Carnegie International Non-Proliferation Conference 2005:
The 2005 Carnegie International Non-Proliferation Conference will take place on November 7-8 in Washington, D.C., at the Ronald Reagan International Trade Center. This year’s conference, "Sixty Years Later," will look back on the six decades of the atomic age, and look forward to solutions for today’s proliferation challenges, including Iran and North Korea. Space is limited. Early registration ends October 14 to receive the discounted registration rate.

Confirmed keynote speakers include IAEA Director General and Nobel Peace Prize Winner Mohamed ElBaradei, Commander of the United States Strategic Command James E. Cartwright, Senator Richard Lugar, former Senator Sam Nunn, Egyptian Ambassador to the United States Nabil Fahmy, US Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman, and others. This year, we are delighted to partner with the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in hosting a special concluding panel and a reception celebrating their 60 years of publication.

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/resources...?fa=newsletters] proliferationnews@carnegieendowment.org.

October 13, 2005

Envoy: North Korea Could Face Isolation
(Nick Wadhams, Associated Press)

Wednesday, October 12
North Korea will find itself in a ``wilderness of isolation'' if it walks away from a landmark agreement to give up its nuclear program, but will see a host of economic and diplomatic opportunities if the deal sticks, the chief U.S. envoy for talks with the country said Tuesday.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill also suggested that the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council could play a role in verifying North Korea's disarmament if it happens.

White House May Reconsider Missile Defense Approach
(David Ruppe, Global Security Newswire)

Friday, October 7
After spending years and billions of dollars to develop and deploy ground-based missile interceptors, the Bush administration appears to be reconsidering its leading approach to defending the U.S. homeland against enemy ICBMs, a key congressional committee said last week.

While the U.S. Missile Defense Agency continues to seek billions to develop and deploy the interceptors — including as many as 40 in silos in Alaska by the end of 2007 and some in Europe after that — it appears to have abandoned ambitions for significantly improving the current system and to favor other approaches, the Senate Appropriations Committee said in a report accompanying its version of the fiscal 2006 defense appropriations bill.

“After many years of investment in this midcourse interceptor, MDA has now essentially decided that the first generation GBI [ground-based interceptors] will also be its last generation GBI. This approach would fail to capitalize on the years of previous investment and technology development in a decreasing budgetary environment,” it said in a lengthy critique.



Cleaning House
(Carnegie Analysis, Ben Bain)

Thursday, October 13
The US government program to prevent nuclear materials from vanishing from insecure facilities into the hands of terrorists has scored several striking successes but is still far from accomplishing its goals. The Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) has securely repatriated 122kg of highly-enriched uranium to Russia in eight operations, including a recent dramatic midnight airlift from Prague. The GTRI mission is of the highest importance, yet recent studies conclude that progress is dangerously slow.

Harvard’s Graham Allison believes, “The only thing keeping al-Qaida from building a nuclear weapon is the fissile material needed to produce a self-sustaining chain reaction for a nuclear explosion.” The 2005 Carnegie report, Universal Compliance, concluded, “securing weapon-usable fissile materials is, therefore, the single greatest nonproliferation priority.” As Allison puts it, “no fissile material, no nuclear explosion, no nuclear terrorism.”



In a Shift, Iran Agrees to Resume Nuclear Talks
(Nazila Fathi, New York Times)

Thursday, October 13
Iran said in a statement reported Wednesday that it was willing to resume talks with three European countries about its nuclear program, but it insisted again on its right to enrich uranium for peaceful uses.

It was the first official request to resume negotiations by the conservative government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which had adopted a tougher line on the nuclear issue after it took office in August. The Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Iran "was ready to resume unconditional negotiations with all member states of the International Atomic Energy Agency, including the three European countries, to strengthen cooperation and assure Iran's right to nuclear development," the ISNA news agency reported Wednesday.



US to Lobby Argentina on Chávez Nuclear Move
(Andy Webb- Vidal, Financial Times - UK)


Wednesday, October 12
Argentina is likely to face heavy US pressure to block any sale of a nuclear reactor to the Venezuelan government of President Hugo Chávez, which is seeking to develop nuclear technology, possibly with the help of Iran.

Venezuelan officials have confirmed reports in Argentina that Venezuela's state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela in August asked Argentina to sell it a “medium-sized” nuclear reactor. Washington maintains an uneasy relationship with Venezuela, which some US officials see as a “destabilising” influence in Latin America, and the prospect of a nuclear-empowered Mr Chávez would complicate matters.



UN Nuclear Watchdog in Talks with Iran on Access
(Francois Murphy, Reuters)

Wednesday, October 12
A team from the U.N. nuclear watchdog is in Tehran for talks on gaining better cooperation from Iran before the United States, France, Britain and Germany push to refer it to the U.N. Security Council, diplomats say.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei has demanded better access to sites, documents and individuals in the IAEA's investigation of whether Iran's nuclear programme is peaceful as it says it is or a front for making nuclear weapons as Washington charges.



Talks on N.Korea Nuclear Action Plan to Start - South
(Reuters)

Wednesday, October 12
Five countries negotiating with North Korea on ending Pyongyang's nuclear weapons programmes will begin consultations next week on how to implement key principles agreed last month, South Korea said on Wednesday.

It was not clear whether those efforts would involve a visit to Pyongyang by the top U.S. envoy to the nuclear talks, Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Christopher Hill, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon told reporters. "We anticipate beginning consultations with related countries around next week," Ban said at a news briefing.

