 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
9/7/10 |
 |
||||||||
|
 |
Home / Publications / News |
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
RANSAC Nuclear News, September 15, 2003 Compiled By: RANSAC Staff A. Cooperative Threat Reduction
 A. Cooperative Threat Reduction 1. The terrorist threat that gets shortchanged In Iraq, the United States has a problem with weapons of mass destruction: It wants to eliminate them, but first it has to find them. In the former Soviet Union, it has the opposite problem: It's knee-deep in these weapons, but it's not quite up to the task of eliminating them. Two years after the worst terrorist attack in history, an even bigger danger still looms: Violent anti-American groups getting their hands on weapons more lethal than box cutters and commercial aircraft. Eight months before the destruction of the World Trade Center, a bipartisan task force warned that "the most urgent unmet national security threat to the United States today is the danger that weapons of mass destruction could be stolen and sold to terrorists or hostile nation states and used against American troops abroad or citizens at home." No one paid much attention to such fears at the time, but Sept. 11 should have put an end to cheerful complacency. Those atrocities were nothing compared to what terrorists could do with an atomic bomb. The chance that Al Qaeda might get one from Saddam Hussein was one of the chief justifications for invading Iraq. Yet elsewhere, the U.S. government is doing far less than it should to avert the unthinkable. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, recently returned from Russia and reports that there is still a huge amount to be done. In 1997, the Russians ratified the international treaty banning chemical weapons. At the time, they had 40,000 metric tons of nerve gas, and today, they still do. In the past six years, they have destroyed a grand total of 100 pounds--pounds, not tons--of that stockpile. Lugar and former Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn of Georgia visited a site that houses some 2 million shells and warheads containing chemical agents. "The smallest of these," notes Lugar, "can easily fit into a suitcase and be carried out of the facility. Just one briefcase could carry enough agents to kill thousands of people." There have been hundreds of documented attempts at smuggling nuclear or radioactive material. Osama bin Laden himself has declared a fervent desire to acquire the bomb. But many weapons sites in Russia and its former sister states have less security than the average American high school. At others, accounting is so lax that if a weapon were stolen, it might never be missed. At least not until it went off in an American city. The chief American effort to defuse the danger, known as the Nunn-Lugar program, provides funds to help the Russian government secure weapons sites and destroy munitions. But it has rarely gotten the urgent priority it deserves. The Bush administration wanted to cut the program when it took office. Congressional Republicans have often balked at giving money to the Russians. After a budget increase last year, the administration proposes to reduce funding for this effort by $35 million in 2004. Even last year's outlays look skimpy next to, say, the cost of the war in Iraq, not to mention the cost of failure. The federal task force recommended $30 billion in funds over 10 years just to safeguard and destroy nuclear materials in the former Soviet republics. We're nowhere near that goal, and our leaders apparently aren't interested in meeting it. Why not? Part of the resistance comes from the less-than-perfect reliability of Russia, where corruption often diverts money from its intended uses. Another complaint is that while we're paying Moscow to destroy weapons of mass destruction in Russia, the Tehran government is paying it to build a nuclear reactor that could spawn weapons of mass destruction in Iran. But even if not all the money we're spending is being spent appropriately, reducing the flow of dollars wouldn't help. We don't cut spending on defense just because programs suffer cost overruns. President Putin has shown some flexibility on the Iranian project, and the danger it presents is less immediate than that of Russia's own loose nukes. Nunn-Lugar has been undeniably effective in its overall purpose. It has paid for the deactivation of some 6,000 nuclear warheads, employed 22,000 weapons scientists who could be working for Al Qaeda instead, and upgraded security for hundreds of tons of nuclear material. Which one of those achievements do the critics think was unnecessary? Nearly three years ago, the task force said, in words that remain true today, "The existing scope and management of the U.S. program addressing this threat leave an unacceptable risk of failure and the potential for catastrophic consequences." There's a word to summarize what we face if Nunn-Lugar fails: doom. Return to Menu B. CW Destruction 1. It's Easier To Create Chemical Weapons Than To Destroy Them On September 4 the Pentagon admitted that it won't be able to destroy US chemical arsenals on time (in line with international commitments). In this connection, the United States wants to contact the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in the Hague and to request that specific CW-elimination deadlines be postponed by at least five years. The convention on banning the development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons, which also stipulates their complete destruction, provides for this opportunity. This document was signed by 174 countries of the world, entering into force April 29, 1997. All countries, which had announced the existence of CW arsenals, i.e. the United States, Russia, India and South Korea, were to have destroyed one percent of such arsenals three years later, destroying 20 percent four years after and completely eliminating all CW stocks by April 29, 2007. Russia, which had stockpiled 40,000 tons of chemical weapons, was unable to meet these deadlines because its inadequate material-technical base could not effectively destroy such weapons; moreover, any full-fledged financial