U.S. Sees Increased Potential for Nuclear Attack

By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Sept. 11 attacks have increased concerns that extremists would use weapons of mass destruction -- including possibly nuclear weapons -- against the United States, Undersecretary of State John Bolton said on Wednesday.

Answering questions at a breakfast with defense writers, Bolton predicted that if extremists possess weapons of mass destruction -- a term that encompasses nuclear, biological and chemical arms -- they will use them.

``I'm concerned about weapons of mass destruction everywhere and my concern about weapons of mass destruction everywhere has gone up since the (U.S.-led anti-terrorism) war began,'' he said.

Bolton, the State Department's top official dealing with arms control and international security affairs, said he was worried ``there will be use of a weapon of mass destruction.''

Sept. 11 proved that anybody willing to fly a jet airplane into the World Trade Center is ``not going to be deterred by anything,'' he said. ``Had these people had ballistic missile technology, there is not the slightest doubt in my mind that they would have used it.''

``If they could couple that with a weapon of mass destruction -- nuclear or whatever -- and dropped it on lower Manhattan, as tragic as the destruction of the World Trade Center was, the loss of lower Manhattan or any comparable place would obviously be a lot worse,'' he said.

Referring to the U.S. struggle with a spreading incidence of infection with the potent germ warfare agent anthrax, Bolton said ``we're having use by somebody of a weapon of mass destruction now, so it's not a hypothetical concern.''

``If the terrorists who launched the attacks on September 11 had had weapons of mass destruction and they thought they could have used then, the horror of what they did demonstrated they'd be prepared to use them as well. So I think it is obviously a national priority,'' he said.

NUCLEAR QUESTION MARK

He refused to say if the United States knew whether Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) and his al Qaeda network of Islamic extremists -- blamed by Washington for the Sept. 11 attacks that killed an estimated 5,000 people -- were in possession of nuclear weapons.

But he said one consequence of the U.S. attacks was a heightened awareness of the interrelationship between nonproliferation and terrorists and that as a result, efforts to halt the spread of nuclear, chemical and biological arms will receive more attention in coming months.

``Essentially every state on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism is also an aspirant to obtain weapons of mass destruction or may already have them,'' he said.

``So dealing with global terrorism ... will inevitably get us into the business of dealing with weapons of mass destruction proliferation,'' a topic now under discussion with Russia and China, he added.

Iran, Iraq and North Korea (news - web sites) have long been key states of U.S. concern in regard to both weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. Some administration officials have urged including Iraq as a target in the war on terrorism but so far they have not prevailed.

Bolton sidestepped a direct answer on whether the United States believed Pakistan could lose control of its nuclear arsenal in any political instability that might result from its alliance with Washington in the anti-terrorism war.

He noted a recent statement by Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes, who said he believed Pakistan does have adequate control over its nuclear weapons.

``I can't think of anyone who would be more concerned about that question than the defense minister of India,'' he said.

India and Pakistan are bitter nuclear rivals.

Bolton said Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had made ''courageous decisions'' in supporting the anti-terrorism effort and the United States has taken steps, including financial assistance, to support his government.

He added: ``The question of stability on the subcontinent was something we were concerned about before the attacks of September 11 and what's happened after that, including the military operations in Afghanistan (news - web sites), have not reduced those concerns.''

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

Answers

FinancialTimes

Atomic agency warns of nuclear terror risk By Clive Cookson in London Published: October 31 2001 21:52 | Last Updated: October 31 2001 22:33

The September 11 suicide attacks have shown that the world faces a serious risk of nuclear terrorism, the International Atomic Energy Agency warned on Wednesday.

It said the threat was most likely to come from the explosion of a conventional "dirty bomb" that would spread radioactive materials. Making such a bomb could expose the terrorists to life-threatening radiation.

"The willingness of terrorists to sacrifice their lives to achieve their evil aims makes the nuclear terrorism threat far more likely than it was before September 11," said Mohamed El Baradei, IAEA director general.

"We have been alerted to the potential of terrorists targeting nuclear facilities or using radioactive sources to incite panic, contaminate property and even cause injury and death among civilian populations," he said.

The IAEA will hold a special meeting of experts on nuclear terrorism on Friday at its headquarters in Vienna. It is preparing a series of anti-terrorist initiatives, including measures to track down and dispose of surplus radioactive sources.

Although the most spectacular act of terrorism would be to set off a nuclear explosion, IAEA experts believe it is "highly unlikely" that al-Qaeda or any other terrorist network has the expertise or enough uranium or plutonium to make its own atomic bomb. Nor do they believe rumours that terrorists might have obtained "suitcase bombs" - capable of one-kiloton explosions - from the nuclear arsenal of the former Soviet Union.

According to the IAEA, terrorists are much more likely to use a "dirty bomb" that spreads radioactive material through a conventional explosion. There are tens of thousands of highly radioactive sources around the world, generating radiation for industry, medicine and research. Often they are left virtually unprotected against theft.

"A large source could be removed quite easily, especially if those involved have no regard for their own health," said Abel Gonzales, IAEA director of radiation and waste safety. "The effects of a dirty bomb would not be devastating in terms of human life but contamination in even small quantities could have major psychological and economic effects."

An example of the danger was the accidental contamination of Goiânia in Brazil with a medical radiation source, caesium 137, that was stolen and broken up for scrap in 1987. Four people died, 14 received dangerous irradiation, 249 were contaminated and 110,000 required radiological monitoring.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001