China's Nuclear Capabilities
(Carnegie Analysis, Caterina Dutto)

Tuesday, October 18
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s first visit to China since taking office is designed to promote dialogue with China’s military. Some recent administration reports and statements argue that China is building up its nuclear forces and is a growing threat to international security. Rumsfeld’s visit comes ahead of President George W. Bush’s scheduled visit to China in November. For current data and analysis of China’s strategic forces, we have provided an excerpt from the China chapter in Carnegie’s recent publication, Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear Biological, and Chemical Threats.

Bush to Visit China, Japan in November Asia Trip
(Reuters)

Monday, October 17
President George W. Bush will visit China and Japan in November as part of a trip to a region of increasing economic significance and strategic concern to the United States. Bush, who previously visited Beijing in 2001 and 2002, is going to China at the invitation of Chinese President Hu Jintao, who has worked with the United States, South Korea, Japan and Russia to persuade North Korea to halt its nuclear weapons programs.

The trip coincides with simmering U.S. concern over the rise of China on the global diplomatic stage and China's growing economic and military clout.

Senior U.S. officials have expressed deep concern about China's drive to lock up oil and raw material supplies from around the world, including from countries, like Iran, with which the United States is in conflict. Booming China is the third-largest importer of oil.

Rumsfeld Strikes Less Severe Tone in China
(Thom Shanker, New York Times)

Tuesday, October 18
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld landed in the Chinese capital Tuesday with words inviting China to play an increasing role in global economic and security affairs, while also urging the communist leadership here to fully explain the growth in military spending that has powered a significant arms build-up.

Mr. Rumsfeld's initial comments struck a tone noticeably less severe than during his June keynote address on Asian security delivered in Singapore, which was criticized by Chinese delegates in attendance as an attack on China's right to defend its national interests.

Rice Is Rebuffed by Russia on Iran
(Robin Wright, New York Times)

Sunday, October 16
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed on Saturday to persuade Russia to take a tougher line on Iran's nuclear program, an issue the Bush administration wants to take to the U.N. Security Council if Tehran does not resume negotiations to limit its ability to produce the world's deadliest weapon.

After talks that went almost twice as long as scheduled, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Russia wanted to pursue negotiations within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N. nuclear watchdog, and that it was not ready to take more drastic action.

America Offers 'Gaddafi Deal' to Bring Syria in from the Cold
(Richard Beeston and Nick Blanford, Times of London)

Saturday, October 15
The Bush Administration has offered Syria’s beleaguered President a “Gaddafi deal” to end his regime’s isolation if Damascus agrees to a long list of painful concessions.

According to senior American and Arab officials, an offer has been relayed to President Assad that could enable him to avoid the looming threat of international sanctions against his country. The matter could come to a head as early as next week when Detlev Mehlis, the head of the United Nations team investigating the murder of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese Prime Minister, is due to submit his report to Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General.

George W. Bush's Suicidal Statecraft
(Zbigniew Brzezinski, International Herald Tribune - Opinion)

Thursday, October 13
Sixty years ago, Arnold Toynbee concluded, in his monumental "A Study of History," that the ultimate cause of imperial collapse was "suicidal statecraft." Sadly for President George W. Bush's place in history but - much more important - ominously for America's future, it has lately seemed as if that adroit phrase might be applicable to the policies pursued by the United States since the cataclysm of 9/11.

Though there have been some hints lately that the administration may be beginning to reassess the goals, so far defined largely by slogans, of its unsuccessful military intervention in Iraq, Bush's speech of Oct. 6 was a throwback to the more demagogic formulations that he employed during the presidential campaign of 2004 to justify the war that he himself started.

Eye On Eurasia: Russia's Security Weakness
http://www.spacewar.com/news/russia-05zq.html

Iran to Escape UN Referral Over Nuclear Plans-Diplomats
(Louis Charbonneau, Reuters)

Thursday, October 20
The International Atomic Energy Agency will most likely not refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council when the U.N. agency's board meets next month despite fears Tehran is seeking nuclear weapons, diplomats said. The 35-nation governing board of the IAEA, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, declared last month that Iran had violated the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by hiding activities for 18 years that could be used to make atom bombs, paving the way for a Security Council referral and possible U.N. sanctions.

The Doctor Is In
(Carnegie Analysis, Joseph Cirincione)

Thursday, October 20
Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski took his scalpel to the administration’s national security strategy in an opinion piece Oct. 13. Former State Department chief of staff Larry Wilkerson assisted in the surgery with an October 19 speech. The war in Iraq has hurt “America's ability to cope with nuclear nonproliferation,” Brzezinski says. “The contrast between the attack on the militarily weak Iraq and America's forbearance of the nuclear-armed North Korea has strengthened the conviction of the Iranians that their security can only be enhanced by nuclear weapons.”

“Moreover, the recent U.S. decision to assist India's nuclear program, driven largely by the desire for India's support for the war in Iraq and as a hedge against China,” Brzezinski continues, “has made the United States look like a selective promoter of nuclear weapons proliferation. This double standard will complicate the quest for a constructive resolution of the Iranian nuclear problem.”

Megatons to Megawatts
(Carnegie Analysis, Ben Bain)

Thursday, October 20
One-tenth of America’s electricity comes from fuel made from Russian nuclear warheads. The Megatons to Megawatts program converts highly-enriched uranium in Russian weapons into low-enriched uranium that is used in US civilian nuclear power reactors. The program reached an important milestone in early October - converting 255 metric tons of warhead material, the equivalent of over 10,000 weapons.