appropriations were lacking. Russia needed at least $8-10 billion; meanwhile annual federal appropriations (for this purpose) totalled not more than 500 million roubles. The Government of Russia notified the OPCW in the Hague 180 days before the reporting deadline (in accordance with convention provisions), also citing some rather weighty arguments, which explained the Russian side's inability to abide by its commitments. Consequently, Moscow was allowed to delay the CW-elimination process on two occasions. Russia informed the Hague about the destruction of one percent of all CW arsenals (400 tons) only this past April. However, the US situation is much more favorable. The United States, which officially has 31,279 tons of chemical weapons, also boasts the required material-technical base for destroying such weapons, as well as enough money for this purpose. The Pentagon estimates that its experts needed $24 billion in order to accomplish this objective. This sum total exceeded previous federal-budget appropriations by an impressive $9 billion; nonetheless, the Congress used to set aside over $120 million for the US Army's CW-elimination programs each year, increasing this sum total by another $40 million after the September 11, 2001 tragedy. Consequently, Washington managed to destroy almost 25 percent of its CW arsenals by late 2001. The United States, which has mastered an environmentally-friendly CW-destruction process a long time ago, doesn't have to incinerate its chemical weapons. This CW-detoxification process is already being used by Russia at its Gorny factory for recycling lewisite and mustard gas in the Saratov region. Plans are in place to introduce a similar process at the Shchuchye facility in the Kurgan region; consequently, it will become possible to effectively dispose of sarin, soman and VX gases there. Washington had furnished Moscow with $25 million back in the early 1990s for the purpose of developing this process; the US side eventually did its best to assess the efficiency of the afore-said process. This CW-disposal method was developed by Moscow's GOSNIIOKHT state-run R&D institute of organic chemistry and technologies, what with US scientists checking it at a well-known Maryland center, which developed virtually all US chemical weapons. Moreover, it was checked at Russia's Saratov higher military NBC (Nuclear, Bacteriological and Chemical) protection school and rated absolutely safe. That's why the US Administration agreed to help Russia destroy its CW arsenals in accordance with the Nunn-Lugar cooperative-threat reduction program. Nonetheless, the US side declined to buy Russian know-how. Russia continues to receive assistance (in line with the Nunn-Lugar CW-disposal program) by fits and starts, thus failing to ensure the timely fulfilment of its commitments stemming from the convention's second stage. Meanwhile the US side has also been forced to admit that it's unable to do this on time. Moscow doesn't gloat over the Pentagon's statement; nor does it have any time-serving political considerations in this connection. Experts from the national Munitions Agency, which is solely responsible for destroying all chemical weapons, are saying that it's much harder to destroy this poisonous stuff than to create it. Summing up, it takes a lot of time, money and effort to say goodbye to the Cold War era. Return to Menu 2. Russia ready to let American specialists see secret technology Russia is ready to receive American specialists and familiarize them with the domestic technology for environmentally friendly elimination of chemical weapons, Chairman of the State Commission for Chemical Disarmament of the Russian Federation Sergei Kiriyenko said in a exclusive interview with ITAR-TASS on Friday. "Americans are helping us with funds to build an industrial facility in the town of Shchuchye, Kurgan region, for the elimination of chemical weapons. When devising the project, we also examined thoroughly the proposed technology," Kiriyenko stressed. "Our technology is now open. We even offered it to Japan when that country was considering the elimination of the chemical weapons that remained in Chinese territory during World War II," Kiriyenko said. According to him, "The Americans have their own advanced technology, but our method of eliminating chemical weapons confirms that our approach to its liquidation is correct." "Our chemical weapons are stored in populated areas and therefore we could not agree to burning them as the United States does. Russia is using a two-tier "cold" technology, which is environmentally friendly and optimal as regards the cost. The American military are forced to switch to this kind of technology at present." Sergei Kiriyenko noted that the switch to the technologies that are new to the United States will take some time. It is not accidental that the Pentagon made a statement on September 3 on the possible extension of the timeframe for the elimination of its chemical weapons. Return to Menu 3. Russia to back US request on chemical weapons Sergei Kiriyenko, the Head of the State Commission for Banning Chemical Weapons, told Itar-Tass on Thursday that Russia would support the U.S. proposal to extend the deadline for destroying U.S. chemical weapons at a session of the Organization for banning chemical weapons this autumn. Kiriyenko explained that the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, to which the United States is a signatory, provides for the liquidation of at least 45 percent of U.S. chemical arsenals by April 29 next year and of 100 percent of chemical stockpiles (30, 600 tons) by late 2007. However, the Pentagon announced early in September that the United States would be unable to meet the established deadline and would like to ask for a delay. The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention entered in force in 1997. It provides for granting a delay if the sides present a notification 180 days before the deadline expires. The parties are allowed to suspend the liquidation of chemical weapons for five years if they have serious grounds. A 145-member Organization for banning chemical weapons has been set up to put the provisions of the 1993 Convention