Defense Environment Alert 04/18/06

RUMSFELD ACKNOWLEDGES CHEM WEAPON DISPOSAL DEADLINE WON'T BE MET

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld April 10 acknowledged in a letter to congressional defense committee leaders that the United States will not meet even the extended 2012 deadline for destruction of its chemical weapons stockpile under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). The move means the United States will have to formally apply for a deadline extension in November even though it does not expect it will be able to finish weapons destruction by the later date.

Several sources who closely follow chemical demilitarization say, while pleased with DOD's candor, they are puzzled over the timing of the announcement.

One source familiar with the chem demil program says it could preview a change in funding for the program, whose costs have grown significantly since the program's inception. The announcement comes as the Bush administration faces tight budgetary prospects because of Iraq and hurricane recovery, prompting one observer to speculate that the letter could be building a case for thinning out chemical demilitarization funding over a longer period than anticipated in favor of other programs.

While it was long believed in the chem demil community that the United States would not meet the deadline, high-level government officials before now had not publicly acknowledged it. The letter is available on InsideEPA.com. Seepage 2for details.

The letter states that the country has "encountered and overcome many challenges" in meeting the treaty deadlines and that DOD will "continue to work diligently to minimize the time to complete destruction without sacrificing safety and security." The letter also promises lawmakers that DOD will continue to request all needed resources to complete destruction as close to the April 2012 extended deadline as possible. The CWC - to which the United States is a party - allows for a one-time, five-year extension of the treaty's 2007 deadline for destroying all declared stockpiled chemical weapons. Russia, the other signatory with major chemical weapons stockpiles, is also expected to miss the 2012 deadline.

A nonproliferation expert says of the letter's timing that "none of us know why this happened now," adding that it could signal various scenarios: an increase in chemical demilitarization funding to hurry the process, a decrease in funding to allocate the money to other programs that are on schedule, or a number of other possibilities.

Funding might be cut because "the administration is probably not concerned with any political whacks other countries might take at the U.S. over this," the source says, but stresses that "I don't believe they will cut back funding. It's one thing not to meet a deadline and another to intentionally stretch out the process."

The letter states that the United States in November will formally apply for the permitted one-time, five-year deadline extension to 2012, before the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a CWC-created body that oversees chem demil around the world. By 2012 the United States will have destroyed about 66 percent of its chemical weapons stockpile, Rumsfeld writes. The nonproliferation expert says Rumsfeld's letter could be a way to signal the necessity of this extension to Congress and especially the Senate, which ratified CWC.

Russia is believed to be even further behind schedule than the United States, with a long-delayed chemical weapons destruction facility at Shchuch'ye, in Russia's Kurgan region, recently pushed back another 14 months. The nonproliferation expert says the letter "gives the U.S. and the Russians a little cover" on the delay, given that neither country will meet the deadline with or without the facility.

Critics of the chem demil program say they hope the letter signals more openness by DOD toward the public and regulators in the future. "It was understood although never articulated in the past that we wouldn't meet 2012," says one chemical demilitarization watchdog. "If this is an increase in their candor, we support it."

A security analyst says the announcement will not surprise anyone in the chemical weapons community and that the obstacles to meeting the deadline are more political than technological. "At a certain point the government has to make what is already seen to be reality [into] 'official reality,'" says one chemical weapons expert. "Asking, 'Why now?' is a reasonable question. This announcement could have been made years ago."