'Cheney Cabal Hijacked US Foreign Policy'
(Edward Alden, Financial Times - UK)

Thursday, October 20
Vice-President Dick Cheney and a handful of others had hijacked the government's foreign policy apparatus, deciding in secret to carry out policies that had left the US weaker and more isolated in the world, the top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed on Wednesday.

In a scathing attack on the record of President George W. Bush, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Mr Powell until last January, said: “What I saw was a cabal between the vice-president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made. Now it is paying the consequences of making those decisions in secret, but far more telling to me is America is paying the consequences.”

The Nuclear Campus
(Matthew Bunn, Boston Globe - Opinion)

Thursday, October 20
Four years after 9/11, most nuclear research reactors at universities across the United States are essentially undefended, with no guards on site, no fences or security cameras around the building, and few other security measures in place. Some of these facilities are fueled with highly enriched uranium, the easiest material in the world for terrorists to use to make a nuclear bomb.

With terrorist warnings and attacks clogging the airwaves, action is needed to get rid of the potential bomb uranium wherever possible and provide effective security where highly enriched uranium is still needed, both to reduce the dangers posed by these US facilities and to help the United States persuade other countries to do the same.

In 1986, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which oversees these facilities, recognized the danger posed by the stores of highly enriched uranium and issued a rule requiring all the reactors it regulates to convert to low-enriched uranium, which could not be used as the core of a terrorist bomb. The reactors were directed to convert the moment that usable low-enriched uranium fuels were available, and the Department of Energy came up with the money to pay for it.

Iran Gives U.N. Nuclear Agency Key Documents
(Associated Press)

Thursday, October 20
Iran has given U.N. inspectors key documents about activities that could be used to make a nuclear weapon and allowed them to question a senior official suspected of involvement in the program, diplomats and officials said Thursday.

The International Atomic Energy Agency hoped Iran's recent decision to cooperate with it will shed light on whether the country's military engaged in secret uranium enrichment activities, the diplomats and officials told The Associated Press.

North Korea Must Declare Nuke Plans: Seoul
(Reuters)

Thursday, October 20
North Korea must disclose the full extent of its nuclear weapons programmes at the next round of six-country talks as part of a detailed action plan to resolve the crisis, South Korea's foreign minister said on Thursday.

Ban Ki-moon also told reporters South Korea, Japan, the United States, Russia and China must in turn provide a detailed plan of economic assistance to the North at the talks, which are expected to start in early November. "The action plan must involve a conscientious declaration of the nuclear weapons programmes, its other nuclear programmes and related facilities that North Korea must dismantle," Ban said.

US Blacklists Eight North Korea Entities Over WMD Proliferation
http://www.spacewar.com/news/korea-05zzzzx.html

Washington (AFP) Oct 21, 2005 - The United States blacklisted on Friday eight North Korean entities as proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and froze whatever assets they have under US jurisdiction.

US, South Korea To Examine Military Command Shift
http://www.spacewar.com/news/korea-05zzzzy.html

Seoul (AFP) Oct 21, 2005 - The United States and South Korea agreed on Friday to accelerate talks on switching the command structure of Korean forces in wartime in what would be a major shift in the half-century-old alliance.

Analysis: Seoul Seeks Smaller U.S. Role
http://www.spacewar.com/news/korea-05zzzzz.html

North Korea Demands US Accord It Same Status As Israel
http://www.spacewar.com/news/nuclear-doctrine-05zzp.html

Seoul (AFP) Oct 23, 2005 - North Korea on Sunday demanded the United States grant the communist state the same status as Israel, a US ally suspected of having nuclear arms outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

US Official Holds Talks On Nuclear Deal With India
http://www.spacewar.com/news/nuclear-civil-05zzzh.html

New Delhi (AFP) Oct 21, 2005 - A senior US State Department official met Friday with India's foreign secretary for talks on a nuclear deal between the two nations that breaks precedent on decades of non-proliferation policy.

US Support For India's Nuclear Programme Is A One-Off: Official
http://www.spacewar.com/news/nuclear-civil-05zzze.html

Paris (AFP) Oct 19, 2005 - Washington's moves to cooperate with India in developing nuclear energy is a one-off situation based on India's "responsible" track record which sets it apart from other aspiring nuclear powers, a senior US official said Wednesday.

India, US committed to implementing landmark nuclear deal
http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051021153751.6a04lwul.html

Blix Says US Misled Itself, the World on Iraq
(Russell Contreras, Boston Globe)

Saturday, October 22
Bush administration officials misled themselves on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and ''then they misled the world," Hans Blix, the former United Nations chief weapons inspector said yesterday.

Speaking at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, Blix criticized the administration's actions before invading Iraq in March 2003, but stopped short of saying it intentionally fooled the public on the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Living in Limbo
(Carnegie Analysis, Stephen Young)

More than a year after the Bush administration’s self-imposed deadline for deploying an antimissile system, the program appears in limbo, with no signs that the system will be declared operational. There are even signs the administration is giving up on the system.

Given the administration’s history, this is surprising. In 2000, George Bush campaigned on a pledge to deploy antimissile systems. It was the key national defense issue of his presidency until September 11, 2001. Even then, he linked the 9/11 attacks to the need to quickly deploy a system, declaring on December 17, 2002, that the United States would begin operating antimissile weapons in 2004. The Pentagon subsequently announced a goal of commencing “initial defensive operations” on October 1, 2004. The Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency shifted its primary focus from developing the system to meeting that goal. By the end of 2004, eight interceptors were in silos in Alaska and California.

The administration, however, never declared the system operational.