into action. Return to Menu C. Nuclear Terrorism 1. Russian Atomic Energy Ministry: WMD May Find Themselves in Terrorist Hands The threat that international terrorists may get access to the weapons of mass destruction is becoming an urgent problem for the world community, said Russian Minister of Atomic Energy Alexander Rumyantsev. He spoke at the 47th General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that opened in Vienna on Monday. According to Rumyantsev, though the Cold War has ended, "many questions of strengthening peace and strategic stability are waiting for their solution." The minister believes that "today we have to speak of the possibility when international terrorists may get access to weapons of mass destruction, appropriate materials and technologies as of today's reality." The Atomic Energy Minister believes that a reply to the existing problems and the new challenges "can be active joint work by all countries on a firm foundation of the international law and the preservation and strengthening of the regime of international treaties." However, in this work, according to him, it is necessary to ensure "a balance of the interests of all the states." Alexander Rumyantsev called the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons an effective instrument for deterring the threat of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and ensuring regional and global stability. Return to Menu 2. ATOM-2003 drill held at Leningrad nuclear plant�s site September 11 the large-scale tactical exercise ATOM-2003 was held at Leningrad nuclear power plant site. The exercise was participated by the Russian federal security service (FSB), internal troops, ministry of interior (MVD), Rosenergoatom Concern and representatives from law enforcement agencies of Armenia and Ukraine, as Nuclear.Ru was informed by Leningrad NPP public relations office. The exercise that had started in the town of Sosnovy Bor on September 2 was targeted to enhance interaction of the law enforcement and security force with Rosenergoatom�s entities and Leningrad NPP administration in the event of an emergency. The exercise was conducted in two phases. The second phase ended September 11 and featured a simulated hostage taking at the nuclear power plant and setting them free. According to head of FSB directorate for St. Petersburg and Leningrad Region one-star general Alexander Bortnikov, the exercise achieved its goal. He also noted that the exercise triggered a rather large force including the Sosnovy Bor�s anti-terrorist commission. �The law enforcement agencies have demonstrated their capabilities of team work in extreme situations�, Bortnikov said adding that such events are held frequently enough at nuclear power facilities and other potentially hazardous sites. Return to Menu D. US-Russia 1. Russian, US Presidents to Discuss Strategic Stability Russian and US Presidents Vladimir Putin and George Bush will discuss the world's strategic stability in Camp David, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov told a press conference in Moscow. "Both sides are actively getting ready for this meeting," Yuri Fedotov stressed. According to him, the two leaders will also discuss bilateral issues. The forthcoming summit will be of particular importance for the consolidation of Russia-US relations, the diplomat said. Return to Menu E. Russia-Iran 1. RF says IAEA resolution on Iran will help solve problems Russia considers the International Atomic Energy Agency's resolution on Iran a plan of action, Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko said. He said the resolution approved by the IAEA Board of Governors sends a "clear, direct but respectful signal to Iran on the need to continue and expand cooperation with the Agency, and ensure full transparency of its nuclear programme." Russia considers the resolution "a formulated plan of work for the IAEA and Iran in order to urgently clarify remaining issues," the spokesman said. "We are confident that such cooperation is in the interests of Iran," he added. Yakovenko believes that accession to the additional protocol to the IAEA safeguards agreement "is in the interests of Iran". In his view, "This would be a good confidence-building measure and a demonstration of openness with regard to nuclear activities." The diplomat expressed the hope that "by the next meeting of the Board of Governors we will be able to state serious progress in the implementation of measures proposed in the resolution, and the issue will be returned from political debates to normal work of the Agency in one of the its member states." The resolution sets a new deadline - October 31 - for Iran's compliance with IAEA requirements. The IAEA Board of Governors urged Iran to supply, as soon as possible, full information regarding all aspects of its previous and current nuclear activities. Return to Menu 2. Russia urges Iran nuclear compliance (excerpted) Russia has urged Iran to co-operate with a demand from the UN's nuclear agency to prove that it is not secretly developing atomic weapons. Iranian delegates walked out of a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Friday after a resolution was adopted giving Iran until 31 October to disclose all its nuclear activities. "It is in Iran's interest to clear these issues and thus confirm the peaceful nature of its nuclear programmes," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak said. Russia is building Iran's first nuclear power reactor at the port of Bushehr. Correspondents say Moscow has come under intense pressure from the US to drop the project because of fears that Tehran may use spent fuel from the plant to develop nuclear weapons. For its part, Washington has warned that Iran's failure to work with the IAEA programme will constitute proof that it is pursuing a secret weapons programme. Mr Kisylak told the Russian Interfax news agency that Iran should not see the IAEA deadline as an ultimatum. "It is a serious and respectful appeal by the agency for Iran to co-operate with the IAEA with a view to lifting all remaining questions, and do so without delay," he said. [�] Return to Menu 3. Iran and Russia in dispute over N-waste Iran has