Nuclear terrorism an international threat: Foreign secretary

February 8, 2017

New Delhi, Feb 8: Asserting that nuclear security remains a continuing concern, India today said terrorism, especially nuclear terrorism is an international threat that should not serve national strategy and pitched for a global response in this regard.

JaishankarForeign Secretary S Jaishankar, who was speaking at the Implementation and Assessment Group Meeting of Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, also hoped that the horrors of atomic power destruction would never be repeated as the negative consequences of atomic power cannot be overlooked.

"Events that have unfolded around us, more so in the past couple of decades, have highlighted that terrorism remains the most pervasive and serious challenge to international security. If access to nuclear technology changes State behaviour, it is only to be expected that it would also impact on non-state calculations.

"Nuclear security, therefore, will be a continuing concern, especially as terrorist groups and non-state actors strike deeper roots and explore different avenues to spread terror. Developing a comprehensive global response is the highest priority," he said.

Maintaining that nuclear energy will continue to play an important role in tackling challenges of inclusive growth and climate change, he said, "On the other hand, the negative consequences of atomic power also cannot be ignored. The world has witnessed the immense destructive power of the atom.

"We hope that such horrors will never be repeated and cannot overstate the importance of countries with nuclear weapons to be responsible."

Jaishankar also warned of the dangers of discriminating among terrorists -– good or bad or even yours and mine -- are increasingly recognised. "Terrorism is an international threat that should not serve national strategy. Nuclear terrorism even more so," he said.

During his address at the meeting, which is being attended by delegates from over 100 countries including the US, the UK, France and Pakistan, he also referred to the strong credentials of India, which is looking for a membership in Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), in promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

Advocating a two-pronged strategy, Jaishankar said the first is to clamp down on terrorism in general and the second to restrict unauthorised access to nuclear technology and material.

"Responsible States provide political commitments to assure each other that they will protect nuclear material under their control from falling into the wrong hands... "However, political commitments alone cannot ensure the safety and security of nuclear material," the foreign secretary said while referring to several treaty instruments which provide a firm basis for translating broader political commitments into legally binding measures.

The treaties include the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (ICSANT) and the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) and its Amendment, he said.

Talking about history of nuclear technology, he said, "The power of the atom is wondrous. It has benefited mankind in myriad ways. The scientific community has played a vital role in harnessing nuclear energy and radiological sources for societal needs. The ancient Indian philosopher and sage, Kanada, propounded the concept of 'atom' in the sixth century.

"Today, two-and-a-half millennia later, as a country possessing advanced nuclear technologies, India is at the forefront in promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy. We have actively associated with and contributed to the IAEA and other multilateral forums dealing with all aspects of nuclear material."

Talking about international obligations adhered to by India, he said every year at the First Committee of the UN General Assembly, India co-sponsors a resolution on "measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction" that has been adopted by consensus since 2002.

As a State Party to these instruments, India has demonstrated its faith in these instruments and believes that their universalisation is a global good, he said, adding effective implementation of the obligations under UN Security Council Resolutions 1540 and 1373 is another important pillar in the fight against terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Stressing that Indian experts have contributed positively and substantively to the drafting of various documents and playbooks of the GICNT, Jaishankar said India remains committed to furthering the objectives of the global initiative.

"We have been contributing to the Nuclear Security Fund of the IAEA. India's Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership (GCNEP) is available to interested States for training courses and capacity building programmes in the field of nuclear and radiological security," he said.

Observing that there are 13 instruments that are widely accepted as benchmarks for a State's commitment to combat terrorism, Jaishankar said, "What is more important is that adhering parties display the required sincerity to implement their commitment.

"The existence of a number of conventions and treaties dealing with nuclear terrorism underscores the fact that there is no one instrument that can deal with this issue in a holistic manner.

"The march of globalisation means that combating nuclear terrorism in isolation or as part of a small group is unlikely to yield the desired results," he said, adding in this the GICNT plays an important role as it works towards building worldwide communities of experts and practitioners in order to have a consistent and coherent approach towards the issue of nuclear terrorism.

He further said given its impressive membership of 86 partner countries and five international organisations, the GICNT is expected to play an important role in providing an effective international platform for consolidating and disseminating the technical expertise and best practices to respond to malicious acts by terrorists.

The Implementation and Assessment Group (IAG) and the other working groups of the GICNT, namely, Nuclear Detection Working Group (NDWG), Response and Mitigation Working Group (RMWG) and Nuclear and Forensics Working Group (NFWG) have established themselves as the drivers for taking forward the important work of the Global Initiative, Jaishankar said.

