New book outlines U.S. strategy for determining source of a possible attack
MSNBC

NEW YORK — The U.S. government has developed a suite of technologies
that would enable it to determine the origin of a nuclear weapon used in
an attack against the United States, according to a forthcoming book on
America’s nuclear detectives.

In the event of such an attack, U.S. officials believe they could
determine where the fissile material used in the nuclear weapon
originated, as well as who carried out the assault, intelligence
historian Jeffrey T. Richelson writes in “Defusing Armageddon.”
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

“Not only can intelligence help prevent a nuclear terrorist attack, but
also in the event one occurs, it may be able to identify the entity
responsible and those who contributed, particularly by providing a bomb
or components,” Richelson claims in the first book-length treatment of
these counter-nuclear efforts, including the Nuclear Emergency Search
Team (NEST), America’s bomb hunters.

This is important, Richelson argues, because U.S. officials believe the
most likely nuclear attack would involve an established nuclear power
providing either a nuclear device or components to a terrorist group.
Finding out which nuclear power provided these items to the terrorists
would be key in crafting an appropriate U.S. response.

Earlier this month, a congressionally mandated task force reported that
terrorists are likely to strike a major city with weapons of mass
destruction by 2013. It added: "In our judgment, America's margin of
safety is shrinking, not growing."

Richelson says U.S. officials want prospective terrorists — and the
nuclear scientists who may be tempted to help them — to understand U.S.
capabilities. Denying them the certainty that they can attack without
consequences, U.S. officials feel, is critical to preventing an attack.

Ferreting out nuclear explosives

An attack on the United States would trigger a series of reactions among
those responsible for determining the weapon’s origin. These efforts
would be coordinated by the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center,
a little-known, three-year-old operation, which works closely with an
Energy Department team tasked with ferreting out nuclear explosives
before they go off and developing “nuclear forensics” to unearth the
origin of a weapon.

U.S. officials would begin by determining the weapon’s precise location
with the help of Defense Support Program satellites — infrared spy
satellites that detect heat sources — and Global Positioning System
satellites, all of which carry nuclear detection packages that could
help pinpoint any detonation.

To gather nuclear debris — the key evidence in the detective story — a
specially equipped Air Force WC-135 aircraft called “Constant Phoenix”
would be deployed. The plane is a modified Boeing 707 that carries
debris sampling and air-sampling equipment as well as devices to track
radioactive clouds. One problem with this part of the plan, Richelson
and others note, is that there is only one WC-135 left, down from a Cold
War total of ten. Energy Department officials have called for
development of Predator-like drones to fill the gap.

The debris would be analyzed and compared against a database of nuclear
signatures, which the United States has been gathering as part of its
intelligence efforts on foreign powers. With this information, the
United States should be able to determine, at the very least, which
country originally produced the highly enriched uranium or plutonium.

Panel warns terror attack likely by 2013

“The possibility of attribution stems from the fact that every nuclear
device has distinct signatures. These include physical, chemical,
elemental and isotopic properties that provide clues as to what material
was in the weapon and its construction,” Richelson writes in his book,
which is set for publication next month. “The shape, size, and texture
of the material would determine the bomb’s physical signature. The
bomb’s unique molecular components would determine the device’s chemical
signatures.”
Figuring out the reactor

The United States also should be able to determine in which type of
reactor the plutonium was produced, what the operating conditions were
and its age, which would provide additional clues about its origins. The
same would hold true for enriched uranium. There are enough signatures
to suggest what kind of centrifuge — or electro-magnet — was used to
enrich the uranium to bomb grade.

“By comparing the results of the initial analysis to a database of known
reactor types or samples of HEU produced by different enrichment
processes, forensic workers might determine the origin of the material
or at least narrow the field of viable suspects, eventually pinning the
blame on the culprit with the assistance of additional intelligence and
data,” Richelson claims.

With all that in hand, Richelson says, the next step would be
determining “bomb efficiency,” which in turn can help identify who
designed the bomb.

“That information could reveal who built it. Current computer programs
can assist in debris management by estimating the pre-detonation isotope
mixture, which when combined with data on the mixture after the
detonation might make it possible to infer the efficiency of the bomb’s
design,” Richelson writes.

In turn, that could narrow down the bomb’s origin and who may have
helped. But, for example, if the bomb resembled the Hiroshima bomb,
called a gun-type design, it would indicate the “serious possibility
that the device was made without assistance,” because those designs have
been in open-source literature for decades.

Updating the database

Richelson admits that the success of nuclear detective efforts is
dependent on the intelligence community’s ability to maintain a
comprehensive and updated database. Otherwise, he notes, “confidence
that the United States does not have samples a country’s nuclear DNA
might make that country willing to provide terrorists with a bomb or
nuclear material.”

These kinds of high-tech anti-nuclear efforts are likely to get the
attention of the incoming Obama administration. Vice President-elect
Joseph Biden has pushed for more funding and more basic research.

In 2007, Biden told the Wall Street Journal, “We need more nuclear
forensics research, more scientists to analyze nuclear samples, and an
assured ability -- using our own aircraft or those of cooperating states
-- to quickly collect nuclear debris from the site of any attack, in
this country or around the world.”

Moreover, Secretary of State-designate Hillary Rodham Clinton sponsored
legislation to double the center’s budget last year.

Ironically, and perhaps tragically, says Richelson, the nuclear
forensics technologies are more advanced than those associated with
nuclear detection.

"Unfortunately, despite the skill and determination of NEST personnel,
it may be easier to determine who was behind a terrorist nuclear attack
than to prevent it."

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites