos Hopes To Lead New Era Of Nuclear Space Tranportion
EU urges India, Israel, Pakistan to sign nuclear treaty
Bush to Outline Plan for Limiting Nuclear Arms
Wisconsin may lift ban on nuclear plant construction
Bush's Nuclear Proposal: Hypocrisy Charged
Bush to Propose Fuel Ban to End Spread of A-Bombs
TEXT Bush's Speech on the Spread of Nuclear Weapons
The wrong side of history
Cheney's future at stake after leaking of CIA agent's name
MILITARY
The Frontline - Afghan Front Is Treacherous
U.N. Official in Warning on Afghan Drugs
Congo's path back from war
Delivery of three Phalcon early warning radar systems to India
E-Bombs future for weaponry
U.S. biodefense campus set for Fort Detrick
PM edges away from US with plan to talk to Gaddafi
GAO: Defense Contractors Owe $3 Billion In US Taxes
U.S. Says Non-Construction Iraq Deals Open to All
China Says It Won't Meddle in Taiwan Elections
Iran's President Criticizes Conservatives
Army probe over Iraqi PoW death
Doubts remain over SDF's use of weapons in Iraq
At Least 47 Die in Baghdad Blast; 2nd Attack in 24 Hours
Up to 80 Killed in Bomb Blasts at 2 Iraqi Sites
Love across the lines
Two Car Bombs Kill at Least 75 in Central Iraq
Scenes of horror at Iraqi hospital
At Least 14 Palestinians Killed in Israeli Raids
Recent Israeli Operations in Gaza Strip
Pentagon eager to wash hands of Iraq mess it created
Pentagon Regularly Shortcuts Operational Testing of Weapons
U.S. Military May Run Out Of Money
Pentagon: U.S. can fund Iraq war beyond Sept.
Pentagon faces challenge in creating armed services information network
Service Chiefs Challenge White House on the Budget
Military Chiefs Testify of Worries About War Funding
Guard Records On President Are Released
Fighter Jet, Copter Assessed for Roles In Military Future
1,188 Americans Killed in Iraq - Your Son Will Be Next
US news commentator apologizes for backing Iraq war
Study of Rhetoric On Iraq Is Urged
U.N. Prosecutor Says War Crimes Suspect Is in Belgrade
POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
No 'Smoking Guns' in Reports, Head of Sept. 11 Panel Says
9/11 Panel to Accept Summary of Briefings
Report Questions the Reliability of an F.B.I. Ballistics Test
Study Faults FBI Bullet Tests
Move Against Police Heartens Some in Juarez
Freed Afghan, 15, Recalls a Year at Guantánamo
Pentagon Allows Padilla to See Lawyer
U.S. to Allow 'Enemy Combatant' to See a Lawyer
ENERGY
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Tested for Manufacturing
Wind is near-term renewable fuel for hydrogen
OTHER
Avian Flu Cases Strike Fear in Delmarva
ACTIVISTS
New York Police Sued Over Anti-War Protest Arrests
Subpoenas on Antiwar Protest Are Dropped
After a Year, Students Take a Second Look at the Iraq Invasion
-------- NUCLEAR
Ownership of Nuclear Weapons: Whose Prerogative?
By Yamin Zakaria Editorials
Al-Jazeerah,
Feb 11, 2004
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2004%20opinions/Feb/11%20o/Ownership%20of%20Nuclear%20Weapons%20Whose%20Prerogative%20By%20Yamin%20Zakaria.htm
Nuclear weapons (A-Bomb, Hydrogen Bomb and Thermo Nuclear) epitomises weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Its sheer destructive power dwarfs the other WMDs: Chemical and Biological. Many view it as the weapon of Armageddon. Therefore, the use of such weapon under any circumstance other than genuine self-defence is apt to classify it as an action of a bloodthirsty criminal, which symbolises the pinnacle of "terrorism" and war crimes.
Nuclear weapons were only ever used against Japan in bombing the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, both were highly populated with civilians. Japan at the time lost all its Air defence capabilities, its military was constantly retreating, the island of Okinawa was occupied by the US and threatening the invasion of the main land Japan. The military operations were reduced solely to the defence its territory, i.e. mere survival. In fact, more people perished in the gratuitous bombing of the civilian areas in Tokyo than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thus, there was very little to gain in military terms by nuking the two cities as Japan was already on her knees. She was facing total annihilation just from the use of the conventional weapons unless it accepted surrender.
So, President Roosevelt demanded for the unconditional surrender of Japan, to which Hirohito replied through Joseph Stalin, that he was prepared to 'negotiate' the issue. The proud Japanese nation could not just lay down their arms and Hirohito's pretext to 'negotiate' was cosmetic diplomacy, an attempt to mask the humiliation of defeat. However, more to the point, Roosevelt's offer was not rejected outright. Which means the US clearly had the diplomatic option to end the war virtually on its own terms, given the military situation on the grounds. In addition, the US could have simply exerted further pressure by threatening Japan with the nuclear bomb, practically achieving the unconditional surrender. The US regime had ulterior motivations, which was to test the bomb and thereby demonstrate its muscle to the world and satisfy its inherent violent nature. Japan being Orientals was preferred over Germany to be used as a testing ground for the weapon. Hence, one of the first actions carried by the US governor of Japan (General D. McCarthy) was to meticulously collate all the information resulting from the impact of the two bombs.
Therefore, the deployment of the nuclear bombs was not remotely connected with the genuine defence of the US. Which leads to the conclusion based on the above principle (paragraph1 ) that the nature of the US regime is: evil, it exemplifies the apex of state terrorism and personifies war criminals. Such actions coupled with the needless bombing of the civilians in Tokyo easily qualify as war crimes and State terrorism, which exceeds in many folds to the combined casualties of all the victims of all the alleged 'terrorist' actions from 1946 to date. It certainly dwarfs the track record of the US groomed Saddam Hussein or Pinochet. In line with its violent nature, the US then came to brink of using the bomb against China,! North Korea and Egypt.
Nations produces and purchases weapons from the point of view of deterrence and to protect its existing interests as a minimum whilst the more powerful nations may use it to further its interests overseas. One of the axioms of international relationship is that: power is relative. It is not how much firepower you posses in absolute terms but in relation to your adversary. As an example, Britain has more firepower today in comparison to its colonial days in the19 th century, when she exceeded in her power relative to her rival nations, thus became the dominant power at that time. However, despite possessing greater firepower today, her relative power has declined, as has her position.
This is supposed to be the context for nations acquiring its weapons; security and defence forms the backbone of any nations sovereignty. In addition, the UN charter does not prevent any country from pursuing such objective. Thus, every nation has the right to possess Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons, especially considering the past track record of the US, some of which has been highlighted above coupled with the recent wanton aggression in Iraq based on its policy of pre-emptive strike. Nations pursuing the policy of non-proliferation of WMD would only increase the relative power of the US, whilst weakening their own position even further. In return, this does not guarantee a more peaceful world but certainly a world where the weaker nations are brought to its knees, run like slaves to serve the Empire. Just examine the US history in terms of the African Slave trade. Examine why North Korea was not invaded or attacked, where the US tone is far more conciliatory.
The US has launched its mission to contain the proliferation of the WMD but selectively focusing on the Muslim countries and North Korea as it turns a blind eye to its European allies and Israel. Which, she trumpets around as a 'peaceful' mission. One should also note the duplicity of such proclamation, as the US is one of the largest producer and exporter of WMDs. The US has refused to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and furthermore, George Bush stated that he wants to acquire mini-Nukes and 'tactical' Nuclear weapons. No doubt, such weapons would not be classified as WMD until it gets used by one of its opponents or the US itself becomes a victim of one. Mossad in partnership with the Christian-Zionist hawks might be able to help there, thus launch the final crusade against the Islamic world.
Many influential figures within the US do not feel ashamed to openly uphold such discriminatory policy, by proclaiming that nuclear bombs in the 'right hand' (US ally or a colony) is not a problem; diplomacy and subtlety was never a strong point of the US. So, it is not the much ranted about universal principles but self-interest that underpin the US policy. One US based Jewish hawk recently expressed this right by stating that America is God's chosen nation under the leadership ('Prophethood') of Bush, as Bill Clinton would have clearly failed over Monica. This is expected from people who believe to be God's chosen people. One can let the reader ponder of what they think of the rest of humanity.
As the war in Iraq comes to a conclusion, the schizophrenic clown of Libya surrenders its 'WMD' even though it had none to begin with in the first place. It's like a child urinating in its pants just from the verbal threats issued by a bully. Which exposes the real character of these Arab regimes; they have very little courage, vision and support from its own population. Thus any threats results either in capitulation unless they can quash it by resorting to brutal force.
The other remaining 'threat' is Iran, part of the "axis of evil", who never really embarked on this course of developing Nuclear weapons. As the Iranian President suddenly 'discovered', possessing Nuclear weapons is contrary to Islamic teachings. So how does he intend to carry out the liberation of Palestine and confront the great Satan as we have been hearing for years? In fact, if Iraq is anything to go by, there is more probability of Iran using its bombs on Afghanistan.
The selective targeting of Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is explained by the fact that Iran unlike Israel is a signatory to the NPT (Nuclear Proliferation Treaty). However, if non-Proliferation is the real objective than surely some sort of pressure should have been applied in parallel to force Israel to open itself to inspection, to say the least.
That leaves Pakistan, the only Muslim country with Nuclear weapons. The case of Pakistan also proves that you don't have to posses enormous amount of wealth like oil to build such things. The US has already secured its interest otherwise Pakistan would have been declared as part of an "axis of evil" by asserting its complicity with the Taliban regime and hence by implication providing support to Al-Qaeeda. In time the US may well decide to use this card but at present Musharraf is compliant and useful enough.
When Pakistan to its full credit acquired the nuclear bomb, it was labelled by the mass media as the "Islamic Bomb". The sarcastic reference here was to the Islamic character of Pakistan being populated largely by Muslims. Note when India also flexed its Nuclear muscle, with a government that can be definitely described as a Hindu fundamentalist regime, no such labels (Hindu Bomb) were applied. It also demonstrates how and why the mass media uses such politically charged terms.
The security concern of Pakistan from the potential threat from its eastern flank (India) was the reason for acquiring this Nuclear deterrent. Therefore, logic dictates that Musharraf should have taken into account as well as the potential threat arising from the newly formed axis of US-India-Israel before openly and unconditionally cooperating with the US in virtually surrendering the Weapons.
On the contrary, Musharraf was happy to humiliate the hero of Pakistan, Dr. Abdul Qadir Khan. His 'crime' was to proliferate the nuclear technology to other nations. Firstly, such proliferation is in the interest of Pakistan otherwise the unipolar world will become even more polarised to the determent of Pakistan. Secondly, the countries to which the nuclear technology was leaked do not pose any threat to its own interests or borders. Finally, Pakistan has not signed up to the charter of NPT (Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) along with India and Israel, thus any concession should have been linked to India and Israel. Perhaps that is asking too much from a leadership that had no vision and is in constant capitulation to US interests. Thus, it seems that instead of the Nuclear weapons being a deter! rent in protecting Pakistan, to the contrary the Pakistani government is protecting the weapons on behalf of the US interests in the region.
Yamin Zakaria lives in London, UK
Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah's.
editor@aljazeerah.info
-------- accidents and safety
New Effort To Control, Track And Negate Potential Dirty Bomb Sources
Feb 11, 2004
Space Daily
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/terrorwar-04b.html
Albuquerque - Small radioactive sealed sources, designed to provide useful tools for measurement and analysis in a variety of industry and laboratory settings, have moved from the beneficial category to the threatening category in the post 9/11 world.