told Russia it will have to pay to retrieve the plutonium-laden spent fuel rods from the nuclear power plant being built in Bushehr. The move adds a new twist to international talks on Iran's nuclear programme as the United Nations' nuclear watchdog prepares to pass a resolution on the issue in Vienna. Alexander Rumyantsev, Russia's minister for atomic energy, said the demand was "foolish in lay terms" and contradicted standard practice. But he said Russia still expected to resolve the dispute through "bargaining" and have the plant working by the end of next year. Briefing foreign journalists in Moscow, Mr Rumyantsev said Iran would have to agree to return the spent fuel rods or Russia would not supply them. Ordinarily the country that receives spent fuel rods charges for storage, but he said Russia could compensate by raising the initial price. "The Iranians are always difficult to bargain with," he said with a chuckle. "We will have to negotiate for some months, maybe half a year." An official at the ministry said he expected the UN nuclear watchdog's governing board to adopt a "soft but strict" resolution at today's meeting, giving Iran until the end of next month to assure the International Atomic Energy Agency it had no clandestine nuclear programme. He said he expected a "consensus" decision. The Russian ministry's indication of support for the resolution came after intense lobbying by the US of the board's Russian and Chinese members. Key European countries, including France and Germany, have already joined the US in backing the resolution. But Iran insisted yesterday it would resist attempts to impose a deadline and warned that a strongly worded resolution by the IAEA's governing board would complicate its co-operation rather than enhance it. "Nobody is in a position to impose a deadline on a sovereign country," said Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's delegate to the IAEA. The week-long IAEA meeting in Vienna comes after findings of weapons-grade nuclear material in samples taken at an Iranian nuclear site, one of several concerns raised that were considered by the US to be a serious failure of compliance. Iran says the weapons-grade material comes from contaminated equipment that has been imported. Behind the scenes negotiations among the IAEA board yesterday led to a combining of two competing draft resolutions. A draft sponsored by the UK, France and Germany was modified to take into account some of the concerns of South Africa, which had submitted a milder assessment of Iran's co-operation and set no deadline for it to comply. Return to Menu 4. Russia against an Iranian nuclear weapons programme: Ivanov Russia's Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov on Friday said Moscow was committed to attempts by the UN nuclear watchdog to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons Russia "is engaged in avoiding the expansion of nuclear arms and a development of a nuclear programme in Iran," Ivanov said shortly before the UN body imposed a deadline on Tehran to declare its nuclear activities. But the minister, currently on a visit to Slovenia, said Moscow still wanted to continue its nuclear cooperation programme with Tehran. Russia is building the Islamic state's first nuclear plant in Bushehr, a project that has attracted criticism from Western nations who fear Tehran may use spent fuel from the plant in a weapons programme. "We are collaborating with Iran strictly following our international duties," Ivanov said during a joint press conference with his Slovenian counterpart Dimitrij Rupel. "The object that is being built in Iran in collaboration with Russia is monitored by the IAEA and we have so far not received any requests related to it," he continued, referring to the Bushehr plant. The foreign minister was speaking just before the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) imposed an October 31 deadline on Iran to prove it is not secretly developing atomic weapons. The Iranian delegation at the IAEA walked out in protest just as the body was about to adopt the resolution. On Thursday, a source at the Russian atomic energy said that Russia would not call off the Bushehr project if Iran does not agree to IAEA demands but it would do so if Tehran was found in violation of the agency's norms. "Then we'll stop our cooperation immediately," the source said. The United States alleges that Iran is covertly developing atomic weapons under the guise of its nuclear energy programme. The Bushehr was originally due to go online by the end of 2005, but the project has been held up as Russia and Iran negotiate a separate agreement that would oblige Tehran to return the plant's spent fuel back to Russia for storage. Ivanov arrived in Ljubljana on Friday afternoon from Serbia to hold talks on Slovenia's future membership of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), due in 2004. He is to travel to Geneva on Saturday to take part in a UN-brokered meeting on the Iraqi crisis with the foreign ministers from the other four permanent members of the security council: Britain, the United States, Russia and China. Return to Menu 5. Russia-Iran Nuclear Cooperation Meets International Regulations, sys Foreign Minister Ivanov Russia's nuclear cooperation with Iran follows accepted international rules and regulations, Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov pointed out at a Friday press conference in the Slovene capital of Ljubljana. "The facilities now being constructed in Iran in association with Russia are under IAEA supervision," Mr. Ivanov said, referring to the nuclear power station at Busher. According to him, the Russian side has received no reprimands from the International Atomic Energy Agency in connection with this project. Russia is going to continue nuclear cooperation with Iran and other countries in full compliance with effective regulatory norms and in close cooperation with the IAEA, the minister said. Return to Menu 6. Allies Line Up with U.S. to Set Iran Nuke Deadline (excerpted) [�] RUSSIA PROTECTS ECONOMIC INTERESTS Supporters of the resolution tried hard to bring Russia on board, but the most they were able to get was a pledge not to vote