The membership of these groups represent the entire spectrum of relevant stakeholders -- the scientific community, law enforcement agencies, first responders to nuclear security events, prosecutors and the judicial fraternity and of course, key decision-makers from the diplomatic community, he said. He also hoped the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism which was proposed by India in 1996, would be adopted soon.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 4,2020

Jun 4: A malaria drug President Donald Trump took to try to prevent COVID-19 proved ineffective for that in the first large, high-quality study to test it in people in close contact with someone with the disease.

Results published Wednesday by the New England Journal of Medicine show that hydroxychloroquine was no better than placebo pills at preventing illness from the coronavirus.

The drug did not seem to cause serious harm, though -- about 40% on it had side effects, mostly mild stomach problems.

 “We were disappointed. We would have liked for this to work,” said the study leader, Dr. David Boulware, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Minnesota.

“But our objective was to answer the question and to conduct a high-quality study,” because the evidence on the drug so far has been inconclusive, he said.

Hydroxychloroquine and a similar drug, chloroquine, have been the subject of much debate since Trump started promoting them in March.

Hydroxychloroquine has long been used for malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis, but no large studies have shown it or chloroquine to be safe or effective for much sicker patients with coronavirus, and some studies have suggested the drugs may do harm.

Trump took a two-week course of hydroxychloroquine, along with zinc and Vitamin D, after two staffers tested positive for COVID-19, and had no ill effects, according to results of his latest physical released by his doctor Wednesday.

Federal regulators have warned against hydroxychloroquine's use except in hospitals and formal studies because of the risk of side effects, especially heart rhythm problems.

Boulware's study involved 821 people in the United States and Canada living with someone diagnosed with COVID-19 or at high risk of getting it because of their job -- doctors, nurses, ambulance workers who had significant exposure to a sick patient while not wearing full protective gear.

They were randomly assigned to get either the nutrient folate as a placebo or hydroxychloroquine for five days, starting within four days of their exposure. Neither they nor others involved in the research knew who was getting which pills.

After 14 days in the study, 12 per cent on the drug developed COVID-19 symptoms versus 14 per cent in the placebo group, but the difference is so small it could have occurred by chance, Boulware said.

“There's basically no effect. It does not prevent infection,” he said of the drug. Even if it were to give some slim advantage, “we'd want a much larger effect” to justify its use and risk of side effects for preventing illness, he said.

Results were no different among a subgroup of participants who were taking zinc or vitamin C, which some people believe might help make hydroxychloroquine more effective or fight the coronavirus.

There are some big caveats: The study enrolled people through the Internet and social media, relying on them to report their own symptoms rather than having them tracked in a formal way by doctors.

Participants were not all tested for the coronavirus but were diagnosed as COVID-19 cases based on symptoms in many cases. And not all took their medicines as directed.

The results “are more provocative than definitive,” and the drug may yet have prevention benefits if tried sooner or in a different way, Dr. Myron Cohen of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill wrote in a commentary in the journal.

Others were glad to see a study that had a comparison group and good scientific methods after so many weaker reports on hydroxychloroquine.

“This fits with everything else we've seen so far which suggests that it's not beneficial," said Dr. Peter Bach, director of a health policy center at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

This study was in younger relatively healthy people, but the results “would make me very discouraged about trying to use this in older people” who are most vulnerable to serious illness from the coronavirus, Bach said.

“If it does work, it doesn't work very well.” Dr. Dan Culver, a lung specialist at the Cleveland Clinic, said there's still a chance that giving the drug sooner than four days after someone's exposure to the virus may help prevent illness.

But the study “takes 'home run' off the table” as far as hopes for the drug, he said.

The study was mostly funded by David Baszucki, founder of Roblox, a California-based game software company, and other private donors and the Minnesota university.

Boulware also is leading a study testing hydroxychloroquine for treating COVID-19. The study is finished and results are being analyzed now.

On Tuesday, the journal Lancet posted an “expression of concern” about a study it published earlier this month of nearly 15,000 COVID-19 patients on the malaria drugs that tied their use to a higher risk of dying in the hospital or developing a heartbeat problem.

Scientists have raised serious questions about the database used for that study, and its authors have launched an independent audit.

That work had a big impact: the World Health Organization suspended use of hydroxychloroquine in a study it is leading, and French officials stopped the drug's use in hospitals. On Wednesday, the WHO said experts who reviewed safety information decided that its study could resume.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
August 7,2020

Russia boasts that it's about to become the first country to approve a Covid-19 vaccine, with mass vaccinations planned as early as October using shots that are yet to complete clinical trials -- and scientists worldwide are sounding the alarm that the headlong rush could backfire.

Moscow sees a Sputnik-like propaganda victory, recalling the Soviet Union's launch of the world's first satellite in 1957.