The Department of Energy's Sandia National Laboratories is working to get a better handle on where these sources are located and how they can be controlled. The recurring loss, theft, or misplacement of radioactive sources, worldwide in scope, has long been an issue for public health and law enforcement officials.
Now, with the added potential for their use in radioactive dispersal devices (RDDs), or so-called "dirty bombs," officials view them as much more of a threat. Such a bomb detonates conventional explosives to scatter radioactive material across a target area. Dirty bombs, experts acknowledge, are likely to cause as much or more damage from fear and reaction to fear as from the dangers of the explosives or the radioactive materials themselves.
Clipping Collection
Joe Schelling, of Sandia's Program Development and Environmental Decisions Department, keeps a collection of news items that suggest the problem. One tells of a small, yttrium-90 sealed source was left in a New York taxicab. It was later recovered. Others tell how radioactive cesium chloride, removed from a sealed source, found its way into the hands of children in Brazil. At least four deaths and the destruction of part of a town, including businesses and 85 homes, resulted. Others detail a regular pattern of losses or misplacement of sealed sources.
"After 9/11, people in government started asking 'where is this stuff (sealed sources) in the country?' And nobody had a good answer," says Schelling. "We definitely started paying attention to missing radioactive sources because of the RDD potential," says Lori Dotson, who is managing Sandia's project to better control the more than two million government and commercial sealed radioactive sources in the US.
Enter RSRT
The project, called the Radioactive Source Registry Tracking System (RSRT), will first track all DOE sealed radioactive sources and provide decision makers with some estimation of the potential threat they may pose. The system is being coordinated with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency to be consistent with national and international source tracking needs.
Following reports from an International Conference on Security of Radioactive Sources in Vienna, Austria, in March 2003 and from the DOE/NRC Interagency Working Group on Radiological Dispersal Devices in May 2003, the Secretary of Energy chartered DOE's Office of Plutonium, Uranium, and Special Materials Inventory (SO 62) to create a database for tracking sealed sources.
The Sandia team's effort has resulted in an initial RSRT system well ahead of schedule, notes Gary "G.D." Roberson, DOE project manager. With anticipated increases in funding over the next few years, he expects the system to make a significant contribution. "It is already significant in the sense that the DOE has a database that is a direct commitment to the charter and is up and running."
Responding to the May charter from Secretary Spencer Abraham, Sandia team members built the RSRT system by using existing data and databases and adding other sealed source data from throughout the DOE complex. "Sandia had an operational database with some 55,000 entries called the National Inventory of Sealed Sources, which contained select nuclear materials, actinide isotopes, and sealed sources," explains Schelling.
The Sandia team set aggressive milestones to demonstrate that it could deliver an online system to meet the immediate needs of the new charter. The team met the first milestone late last year, six weeks ahead of schedule, by placing the interim RSRT online.
Federal regulations set limits on the types of radioactive material that must be controlled. The Sandia system uses those limits as a baseline. Now, acquiring data becomes critical to the ultimate success of the RSRT program. Idaho National Engineering and Environment Laboratory is supporting the team by leading the data acquisition effort.
The team's goal is to track all DOE sealed sources by March 31.
----
Sick Nuclear Weapons Workers Overwhelm Energy Department
By J.R. Pegg
WASHINGTON, DC, (ENS)
February 11, 2004
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2004/2004-02-11-10.asp
The U.S. Energy Department predicts it will take at least three years to process all the claims of workers exposed to radioactive contamination while building atomic weapons for the government. Congressional critics need to realize even that is "an incredibly aggressive schedule," U.S. Energy Deputy Secretary Kyle McSlarrow told the Senate Energy Committee on Tuesday.
McSlarrow, testifying before the committee on the Bush administration's Energy Department budget request for fiscal year 2005, said neither Congress nor the agency did "a good job of anticipating the need for resources."
The Bush administration has requested $43 million for the program, well above its earmark of $16 million for the current fiscal year.
The program is tasked with implementing the Energy Department's responsibilities under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act of 2000.
The law promised each worker or their survivors $150,000 for illnesses caused by radiation exposure, calling on the Department of Labor to pay out benefits, with the Energy Department providing support for the process along with assistance to workers and families in pursuing claims.
Applications for the two programs have topped 70,000 and fewer than half of the application have been completed.
"Everybody vastly underestimated the scope of the program," McSlarrow said.
Congress has acknowledged that a legislative fix may be in order, but the Bush administration has pledged to eliminate the backlog by 2006.
The commitment to work off the backlog by 2006 does not seem good enough, said Senator Jeff Bingaman, considering the deteriorating health of many of the people the program aims to compensate.
"We need to find a way to get these claims processed," said the New Mexico Democrat.
Bingaman called on the Bush administration "not to get into a mindset that Congress has to change the law before you guys fix this program."
Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, a New Mexico Republican, said the committee is "going to pursue this with vigor."
"It does not make sense to build people's enthusiasm up and then have a program of this," Domenici said.
The compensation issue dominated much of the hearing, but lawmakers raised a number of other concerns with the Energy Department's budget proposal, including a decrease in funding for science and research programs.
The Bush proposal cuts the Energy Department's science budget by two percent compared to fiscal 2004 appropriations.
"There is an unfortunate trend in [cuts to] basic research across the executive branch," Bingaman said.
North Dakota Democrat Byron Dorgan complained that the budget proposal cuts funding for the clean coal initiative by some $120 million, a move he said undermines the President's pledge to spend $2 billion over 10 years on clean coal research.
McSlarrow defended the plan as the "most aggressive pro-coal budget this country has ever seen" and said the administration was on track to meet the overall funding pledge.
The science and research budget proposal is reflective of the administration's focus on new technologies and of the tight spending restraints on most federal activities not related to homeland security or defense, McSlarrow told the committee.
Domenici honed in on a $25.2 million reduction for infrastructure at the department's 17 science laboratories.
"These laboratories have to be the best research institutions in the world and they probably are," he said. "But they are not going to stay that way if we continue to underfund them."
Several senators questioned the administration's proposal to move the vast majority of funding for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository "off budget."
The Bush administration has asked for $880 million to fund the controversial Yucca Mountain plan, including $749 million in fees received from utilities from the Nuclear Waste Fund toward construction of the facility 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
The White House is keen to make this fund, which has accumulated some $13 billion, a source of direct funds for the Yucca Mountain project, which is estimated to cost some $58 billion.
But currently the money from the fund is available as general revenue and lawmakers are wary of changing this.
Senator Gordon Smith, an Oregon Republican, also queried McSlarrow about the administration's request for Congress to allow it to reclassify millions of gallons of high level nuclear waste as less hazardous.
The Energy Department contends the change is needed to expedite cleanups of nuclear waste - at issue is some 100 million gallons of high level nuclear waste created by the U.S. military.
The majority of the waste is currently stored in underground tanks at federal facilities in South Carolina, Idaho and at the Hanford site in Washington.
The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires the Energy Department to bury this highly radioactive waste deep underground - if the waste is reclassified as less hazardous, the department would be permitted to leave it on site where it is now located
In July 2003 environmentalists won a lawsuit in federal court to block the department from changing the classification of the waste without Congressional approval.
State officials have made it clear they do not support the request to reclassify the waste to a lower hazard categoy, and critics fear the reclassification would allow the agency to leave high level waste on site instead of burying the waste deep underground.
"Anything less than full cleanup of the Hanford site is going to be unacceptable," Senator Smith told McSlarrow.
The Energy Deputy Secretary said the administration does not want the reclassification to avoid responsibility, but rather for the flexibility needed to handle the problem.
"We are not going to do anything that is not in compliance with what state regulators want," McSlarrow said. "The most dangerous thing going on at Hanford is that the environmentalists are keeping us from doing the cleanup we want to do."
The cleanup and disposition of nuclear wastes left at Hanford from 60 years of nuclear weapons production is not governed by environmentalists but by the 1989 Tri-Party Agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the State of Washington, Department of Ecology.
-------- china
China Seeks Stolen Radioactive Material
February 11, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-China-Radioactive-Theft.html
SHANGHAI, China (AP) -- Authorities are racing to find a canister of potentially deadly radioactive material stolen from a northern China construction site and are urging those who took the material not to risk radiation poisoning by opening it, officials said Wednesday.
The football-sized lead container of cesium-137 was taken from a power plant construction site in Pucheng, a county in northern China's Shaanxi province, about five days ago, according to a county government official, who refused to give his name. He would not provide further details.
A report in the state-run newspaper China Daily said police believe the canister was mistaken for scrap metal -- a material often stolen for sale to salvage companies.
Cesium-137, a highly radioactive material, is used in soil-testing gauges in construction and is found in photoelectric batteries and vacuum valves. It explodes if it comes into contact with water, and exposure can cause blood diseases, sterility and birth defects.
An official in the local police's ``political department'' said that anti-chemical weapons troops had been deployed to try to find the cesium, using Geiger counters, but that so far there were no suspects or leads in the case.
Criminal investigators, who were not available for comment, were in charge, said the official, who refused to give his name.
``We're trying our hardest,'' he said.
Officials at the Pucheng Power Generating Factory directed inquiries to the No. 1 Northwestern Power Construction Co., saying that the contractor was responsible for ensuring the security of the cesium. Staff contacted at the construction company refused comment.
A reward of $600 was being offered to anyone who helps resolve the case, the China Daily said.
None of the officials suggested any suspicion that the canister might have been stolen specifically for the cesium.
In the United States and elsewhere, authorities have stepped up efforts to track down similar stolen materials, fearing the radioactive material might be used by terrorists to build radiological ``dirty bombs.''
--------
US raps China over Taiwan missile build up
BEIJING (AFP)
Feb 11, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040211075704.rinf6pgh.html
The United States Wednesday rapped China for deploying so many missiles targeting Taiwan, saying it did nothing to reduce tensions with elections on the island just weeks away.
"We expressed our concern about the missile build-up across from Taiwan and made the point that we have important shared interests and don't think those interests are being served by the missile build-up," said US Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith.
"That does not contribute to a reduction in tensions," he told a press roundtable after the sixth annual round of Sino-US defense consultations.
The two days of meetings with senior Chinese officials headed by General Xiong Guangkai, deputy chief of general staff of the People's Liberation Army, were dominated by the Taiwan issue.
But the US concerns appear to have fallen on deaf ears.
Asked if China had said whether they were prepared to withdraw any of the missiles, Feith said: "No".
He added, in response to questions on whether he had sensed any change in the Chinese attitude: "I don't think so."
Feith's visit comes after trips to China last month by Deputy US Secretary of State Richard Armitage and US chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers.
The purpose of this week's meeting was to brief China on the realignment of the United States' global military posture.
"We wanted to make sure the Chinese understood the key thoughts that are shaping our thinking on how we want to realign our forces globally," said Feith.
"And we wanted to give them a sense of the fact this is not only global but a very long term view that we are taking.
"Contrary to a lot of reports, it is not focused on any particular country and not on current events. It is a much bigger, longer term picture."
Despite China's reluctance to withdraw its almost 500 missiles facing Taiwan, which it considers a renegade province to be reunified by force if necessary, Feith said both sides agreed everything must be done to avoid war.
"On the broader issue on the talks we had here of Taiwan and the danger of war, both sides made it clear that we have a strong interest in keeping tensions down and avoiding war," he said.
"I don't think anyone should talk lighty about military action and that is an area where I think we have an important common interest. Nobody benefits from talk of war that will get everybody tense and increase danger."
The United States is Taiwan's biggest weapons supplier and has made clear it will help defend the island if it is attacked.
Taiwan holds election next month, alongside a referendum in which Taiwanese voters will be asked whether the island should beef up its defenses against China's military threat, and whether Taipei should start negotiations with China for peaceful co-existence.