against it, diplomats said. Russia, like China, is expected to abstain from the vote. A Russian atomic energy ministry official told Reuters in Moscow that Russia did not want to unduly provoke Tehran. "Iran has to be given room to maneuvere so that it is not pushed into a corner like North Korea and withdraws from the (NPT)," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. But a Western diplomat close to the talks with Russia said the real reason Moscow opposed a tough resolution was fear it might harm Russia's nearly $1 billion deal with Iran to construct a nuclear power plant at Bushehr, a project carrying some 20,000 Russian jobs. "They (Russia) don't want their customer to go out of business," the diplomat said. Russia does not like the demand in the resolution for Iran to stop enriching uranium or its implied threat that Tehran must enable the IAEA to come to a "definitive" conclusion on Tehran's nuclear plans by November or go to the Security Council for possible sanctions. In an August 26 report, the IAEA said it had found traces of weapons-grade highly enriched uranium at an enrichment facility at Natanz, Iran, sparking fears the country had been purifying uranium for use in an atomic bomb. Iran denied the charge and said the enriched uranium was on machinery that was "contaminated" when Tehran purchased it abroad on the black market in the 1980s. The explanation has met with skepticism inside and outside the IAEA. Return to Menu 7. Russia supports draft Iran resolution at UN nuclear agency: source Russia supports a draft resolution at the UN nuclear watchdog that would set an October 31 deadline for Iran to prove that it is not secretly developing nuclear weapons, a source at the Russian atomic energy ministry told AFP. "Russia has to be in the majority on this question," the source said. The comments came as the United States and its key allies lobbied fellow members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to support the resolution in backroom talks at the agency's headquarters in Vienna. The draft was a softer version of a resolution proposed earlier, the source said in Moscow. "Russians are huddling together with the Americans to find a compromise in a softer resolution," the source said. "Iran has to be given room to maneuver so they are not pushed into a corner like North Korea and withdraw from the NPT (nuclear non-proliferation treaty)," the source said. The negotiations led to the suspension of a key meeting scheduled Thursday of the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors. The session is now expected to be held Friday. "We're still working behind the scenes to bring as many people on board for the (deadline) resolution as possible," a Western diplomat said. Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi said his government was willing to cooperate, but warned setting a deadline would complicate matters, and again denied Tehran was developing nuclear weapons. "We are ready to cooperate with the IAEA fully to give them access to files to do an inspection," Kharazi told journalists during a visit to Sarajevo, but warned "putting pressure on Iran will make it more complicated." Washington claims Tehran is hiding a program to develop atomic weapons. Russia is building the Islamic state's first nuclear plant in Bushehr, a project that has attracted criticism from Western nations, who fear Tehran may used spent fuel from the plant in a weapons program. Russia would not call off the project if Iran does not agree to IAEA demands, but would do so if Tehran is found in violation of the agency's norms, the source said. "Then we'll stop our cooperation immediately," the source said. The plant was originally due to go online by the end of 2005, but the project has been held up as Russia and Iran negotiate a separate agreement that would oblige Tehran to return the plant's spent fuel back to Russia for storage. Return to Menu 8. Russia, Iran Face Disagreements Over Nuclear Program As the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna debated a U.S.-backed resolution that would find Iran in non-compliance of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, disagreements surfaced between Tehran and its main supplier on nuclear technology, Russia. To address international concerns that Iran may develop nuclear weapons, Russia has said it would freeze construction on the $1 billion Bushehr 1,000-megawatt light-water nuclear reactor plant and would not begin delivering fuel for the reactor until Iran agreed to return all spent fuel to Russia. During recent weeks, both sides have said that an agreement was close to being signed in September. However, Russian and Iranian experts met in Moscow on Sept. 5 but failed to clinch a deal. On Sept. 8, Russia's atomic energy minister, Alexander Rumyantsev, was quoted by the ITAR-TASS news agency as saying that Russia and Iran were soon likely to resolve "purely technical" differences over the key agreement. However, those differences were not all about technicalities. On Sept. 10, Tehran reportedly made a new demand that could disrupt Russian-Iranian cooperation on the Bushehr plant, according to Russia's Atomic Energy Ministry. Deputy Nuclear Energy Minister Valery Govorukhin was quoted by ITAR-TASS as saying that Iran demanded Russia pay for the spent fuel. Normally, suppliers of the fuel are paid for receiving and storing spent fuel, he said, indicating that the demand was unacceptable. Govorukhin insisted that the dispute was commercial and said both sides had agreed to start talks, ITAR-TASS reported. Should Iran refuse to withdraw its demand, Russia would have to charge that country a higher price to include the cost of buying back the spent fuel, he said. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is designed solely for generating electricity, but it has avoided signing an additional protocol to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that would allow for comprehensive IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities without notice. The draft resolution - put forward by the United States, Britain, France and Germany - gives Iran until the end of October to prove that it is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program. If Iran fails to meet the deadline, the IAEA would refer the issue to the Security Council, which would vote on whether to slap sanctions on Tehran. Despite disagreements over Bushehr, Moscow still sounds diplomatic when discussing the Iranian nuclear program. All issues regarding the project should be solved through cooperation between Iran and the IAEA, Russia Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko stated on Sept. 10. Russia has long been under heavy criticism from the West for its help in building the Bushehr nuclear plant on Iran's Gulf coast. The U.S. insisted that the Russian technology could be used to develop nuclear weapons, but Moscow and Tehran have argued that the plant can be used only for civilian purposes and will remain under international control. Moscow has also brushed off repeated U.S. demands that it cancel the Bushehr project. The Kremlin has repeatedly argued it abides by international agreements banning the proliferation of nuclear technologies. Until recently, Russia insisted it would not halt construction of the Bushehr plant unless the IAEA finds solid evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. Russian deliveries of uranium to Bushehr could have begun by next year if Iran had signed a formal agreement to return all spent nuclear fuel to Russia for reprocessing and storage. The plant was expected to open in 2005 and not in 2004, as earlier planned. Meanwhile, Moscow has urged Tehran to sign an additional protocol to the nonproliferation treaty that would open the door to tougher inspections of its nuclear program by the IAEA. Tehran has reportedly stated that it would sign such an addition only if sanctions against Iran were lifted. That nation did sign the nonproliferation treaty but is only obliged to admit inspectors to nuclear sites it has declared to the IAEA. Return to Menu F. Russia-North Korea 1. Russia denies helping N.Korea to develop long-range missile Russia is not helping North Korea to develop long-range ballistic missiles capable of striking the United States, Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said late Friday. "As a responsible member of the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Russian Federation is not involved in any cooperation that would oppose its principles," a foreign ministry statement quoted Ivanov as saying. "We do not make any exceptions, including for our neighbor North Korea," he said. The comments came in response to news reports earlier in the week that Russia was helping Pyongyang to develop a ballistic missile capable of striking the United States. "The appearance of such disinformation is not contributing to the goals of ensuring peace, stability and safety on the Korean peninsula," Ivanov said. The MTCR is an informal arrangement among 33 nations that aims to stem the spread of ballistic and cruise missiles. Return to Menu 2. Another Round of DPRK Talks May Be Held in November The next round of six-party talks on the DPRK nuclear problem will most probably be held in November, Alexander Vorontsov said at a RIA Novosti press conference. He is in charge of the Korea sector at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. "At the first round of the Beijing talks in August, different timeframes of a possible second meeting were cited. As a result, the sides agreed to coordinate them through the diplomatic channels," said Vorontsov. "As we know now, November is the most probable time," he added. To Vorontsov, although after the August talks Pyongyang officially declared that it sees no sense in their continuation, the DPRK leadership made it clear through the diplomatic channels that it is not against the second round of talks. Return to Menu 3. Russia is Ready to Contribute to Progress of Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Programme Russia is eager to contribute to the progress of talks on North Korea's nuclear programme, reads the message of congratulations on the 55th anniversary of North Korea's establishment the Russian president has forwarded to Kim Jong-il, Chairman of North Korea's Defence Committee. "Russia is ready to contribute to achieving progress at talks on the nuclear problem. Such a contribution shall be regarded as a result of our joint persistent efforts, reads the congratulatory message. In this way, we expect to get realistic opportunities for providing a healthier environment on the Korean peninsula." "Our countries and peoples have been tied by the old traditions of friendship, good-neighbourliness and cooperation. Russia supports the Korean people's striving for national reconciliation and peaceful reunion, for the development of inter-Korean dialogue and cooperation, which would strengthen peace and security on the peninsula and in the Asia-Pacific Region at large," says the message. Return to Menu 4. N. Korea Has More Capable Missile - U.S. Officials North Korea has used Russian technology to develop a new intermediate range ballistic missile that may be the most capable and accurate system in Pyongyang's inventory, U.S. officials said on Wednesday. There also are "indications" the North Koreans have begun limited production of the longer-range Taepo Dong 2 missile, which can reach the continental United States, and this could mean the weapon is nearly ready for export, a senior U.S. official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. Experts said if the North has built a new missile based on a new design instead of the old Scud technology, this would be a significant development. But some were skeptical and one U.S. official said he believed the Bush administration remained divided on its assessments of Pyongyang's missile program. In addition to working to improve the accuracy and range of all its three existing missile systems, the North Koreans have been "developing and perfecting a completely new and different missile system, an intermediate range missile system based on an improved different technology," one official said. U.S. officials said the missile is based on Russia's SSN6, a submarine-launched ballistic missile deployed in 1969 with a range up to 3,400 miles. Other North Korean missiles -- the Scud, No Dong and Taepo Dong -- are based on Russia's Scud missile, which has a shorter-range and is less accurate. One U.S. official said North Korea is believed to have acquired the SSN6 Russian missile expertise in the 1990s when post-Soviet Russia was a "free for all" bazaar and everything was for sale. "There is absolutely no indication that the Russians are now or have recently -- within the last couple of years -- been involved in this program," he said. RUSSIAN ROLE But other officials said this is not definitive. Russian officials deny cooperation with North Korea but they also deny cooperating with Iran, and Washington knows that Russia-Iran involvement is going on, they said. The existence of a new missile was first reported in recent days by Asian media, including the South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo. But U.S. officials revealed more details about the system, its military import and its impact on six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear crisis held in Beijing last week. It was widely reported that Pyongyang was expected to showcase the new intermediate range missile during festivities marking the country's 55th anniversary. That did not happen. U.S. officials said one reason is that participants in the Beijing talks -- especially Russia and China, the North's only allies -- strongly urged Pyongyang not to do anything provocative that might jeopardize the talks. Also, U.S. intelligence sent a delegation to Moscow last week to urge Russia to lean harder on Pyongyang. Like most other issues involving North Korea, this was hotly debated within the administration, officials said. Secretary of State Colin Powell, leader of U.S. pro-engagement forces, backed the push to persuade Pyongyang not to display its new system while Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who have been hostile to negotiations, wanted to stand back and let the North do whatever it might choose to do. Last month's six party talks in Beijing, designed to launch a negotiating process with Pyongyang, ended with no progress other than agreement to meet again, probably in November. U.S. officials said there have been hints about the new intermediate range missile for several years but only in the past year has its existence and derivation been confirmed. It shows Pyongyang can work with a much higher quality design, perfect and manufacture against that design, U.S. officials said. There is more confidence it will work because it is based on a well-established Russian design, they added. But skeptics noted that, while it continues to ground test missile engines and other components, Pyongyang has observed a moratorium on missile test flights since 1999 and its 1998 test of a Taepo Dong 1 missile failed to achieve orbit. Return to Menu G. Nuclear Industry 1. A. Nyago, price fluctuations wouldn�t constrain NFC development The price fluctuations at the world nuclear fuel market would not be a constraint for the nuclear fuel cycle (NFC) development, said to Nuclear.Ru TVEL Corporation President Alexander Nyago during the WNA September symposium. �We do not expect a rapid price growth, he said. �In future, due to devaluation of all world currencies, the prices will be higher. But I do not expect a substantial raise within coming five years.� TVEL�s president believes that presently the world nuclear fuel produces have good opportunities for further development. �The market will develop, new nuclear power unit constructions have begun. Russia participates in nuclear power construction in China, India, Iran, and Ukraine. Finland has called for tender, the Asian market has become more active as regards the nuclear fuel consumption�, Nyago said. Commenting on concerns regarding possible deficit of uranium on the market, Nyago noted that speculations on uranium to end to evolve a prompt rise of prices had been for long. �Firstly, we try to process today, i.e. to use recovered uranium on a wider scale. Then we will shift to MOX-fuel made of weapons plutonium. This will be a certain replacement to uranium�, said TVEL�s president. He noted that in any case uranium would last for sever decades. Presently, mining is very intensive and new deposits being explored. �And in Russia we start thinking how to get back the markets we had lost. We work actively with Kazakhstan; we have a joint venture. On the whole, we don�t think uranium stocks end up that fast�, Nyago said. Return to Menu 2. Milko Kovachev says the EС experts are likely to confirm IAEA judgments �It may be expected that the IAEA expert judgments will be confirmed and what has been done for the recent year will be considered as well�, said to Nuclear.Ru Milko Kovachev, the minister of energy and energy resources of Bulgaria elaborating on the upcoming independent EC peer review to evaluate future operation of Kozlodui-3, 4. He reminded that the last year IAEA mission evaluated the unit three and four conditions and issued �the positive statement on the whole�. �It is unlikely that the coming inspection will produce a drastic difference in conclusions by experts�, said Kovachev who participated in the annual symposium of the World Nuclear Association held last week in London. Speaking on prospects to send INF (irradiated nuclear fuel) from Kozlodui nuclear plant to Russia, the minister reminded that at present Bulgaria implements the existing INF processing contract. While saying that he noted the importance of so-called �buffer amounts�, i.e. the amounts of irradiated nuclear fuel in store at the plant�s site. Some time ago certain investments were made to the pool-type storage facility and now the �dry� storage implementation is underway. �In any event this is an intermediate stage with the final one to be the direct storage or sending for processing�, Kovachev said adding that in Bulgaria it is difficult to solve this problem apart from the world community�. The minister also said that in cooperation with the IAEA they pursued the regional approach and would be actively participating in solution of this issue at the international scale, but using both opportunities so far. As regards the completion of Belene N-plant construction, as Kovachev