The White House Cabal
(Lawrence B. Wilkerson, Los Angeles Times - Opinion)

Tuesday, October 25
In President Bush's first term, some of the most important decisions about U.S. national security — including vital decisions about postwar Iraq — were made by a secretive, little-known cabal. It was made up of a very small group of people led by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

When I first discussed this group in a speech last week at the New American Foundation in Washington, my comments caused a significant stir because I had been chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell between 2002 and 2005.

But it's absolutely true. I believe that the decisions of this cabal were sometimes made with the full and witting support of the president and sometimes with something less. More often than not, then-national security advisor Condoleezza Rice was simply steamrolled by this cabal.

U.S. Wants Russia to Push Iran on Nukes
(Judith Ingram, Associated Press)

Monday, October 24
The U.S. national security adviser met with Russia's foreign minister on Monday, as Washington pushes diplomatic efforts to confront Iran over its nuclear program. Iran's foreign minister held separate talks in the Russian capital. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley met with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and other senior officials at the start of his two-day visit.

The United States has been trying to rally support for bringing Iran before the U.N. Security Council for possible economic penalties if it does not provide answers and allay fears about its nuclear program, which the U.S. says is a covert drive to build nuclear weapons.

U.S. Widens Campaign on North Korea
(David E. Sanger, New York Times)

Monday, October 24
The Bush administration is expanding what it calls "defensive measures" against North Korea, urging nations from China to the former Soviet states to deny overflight rights to aircraft that the United States says are carrying weapons technology, according to two senior administration officials.

At the same time, the officials said, the administration is accelerating an effort to place radiation detectors at land crossings and at airports throughout Central Asia. The devices are intended to monitor the North Koreans and the risk that nuclear weapons material could be removed from facilities in the former Soviet states.

White House Sanctions North Korean Firms
(Global Security Newswire)

Monday, October 24
The United States on Friday placed sanctions on eight North Korean entities for WMD proliferation-related activities, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Sept. 9).

The action freezes any assets the entities have under U.S. jurisdiction and bans transactions between U.S. citizens and the entities, according to a Treasury Department statement. The entities include Hesong Trading Corp. and Tosong Technology Trading Corp., subsidiaries of the Korea Mining Development Corp.

PROLIFERATION NEWS
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
October 31, 2005


Lessons Lost

During the last 60 years, we missed several opportunities to contain the nuclear threat. It's not too late to learn from our mistakes.

By Joseph Cirincione
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November/December 2005 (Photo credit: William Duke)


"The hope of civilization," President Harry S. Truman said in his message to Congress in October 1945, "lies in international arrangements looking, if possible, to the renunciation of the use and development of the atomic bomb." One month later, Truman joined the leaders of Britain and Canada to propose to the new United Nations that all atomic weapons be eliminated and that nuclear technology for peaceful purposes be shared under stringent international controls. By 1946, he had a detailed plan that included many of the nuclear nonproliferation proposals still debated today, including a ban on the production of new weapons and fissile material for weapons; international control of nuclear fuel; a strict inspection regime; and complete nuclear disarmament.

But in the United States, opponents of the proposal said America should hold on to its nuclear monopoly. In the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin wanted his own bombs. Both nations opted to seek security through atomic arsenals, not atomic treaties. The end result? The number of nuclear weapons grew from the two fission bombs held by the United States in November 1945 to more than 27,000 nuclear and thermonuclear bombs held by eight or nine nations today.

Now, as then, there is a clash of strategies. Proposals to reduce stockpiles, end production of nuclear weapon materials, increase international controls, and create new mechanisms for producing nuclear fuel vie with strategies to deploy new nuclear weapons, preserve large nuclear arsenals indefinitely, block selected nations from getting nuclear technology, and counter proliferation through military action. The nuclear expansionists defend these latter strategies as "new thinking" best suited to an era when terrorists and rogue nations can ignore arms control treaties and exploit our supposedly naïve faith in international law. But, as the history of the last six decades reveals, this so-called new thinking has time and again led us down a dead end.

To continue reading this article, please visit http://www.thebulletin.org/index.htm. The full article is posted on the Bulletin website and appears in the Special 60th Anniversary issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November/December 2005.

Joseph Cirincione is the Director for Nonproliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

For the latest proliferation news and resources, visit the Carnegie Proliferation News website, www.ProliferationNews.org.

November 1, 2005

Nonproliferation Turns 60
(Carnegie Analysis, Jane Vaynman)

Tuesday, November 1
Building the bomb was a feat of engineering and physics; controlling it would take politics and cooperation. This was clear to Harry S Truman when he tabled the first international nonproliferation initiative 60 years ago this November.

On November 15, 1945, President Truman joined with Prime Minister Clement Attlee of the United Kingdom and Prime Minister William Mackenzie King of Canada in a proposal for the future of atomic energy. The two-page statement called for careful planning by a new international atomic energy commission to be established by the United Nations. The statement itself also explicitly foreshadows the tension between energy needs and security imperatives that continues unresolved decades later.

United Nations First Committee Update, October 31, 2005
(Rebecca Johnson, Acronym Institute)

Monday, October 31
Rebecca Johnson reports on the deliberation of the United Nations First Committee on Disarmament and International Security. She describes the three separate resolutions presented in Committee by Iran, the U.S., and France and Germany. Johnson also provides a resolution index for the UN's First Committee.

U.S. Nuclear Deal With India Criticized by G.O.P. in Congress
(Joel Brinkley, New York Times)

Monday, October 31
Senior Republicans in Congress are angry with the Bush administration for proceeding with a deal to help India build civilian nuclear power plants without involving Congress so far, especially given that Congress will have to change one or more laws to make the deal viable.

"As it stands, the situation is both strange and unusual in that the Indian authorities know more about this important proposal than we in Congress," Representative Henry J. Hyde of Illinois, chairman of the House International Relations Committee, complained last week in an unusual public rebuke of the administration by a loyal Republican.

Republican aides said several members of Congress were outraged. Recently, the Republican chairmen and senior Democrats on both the Senate and House foreign affairs committees wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, urging her in atypically sharp language "to begin substantive discussions with our respective committees as soon as possible." The stated concern is procedural, but behind it lies a larger unease about bypassing nonproliferation rules for India, where "we still don't have transparency," as a Senate aide put it.

Japan, North Korea Set for Talks on Improving Ties
(Reuters)

Tuesday, November 1
Japan and North Korea kick off their first full-fledged talks in more than three years on Thursday seeking to resolve long-standing disputes that have blocked the Asian neighbours from establishing diplomatic ties.

The talks in Beijing between foreign ministry bureaucrats from the two countries come after North Korea agreed in principle in September to dismantle its nuclear arms programmes in exchange for aid and better ties with Washington and Tokyo.

The Beijing meetings would be the first comprehensive talks between Japan and North Korea since October 2002 when the two sides met in Kuala Lumpur, officials and analysts said. A failure to improve ties could hamper the six-party process on North Korea's nuclear arms programmes because Tokyo is reluctant to give large-scale aid to Pyongyang in return for abandoning its nuclear ambitions.

Article Raises Questions About Vietnam War
(Associated Press)

Monday, October 31
The National Security Agency has been blocking the release of an article by one of its historians that says intelligence officers falsified documents about a disputed attack that was used to escalate the Vietnam War, according to a researcher who has requested the article.

Matthew Aid, who asked for the article under the Freedom of Information Act last year, said it appears that officers at the NSA made honest mistakes in translating interceptions involving the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident. That was a reported North Vietnamese attack on American destroyers that helped lead to President Johnson's escalation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

Rather than correct the mistakes, the 2001 article in the NSA's classified Cryptologic Quarterly says, midlevel officials decided to falsify documents to cover up the errors, according to Aid, who is working on a history of the agency and has talked to a number of current and former government officials about this chapter of American history.

Aid draws comparisons to more recent intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction that overstated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's arsenal.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-11-03-voa11.cfm

Diplomats Say Iran Close to Restarting Uranium Processing
By VOA News
03 November 2005



Diplomats say Iran is readying a new phase of uranium processing, despite a call by the U.N. atomic agency to suspend all sensitive nuclear work.


Two technicians carry box containing uranium ore concentrate, known as yellowcake, at the Uranium Conversion Facility of Iran, just outside the city of Isfahan (file photo)
Officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran will begin feeding a new batch of uranium into its plant at Isfahan next week.

Earlier this year, the 35-nation IAEA board warned it would refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council if the country failed to suspend uranium enrichment and allow nuclear inspections.

This week, Iran allowed U.N. inspectors access to its Parchin military complex to collect environmental samples, in an apparent effort to avoid possible sanctions.

The United States says the Parchin site has been used for nuclear weapons testing. But Tehran insists its nuclear program is peaceful.

Meanwhile, Iran's state media quoted the country's foreign minister saying more than 40 of the country's ambassadors were being replaced. He said some envoys had reached retirement age, adding their terms will expire by the end of the year.

http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/afx/2005/...afx2332063.html

AFX News Limited
Iran 'open to offers' on nuclear enrichment abroad
11.11.2005, 09:15 AM


TEHRAN (AFX) - Iran wants to conduct sensitive nuclear work on its territory but is open to the possibility of uranium being enriched abroad for its needs, nuclear chief Ali Larijani said.

'What is important for Iran is to enrich (uranium) on its soil,' Larijani was quoted as saying by local news agencies, but added that if there was a formal proposal for enrichment abroad 'we will discuss it.'

Under a proposal reportedly being floated, Iran would be allowed to carry out an initial step in making nuclear fuel -- converting uranium ore into the uranium hexafluoride gas that is the feedstock for making enriched uranium.

But enrichment itself could be carried out in Russia under an offer reportedly being considered by the European Union and the United States.

Russia has staunchly backed Iran's right to a civilian nuclear energy programme, but the United States has alleged that Tehran's effort is a cover to develop weapons.

sgh-lal/txw





COPYRIGHT



Copyright AFX News Limited 2005. All rights reserved.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=8007

November 12, 2005
A Legal US Nuclear Attack Against Iran
The real reason for the IAEA Iran resolution
by Jorge Hirsch
On September 24 of this year, the United States finally achieved a goal it had persistently pursued over several years. Iran was declared by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) to be in "non compliance" with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The resolution passed by the IAEA is remarkably weak. It does not set a date for Iran to be referred to the UN Security Council, and it does not even mention the possibility of sanctions. It even notes that Iran has made "good progress" in correcting its "breaches," all of which date back to before October 2003. The LA Times characterized it as a "gentle slap." It is instead an enormous thud.

We pointed out before that the probable reason for the U.S. to insist on the passage of such a weak resolution (on the face of opposition by Russia and China to stronger resolutions) was to reach a stalemate in the Security Council that would provide an excuse for U.S. military action, which would necessarily include the use of nuclear weapons against Iran [1], [2], [3]. There is, however, an even stronger reason for the U.S. to have pushed for this resolution so adamantly, a reason which is valid even if Iran is not referred to the Security Council at the forthcoming November 24 meeting or thereafter, and that supports the predicted scenario.