-------- europe
WMD demands threaten Syria-EU trade deal
By Judy Dempsey in Brussels
February 11 2004
Financial Times
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1075982469825&p=1012571727102
A landmark trade and political agreement between the European Union and Syria could be in jeopardy after several EU member states demanded Damascus first take tougher action on curbing weapons of mass destruction.
The move by Britain, Germany and the Netherlands follows Libya's renouncement of weapons of mass destruction and Iran's decision to accept tougher inspections of its nuclear sites by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
"Some member states feel they can beef up the language on WMD in the EU-Syria accord because of developments in Libya and Iran," an EU diplomat said.
Syria was the last of the 12 north African and Middle Eastern countries to sign an association agreement with Brussels. They are part of the "Barcelona process", established by the EU in 1995 to create a free trade zone in the region by 2010.
The European Commission said the agreement could help modernise the economy and give support to the reformers. Syria sees its relationship with the EU as a way to prevent it being isolated after Washington imposed sanctions in December because it argued Damascus supported WMD and supported anti-Israeli groups.
Clinched in December, the agreement with Syria is the first time the EU has included a "conditionality" clause on WMD in a trade accord with non-EU countries.
The clause states that Syria must comply with its commitments to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and other related issues such as participating in curbing exports and controlling end-user certificates for goods that could be used for producing WMD. "If Syria does not comply on these issues the agreement could be suspended," another EU diplomat said.
That WMD clause states that Syria should "work towards" implementing all existing obligations related to non-proliferation and disarmament.
Britain, Germany and the Netherlands, however, want the wording to be identical to the EU's "non-proliferation clause" that foreign ministers in November agreed to include in agreements with third countries. That wording states that parties should "take steps" to implement existing obligations. "It is more concrete, I suppose but the sentiment is the same," said a diplomat.
The commission and some member states said Syria had already gone far in accepting tough trade and political conditions. "If we push it too far, Syria might simply refuse to compromise," one official said.
-------- india / pakistan
Pakistan to Share Nuke Probe Evidence
By MUNIR AHMAD
Associated Press Writer
Feb 11, 2004
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PAKISTAN_NUCLEAR?SITE=DCTMS&SECTION=HOME
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- Pakistan pledged Wednesday to share information on black market deals that allegedly moved nuclear know-how to North Korea, data that could give other countries a better idea of the communist nation's atomic arsenal.
During a meeting with a Japanese diplomat, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf said Pakistan will hand over information to Japan when its investigation is complete.
Pakistani officials have shied away from saying directly that they will hand over evidence to the United States. Musharraf has drawn strong domestic criticism for his cooperation with the United States' anti-terror campaign in neighboring Afghanistan, and is keen to avoid any appearance that he is a U.S. puppet.
Japan is one of six nations due to join a meeting on North Korea's nuclear program in Beijing later this month. The United States will also be there, and U.S. officials have expressed hope that information from Pakistan could help clarify details about North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
"Pakistan would share with Japan the results of its internal investigations on any illegal transfers to North Korea when the investigations were completed," a Foreign Ministry statement said after the talks with Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister Ichiro Fujisaki.
North Korea has denied receiving technology from Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, who was pardoned by Musharraf last week after he confessed to leaking nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea.
Pakistan began its investigation into alleged transfers of nuclear technology in November after the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, requested help in determining if Pakistani scientists were involved in proliferation.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Masood Khan said Pakistan was working with a range of groups interested in stopping the spread of nuclear technology.
"Pakistan is a responsible state and will cooperate so that this underworld is unearthed," said military spokesman Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan.
Six scientists and security officials remain in custody in the investigation, and Khan is being guarded under tight security at his Islamabad home.
Sultan declined to say whether Khan was still being interrogated, or reveal any details of previous questioning on the scientist's ties to North Korea.
"Whenever there is a need to question somebody it can be done," Sultan said.
----
Musharraf forced scientist to retire
James Astill in Islamabad
Wednesday February 11, 2004
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,2763,1145261,00.html
Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, has said he forced the disgraced founder of the country's nuclear programme into early retirement three years ago after suspecting him of selling nuclear secrets to other countries.
Last week Abdul Qadeer Khan accepted sole responsibility for sales of nuclear arms technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea, ending a two-month government investigation into the scandal.
He was promptly pardoned by General Musharraf, who refused to let independent investigators look further at a case in which many analysts believe senior Pakistani officials may also be implicated.
Gen Musharraf's claim that he tried to curb the proliferation three years ago, as reported in the New York Times yesterday, is a rebuff to widespread allegations that he was personally involved in the technology deals.
"We nipped the proliferation in the bud, we stopped the proliferation," Gen Musharraf said of Dr Khan's retirement from his nuclear research post. "That is the important part."
He also denied that America had urged him for months to investigate allegations of rampant nuclear proliferation, which he eventually did in November. "If they knew it earlier, they should have told us," Gen Musharraf told the paper.
"Maybe a lot of things would not have happened," he said.
According to UN officials, the nuclear black market supplied by Dr Khan was flourishing until late last year, when UN and American agents began investigating it.
----
AP: Pakistan, Nuclear Black Market Linked
February 11, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Nuclear-Network.html?pagewanted=all&position=
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The black-market network that supplied nuclear weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea relied on European businessmen convicted or investigated in the 1980s for selling similar equipment to Pakistan, U.S. officials say.
The evidence developed by the United States points to at least two college friends of Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist who admitted being the mastermind of the scheme, according to the officials familiar with the intelligence and to proliferation experts assisting the international effort. All spoke to The Associated Press only on condition of anonymity.
One of the friends, Henk Slebos of the Netherlands, was convicted there in 1985 of trying to sell equipment to Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. Slebos' wife told the AP this week he would not talk to reporters.
Some evidence came from Khan himself and from admissions that Iran made to U.N. inspectors, while other intelligence was developed during a covert CIA operation aimed at cracking the smuggling ring, the officials said.
Khan last week admitted selling nuclear secrets and equipment. He was pardoned by Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
U.S., international and Pakistani investigations continue into the extent of Khan's network and whether it provided equipment or information to anyone outside the three countries already named. President Bush said Wednesday the United States would ``find the middlemen, the suppliers and the buyers'' and stop them.
That black market figures already suspected of smuggling in the 1980s re-emerged to play a role in Khan's effort has alarmed some weapons experts.
``This should serve as a wake-up call for the need for much more alert and aggressive efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials to terrorists and other states,'' said Graham Allison, a Harvard professor and former top Pentagon arms control official under President Clinton. CIA Director George Tenet said agents worked for years to penetrate Khan's nuclear network; their efforts paid off in the October seizure of a ship full of nuclear components headed for Libya. That seizure helped prompt Libya to reveal -- and renounce -- its nuclear weapons program in December.
The network Khan set up to peddle his nuclear knowledge became a comprehensive one-stop-shopping venue for countries wanting their own atomic bombs, experts from the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency and U.S. agencies have said.
From the high-speed centrifuges needed to make uranium bomb fuel to designs for the bomb itself, Khan's network provided the know-how, the materials, even 24-hour technical support if problems cropped up, diplomats and intelligence officials have said.
He even had glossy brochures -- complete with his own photo -- with color pictures and specifications of some of the centrifuge parts for sale.
The network provided Libya and Iran with equipment and know-how to make a large centrifuge plant to separate bomb fuel from ordinary uranium. Libya also got a relatively unsophisticated but workable nuclear warhead design from Pakistan, U.S. intelligence officials and diplomats allege.
The network evolved after Khan's black-market deals to supply Pakistan's nuclear program in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. The enterprise started with Khan stealing centrifuge designs while he worked in the early 1970s for Urenco, a European uranium enrichment consortium. He was convicted in absentia in the Netherlands for stealing the designs but the conviction was overturned because Khan was not properly served with court papers.
Several of the European businessmen Pakistan tapped for nuclear help also are believed to have aided Libya and Iran, according to senior U.S. intelligence officials and outside nuclear experts.
One of the businessmen was Slebos, who was convicted in 1985 of trying to ship high-tech equipment to Khan's laboratory in Pakistan. The U.S. officials said evidence points to Slebos as a participant in the Khan network that helped supply Libya with nuclear weapons equipment in the 1990s.
Slebos now runs a company called Slebos Research, which was a corporate sponsor of a conference organized by Pakistan's Khan Research Laboratories last year. Dutch officials have said they intercepted five shipments to Pakistan from Slebos Research and another company in 1998.
The Slebos Research Web site says it offers ``solutions for unusual problems'' and boasts, ``We find hard to get objects for customers all over the world.''
Slebos did not respond to telephone and e-mail messages left at his firm. A woman who answered Slebos' home telephone and identified herself as his wife said Slebos would not talk to reporters.
Iran identified to the IAEA three German businessmen among five middlemen who were sources for some of its centrifuge technology. The U.N. nuclear watchdog has not made their names public.
The U.S. officials and outside experts say they included two former executives, Otto Heilingbrunner and Gotthard Lerch, of a company that made centrifuge components. German prosecutors investigated them in the 1980s for allegedly selling equipment and blueprints to Pakistan's nuclear program.
The two men worked in the 1980s for Leybold AG, which got nuclear-related designs from Urenco while bidding on a centrifuge contract for the uranium enrichment consortium. Leybold has publicly acknowledged it also sold nuclear equipment directly to Iraq and Iran in the 1980s.
Heilingbrunner, reached by telephone at his home near Cologne, said he was involved in selling aircraft engine parts to Iran in the 1980s but denied any involvement with nuclear sales.
``I have nothing to do with Libya, Iraq, North Korea or any others,'' he said.
Lerch could not be located for comment.
Another German supplier named by Iran, the late Heinz Mebus, also was a college friend of Khan. Mebus worked in the early 1980s for Albrecht Migule, who was convicted in the former West Germany of selling equipment to Pakistan to help its uranium enrichment program.
Khan's network also used at least five factories in Malaysia and other countries to make centrifuge components, the U.S. officials and outside nuclear experts said.
The most sophisticated factory was near Malaysia's capital, Kuala Lumpur, owned by Scomi Precision Engineering, or SCOPE. The majority owner of SCOPE's parent company Scomi Group is Kamaluddin Abdullah, the only son of Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
Scomi officials have said they did not know that the precision parts they made were destined for uranium centrifuges. Centrifuge parts made by SCOPE were aboard the ship bound for Libya seized in Italy last October.
The middleman for that deal was B.S.A. Tahir, a Sri Lankan based in the United Arab Emirates port of Dubai, which is a hub for Khan's network, Bush said Wednesday. Malaysian authorities have questioned Tahir, Bush said.
Tahir ordered the centrifuge parts beginning in 2001 on behalf of a company called Gulf Technical Industries LLC, which calls itself a dealer in specialty steel products. The multi-million-dollar contract made GTI Scomi's biggest customer in fiscal 2002, according to Scomi's public financial reports.
Associated Press writers Tony Czuczka in Berlin, Toby Sterling in Amsterdam and John Solomon in Washington contributed to this report.
-------- iran
IRAN, RUSSIA ARRANGE TO COMPLETE BUSHEHR
February 11, 2004
[MENL]
http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/february/02_12_2.html
MOSCOW -- Iran and Russia plan to complete the last phase of the Bushehr nuclear reactor in the Persian Gulf.
Representatives from the two countries plan to meet next week to discuss a schedule to complete Bushehr. Officials said the meeting will discuss work schedule, payment schedule and technical issues.
On Sunday, a delegation of the Russian Atomic Energy Ministry will arrive in Teheran to review the Bushehr project. Officials said Bushehr is 90 percent complete and could be ready for operations in 2005.
Russian Atomic Minister Alexander Rumyantsev said the visit will clarify prospects for Russian-Iranian cooperation in nuclear energy. Bushehr has been estimated as a $1 billion project.
