NATO HQ 22 May 2003

Video-interview with Ted Whiteside Head of NATO's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Center) Video-interview Q: Good morning, Mr. Whiteside. You are the head of NATO’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Centre. Thank you for joining us today to talk about what NATO is doing about the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. To start off, at the Prague Summit last year, NATO launched new initiatives aimed at countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Could you explain to us what these initiatives are? Ted Whiteside: Yes. The initiatives are in three broad areas. The first is to examine options for addressing the increasing threat of missile proliferation and the threat this constitutes to Alliance territories, populations and forces. Heads of State and Government agreed that we would launch a new feasibility study to look into possible missile defence configurations to protect Alliance territories, populations and forces. This will be a long-term process but the kick-off, if you wish, was given at the Prague Summit. The second initiative is in the area of defence against nuclear, biological, chemical, radiological weapons. There were five initiatives which were launched last year and the Heads of State and Government endorsed rapid implementation of these initiatives. The five initiatives are to constitute an event response force to counter these types of threats, to set up deployable laboratories to assess what type of agents one might be dealing with. Third, to look at the creation of a medical surveillance system. Fourth, to create a stockpile of pharmaceutical and other medical counter-measures to react to such threats and lastly, to improve training across the whole spectrum in this area. The third block of initiatives at Prague was to endorse the implementation of the civil emergency plan of action for this particular threat and there, particularly, to share national assets across NATO and with partners. Q: But of course, this is not the first time that NATO is addressing the threat of weapons of mass destruction. How do these initiatives differ from previous programmes? What’s new about them? Ted Whiteside: These programmes are, perhaps, more focused than they have been in the past and also, I believe somewhat more robust. NATO did have a feasibility study for missile defence in the past. This was a feasibility study that dealt chiefly with deployed forces protection, that is to say theatre missile defence. This time, Heads of State and Government have said we would broaden the scope of examining it. We’re looking at a much broader architecture. It’s true that in the past, there have been initiatives dealing with protective measures for deployed forces. But these five initiatives, which I have just outlined are now being looked at, examined in the course of this year and at the end of the year, there will an assessment made as to how well they work, and how we move forward. So it’s much more robust, much more focused. Q: And you mentioned a bit of this already, but in terms of practical impact on the Alliance capabilities? What will these programmes mean? Ted Whiteside: In the immediate term, the five defensive measures that I have talked about mean that the Alliance will have the ability to deploy these assets already late in the fall of 2003. So in a very short period of time, there will be assets brought together, since November 2002, and which will be deployable. Now, it remains to be seen what shape these deployments are actually going to take, but these are very pragmatic steps to arrive at these capabilities. Q: About the Weapons of Mass Destruction Centre, could you explain a bit more about its role and its mission? Ted Whiteside: The Weapons of Mass Destruction Centre is an idea that came that came from the 1999 Summit in Washington and the role of the centre is really three-fold: To improve intelligence and information-sharing about proliferation issue. Second, to assist Allies in enhancing the military capabilities to work in a WMD environment and third, to discuss and bring the Alliance’s support to non-proliferation efforts in the world, generally. Today, the centre is a small group of 10 people, counting experts in their field: chemistry, microbiology, people who have worked in arms control and non-proliferation in the past and we try to support Alliance groups that deal with these issues. Q: Of course, NATO is not alone in addressing these issues. How do NATO efforts tie into those of other international bodies, organizations? Ted Whiteside: That’s a very good question. The principle which defines a relationship with other international organizations is that of complementary. We’re trying to assist non-proliferation regimes in the world. NATO Allies support all of the non-proliferation efforts in the world. A couple of examples: NATO Allies have spoken out in the past, supporting the Non-Proliferation Treaty. We want it to be universal. We want it to be strongly enforced. In the same way, NATO is working with international organizations, such as the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, to talk about how to create joint exercises at some stage, which would exercise a response to the potential threat coming from chemical weapons. In the same vein, we’re working closely with organizations such as Interpol and the World Health Organization, to be aware of their programmes which, in many ways, are running in the same direction as those of NATO. Q: And one of the things which we hear a lot about in the news is the potential use of WMD by terrorist groups. How does the Alliance see this risk? Ted Whiteside: It is unfortunately a growing risk. We live in a world with many dual-use technologies. And the dual-use technology that can be used for proper and appropriate purposes can also be misused. A good example of this is the pharmaceutical, biological industry. Biological agents can be used in very insidious ways - We saw this in the case of the anthrax attacks in the United States in 2001 - they’re very difficult to counter. They are weapons of mass destruction in the sense that they can kill many people. But there are also weapons of mass disruption. Even if they do not kill, they can create tremendous economic havoc. So this risk of the use of biological weapons or, indeed, radiological devices, is a growing risk and one that NATO has to face square on. And we have to be looking at ways to counter this threat. Q: And of course NATO is now, after Prague, also deepening its relations and co-operation with partner countries. Will these partners, for example Russia, Ukraine, other partner countries, the Mediterranean dialogue countries, be involved in these non-proliferation efforts. Ted Whiteside: Yes, and increasingly so. If I look first at Russia, we’re doing a joint threat assessment with Russia now, to determine what is the threat environment that we’re facing in terms of weapons of mass destruction. Russia is also working very closely with NATO on theatre missile defence co-operation and it’s a very ambitious program with Russia in this regard. The other partners are also involved in discussions and consultations with the Alliance. The partners have recently received information from the Allies about five defence capabilities I’ve talked about, and further consultations are planned. This also extends to the Mediterranean dialogue countries, where the discussions are perhaps somewhat more at an initial phase. But we hope that they will deepen over the next several months. Q: Thank you very much. Ted Whiteside: Thank you.