The IAEA resolution of September 24 2005 allows the United States to carry out a nuclear attack against Iran "legally."

Non-nuclear states have sought for many years that nuclear states issue clear "negative security assurances," meaning a committment from nuclear states not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. No matter how logical such a desire appears to you and me, nuclear states have been notoriously reluctant to make such pledges, especially the United States.

The latest such assurances from the five nuclear states date back to 1995, and are the subject of UN Security Council Resolution 984, which was passed with unanimity. The legal status of these assurances is not totally clear, and non-nuclear states have continued to request "legally binding" assurances, implying that the existing assurances are not. In fact, in 2002 John Bolton, then Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, in an interview with "Arms Control Today" explicitly disavowed any U.S. committment to the 1995 resolution.

Nevertheless, a case can be made that these assurances are at the very least "politically binding" and may even be "legally binding." The reason is that they were made for the explicit purpose of having the non-nuclear states extend the NPT in 1995. The fact that the non-nuclear states indeed did extend the NPT based on these assurances confers them legally binding character even if it was not so intended originally, according to G. Bunn (1997).

The text of the 1995 U.S. negative security assurance (S/1995/263) reads:

"The United States reaffirms that it will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons except in the case of an invasion or any other attack on the United States, its territories, its armed forces or other troops, its allies, or on a State towards which it has a security commitment, carried out or sustained by such a non-nuclear-weapon State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State."

Good news, the U.S. cannot nuke Iran, a party to the NPT? Think again. The paragraph immediately before in the U.S. declaration reads:

"It is important that all parties to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons fulfil their obligations under the Treaty. In that regard, consistent with generally recognised principles of international law, parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons must be in compliance with these undertakings in order to be eligible for any benefits of adherence to the Treaty."

Iran was "in compliance" until September 24th, 2005. Thereafter, the "benefit" of not being subject to nuking no longer applies. An analysis of this qualification of the U.S. negative security assurance declaration and its implications for non-nuclear states has been made by Jean du Preez in 2003 and is consistent with our conclusion.

Bolton's statements were made at a time when the US had already been denouncing for several years that Iran was pursuing a secret nuclear weapons program in violation of the NPT. The detailed analysis of Gordon Prather, however, shows that Iran's 'violations' did not then nor do now amount to "non-compliance." Nevertheless it will be politically very important for the US that the 1995 security assurance is no longer applicable to Iran, and Bolton (now US Ambassador to the UN) will surely emphasize it at the United Nations when the time comes to justify the US action.

Iran's protective shield against US nukes, however feeble it was, is no longer. Any "negotiating proposal" of the EU and the US towards Iran will be carefully tailored so that Iran cannot possibly accept it. Irrespective of what happens at the November 24th IAEA meeting, the US plan to nuke Iran will continue moving forward, focused and unrelenting.

A Reminder Of How Debate Over Prewar Intelligence Continues To Shadow Bush
(Richard W. Stevenson and Douglas Jehl, New York Times)

Tuesday, November 15
With Mr. Bush politically weakened, the Democrats emboldened and public support for the war ebbing, the White House is building two main lines of defense. It is asserting that many Democrats saw the same threat from Iraq as the administration did. And it is pointing to two government studies that it says found no evidence that prewar intelligence, while admittedly flawed, had been twisted by political pressure.

The first is giving the White House some political protection, though not enough to deter Democratic attacks. The second addresses only part of the issue, because neither study directly addressed the broader question: whether the administration presented that intelligence to Congress, the nation and the world in a way that overstated what the intelligence said about the threat posed by Mr. Hussein's weapons programs and any links to terrorism.

UN Nuclear Chief to Press Iran on Compromise
(George Jahn, Associated Press)

Monday, November 14
The head of the UN nuclear monitoring agency is supporting a proposal that calls for Iran to move its uranium enrichment program to Russia, and he plans to carry the details with him to Tehran within days, diplomats said yesterday.

The planned trip by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is meant to persuade Tehran to accept the initiative aimed at eliminating Iran's capacity to make fuel for nuclear weapons, despite an initial rejection.

North Korea Tabled Five-Part Disarmament Plan
(Global Security Newswire)

Monday, November 14
North Korea last week offered a five-step plan for gradually eliminating its nuclear weapons capability, Agence France-Presse reported today.

North Korean negotiators at the six-party talks in Beijing proposed forgoing nuclear testing, ending transfers of nuclear technology and halting production of additional nuclear weapons, said South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young.

They also proposed readmitting inspectors and dismantling their atomic weapons before returning to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Chung said.

In Asia, Bush Hopes to Advance Trade, but Soft-Pedal Iraq and North Korea
(David E. Sanger, New York Times)

Tuesday, November 15
Japan, Tuesday, Nov. 15 - The first time President Bush visited Asia as president, just two months after the Sept. 11 attacks, he had little time or patience for a summit meeting that traditionally focused on trade and globalization. He talked only about terrorism, and insisted that everyone else follow his lead.

But when Mr. Bush arrives in this ancient Japanese capital tonight, his first stop on a four-nation tour, he will be embarking on a trip that sounds like those of his father's presidency and President Clinton's.

Should the US Sell Nuclear Technology to India? - Part II
(Ashley J. Tellis, YaleGlobal Online)

Thursday, November 10
The Indo-US bilateral agreement providing New Delhi access to the long-denied civilian nuclear technology has emerged as a contentious issue in the Congress. But it need not be because the deal is good for both countries’ national security interests as well as for preventing nuclear proliferation.

The July 18, 2005 agreement, many critics assert would undermine the global nonproliferation regime and ultimately American security. At the first hearing on this subject on September 8, 2005, Congressman Henry J. Hyde correctly noted that among the critical questions surrounding this agreement was whether its “net impact on our nonproliferation policy is positive or negative.” On October 26, 2005, at the second hearing on this issue, four out of the five witnesses empanelled by the House Committee on International Relations affirmed the conventional wisdom that such a deal weakens nonproliferation rather than strengthening it.

India Will Have to Present 'Credible' Plan of Separation: US
(Press Trust of India)

Monday, November 14
Asserting that the Bush Administration was committed to implementing the July 18 nuclear agreement with India, the US today made it clear that India would have to present a "credible" plan of separating civil and nuclear establishments before the American Congress decides on lifting of sanctions on it.

Describing the issue as a "complicated process" involving several players, US Ambassador to India David C Mulford said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also would have to be "positive" on the deal for it to be "fully effective" but noted that officials of the nuclear watchdog had recently made "positive statements" on the issue.

Intelligence Probe Takes Shape
(Walter Pincus, Washington Post)

Thursday, November 10
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence yesterday worked out a tentative arrangement for pursuing its inquiry into how the Bush administration publicly portrayed the intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, with Democrats saying they expected some officials to be called to testify before the review is completed.

"There is a new resolution of the way we are going," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said yesterday after the committee met in closed session for 90 minutes. Feinstein is one of six committee members charged with resolving differences over how to proceed with the "phase two" inquiry.

The first phase, completed last year, focused on the quality of prewar intelligence, not on how officials used the information. "It is uncertain how long it will take, but the process will be similar to our phase one inquiry," she said, which involved closed hearings and multiple draft reports before being completed.

Carnegie News:

Joseph Cirincione: On November 14, Carnegie Director for Nonproliferation Joseph Cirincione delivered a public lecture on “Proliferation Threats and Policies, 2005”at the University of Kansas at the Eurasian Security and Military Affairs Forum.

Today, November 15 at 2:30pm, Cirincione will speak at Kansas State University on “The Problem of Controlling Weapons of Mass Destruction, with Special Emphasis on North Korea and Iran.” Tonight at 6:30pm, Cirincione will give a presentation to the KSU community and university leaders as part of the Military and Diplomatic Lecture Series.

From November 17 - 21, Cirincione will be in Istanbul, Turkey to participate in the Istanbul Workshop on Nuclear Dangers in the Middle East sponsored by the Swedish Foreign Ministry. On November 19, he will speak in the session on “External Influences on the Middle East Nuclear Policies: US, EU, China, Russia.”

proliferationnews@carnegieendowment.org.

http://www.antiwar.com/bidwai/?articleid=8056
November 17, 2005
Indian Nuclear Deal With US Turns Faustian Bargain

by Praful Bidwai
NEW DELHI - Indian leaders are finding, to their dismay, that they confront far tougher choices in implementing a controversial nuclear agreement they signed with the United States than they had bargained for.

These choices pertain to a sequence of steps New Delhi must take that could prove a potential obstacle to the deal's execution, based upon its approval by the U.S. Congress.

Under the agreement, signed on July 18 by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the U.S. promised to make a one-time exception for India in the international nuclear control regime, recognize it as a "responsible" nuclear weapons-state (NWS), and resume civilian nuclear commerce with it.

In return, India would separate its civilian nuclear facilities from military ones and "voluntarily" place the former under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It would also sign an Additional Protocol with the IAEA providing far more intrusive-than-normal inspections of civilian facilities.

On Monday, U.S. ambassador to India David Mulford bluntly announced that India must submit a plan for civilian-military separation so that Washington can judge whether or not it is "credible" and decide to present it to the Congress.

The agreement's approval would demand a change in U.S. domestic laws, in particular the Nonproliferation Act of 1978, which prohibits civilian nuclear transactions with, and triggers sanctions against, a country that is pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

India, which shocked the world by detonating five nuclear bombs in May 1998, has an ambitious nuclear weapons program for which it desperately seeks recognition, especially from the U.S.

From initial condemnation of the tests, Washington has moved to an awkward acceptance of India's NWS status. This followed rounds of high-level talks on the nuclear and missiles issue and a political-military reconciliation under which the two states launched a "strategic partnership."

If implemented, the July agreement would bring this process to fruition and give it official imprimatur. However, India would still not have the status of a nuclear power under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of 1970, which only recognizes five NWSs (the U.S., Russia, Britain, France, and China).

Indian leaders had promised that the agreement's implementation would be strictly "reciprocal." On July 28, Manmohan Singh told Parliament: "Indian actions will be contingent at every stage on actions taken by the other side." He said India's commitments would be "conditional upon, and reciprocal to, the U.S. fulfilling its side" of the deal. He also said the separation of civilian and military installations would take place in a phased manner over a period of time.

Singh reiterated that the decision to place civilian nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards would be strictly voluntary and "based solely on our own duly calibrated national decisions" and in keeping with the agreed principle that "India should have the same benefits and advantages" as the five NPT-recognized NWSs.

However, ambassador Mulford's statement and recent depositions by senior U.S. officials before congressional committees put a divergent interpretation on India's obligations under the deal. Although India need not complete the separation of civilian and military facilities before Congress approves the agreement, it must draw up a "game plan" to do so before Congress considers the deal.