-------- israel
U.S. AVOIDS NPT ISSUE WITH ISRAEL
February 11, 2004
[MENL]
http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/february/02_12_4.html
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has avoided pressing Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or related accords.
A report by the Washington-based Arms Control Association asserted that the administration has done little more than mouth rhetoric for countries to sign the NPT and related agreements. The report said that neither President George Bush nor senior aides have pressed Israel to sign the NPT or the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, which would place a cap on the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium for weapons.
"Since taking office," the report said, "the current administration has not raised disarmament issues with Israel, contenting itself with continuing the practice of previous administrations of periodically tipping its hat to the importance of the universality of the NPT as a long-term goal but deferring any efforts to pressure Israel on this issue until a broader, lasting peace in the Middle East is achieved."
The report, entitled, "Israel, India, and Pakistan: Engaging the Non-NPT States in the Nonproliferation Regime," said the administration has decided to focus on efforts toward Israeli-Palestinian peace rather than a nuclear-free Middle East. The administration has embraced the view by Israel that peace in the Middle East is a precondition for eliminating nuclear weapons.
-------- korea
Building the bomb:
North Korean exiles reveal 15 year history of nuclear cheating
By Jasper Becker in Seoul
11 February 2004
UK Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=489988
North Korea had developed a nuclear bomb by the end of the 1980s and probably has many such weapons after pursuing its secret programme under the noses of international inspectors, according to defectors from the country.
The defectors have revealed in interviews with The Independent the extent to which the impoverished communist state cheated on its international agreements as it diverted scarce resources into the clandestine programme. They also confirm that Pakistan provided crucial help for North Korea, which yesterday described a confession by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist that he had sold nuclear technology to North Korea as "nothing but mean and groundless propaganda".
Details began to emerge in October 2002, when the United States forced North Korean officials to admit it had been running a uranium-enriching programme to build a bomb. Kim Dae Ho, who worked on the nuclear programme for 10 years until defecting in 1994, said: "I saw classified documents in 1987 in which (the then North Korean leader) Kim Il Sung said we have finally developed a highly enriched uranium programme in a self-reliant way. "Then in 1989 he announced that we finally have the centrifuge technology and are making weapons-grade uranium. He ordered the state to reward scientists with the best available gifts including Toshiba colour TVs."
Mr Kim was smuggled out of China on a Chinese fishing vessel in great secrecy. Until recently he has been forced to keep a low profile, but is now publishing a book.
Another eyewitness, a North Korean nuclear technician who left the country two years ago after working and living for years in North Korea's nuclear-research centre in Yongbyon, confirmed that the country had acquired nuclear weapons by enriching uranium and by extracting plutonium by spent fuel rods from the 5-MegaWatt (MW) experimental reactor at Yongbyon. He said: "By the end of the 1980s we had the bomb. They began hiding the research facilities in tunnels." He refused to go into details for fear of endangering relatives still in the country.
Mr Kim said North Korea extracted 26.4lbs of plutonium from fuel rods during shutdowns of the reactor in 1989, 1990 and 1991 - enough to build three nuclear warheads.
In 1994 Washington and Pyongyang signed a landmark deal under which North Korea agreed to freeze its nuclear-weapons programme in exchange for free oil deliveries and the gift of two light-water reactors worth $4.5bn (£2.4bn). But Mr Kim said: "The work intensified after 1994. It never stopped."
The two technicians are part of a growing stream of North Koreans escaping to the South and providing evidence which undermines the position of the current South Korean government, which wants to present Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader, as a reliable partner, and former members of the Clinton administration, who defend the 1994 deal and are horrified by the tough line taken by the current US government.
The Bush administration is believed to have drawn on the testimony of such escapees to gather evidence that North Korea had never intended to stick to any of its promises nor treaties made to Seoul, Washington or the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA). The CIA had accumulated enough evidence of the uranium-enriching programme for James Kelly, the US Assistant Secretary of State, to take to Pyongyang in the autumn of 2002. North Korea first admitted the allegations were true butlater retracted the confession. The 1994 Agreed Framework collapsed and Pyongyang expelled the IAEA inspectors.
North Korea had relied on Soviet help until the 1970s to develop a nuclear industry, but the programme was accelerated in 1984 when Kim Jong Il took control of the government after his father, Kim Il Sung, slipped into semi-retirement.
"Kim Jong Il assigned two army regiments to exploit North Korea's natural deposits of uranium in Pyongyang province and set up a special fund called N710 to finance their work. They were given the very best of everything," Mr Kim said.
More than 30,000 soldiers were assigned to the programme which had three key sites: an underground uranium mine, a subterranean nuclear-test centre, and the 5-MW Yongbyon nuclear reactor near Mount Yaksan.
In the early 1990s, IAEA inspectors focused efforts on monitoring the 5-MW Yongbyon reactor and trying to determine if North Korea had diverted spent fuel rods to extract plutonium.
"We spent months hiding the nuclear processing plant from the IAEA inspectors. The most difficult thing was preventing the release of tell-tale krypton into the atmosphere," Mr Kim said.
Other defectors said North Korea became convinced from the 1991 Gulf war that the US might launch a pre-emptive strike against its nuclear facilities after Saddam Hussein was found to be much closer to building a bomb than suspected. North Korea did everything it could to fortify or hide its facilities.
Although North Korea's leadership claimed that the achievements were the fruits of its self-reliant Juche philosophy, Mr Kim said the uranium-enrichment programme benefited from Chinese know-how and materials. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Pyongyang also recruited large numbers of unemployed former Soviet and East German weapons experts.
Although Mr Kim said he knew little about Pakistan's help, North Korea might not have succeeded without it. In the early 1980s the two countries made a deal under which North Korea delivered medium-range missiles to Pakistan so it could threaten India. In return, Pakistan provided North Korea with the blueprints stolen by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear programme, when he worked in Europe in the 1970s.
----
N. Korea lists demands for a nuclear freeze
February 11, 2004
By Jae-suk Yoo
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040210-115645-4341r.htm
SEOUL - North Korea said yesterday that it has received support from China for its proposal to freeze its nuclear weapons programs in return for free oil and other economic concessions from the United States.
China signaled its support at a meeting in Beijing between North Korea's vice foreign minister, Kim Kye Gwan, and top Chinese officials including Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing. The Chinese side "recognized the rationality" of Pyongyang's proposal to help end the nuclear dispute, a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman told KCNA.
The United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia are scheduled to begin talks on Feb. 25 over U.S. demands that North Korea dismantle its nuclear weapons programs in a "complete, irreversible and verifiable manner."
North Korea has proposed to freeze all its nuclear activities as a first step to resolving the nuclear dispute if the United States provides free oil shipments, lifts economic sanctions and removes the communist country from its list of countries that sponsor terrorism.
The Bush administration insists that North Korea begin dismantling - not just feezing - its nuclear programs before it makes any concessions.
China cautioned against expecting a swift resolution of the standoff, saying all sides should have "realistic" expectations about the upcoming talks. "The question is a very complicated one ... and we have different views about the issue," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said yesterday.
She added that the sides "should not expect to solve the issue within one or two rounds of talks."
Earlier yesterday, North Korea denied receiving nuclear weapons technology from Pakistan, and accused the United States of spreading false rumors. "This is nothing but a mean and groundless propaganda," a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman told KCNA.
Meanwhile, Radio Free Asia reported yesterday that a man who leaked documents from a North Korean prison camp detailing chemical weapons and gas experiments on political prisoners - including women and children - has been arrested by Chinese authorities after escaping across the border with his family.
"We have pleaded with the American authorities, but we have been disappointed," said South Korean human rights activist Kim Sang-hun, who is conducting an international campaign to pressure Chinese authorities to free the North Korean man and his family.
"These people will be dragged to North Korea, [where] they will face death. This person will be executed, or punished," Mr. Kim said.
A State Department spokesman in Washington declined to comment, saying U.S. officials here were not aware of the arrest.
Mr. Kim did not name the man nor did he give details of the family, all of whom were arrested in China recently.
--------
North Korea Must Include Uranium in Talks, South Envoy Says
February 11, 2004
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-korea-north.html
SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea must be prepared to discuss its uranium-based nuclear arms program in negotiations this month with the United States and neighboring countries, South Korea's ambassador to Washington said on Wednesday.
Ambassador Han Sung-joo told reporters in Seoul that the confession by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist that he had sold nuclear arms technology to Pyongyang had ``further confirmed'' the existence of the North's highly enriched uranium program.
Pyongyang said Tuesday that statements by the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, Abdul Qadeer Khan, that he had sold nuclear secrets to North Korea, Libya and Iran were a ``sheer lie'' cooked up by the United States to justify an invasion.
Analysts said the combative North Korean reaction was designed to prevent discussion of the issue in negotiations aimed at ending a crisis that erupted in October 2002 when U.S. officials said that Pyongyang had admitted to pursuing an HEU program.
Pyongyang has since denied it had made such an admission. But Han said such denials wouldn't fly when North Korea sits down with the United States, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia for a second round of six-party talks beginning on February 25.
``Even among U.S. domestic critics of the Bush administration, nobody who has seen the evidence doubts that North Korea has an HEU (highly enriched uranium) program,'' Han said in a briefing with reporters.
``Previous intelligence, what has emerged from Pakistan and other information are more than enough to outweigh (doubts about U.S. intelligence) in the Kay Report,'' he said. The Kay Report said that the United States went to war in Iraq based on faulty intelligence about that country's weapons of mass destruction.
The HEU program makes North Korea's offer to freeze its plutonium-based nuclear program in exchange for compensation unacceptable to the South Korea, the United States and Japan, Han said.
``From the point of view of South Korea, the United States and Japan, North Korea has in the past already agreed to do that, and it will be difficult to compensate them for it,'' he said.
North Korea had frozen its plutonium-based program under a bilateral agreement with the United States in 1994 in exchange for energy aid. That deal unraveled last year and North Korea says it has reprocessed more plutonium for a ``nuclear deterrent.''
Dismantling the plutonium program, the HEU program and any atomic bombs North Korea created before the 1994 freeze was the ultimate goal of the United States and its allies, Han said.
The U.S. has said a verifiable commitment by North Korea to end all those programs would be met by ``corresponding measures,'' include assurances against an American attack and measures to address the North's energy and economic problems.
``The U.S. stance is not that no compensation will be offered until the programs are entirely dismantled, but that North Korea will get aid from the parties at the six-way talks and other countries when it confirms it will do that and begins that process,'' the ambassador said.
The six countries met in Beijing last August but failed to go beyond stating their respective positions in the dispute.
-------- mideast
Libya decided 10 years ago against developing WMD, Foreign Minister says
By Mary Dejevsky
UK Independent
11 February 2004
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=490047
Libya decided more than 10 years ago not to develop any weapons of mass destruction, Abdul Rahman Shalgam, its Foreign Minister said yesterday.
His appeared to contradict the co-ordinated announcements in London, Washington and Tripoli last December that Libya was renouncing its WMDs and would comply with international inspection regimes. Despite the reports that Libya would destroy its illegal weapons and programmes, it was not clear then how advanced Libya's programmes were and whether it had actual weapons to destroy.
The first doubts were cast by Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the IAEA, who said after visiting Tripoli that Libya was several years from developing a nuclear capability. Yesterday Mr Shalgam said it was not true that Libya had made "concessions". This was a view put about by "poisonous" pens in the Arab media. Libya, he said, "reviewed a number of issues, including programmes and equipment called weapons of mass destruction.
"We had the equipment, we had the material and the know-how and the scientists. But we never decided to produce such weapons. To have flour, water and fire does not mean that you have bread."
Libya's renunciation of such weapons, he said, went back to at least 1992, since when it had been in periodic talks with the US, and was well-documented. Mr Shalgam insisted it was Libya that had taken the initiative in renouncing its weapons programmes and it would be subject not to "inspections" but to "verification".