thinks, the government is to receive the report from working groups and basing on that make judgment regarding commercial prospects of the project. �We expect the Belene nuclear plant decision is made this year�, the minister said. He also added that if a decision were made regarding the tender the previous experience of construction (the 1980s), when it had been done to the VVER-1000 design, would be taken into consideration. �The site preparation investments and the first unit equipment was over one billion dollars, and this was essential, he said. �Another important factor is the equipment conditions�. On the whole, the minister thinks nuclear power is �the alternative, which should not be forgotten�. �Our power generation did not suffer due to the Iraqi crisis when the world oil prices went high, because it is built upon coal and atomic energy. This lesson must be learnt for the sake of future development of the industry�, Kovachev said. Return to Menu H. Official Statements 1. Daily Press Briefing (excerpted) [�] QUESTION: In Vienna, the vote put off on the IAEA resolution -- does this make you concerned that you don't have the votes to get a resolution passed that are required? MR. BOUCHER: No, I think that the summary is vote put off, but progress nonetheless. We are joining a number of states in cosponsoring a resolution that states it's urgent and essential that Iran fully cooperate with the agency by the end of October. The resolution reflects the hard work and ongoing consultations of our delegation and of the delegations in Vienna and elsewhere. Director General ElBaradei has made it clear that this resolution is the best way for the board to support the Agency's efforts to get to the bottom of the Iranian nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency Board will reconvene tomorrow, September 12th, to consider this resolution, which we understand now commands wide support among board members. As the resolution calls for, we believe Iran must immediately answer the many questions about Iran's nuclear program highlighted in the Director General's reports, including questions about Iran's uranium centrifuge enrichment program. I would point out that the Secretary himself has been working on this. He spoke with South African Foreign Minister Zuma yesterday about the draft that South Africa has put forward, and it now appears that the nations in Vienna have been able to come together on a text that will enjoy wide support and it will be taken up tomorrow. QUESTION: It sounds like Russia still isn't on board though. MR. BOUCHER: I don't have a vote count, can't tell you everybody who will vote for or abstain or against. But, as I said, it commands significant and widespread support. [�] Return to Menu 2. Progress Report on the Global War on Terrorism (excerpted) [�] � The G-8 Leaders took significant steps to expand international cooperation on projects to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the first year of the Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction launched by leaders in June 2002. The Partnership has been broadened to include Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, and Switzerland. The G-8 also launched an initiative to improve the security of radioactive sources and prevent their use by terrorists in so-called �dirty bombs.� � On May 31, 2003, the President announced the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), designed to combat the trade in weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems, and related materials to and from states and non-state actors of proliferation concern. This proliferation, together with terrorism, constitutes the greatest threat to international security. On September 4, 2003, Australia, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom joined the United States in announcing the PSI Statement of Interdiction Principles, consistent with national legal authorities and international law and frameworks. � The International Atomic Energy Agency�s (IAEA) Nuclear Security Action Plan provides advice, training and equipment to its 136 Member States to combat nuclear terrorism. The United States has contributed $15.9 million since the Action Plan�s inception in March 2002. The IAEA coordinates its nuclear security activities with the United States and other donor states to mutually reinforce our nuclear security goals. � International arms export control regimes � Australia Group for chemical/biological weapons, Wassenaar Arrangement, Missile Technology Control Regime and Nuclear Suppliers Group � have added to their guidelines the need to prevent acquisition of controlled items by terrorists, and are in the process of adopting other measures to achieve this goal. � The Radiological Threat Reduction program identifies and pursues actions that can be taken to reduce the threat of a radiological attack against the United States. Working with the International Atomic Energy Agency, this program aims to assist countries that are technically or financially unable to secure high-risk orphan or surplus sources. [�] Return to Menu I. Links of Interest 1. "Nuclear Nonproliferation: New Challenges and New Solutions" - 47th General IAEA Conference Return to Menu 2. Albright: Inflexible U.S. Policy Could Spur Iran to Accelerate Nuclear Arms Program Return to Menu 3. Statement to the Forty-seventh Regular Session of the IAEA General Conference 2003 Return to Menu 4. Fact Sheet: U.S. Border Security and WMD Return to Menu 5. The ABC News Nuclear Smuggling Experiment: The Sequel Return to Menu DISCLAIMER: Nuclear News is presented for informational purposes only. Views presented in any given article are those of the individual author or source and not of RANSAC. RANSAC takes no responsibility for the technical accuracy of information contained in any article presented in Nuclear News. RANSAC's Nuclear News is compiled two to three times weekly. To be automatically removed from our mailing list, click on the following link: Remove Me From The List If you have questions/comments/concerns, please reply to news@216.119.87.134 |
|
|
|
© 2007 Partnership for Global Security. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement.