ACCESSION NUMBER:00000
FILE ID:96032001.POL
DATE:03/20/96
TITLE:20-03-96 DEUTCH CALLS DEVELOPED NATIONS VULNERABLE TO TERRORIST ATTACK
TEXT:
(Says chemical agents are weapon of first choice) (990)
By Jacquelyn S. Porth
USIA Security Affairs Writer
Washington -- Chemical weapons are the likely tool of preference for
terrorists trying to harm the United States and its allies, followed
closely by biological and nuclear weapons as a second and third
choice, Director of Central Intelligence John Deutch told members of
Congress March 20.
And the ability of the United States or other developed countries "to
protect their infrastructure" from nuclear, chemical, or biological
terrorist attack, Deutch said, "is very small indeed." Infrastructure
vulnerability is an issue, he explained at a Senate Permanent
Investigations Subcommittee hearing on global proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction and illicit trafficking of nuclear materials,
because there has been a growth in international terrorism and a
willingness by terrorists to attack civilian populations.
Senator Sam Nunn noted that the "new adversaries" of the United States
and its allies "are in some ways more dangerous than the Cold War
threats" once faced. Now, he pointed out, there is "the possibility
that weapons of mass destruction may become accessible to groups
willing to do the unthinkable."
Senator Richard Lugar said he believes that the risk of a possible
nuclear detonation in the United States could increase if "nuclear
terrorists gain access to the torrent of nuclear materials awash in
Russia and the other states" of the former Soviet Union. He cited
German statistics that there had been 700 cases of attempted nuclear
materials smuggling in Russia between 1991 and 1994 and that, in 1993,
the Russian government reported 900 attempts to illegally enter
Russian nuclear facilities.
Deutch pointed out that most of the reports of Russian diversions have
been "bogus," although in a few cases weapons-usable material has been
involved but in such small quantities as to be "significantly less
than what is required for a nuclear explosive device." Nevertheless,
he stressed, these incidents should "serve as a warning to us." Enough
nuclear materials to create an explosive device could conceivably be
smuggled in one suitcase, he said.
The director observed that the Russians no longer have enough money to
provide adequate security for their nuclear weapons facilities and
that the deteriorating security situation invites diversion. That
threat "is real," he said, and "we must do everything we can to reduce
the strategic nuclear material inventory productive capacity" in
Russia.
If a significant diversion were to occur, either through the sale of
some nuclear device or a meaningful amount of strategic nuclear
materials, he warned, "we will face a crisis of enormous proportions."
For terrorists or subnational groups, Deutch explained, "the only
practical way to acquire nuclear weapons" is by stealing or purchasing
them or by buying the strategic nuclear materials and then addressing
"the much simpler problem of constructing a device from the highly
enriched uranium or plutonium."
Deutch cited several countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya and North Korea --
as having explored the possibility at one time or another of buying
nuclear materials or devices.
Another subcommittee witness, Gary Milhollin of the Wisconsin Project
on Nuclear Arms Control, criticized U.S. plans to export super
computers to Russia. He said it is a "mistake" because it will
increase Russia's ability to make nuclear weapons.
Milhollin also faulted China for allegedly exporting ring magnets to
Pakistan for its nuclear weapons material production facility. There
has not been "an official peep" on this issue by the U.S. government,
he said, urging imposition of sanctions against China. The Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which was renewed and indefinitely
extended last year, should be more than just a piece of paper, he
said.
The U.S. should defend the NPT, and it should not reward Pakistan's
behavior, Milhollin declared. This was a reference to a Clinton
administration plan to send $368 million in military equipment to
Pakistan. Reuters reported March 20 that Congress had been notified of
the plan to send P-3 anti-submarine warfare aircraft and various
missile systems to Pakistan, which had previously paid for the
equipment but never received it.
The Pakistani situation is getting worse, according to Milhollin,
because that country has a nuclear shopping list and there is "a lot
of shopping going on." He said the U.S. should have a global policy,
applicable to every nation, against such activity.
Milhollin quoted data gathered between 1980 and 1994 which indicates
that China supplied nuclear technology to Algeria, Iran, Iraq and
Syria, as well as missile technology to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and
Syria.
Since 1994, he added, China has provided missile components and poison
gas ingredients to Iran and sold missile components to Pakistan.
Although China has been promising to "clean up its act," he said, it
has not, and the United States hasn't been able to establish "an
effective strategy for getting China to keep its word."
David Kay, senior vice president of Hicks and Associates, told the
subcommittee the allegation that China provided Pakistan with
information for a nuclear weapons design should be "a wake up call."
Meanwhile, Iraq's status as producer of weapons of mass destruction is
unclear, according to the executive chairman of the United Nations
Special Commission (UNSCOM). Rolf Ekeus told senators March 20 that
UNSCOM cannot provide the U.N. Security Council "reasonable
assurances" that commission members have had access to all Iraqi
weapons. Efforts to hide Iraqi missiles, he said, have been linked to
Iraqi Republican Guard and Presidential Guard units.
Ekeus expressed "serious concern" that Iraq may be hiding more than a
dozen missiles with biological warheads on mobile platforms, even
though the Iraqi leadership insists otherwise. While Iraq claims that
it has destroyed its biological agents, no coherent accounting or
proof has been provided, according to the U.N. official. He said there
is no Iraqi paperwork to support its claim, no concrete physical
proof, and no credible witnesses.
NNNN
.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