He admitted Libya had possessed "some equipment" that violated the non-proliferation agreement, but this had already been given up to the IAEA. Any suggestion that Libya had been scared into making concessions by the US and British use of force in Iraq had been put about by "malevolent journalists". Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, asked whether the war in Iraq was seen by the British Government as responsible for Libya's apparent change of policy on its weapons, pointed out that the rapprochement with Libya had begun in the late Nineties.
The "breakthrough" had come with the visit of the Foreign Office minister, Mike O'Brien, to Tripoli 18 months ago, "a good while before military action was contemplated in respect of Iraq". But, he insisted, he would not "claim any crude connection ... between military action in Iraq and what has happened in Iraq and in Libya".
It was rather, he said, that the removal of Saddam Hussein in Iraq had made for a "more secure environment" in the region and this, in turn, could have "eased" the delicate negotiations with Libya.
--------
Bush Official: N. Korea Buys Nuke Info
February 11, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-US-North-Korea.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Companies across Europe and Asia are providing North Korea with vital technology for its nuclear weapons program, probably without the knowledge of their governments, a senior Bush administration official said Wednesday.
The equipment is being used for a uranium centrifuge system, the official told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
The official said that equipment includes rotors -- spinning tubes in which uranium gas is separated.
Negotiations that the Bush administration hopes will end the program are due to resume Feb. 25 in Beijing.
The administration estimates North Korea has produced at least one nuclear weapon and could turn out several more if the program is not halted.
In the meantime, Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan has disclosed he ran a black market operation that provided weapons technology to North Korea, Iran and Libya.
However, North Korea has been shopping worldwide, beyond Pakistan, and making a great effort to cover up its quest for nuclear weapons technology, the official said.
Many companies in Europe and Asia have responded positively, providing the equipment, the official said.
He declined to identify the countries where the companies are located.
Kahn's operation, meanwhile, probably stretches beyond North Korea, Iran and Libya, he said.
Under an arrangement worked out with the United States, the amnesty initially given to the scientist by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was made on condition that Kahn would provide more information about the network, the official said.
That gives Kahn an incentive to reveal more. Otherwise, he could be prosecuted, the official said.
The Bush administration has known about Kahn's operation for three years, but there could be parts of it still unknown to the United States, the official said.
Musharraf said this week that the administration first provided evidence to his government last November.
But State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Tuesday that apart from general concerns, American officials have turned over ``pieces of information'' to Pakistan for some time.
-------- russia
Russia cites U.S. action for war exercises
General says maneuvers are response to American nuclear development plan
Wednesday, February 11, 2004
Compiled by Our Staff From Dispatches AP, Reuters
http://www.iht.com/articles/129040.html
MOSCOW A huge Russian military exercise that will involve numerous launches of ballistic missiles and flights of strategic bombers is not aimed against the United States but reflects Moscow's concerns about U.S. plans to develop new types of nuclear weapons, a top general said Tuesday.
The exercise, which has been under way since late January at the headquarters level, will involve launches of an unspecified number of sea-and ground-based ballistic missiles and take Russian strategic bombers to the air, said Colonel-General Yuri Baluyevsky, the first deputy chief of the General Staff of the Russian armed forces.
Baluyevsky dismissed media reports that the exercise would closely resemble Soviet-era simulations of an all-out nuclear war with the United States, saying that it was not directed against any specific country.
"The enemy is imaginary," Baluyevsky said at a news conference. "There is no hint whatsoever that the enemy is the United States, or any other country. The United States holds a similar exercise each year and no one is making a fuss about it."
At the same time, Baluyevsky said that the exercise was prompted in part by Russia's concern about the development of low-yield nuclear weapons in the United States, which he described as destabilizing.
"They are trying to make nuclear weapons an instrument of solving military tasks, lower the threshold of nuclear weapons use," Baluyevsky said. "Shouldn't we react to that, at least on the headquarters level? I'm sure that we should and we are doing that."
The maneuvers will also help develop weapons systems "capable of providing an asymmetric answer to existing and prospective weapons systems, including missile defense," Baluyevsky said.
Moscow informed the U.S. government in advance of the exercise, in keeping with its arms control treaty obligations, Baluyevsky said, adding that Russia was not trying to scare anyone. "It's not saber-rattling," he said. "It's not aimed at scaring our strategic partners, the United States and NATO. We are doing what the military is intended for: getting ready for solving tasks in any possible conflict."
He dismissed media reports that Russian strategic bombers would test-fire missiles over the North Atlantic as part of the exercise, but refused to disclose their flight routes.
During the cold war, Soviet bombers routinely flew over the northern Atlantic on training missions that imitated a nuclear attack on the United States.
Russia last sent its bombers there in 1999, after its relations with the United States had worsened sharply over the NATO air campaign against the former Yugoslavia.
U.S.-Russian ties have been bolstered by President Vladimir Putin's support for Washington after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, but soured again lately over Moscow's opposition to the war in Iraq and U.S. concerns about Kremlin backsliding on democracy and its pressuring other ex-Soviet nations.
Baluyevsky dismissed media assertions that the exercise was a political show aimed at bolstering Putin's popularity in the run-up to the March 14 presidential election, which the president is expected to win easily.
"This is neither the opening of the election campaign nor a demonstration of our nuclear fist to the entire world," Baluyevsky said.
Baluyevsky also said the exercise would reassure NATO that Russia's nuclear arsenal was in safe hands. "In April 2004 we will hold an exercise in the north to show the safety of stored nuclear arms," he said.
Russia has consistently denied Western suggestions that the instability of the early post-Soviet years had made its huge nuclear arsenals inherited from the Soviet Union easy prey for unstable states or terrorist networks.
An Arabic newspaper said Sunday that some ex-Soviet tactical nuclear warheads, which Ukraine should have handed over to Russia after becoming a nuclear-free state, had got into the hands of Al Qaeda.
Baluyevsky echoed an earlier Ukrainian denial of the report. "All weapons deployed in Ukraine were taken away to Russia. I am not aware of any event in which a single warhead went missing," he said. "All nuclear warheads are in place, and not a single warhead now belonging to Russia has been sold or stolen." (AP, Reuters)
-------- space
Los Alamos Hopes To Lead New Era Of Nuclear Space Tranportion With Jovian Mission
Feb 11, 2004
Space Daily
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nuclearspace-04a.html
Albuquerque - A planned U.S. mission to investigate three ice-covered moons of Jupiter will demand fast-paced research, fabrication and realistic non-nuclear testing of a prototype nuclear reactor within two years, says a Los Alamos National Laboratory scientist.
The roots of this build and test effort have been under way at Los Alamos since the mid-1990s, said David Poston, leader of the Space Fission Power Team in Los Alamos' Nuclear Design and Risk Analysis Group.
NASA proposes using use electrical ion propulsion powered by a nuclear reactor for its Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter, an element of Project Prometheus, which is scheduled for launch after 2011. However, the United States hasn't flown a space fission system since 1965.
Poston discussed technical requirements for such a fission reactor in two presentations Monday at the Space Technology and Applications International Forum in Albuquerque. Los Alamos is a co-sponsor of the forum. Poston discussed "The Impact of Core Cooling Technology Options on JIMO Reactor Designs" and "The Impact of Power and Lifetime Requirements on JIMO Reactor Designs."
Los Alamos is leading reactor design for the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter mission, which would orbit Callisto, Ganymede and Europa to study their makeup, possible vast oceans beneath the ice, their history and potential for sustaining life.
Los Alamos is responsible for such key reactor technologies as nuclear fuel, beryllium components, heat pipes and diagnostic instruments, as well as nuclear criticality testing of development and flight reactors.
"Nuclear power has long been recognized as an enabling technology for exploring and expanding into space, and fission reactors offer essentially limitless power and propulsion capabilities," Poston said.
The JIMO mission demands a safe, low-mass, high-temperature reactor that can be developed and qualified quickly, can operate reliably in the harsh environment of space for more than a decade, and can meet a wide range of mission and spacecraft requirements, he said.
A science mission to explore the icy Jovian moons will require kilowatts of electrical power for the scientific payloads and up to 100 kilowatts of electricity for ion propulsion to propel the spacecraft to Jupiter, maneuver within the Jovian system and allow rendezvous with the moons. The reactor also must power advanced science experiments and systems to send data to Earth at high rates.
Despite the lack of U.S. space reactor research in recent decades, Los Alamos has continued to examine technologies and concepts for a rapid and affordable development program. Working with NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Los Alamos has resolved many hardware issues at the component and system level.
Los Alamos and NASA-Marshall researchers, working with colleagues from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, have built successively more powerful nuclear electric propulsion reactor components, including a 30-kilowatt reactor core, one-third of a 100-kilowatt system (core plus heat exchanger) and a single module suitable for a 500-kilowatt reactor core. Extensive non-nuclear testing of these and other components continues.
Most researchers have agreed on the best fuels and reactor construction materials for the proposed fast-spectrum, externally controlled JIMO reactor. The major design choice that remains is how best to transport power from the reactor core to the power conversion system.
Los Alamos and NASA are examining three primary options for core cooling: pumped liquid-metal sodium or lithium; sodium or lithium liquid metal heat pipes; and inert helium or helium-xenon gas. Many of these options have been tested for decades for terrestrial reactors, but the reactor for JIMO will be unique, Poston said.
"The power and lifetime potential of space fission reactors is almost limitless when compared to the requirements of future NASA missions," Poston said.
"However, it is clear that reactor performance and technical risks are tightly coupled to power and lifetime requirements, so we must thoroughly understand these technical risks before developing the first system. For example, there are fewer technical and development challenges for a 500-kilowatt-thermal reactor than a 1,000-kilowatt-thermal reactor.
"The first step needs to be small enough to ensure success and to put into place the experience, expertise and infrastructure necessary for more advanced systems," Poston concluded.
"After that, we can move on to the systems needed for truly ambitious space exploration, such as multi-megawatt nuclear electric propulsion or nuclear thermal rockets. Our near-term efforts must be focused on making the first mission succeed."
Los Alamos National Laboratory is operated by the University of California for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) of the U.S. Department of Energy and works in partnership with NNSA's Sandia and Lawrence Livermore national laboratories to support NNSA in its mission.
Los Alamos develops and applies science and technology to ensure the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent; reduce the threat of weapons of mass destruction, proliferation and terrorism; and solve national problems in defense, energy, environment and infrastructure.
-------- treaties
EU urges India, Israel, Pakistan to sign nuclear treaty
STRASBOURG (AFP)
Feb 11, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040211131553.j0xxw8kz.html
The European Union's Irish presidency Wednesday urged India, Israel and Pakistan to sign "unconditionally" the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT).
Addressing the European Parliament, Irish Europe Minister Dick Roche welcomed the accession to the treaty by Cuba and East Timor in the past two years, which he said brought it closer to covering the whole world.
"However, there are three countries, India, Israel and Pakistan, that remain outside the regime and we continue to call upon them to accede unconditionally to the NPT as non-nuclear weapon states," he said.
"The EU has repeatedly stated that the NPT is the cornerstone of the global non-proliferation regime and the essential foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament," Roche added.
EU External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten expressed concern at last week's admission by the father of Pakistan's nuclear programme, A.Q. Khan, of his involvement in black-market operations trading in nuclear information.
"Recent revelations on the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea have highlighted the importance of maintaining and strengthening effective controls," he told the Strasbourg assembly.
The Irish minister also restated the commitment of the EU, which includes nuclear powers Britain and France, to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
He said the EU urged "all states with nuclear capability to abide by a moratorium on nuclear test explosions or any other nuclear explosions and refrain from any actions which are contrary to the CTBT".
--------
Bush to Outline Plan for Limiting Nuclear Arms
Curbs on Legal Materials Could Stir Controversy
By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 11, 2004; Page A22
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30486-2004Feb10_2.html
President Bush intends to lay out a broad strategy today to stop the spread of nuclear weapons by cracking down on a burgeoning black market and denying sales of some legal equipment to countries that do not submit to close international supervision, a senior administration official said.
In a speech that will detail the U.S.-led pursuit of the nuclear supply network run by Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan, Bush will press for major changes in 30-year-old rules governing the delivery and verification of nuclear technology, the official said.
Bush will try to prevent more states from becoming able to manufacture weapons-grade material by calling on governments to block transfers of nuclear components to nations that are not already equipped with enrichment and reprocessing facilities. The move would go against the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which permits enrichment for peaceful purposes.
He will propose that countries professing a need for nuclear reactor fuel be able to buy it in a "reliable and cost-effective way," discouraging them from perfecting weapons programs under the guise of developing peaceful nuclear power, the official said.
Bush, in his speech to the National Defense University, intends to declare that aspiring nuclear weapons states face a stark choice illustrated by recent history. They can choose the path of Libya's Moammar Gaddafi, who agreed to end his nuclear weapons program in December in return for assurances of economic investment and diplomatic engagement. Or they can persist and endure the isolation faced by North Korea or the regime change imposed on Iraq.
Bush also intends to propose changes to the U.N. nuclear watchdog organization. The administration did not consult with the International Atomic Energy Agency's director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, who has been publicly discussing his own reform proposals for months.
"Quite frankly, some of these proposals will be unsettling to some," said the U.S. official, who said ElBaradei will be briefed before Bush's speech.
Bush's proposals tap into growing international worries about the availability of nuclear technology and the determination of some governments -- and perhaps terrorist organizations -- to develop atomic weapons. But many of Bush's steps may prove difficult to implement.
The United States does not have the power to make many of the changes alone. A number of the proposals depend on voluntary action by other countries. Changes at the IAEA would require considerable consensus, something lacking in recent relations between the Bush administration and the United Nations.
Bush wants to investigate and imprison nuclear suppliers and distributors, which would require countries to draft laws defining the crime. Many of the components essential to manufacturing weapons-grade fissile material have legal uses and little consensus exists on how to proceed.
Bush's national security staff has long been considering a speech on proliferation, seen by the administration as one of its most vexing international challenges.
Most of his Democratic presidential challengers have charged Bush with botching the proliferation account, arguing that he has harmed U.S. security by devoting too much energy to Iraq and too little to North Korea, Iran and other dangers of weapons proliferation.
Recent revelations of a global network that reached Pakistan, Libya and Iran have forced a reassessment of counter-proliferation tactics and the nuclear threat itself.
The world of nuclear nonproliferation has moved far beyond Cold War arms races, during which the superpowers targeted one another with huge missiles as satellites tracked every move.
One challenge is to defeat shadowy networks of traders who have begun procuring, packaging and selling portable nuclear parts and expertise. Another is to solve the riddles of unpredictable realms such as North Korea, which evicted international inspectors in 2002 and declared its determination to perfect its nuclear program.
"You've got an enormously unsettling dimension that's now unfolding. It's a much more elusive target," said Leonard S. Spector, director of the Washington office of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies. "The models are drug lords and organized crime. You suppress them in one area and they show up somewhere else."
Information from Libya and Iran shows that "any country with a decent industrial infrastructure is able to develop an enrichment capacity," ElBaradei said in an interview before learning of Bush's speech.
U.S. officials have already been pressing countries to tighten their export rules and prosecute violators, while working to gather a network of countries prepared to track and stop manufacturers, agents and shippers. So far, 11 nations have joined the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative, an agreement to stop and search vessels suspected of carrying banned weapons or nuclear technology.
Bush will tout the advantages of the interdiction project in his speech today, urging an increase in the number of participants and an expansion of its mission, the senior official said.
"We need very aggressive law enforcement," the official said, likening the approach to the fight against extremist networks. "We need to seize material. We need to seize assets. We need to prosecute those who are participating in this criminal behavior."
In his speech, Bush will describe U.S. efforts to put Khan and his supply network out of business. U.S. and European authorities say the network supplied virtually all of Libya's nascent nuclear program, including bomb designs.
Bush will describe the network's "reach, the members, the experts, the agents, the money men and the fact that we followed their transactions, monitored their travel, recorded their conversations and penetrated their operations."
Turning to the IAEA, Bush will argue for new rules designed to make it easier to monitor prospective nuclear programs and to penalize countries that seek to develop an illicit nuclear capability, the official said.
Any country that wants to purchase dual-use equipment that could be applied to a nuclear program would first have to sign the "Additional Protocol" to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The protocol, recently signed by Iran, permits more intrusive international inspections. ElBaradei, too, has suggested that the protocol become the norm. A more controversial Bush proposal would establish a new special IAEA committee to monitor compliance.
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
-------- wisconsin
Wisconsin may lift ban on nuclear plant construction
11 February 2004
Power Engineering Magazine
http://pepei.pennnet.com/articles/article_display.cfm?Section=ONART&Category=INDUS&PUBLICATION_ID=6&ARTICLE_ID=198423
A state ban on construction of new nuclear plants would be rescinded under a measure approved Tuesday by the state Assembly Energy and Utilities Committee.
The committee voted 9-3 in favour of the bill proposed by Rep. Michael Huebsch (R-West Salem) that would overturn the 21-year-old moratorium.
The ban on power plant construction is in place until a permanent site for spent nuclear fuel is available. Huebsch says the projected opening of the Yucca Mountain storage facility in Nevada in 2010 would satisfy that requirement.
Huebsch believes the ban should be reversed so that discussion about building a new nuclear plant could begin to help address the state's energy needs.
"Even if we lifted the moratorium tomorrow, we would still have years of planning ahead," Huebsch said. "We need to anticipate that [the moratorium] is going to go and get nuclear back on the table."
Rep. Scott Jensen (R-Waukesha), chairman of the committee, said the bi-partisan passage of the bill at this stage could be an indicator that the bill would be passed by the full Assembly.
The bill's opponents believe other energy sources such as natural gas, clean burning coal and renewable energy sources should be developed instead.
-------- us politics
Bush's Nuclear Proposal: Hypocrisy Charged
From: "David Broatch" <davidbroatch@xtra.co.nz>
Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building,
Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020
http://www.accuracy.org
ipa@accuracy.org
--
Bush's Nuclear Proposal: Hypocrisy Charged
JOHN BURROUGHS,
(212) 818-1861, cell: (917) 439-4585,
johnburroughs@lcnp.org
http://www.lcnp.org
For Release
Wednesday, February 11, 2004
Burroughs is executive director of the New York-based Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. He said this afternoon: "While Bush proposes ad hoc measures to limit the capacity of other countries to produce nuclear materials usable in reactors or bombs, his administration has yet to agree to start negotiations on a verified treaty (the Fissile Materials Cutoff Treaty) that would bar all countries, including the United States, from their production for weapons purposes. All other major countries -- including China -- are ready to work on establishing such a ban.... In the 2005 budget he just proposed to Congress, spending would increase on planning for a facility to produce plutonium triggers for warheads..."
JACQUELINE CABASSO, (510) 839-5877, (510) 306-0119, wslf@earthlink.net, http://www.wslfweb.org
Cabasso is executive director of the Western States Legal Foundation and co-author of the report "Nuclear Weapons in a Changed World." She said today: "The central bargain of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is indeed flawed. Under Article IV of the treaty, in exchange for giving up the right to possess nuclear weapons, the nonnuclear weapon states were promised an 'inalienable right' to develop nuclear technology for 'peaceful' purposes. In reality, that means that any country with a civilian nuclear power program has the potential to develop nuclear weapons. There are at least 44 of those countries -- not three, as Mr. Bush would have us believe. Only, at the moment, most of those countries, including our World War II enemies Japan and Germany, are our friends. Even more importantly, Article VI of the NPT requires the U.S., Russia, France, China and the U.K. to negotiate in good faith the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals...."
GREG PALAST, (212) 505-5566, greg@gregpalast.com http://www.gregpalast.com
In 2001, the BBC broadcast an expose co-investigated by Palast which reported that Bush's National Security Agency effectively stymied the probe of Khan Research Laboratories.
ARJUN MAKHIJANI, (301) 270-5500, arjun@ieer.org http://www.ieer.org
President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, Makhijani said today: "President Bush said this afternoon that he wants North Korea to completely dismantle its nuclear weapons program; that he wants governments to stop making nuclear weapons 'under false pretenses.' But he seeks to maintain a huge U.S. arsenal and build new weapons. The consistent assertion by the United States that it needs nuclear weapons for its security and that it retains the prerogative to use them against any country, including non-nuclear states, is in violation of commitments given to them under the Nonproliferation Treaty. These U.S. policies have been a principal part of creating the desire, the demand for nuclear weapons...."
FELICE COHEN-JOPPA, (520) 323-8697, freevanunu@mindspring.com, http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunu http://www.msnbc.com/news/wld/graphics/strategic_israel_dw.htm
Cohen-Joppa is the coordinator of the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu. She said today: "How can Bush pretend to seriously address nuclear weapons proliferation while the U.S. government continues to support the fiction that Israel does not have a massive nuclear arsenal? Israel's nuclear weapons have driven much of the proliferation problem in the Mideast. All the facts need to be on the table. Unfortunately Mordechai Vanunu -- the whistleblower who revealed the scale of Israel's nuclear capacity in 1986 -- has been silenced in an Israeli jail for 17 years, most of it in solitary confinement. He is scheduled for release on April 21, 2004, but there are moves in Israel to keep him imprisoned even longer, or to find some way of keeping him muzzled."
For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020 or (202) 421-6858; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
----
Bush to Propose Fuel Ban to End Spread of A-Bombs
By DAVID E. SANGER
February 11, 2004
NY TIMES
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/11/politics/11CND-PREX.html?hp
WASHINGTON, Feb. 11 - President Bush is to announce a new proposal today to limit the number of nations allowed to produce nuclear fuel, senior administration officials said on Tuesday. He will declare that the global network in nuclear goods set up by Abdul Qadeer Khan, developer of Pakistan's bomb, exposed huge gaps in accords to stop the spread of nuclear weapons technology, they added.
In an afternoon speech at the National Defense University, they said, Mr. Bush will call for a re-examination of what one official called the "basic bargain" underlying the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty: that those states that promise not to pursue nuclear weapons will receive help in producing nuclear fuel for power generation.
Iran admitted last year that it had cheated on that agreement for 18 years, secretly building uranium enrichment facilities, though the country denied that it intended to produce weapons. North Korea abandoned the treaty last year and declared it was making nuclear arms.
Dr. Khan's network secretly sold equipment to both countries, and to Libya, American and Pakistani officials have said.
In a briefing on Tuesday evening, one administration official said Iran and North Korea were examples of "regimes which have cynically exploited loopholes in the existing treaty" to build up their capacity to produce weapons-grade nuclear fuel.
While proliferation experts have long agreed that the treaty is flawed, Mr. Bush's proposal is bound to raise protests from developing nations, which say the United States and, by extension, the other declared nuclear states Britain, France, Russia and China are trying to extend their rights to produce weapons while denying that status to other states.
In addition to those five, Israel, India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, and North Korea is believed by American intelligence agencies to have at least two and perhaps several more.
Israel is a particularly difficult case for the United States because it has never declared its nuclear ability and has never signed the nonproliferation treaty. Its Arab neighbors and Pakistan have said that any reopening of nuclear regulation should start with forcing Israel to sign the treaty.