But the experimental Covid-19 shots began first-in-human testing on a few dozen people less than two months ago, and there's no published scientific evidence yet backing Russia's late entry to the global vaccine race, much less explaining why it should be considered a front-runner.

“I'm worried that Russia is cutting corners so that the vaccine that will come out may be not just ineffective, but also unsafe,” said Lawrence Gostin, a global public health law expert at Georgetown University. “It doesn't work that way... Trials come first. That's really important.”

According to Kirill Dmitriev, head of Russia's Direct Investment Fund that bankrolled the effort, a vaccine developed by the Gamaleya research institute in Moscow may be approved in days, before scientists complete what's called a Phase 3 study.

That final-stage study, usually involving tens of thousands of people, is the only way to prove if an experimental vaccine is safe and really works.

Health Minister Mikhail Murashko said members of “risk groups,” such as medical workers, may be offered the vaccine this month.

He didn't clarify whether they would be part of the Phase 3 study that is said to be completed after the vaccine receives “conditional approval.”

Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova promised to start “industrial production” in September, and Murashko said mass vaccination may begin as early as October.

Dr Anthony Fauci, the top US infectious disease specialist, questioned the fast-track approach last week.

“I do hope that the Chinese and the Russians are actually testing a vaccine before they are administering the vaccine to anyone, because claims of having a vaccine ready to distribute before you do testing I think is problematic at best," he said.

Questions about this vaccine candidate come after the US, Britain and Canada last month accused Russia of using hackers to steal vaccine research from Western labs.

Delivering a vaccine first is a matter of national prestige for the Kremlin as it tries to assert the image of Russia as a global power capable of competing with the US and China.

The notion of being “the first in the world” dominated state news coverage of the effort, with government officials praising reports of the first-step testing.

In April, President Vladimir Putin ordered state officials to shorten the time of clinical trials for a variety of drugs, including potential coronavirus vaccines.

According to Russia's Association of Clinical Trials Organizations, the order set “an unattainable bar” for scientists who, as a result, "joined in on the mad race, hoping to please those at power.”

The association first raised concern in late May, when professor Alexander Gintsburg, head of the Gamaleya institute, said he and other researchers tried the vaccine on themselves.

The move was a “crude violation of the very foundations of clinical research, Russian law and universally accepted international regulations" the group said in an open letter to the government, urging scientists and health officials to adhere to clinical research standards.

But a month later, the Health Ministry authorized clinical trials of the Gamaleya product, with what appeared to be another ethical issue.

Human studies started June 17 among 76 volunteers. Half were injected with a vaccine in liquid form and the other half with a vaccine that came as soluble powder.

Some in the first half were recruited from the military, which raised concerns that servicemen may have been pressured to participate.

Some experts said their desire to perform well would affect the findings. “It's no coincidence media reports we see about the trials among the military said no one had any side effects, while the (other group) reported some," said Vasily Vlassov, a public health expert with Moscow's Higher School of Economics.

As the trials were declared completed and looming regulatory approval was announced last week, questions arose about the vaccine's safety and effectiveness.

Government assurances the drug produced the desired immune response and caused no significant side effects were hardly convincing without published scientific data describing the findings.

The World Health Organization said all vaccine candidates should go through full stages of testing before being rolled out.

“There are established practices and there are guidelines out,” WHO spokesman Christian Lindmeier said Tuesday.

“Between finding or having a clue of maybe having a vaccine that works, and having gone through all the stages, is a big difference.”

Offering an unsafe compound to medical workers on the front lines of the outbreak could make things worse, Georgetown's Gostin said, adding: “What if the vaccine started killing them or making them very ill?”

Vaccines that are not properly tested can cause harm in many ways — from a negative impact on health to creating a false sense of security or undermining trust in vaccinations, said Thomas Bollyky, director of the global health program at the Council on Foreign Relations. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 22,2020

Karachi, Jun 22: India-born renowned Pakistani Shia scholar and author Talib Jauhari passed away here after a prolonged illness. He was 80.

Jauhari, who was born on August 27, 1939 in Patna, is survived by his three sons, Dawn News reported on Monday.

He migrated to Pakistan along with his father in 1949, two years after the Partition.

After obtaining early education from his father, he went to Iraq where he studied religion for 10 years under the renowned Shia scholars of that time.

Jauhari, who was on a ventilator in the intensive care unit of a private hospital for the past 15 days, breathed his last on Sunday night.

His son Riaz Jauhari confirmed his death and said that the body has been shifted to Ancholi Imambargah for the funeral prayers, The Express Tribune newspaper quoted his son as saying.

Jauhari was respected among his sect as he was a class fellow of the widely revered scholar Ayatollah Sayyid Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani.

He was also a poet, historian and philosopher and authored many books.

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan has condoled Jauhari's death.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.