On Nov. 2, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: "Our judgment is that it would not be wise or fair to ask congress to make such a consequential decision without evidence that the Indian government was acting on what is arguably the most important of its commitments – the separation of its civilian and military nuclear facilities."

To do this, India "must craft a credible and transparent plan and have begun to implement it before the administration would request congressional action."

This sequence of steps flies in the face of "reciprocity" and "Indian actions" being "contingent at any every stage on actions taken by the other side." India must take the first step.

"This is unlikely to go down well with India's political class," says Kamal Mitra Chenoy, professor of international politics at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, in the capital.

The right-wing, nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which was responsible for India declaring itself a nuclear weapon state in 1998, when it ruled the country, has already been bitterly critical of the July deal as one taken without wider national consensus.

As for the Left, the minority Manmohan Singh government is critically dependent on communist parties for survival and credibility. "Already, the government is under attack for having voted against Iran at the IAEA at the behest of the U.S. and in order to defend the nuclear deal," says Chenoy.

The Left, the centrist Samajwadi Party, and the Janata Dal (Secular) have launched a joint campaign on the issue of India's vote against Iran. They have held mass rallies in New Delhi and Lucknow and accused the government of undermining an independent foreign policy as well as India's vital interest in a major gas pipeline from Iran through Pakistan, which holds the key to Asian cooperation in energy.

However, even more controversial will be the U.S. demand, voiced by Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert G. Joseph before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, that India's offer of placing civilian facilities under the IAEA safeguards should not be "voluntary," unlike for the five "recognized" NWSs.

Joseph said that "we would not view a voluntary offer arrangement as defensible from a nonproliferation standpoint or consistent with the [July 18] Joint Statement."

According to M.R. Srinivasan, former chairman of India's Atomic Energy Commission, of the hundreds of civilian nuclear installations they have, the five NWSs have so far placed only 17 under the IAEA safeguards.

Their agreements allow the removal of civilian facilities from safeguards and the transfer of nuclear materials out of them. If India is to have, as claimed by the government, the "same responsibilities and practices" as the five NWSs, it should be permitted to transfer material from civilian facilities.

However, Joseph was categorical that in India's case the IAEA safeguards "must be applied in perpetuity" and "nuclear materials in the civil sector should not be transferred out."

This is a clear case of what New Delhi has repeatedly condemned as "double standards." It claimed the deal was meant to correct imbalances. A note issued by the prime minister's office on July 29 explicitly stated that: "NWSs, including the U.S., have the right to shift facilities from civilian category to military, and there is no reason why this should not apply to India."

The Indian nuclear establishment has special concerns about at least two kinds of installations: the 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor (PFBR) under construction, and plants that reprocess spent fuel from civilian power reactors to extract plutonium from it. This plutonium can be used to make bombs.

India is loath to place the PFBR under safeguards because it claims it is a "research reactor." It is equally reluctant to lose a cheap source of plutonium from the power reactor reprocessing plants.

India's dilemmas come in the context of opposition to the agreement aired by many U.S. proliferation experts and congressmen, who say it will weaken the nonproliferation regime.

The deal is also likely to face opposition from the 55-member Nuclear Suppliers' Group, which the Bush administration hoped to win over. The Group is divided; Russia, France, and Britain, which want to sell nuclear technology and materials to India, support the agreement while Sweden, Japan, and New Zealand have voiced their disapproval.

Complicating matters is India's domestic politics. With widening divergences between Indian and U.S. interpretations of the deal and growing discrepancies between U.S. demands and Singh's pledges, a domestic consensus will prove elusive. This will limit the government's options.

(Inter Press Service)

ElBaradei Could Visit Iran to Sew Up Nuclear Deal
(Mark Heinrich, Reuters)

Tuesday, November 15
The U.N. nuclear watchdog chief could go to Tehran soon to try to nail down a deal over activities the West suspect could be Iran's preliminary steps to making nuclear arms, diplomats said on Tuesday.

A new report on Iran by International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei is to be circulated among the 35 IAEA member states later this week, ahead of a crunch November 24 board meeting on whether to refer Tehran to the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions.

Iran 'Resumes Uranium Processing'
(BBC - UK)

Wednesday, November 16
Iran has begun to process a new batch of uranium to convert it to a gas that can be enriched into the material for nuclear bombs, diplomats say.

" Conversion has resumed," a diplomat close to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna said. The move comes despite heavy pressure from the US and Europe for Iran to cease all nuclear activity.

Hagel Defends Criticisms of Iraq Policy
(Glenn Kessler, Washington Post)

Wednesday, November 16
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) strongly criticized yesterday the White House's new line of attack against critics of its Iraq policy, saying that "the Bush administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them."

With President Bush leading the charge, administration officials have lashed out at Democrats who have accused the administration of manipulating intelligence to justify the war in Iraq. Bush has suggested that critics are hurting the war effort, telling U.S. troops in Alaska on Monday that critics "are sending mixed signals to our troops and the enemy. And that's irresponsible."

U.S., S. Korea Find Unity Against North's Nuclear Arms Program
(Peter Baker and Anthony Faiola, Washington Post)

Thursday, November 17
President Bush and his South Korean counterpart presented a united front Thursday in pressuring North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program without additional concessions, despite calls just a day earlier by South Korea and China for a softer line.

Meeting here in advance of an Asian economic summit, Bush and President Roh Moo Hyun staked out an uncompromising stand toward North Korea and labored to play down differences of opinion about strategy. Bush again flatly rejected North Korea's demand to help it build a light-water civilian nuclear reactor until it has dismantled its entire nuclear weapons program.