In the briefing, the official also said Mr. Bush would discuss for the first time the details of how Dr. Khan's network operated, being careful to praise President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan and to portray Dr. Khan, the former head of Khan Research Laboratories, as a rogue scientist.
Another administration official said Mr. Bush would cast the Khan case as a victory for American intelligence operations, describing "how we uncovered the reach of the network, how we identified the key individuals, how we followed the key transactions, and how we monitored the movement of material and recorded conversation and penetrated operations."
The director of central intelligence, George J. Tenet, made a similar case last week, and administration officials clearly hope the story of the intelligence surrounding the Khan network will be a counterpoint to criticisms of how Iraq's weapons program was misjudged.
The national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, was asked today in an interview on the NBC "Today" show whether the White House could explain how General Musharraf could have pardoned Dr. Khan after he admitted giving nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran and Libya.
"What President Musharraf has done is to give us the opportunity now to wrap up and to destroy what is one of the most active networks, the most active as we know it today, of this kind of shadowy underworld of nuclear entrepreneurs who are out there selling knowledge and expertise on the black market," Ms. Rice said.
"And because of Pakistan's cooperation, because of Pakistan's action based on information that they've been receiving from a number of sources, and because of very good intelligence work by the United States, Great Britain and others, we really now have a chance to wrap up this group. And that's the most important thing."
She said that the administration was pleased that General Musharraf had been willing to "go this far."
"We have to understand that A.Q. Khan was a revered figure in Pakistan, extremely revered figure," she said. "Nonetheless, President Musharraf has taken these steps, and we're going to be able to make progress in an area that has been shadowy and very difficult to make progress in the past."
Mr. Bush is also to identify B. S. A. Tahir, a Sri Lanka-born trader who moved to Dubai as a child, as the "other major node" in the Khan network.
It was Mr. Tahir, who divides his time between Kuala Lumpur and Dubai, who negotiated with a Malaysian company called Scomi to produce parts for high-speed centrifuges, which enrich uranium, Scomi officials have said. It was the interception of one such shipment to Libya in October that allowed American intelligence officials to present Pakistan with evidence about Dr. Khan.
In recent days, efforts to reach Mr. Tahir in Malaysia have been unsuccessful. He owns 49 percent of a computer company, S.M.B. Computers, in Dubai, according to Dubai government documents. Scomi officials have identified him as one of the men who negotiated the deal under which they produced the parts.
Mr. Bush's speech will mark the first time Mr. Tahir has been publicly identified by the United States as a major player, though intelligence officials have mentioned, on background, what they say was his central role in arranging the transfer of centrifuge components from Malaysia to Dubai and on to Libya.
Mr. Bush's proposals appear to be intended to crack down on states like North Korea and Iran without reopening negotiations that could limit the United States' own ability to produce nuclear fuel for weapons and power, or stop allies like Japan from producing such fuel for power plants. China says Japan's program could be diverted to weapons.
He is expected to implicitly reject, for example, an alternative proposal by the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, for an international organization to control the production of all nuclear fuel and how it is used.
The Bush administration has already, in effect, dismissed that approach as unworkable, in part, experts say, because it would limit Washington's ability to produce fuel for its nuclear arsenal.
Mr. Bush's insistence on moving ahead with research on a new class of so-called bunker-busting nuclear weapons has been cited by his opponents including many in Europe as an example of a double standard in which he seeks to stop other states from building weapons while continuing to improve the American arsenal.
The official also said in the briefing that Mr. Bush would propose expanding the Nunn-Lugar program, in which Congress appropriates funds to destroy weapons and retrain former Soviet weapons experts.
His plan would extend the program to scientists in other nations, including Iraq. But Mr. Bush will propose no new financing, and no expansion of the program is included in the budget he sent to Congress last week. Democrats say the existing program is underfinanced.
Mr. Bush will also call for an expansion of the Proliferation Security Initiative, a loose affiliation of countries, organized by the United States, to intercept unconventional weapons. The seizure of the Libyan shipment in October was the biggest single success, though other equipment has been seized on the way to North Korea.
In the briefing, the administration official said Mr. Bush would propose several changes to the internal operations of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The agency, which has had rocky relations with the Bush administration over Iraq, did not know that Mr. Bush planned to speak on nonproliferation until informed by a reporter on Tuesday.
The official said Mr. Bush would call for a new committee within the agency to monitor compliance with "safeguards" agreements, which allow inspection where nuclear fuel or weapons work may be conducted. He will also call on the agency's board to bar from it any country under investigation. Iran was a board member throughout a confrontation last year over allowing full inspections of its facilities.
----
TEXT Bush's Speech on the Spread of Nuclear Weapons
February 11, 2004
NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/11/politics/10WEB-PTEX.html
Following is the transcript from President Bush's speech at the National Defense University on Wednesday, as transcribed by Federal News Service Inc.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you all. Be seated, please.
Thanks for the warm welcome. I'm honored to visit the National Defense University.
For nearly a century the scholars and students here have helped to prepare America for the changing threats to our national security. Today, the men and women of our National Defense University are helping to frame the strategies through which we are fighting and winning the war on terror.
Your Center for Counterproliferation Research and your other institution colleges are providing vital insight into the dangers of a new era. I want to thank each one of you for devoting your talents and your energy to the service of our great nation.
I want to thank General Michael Dunn for inviting me here. I used to jog by this facility on a regular basis, then my age kicked in. I appreciate Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger from Germany -- Ambassador, thank you for being here today.
I see my friend George Schultz, a distinguished public servant and true patriot with us. George, thank you for coming. And Charlotte (sp), it's good to see you.
I'm so honored that Dick Lugar is here with us today. Senator, I appreciate you taking time and thanks for bringing Senator Saxby Chambliss with you as well.
I appreciate the veterans who are here and those on active duty. Thanks for letting me come back.
On September the 11th, 2001, America and the world witnessed a new kind of war. We saw the great harm that a stateless network could inflict upon our country -- killers, armed with box cutters, mace and 19 airline tickets. Those attacks also raised the prospect of even worse dangers, of other weapons in the hands of other men.
The greatest threat before humanity today is the possibility of secret and sudden attack with chemical or biological or radiological or nuclear weapons.
In the past, enemies of America required massed armies and great navies, powerful air forces to put our nation, our people, our friends at risk. In the Cold War, Americans lived under the threat of weapons of mass destruction, but believed that deterrence made those weapons a last resort. What has changed in the 21st century is that in the hands of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction would be a first resort, the preferred means to further their ideology of suicide and random murder. These terrible weapons are becoming easier to acquire, build, hide and transport. Armed with a single vial of a biological agent or a single nuclear weapon, small groups of fanatics or failing states could gain the power to threaten great nations, threaten the world peace.
America and the entire civilized world will face this threat for decades to come. We must confront the danger with open eyes and unbending purpose. I made clear to all the policy of this nation: America will not permit terrorists and dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most deadly weapons. Meeting this duty has required changes in thinking and strategy. Doctrines designed to contain empires, deter aggressive states and defeat massed armies cannot fully protect us from this new threat.
America faces the possibility of catastrophic attack from ballistic weapons armed with weapons of mass destruction. So that is why we are developing and deploying missile defenses to guard our people. The best intelligence is necessary to win the war on terror and to stop proliferation. So that is why I have established a commission that will examine our intelligence capabilities and recommend ways to improve and adapt them to detect new and emerging threats.
We're determined to confront those threats at the source. We will stop these weapons from being acquired or built. We'll block them from being transferred. We'll prevent them from ever being used.
One source of these weapons is dangerous and secretive regimes that build weapons of mass destruction to intimidate their neighbors and force their influence upon the world. These nations pose different challenges. They require different strategies.
The former dictator of Iraq possessed and used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. For 12 years he defied the will of the international community. He refused to disarm or account for his illegal weapons and programs. He doubted our resolve to enforce our word. And now he sits in a prison cell while his country moves toward a democratic future.
To Iraq's east, the government of Iran is unwilling to abandon a uranium-enrichment program capable of producing material for nuclear weapons. The United States is working with our allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure that Iran meets its commitments and does not develop nuclear weapons. In the Pacific -- (applause). In the Pacific, North Korea has defied the world, has tested long-range ballistic missiles, admitted its possession of nuclear weapons and now threatens to build more. Together with our partners in Asia, America is insisting that North Korea completely, verifiably and irreversibly dismantle its nuclear programs.
America has consistently brought these threats to the attention of international organizations. We're using every means of diplomacy to answer them. As for my part, I will continue to speak clearly on these threats. I will continue to call upon the world to confront these dangers and to end them.
In recent years, another path of proliferation has become clear as well. America and other nations are learning more about black market operatives who deal in equipment and expertise related to weapons of mass destruction. These dealers are motivated by greed or fanaticism or both. They find eager customers in outlaw regimes, which pay millions for the parts and plans they need to speed up their weapons programs. And with deadly technology and expertise on the market, there's the terrible possibility that terrorist groups could obtain the ultimate weapons they desire most. The extent and sophistication of such networks can be seen in the case of a man named Abdul Qadir Khan. This is the story as we know it so far. A.Q. Khan is known throughout the world as the father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. What was not publicly known until recently is that he also led an extensive international network for the proliferation of nuclear technology and know-how.
For decades, Mr. Khan remained on the Pakistani government payroll, earning a modest salary. Yet he and his associates financed lavish lifestyles through the sale of nuclear technologies and equipment to outlaw regimes stretching from North Africa to the Korean Peninsula.
A.Q. Khan himself operated mostly out of Pakistan. He served as director of the network, its leading scientific mind as well as its primary salesman. Over the past decade, he made frequent trips to consult with his clients and to sell his expertise. He and his associates sold the blueprints for centrifuges to enrich uranium, as well as nuclear design stolen from the Pakistani government. The network sold uranium hexafluoride, the gas that the centrifuge process can transform into enriched uranium for nuclear bombs.
Khan and his associates provided Iran and Libya and North Korea with designs for Pakistan's older centrifuges, as well as designs for more advanced and efficient models. The network also provided these countries with components, and in some cases with complete centrifuges.
To increase their profits, Khan and his associates used a factory in Malaysia to manufacture key parts for centrifuges. Other necessary parts were purchased through network operatives based in Europe and the Middle East and Africa. These procurement agents saw the trade in nuclear technologies as a shortcut to personal wealth, and they set up front companies to deceive legitimate firms into selling them tightly controlled materials.
Khan's deputy, a man named B.S.A. Tahir, ran SMB Computers, a business in Dubai. Tahir used that computer company as a front for the proliferation activities of the A.Q. Khan network. Tahir acted as both the network's chief financial officer and money-launderer. He was also its shipping agent, using his computer firm as cover for the movement of centrifuge parts to various clients. Tahir directed the Malaysia facility to produce these parts based on Pakistani designs, and then ordered the facility to ship the components to Dubai.
Tahir also arranged for parts acquired by other European procurement agents to transit through Dubai for shipment to other customers.
This picture of the Khan network was pieced together over several years by American and British intelligence officers. Our intelligence services gradually uncovered this network's reach and identified its key experts and agents and money men. Operatives followed its transactions, mapped the extent of its operations. They monitored the travel of A.Q. Khan and senior associates. They shadowed members of the network around the world. They recorded their conversations. They penetrated their operations. We've uncovered their secrets.
This work involved high risk, and all Americans should be grateful for the hard work and the dedication of our fine intelligence professionals. Governments around the world worked closely with us to unravel the Khan network and to put an end to its criminal enterprise. A.Q. Khan has confessed his crimes, and his top associates are out of business. The government of Pakistan is interrogating the network's members, learning critical details that will help them prevent it from ever operating again.
President Musharraf has promised to share all the information he learns about the Khan network, and has assured us that his country will never again be a source of proliferation. Mr. Tahir is in Malaysia, where authorities are investigating his activities. Malaysian authorities have assured us that the factory the network used is no longer producing centrifuge parts.
Other members of the network remain at large. One by one they will be found, and their careers in the weapons trade will be ended. As a result of our penetration of the network, American and the British intelligence identified a shipment of advanced centrifuge parts manufactured at the Malaysian facility. We followed the shipment of these parts to Dubai and watched as they were transferred to the BBC China, a German-owned ship.
After the ship passed through the Suez Canal, bound for Libya, it was stopped by German and Italian authorities. They found several containers, each 40 feet in length, listened on the ship's manifest as full of used machine parts. In fact, these containers were filled with parts of sophisticated centrifuge.
The interception of the BBC China came as Libyan and British and American officials were discussing the possibility of Libya ending its WMD programs. The United States and Britain confronted Libyan officials with this evidence of an active and illegal nuclear program.
About two months ago Libya's leader voluntarily agreed to end his nuclear and chemical weapons programs, not to pursue biological weapons, and to permit thorough inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. We're now working in partnership with these organizations and with the United Kingdom to help the government of Libya dismantle those programs and eliminate all dangerous materials. Colonel Qadhafi made the right decision, and the world will be safer once his commitment is fulfilled.
We expect other regimes to follow his example. Abandoning the pursuit of illegal weapons can lead to better relations with the United States and other free nations. Continuing to seek those weapons will not bring security or international prestige, but only political isolation, economic hardship and other unwelcome consequences. (Applause.)
We know that Libya was not the only customer of the Khan network. Other countries expressed great interest in their services. These regimes and other proliferators like Khan should know, we and our friends are determined to protect our people and the world from proliferation.
Breaking this network is one major success in a broad-based effort to stop the spread of terrible weapons. We're adjusting our strategies to the threats of a new era. America and the nations of Australia, France and Germany, Italy and Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom have launched the Proliferation Security Initiative to interdict lethal materials in transit. Our nations are sharing intelligence information, tracking suspect international cargo, conducting joint military exercises. We're prepared to search planes and ships, to seize weapons and missiles and equipment that raise proliferation concerns, just as we did in stopping the dangerous cargo on the BBC China before it reached Libya. Three more governments -- Canada and Singapore and Norway -- will be participating in this initiative. We'll continue to expand the core group of PSI countries. And as PSI grows, proliferators will find it harder than ever to trade in illicit weapons.
There's a consensus among nations that proliferation cannot be tolerated. Yet this consensus means little unless it is translated into action. Every civilized nation has a stake in preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction. These materials and technologies and the people who traffic in them cross many borders. To stop this trade the nations of the world must be strong and determined. We must work together. We must act effectively.
Today I announce several proposals to strengthen the world's efforts to stop the spread of deadly weapons.
First, I propose that the work of the Proliferation Security Initiative be expanded to address more than shipments and transfers. Building on the tools that we've developed to fight terrorists, we can take direct action against proliferation networks. We need greater cooperation -- not just among intelligence and military services but in law enforcement as well.
PSI participants in other willing nations should use the Interpol and all other means to bring justice to those who traffic in deadly weapons, to shut down their labs, to seize their materials, to freeze their assets. We must act on every lead. We will find the middlemen, the suppliers and the buyers. Our message to proliferators must be consistent and it must be clear: we will find you, and we're not going to rest until you are stopped. (Applause.)
Second, I call on all nations to strengthen the laws and international controls that govern proliferation. At the U.N. last fall, I proposed a new Security Council resolution requiring all states to criminalize proliferation, enact strict export controls, and secure all sensitive materials within their borders. The Security Council should pass this proposal quickly. And when they do, America stands ready to help other governments to draft and enforce the new laws that will help us deal with proliferation. Third, I propose to expand our efforts to keep weapons from the Cold War and other dangerous materials out of the wrong hands. In 1991 Congress passed the Nunn-Lugar legislation. Senator Lugar had a clear vision, along with Senator Nunn, about what to do with the old Soviet Union. Under this program, we are helping former Soviet states find productive employment for former weapons scientists. We're dismantling, destroying and securing weapons and materials left over from the Soviet WMD arsenal. We have more work to do there. And as a result of the G-8 summit in 2002, we agreed to provide $20 billion over 10 years, half of it from the United States, to support such programs. We should expand this cooperation elsewhere in the world. We will retain WMD scientists and technicians in countries like Iraq and Libya. We will help nations end the use of weapons grade uranium and research reactors. I urge more nations to contribute to these efforts.
The nations of the world must do all we can to secure and eliminate nuclear and chemical and biological and radiological materials. As we track and destroy these networks, we must also prevent governments from developing nuclear weapons under false pretenses. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was designed more than 30 years ago to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons beyond those states which already possessed them. Under this treaty, nuclear states agreed to help non-nuclear states develop peaceful atomic energy if they renounced the pursuit of nuclear weapons. But the treaty has a loophole, which has been exploited by nations such as North Korea and Iran. These regimes are allowed to produce nuclear material that can be used to build bombs under the cover of civilian nuclear programs.
So today, as a fourth step, I propose a way to close the loophole. The world must create a safe, orderly system to fuel civilian nuclear plants without adding to the danger of weapons proliferation. The world's leading nuclear exporters should ensure that states have reliable access at reasonable cost to fuel for civilian reactors, so long as those states renounce enrichment and reprocessing. Enrichment and reprocessing are not necessary for nations seeking to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The 40 nations of the Nuclear Suppliers Group should refuse to sell enrichment and reprocessing equipment and technologies to any state that does not already possess full-scale functioning enrichment and reprocessing plants.
This step will prevent new states from developing the means to produce fissile material for nuclear bombs. Proliferators must not be allowed to cynically manipulate the NPT to acquire the material and infrastructure necessary for manufacturing illegal weapons.
For international norms to be effective, they must be enforced. It is the charge of the International Atomic Energy Agency to uncover banned nuclear activity around the world and report those violations to the U.N. Security Council.
We must ensure that the IAEA has all the tools it needs to fulfill its essential mandate. America and other nations support what is called the Additional Protocol, which requires states to declare a broad range of nuclear activities and facilities and allows the IAEA to inspect those facilities.
As a fifth step, I propose that by next year, only states that have signed the Additional Protocol be allowed to import equipment for their civilian nuclear programs. Nations that are serious about fighting proliferation will approve and implement the Additional Protocol. I've submitted the Additional Protocol to the Senate. I urge the Senate to consent immediately to its ratification. We must also ensure that the IAEA is organized to take action when action is required. So as a sixth step, I propose the creation of a special committee of the IAEA Board which will focus intensively on safeguards and verification. This committee, made up of governments in good standing with the IAEA, will strengthen the capability of the IAEA to ensure that nations comply with their international obligations.
And finally, countries under investigation for violating nuclear nonproliferation obligations are currently allowed to serve on the IAEA Board of Governors. For instance, Iran, a country suspected of maintaining an extensive nuclear weapons program, recently completed a two-year term on the board. Allowing potential violators to serve on the board creates an unacceptable barrier to effective action. No state under investigation for proliferation violations should be allowed to serve on the IAEA Board of Governors or on the new special committee. And any state currently on the board that comes under investigation should be suspended from the board. The integrity and mission of the IAEA depends on this simple principle: Those actively breaking the rules should not be entrusted with enforcing the rules.
As we move forward to address these challenges, we will consult with our friends and allies on all these new measures. We will listen to their ideas. Together we will defend the safety of all nations and preserve the peace of the world.
Over the last two years, a great coalition has come together to defeat terrorism and to oppose the spread of weapons of mass destruction, the inseparable commitments of the war on terror. We've shown that proliferators can be discovered and can be stopped. We've shown that for regimes that chose defiance, there are serious consequences.
The way ahead is not easy, but it is clear. We will proceed as if the lives of our citizens depend on our vigilance because they do. Terrorists and terror states are in a race for weapons of mass murder, a race they must lose. (Applause.)
Terrorists are resourceful. We're more resourceful. They're determined. We must be more determined. We will never lose focus or resolve. We'll be unrelenting in the defense of free nations and rise to the hard demands of dangerous times.
May God bless you all.
----
SPEAKING FREELY
The wrong side of history
By Daniel Patrick Welch
Asia Times
Feb 11, 2004
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FB11Aa02.html
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.
SALEM, Massachusetts - We were all lied to. We're used to it. If General William Westmoreland's body counts and Watergate and Iran-Contra and the savings and loans and the first Gulf War didn't teach some of us, then I guess some of us were never meant to learn. The fact is that some of us bought it, and some of us didn't. It's a big, glaring, important distinction, one that, without indulging hyperbole, divides the whole of history and places us on one side or the other.
This is not parlor politics or polite, gentlemanly disagreements with our colleagues "from the other side of the aisle". It's a long, older struggle: call it revolution and counter-revolution, progress and reaction - whatever you choose. But those of us who froze our asses off while being herded like cattle along 3rd Avenue in Manhattan a year ago were not "misled". We, and the 10 million who marched with us the world over last February 15, refused to be misled - indeed refused to be led at all by the liars and their sycophants who packaged and sold this war. The world, it can be safely said from the overwhelming hostility now aimed at the United States, was not misled. History itself was not misled, only sidetracked by a power whose bloated military "strength" defies all need or rational excuse.
The world is waiting, too, to see on which side of history post-Bush America will decide to right itself. Will it abandon its insane military buildup and actively disengage from its designs of global domination? The question weighs heavily on the futures of our children. For it does seem, despite its tenacious hold on power and its almost limitless resources, that the administration of President George W Bush is despised not only by most of the world, but also by most of the same electorate that never gave it any mandate in the first place. All this talk of "electability", as if it were some scientific postulate that could actually hold some concrete meaning, all this talk merely inflates defeatism. Bush the mighty cannot be slain! Why not? He's a criminal and a liar, who in any decent society would have been removed from office long ago.
The question is, what will replace the Bush junta? It is a sweeping question, one that, given the pummeling the world has taken at its hand these past few years, should be a grand one. Akin to the rebuilding of Europe, say, or the end of the Cold War. There was a similar opportunity then, when we talked of the "Peace Dividend". But it was handled by men with small minds and greedy palms, and the New World Order busied itself instead with more wars and the global dominion of a tiny handful of gigantic corporations roaming the globe, looking for every last pocket of opportunity to pick for cash.
Now we face a similar choice, and I suggest we should entrust it to a government whose vision is as broad as the epoch requires. Senator John Kerry, alas, does not fit the bill, despite his meteoric rise to front-runner status in the Democratic Party presidential-nomination race since the Iowa caucus. I do not dislike him; have voted for him against Republicans when it seemed the wise thing to do, and I imagine I could do so again if the alternative were an extension of the Bush Destruction Machine. But I do not want him to be my president, and until I have no other choice, I will oppose his climb to the top of the anti-Bush heap. A translator friend from Brazil, who has chided me for focusing narrowly on the US elections recently, had this to say: "The world doesn't want to know how or if the president will be elected. What the world wants to know is how Bush or Not-Bush will affect their lives. Think about that!"
See - it is not, unfortunately, just about Republicans vs Democrats. Both parties have been complicit in the enormous bloating of the military-industrial complex about which that famous Republican, general/president Dwight Eisenhower, so sternly warned us before leaving office. When push comes to shove, we need people in government who ignore expediency and do that which, in their hearts and in their intellect, they know to be right. This is rendered all the more important by the disintegration of independent thought in the United States, the consolidation of corporate media, the immense pressure and resources controlled by the right wing in this country.
There is an inner clock, one that keeps time despite the seeming sway of history and the drums of war. Some people have it, and most do not. I fault Kerry in this regard. I am not bashing him, so please spare me the hate mail - I am not capable of throwing the election by pointing out obvious flaws. Sena