The U.S. Navy has issued its first security policy (pdf) for protection of “biological select agents and toxins” (BSAT) at Navy facilities, a move that may signify heightened Navy interest in research involving these lethal materials.

Select agents are substances designated by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture that “present a high bioterrorism risk to national security and have the greatest potential for adverse public health impact with mass casualties of humans and/or animals or that pose a severe threat to plant health or to plant products.” A few dozen particular biological agents and toxins have been so designated (pdf), including ebola and smallpox viruses, botulinum, etc.

There are currently two Navy facilities in the United States that have possession of select agents and toxins, according to the new policy: Naval Surface War Center (NSWC) Dahlgren and the Navy Medical Research Center.

“The Navy may increase the number of facilities in the future, and other Navy facilities may gain access or possession of BSAT due to non-routine events,” the document states.

The Navy policy implements a 2004 Department of Defense Directive (pdf) on protecting biological select agents, and a 2006 Instruction (pdf) from the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.

See “Minimum Security Standards for Safeguarding Biological Select Agents and Toxins (BSAT),” Chief of Naval Operations OPNAV Instruction 5530.16, July 20, 2007.

Recently updated reports of the Congressional Research Service on nuclear weapons-related topics include these (all pdf):

“Nuclear Warheads: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program and the Life Extension Program,” updated July 16, 2007.

“Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program,” updated July 13, 2007.

“Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty,” updated July 12, 2007.

“Nonproliferation and Threat Reduction Assistance: U.S. Programs in the Former Soviet Union,” updated February 23, 2007.

“North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Development and Diplomacy,” updated July 2, 2007.

The 1982 U.S. Army medical manual for special forces presented in Secrecy News yesterday is dangerously misleading and it should not be used in practice, one expert in military medicine warned.

“That manual (pdf) is a relic of sentimental and historical interest only, advocating treatments that, if used by today’s medics, would result in disciplinary measures,” wrote Dr. Warner Anderson, a U.S. Army Colonel (ret.) and former associate dean of the Special Warfare Medical Group.

“The manual you reference is of great historical importance in illustrating the advances made in SOF medicine in the past 25 years. But it no more reflects current SOF practice than a 25 year-old Merck Manual reflects current Family Practice. In 2007, it is merely a curiosity.”

“Readers who use some of the tips and remedies could potentially cause harm to themselves or their patients.”

“I wish you would inform my fellow Secrecy News readers of these issues, correcting any false impressions,” Dr. Anderson wrote.

A completely revised Special Operations Forces Medical Handbook was published in 2001. A second edition of that Handbook is now in preparation, said Gay Thompson, managing editor of the Handbook.

A new publication of the Joint Chiefs of Staff presents U.S. military doctrine on “homeland defense” (pdf).

“It provides information on command and control, interagency and multinational coordination, and operations required to defeat external threats to, and aggression against, the homeland.”

See “Homeland Defense,” Joint Publication 3-27, July 12, 2007.

The document further extends the unfortunate use of the term “homeland” to refer to the United States, a relatively recent coinage that became prevalent in the George W. Bush Administration.

Not only does the word “homeland” have unhappy echoes of the Germanic “Heimat” and the cult of land and soil, it is also a misnomer in a nation of immigrants.

Moreover, “homeland” is defined by the military exclusively in terms of geography: It is “the physical region that includes the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, United States territories and possessions, and surrounding territorial waters and airspace.”

This means that actions to defend the Constitution and the political institutions of American democracy are by definition excluded from “homeland defense.”

For the Joint Chiefs, constitutional liberties are subordinate to, and contingent upon, physical security:

“To preserve the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the Nation must have a homeland that is secure from threats and violence, especially terrorism.” (page I-1).

Sen. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has put forward an agenda to increase transparency in government that includes “publishing budgets for every government agency.”

This appears to be a roundabout way of endorsing disclosure of intelligence agency budgets, since the budgets of all other agencies are already published.

The Clinton campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment or elaboration on the proposal.

Intelligence budget secrecy is perhaps the preeminent and most enduring example of overclassification, i.e. classification that is not justified by a valid national security concern.

A proposal to declassify the aggregate figure for the National Intelligence Program, comprised of over a dozen individual agency intelligence budgets, is pending in the Senate version of the FY 2008 Intelligence Authorization Act (S. 1538 [pdf]).

The 9/11 Commission went further and said “the overall amounts of money being appropriated for national intelligence and to its component agencies should no longer be kept secret.” (Final Report, p. 416).

The Clinton campaign appears to have adopted this bipartisan Commission recommendation for release of component agency budget information. The Bush Administration opposes any disclosure (pdf) of any intelligence budget data, even the aggregate figure.

Recent reports of the Congressional Research Service on Middle East-related topics, obtained by Secrecy News without CRS authorization, include the following.

“U.S. Foreign Assistance to the Middle East: Historical Background, Recent Trends, and the FY2008 Request,” updated July 3, 2007.

“Libya: Background and U.S. Relations,” updated June 19, 2007.

“U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel,” updated April 25, 2007.

“Lebanon,” updated July 11, 2007.

“The Iran Sanctions Act (ISA),” updated July 9, 2007.

“Iran’s Influence in Iraq,” updated July 9, 2007.

More publicly unreleased reports from the Congressional Research Service on various topics of interest to some include these (all pdf).

“Journalists’ Privilege to Withhold Information in Judicial and Other Proceedings: State Shield Statutes,” updated June 27, 2007.

“Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Background, Legal Analysis, and Policy Options,” updated June 30, 2007.

“Critical Infrastructure: The National Asset Database,” updated July 16, 2007.

“Chemical Facility Security: Regulation and Issues for Congress,” updated June 21, 2007.

“Pipeline Safety and Security: Federal Programs,” updated July 11, 2007.

Under extreme conditions, live maggots may be inserted into a wound to consume damaged or diseased flesh, according to a medical manual for U.S. Army Special Forces (large pdf).

“Despite the hazards involved, maggot therapy should be considered a viable alternative when, in the absence of antibiotics, a wound becomes severely infected, does not heal, and ordinary debridement [removal of diseased tissue] is impossible,” according to the 1982 manual (at page 22-3).

See “U.S. Army Special Forces Medical Handbook,” ST 31-91B, 1 March 1982 (407 pages, 16 MB PDF file).

It turns out that maggot therapy is recognized and regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Sterilized maggot colonies can be ordered, by prescription only, from specialized suppliers.

The Special Forces manual, however, envisions the use of unsterilized maggots for emergency use.

Along with a lot of standard wilderness medicine, the manual also describes various unorthodox, potentially dangerous remedies that may be considered when conventional medical alternatives are unavailable.

For example, the manual suggests that intestinal worms can be combated by eating cigarettes. “The nicotine in the cigarette kills or stuns the worms long enough for them to be passed.”

Another option for dealing with intestinal parasites is to swallow kerosene. “Drink 2 tablespoons. Don’t drink more.” (page 22-2).

Update: But see also “A Caveat on the Special Forces Medical Manual.”

The crucial interactions between military forces and the civilian environment in which they operate are the domain of “civil affairs,” a subject of urgent interest to the U.S. military in Iraq and elsewhere.

Civil affairs operations that promote cooperation between the military and the local population help to advance the military mission. Activities that generate friction or inspire opposition are not helpful.

“A supportive civilian population can provide resources and information that facilitate friendly operations. It can also provide a positive climate for the military and diplomatic activity a nation pursues to achieve foreign policy objectives,” according to U.S. military doctrine.

“A hostile civilian population threatens the immediate operations of deployed friendly forces and can often undermine public support at home for the policy objectives of the United States and its allies.”

“The problem of achieving maximum civilian support and minimum civilian interference with U.S. military operations will require the coordination of intelligence efforts, security measures, operational efficiency, and the intentional cultivation of goodwill.”

“Failure to use CA [civil affairs] assets in the analysis of political, economic, and social bases of instability may result in inadequate responses to the root causes of the instability and result in the initiation or continuation of conflict.”

Earlier this month, the U.S. Army issued a revised “how-to” manual on the conduct of civil affairs. That manual has not been approved for public release and is not readily available. But a copy of the prior edition from 2003 was obtained by Secrecy News.

See “Civil Affairs Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures,” U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-05.401, September 2003 (535 pages, 16 MB PDF file).

A more concise treatment of the same subject was given in another recent manual. Though not approved for public release, a copy was obtained by Secrecy News. See “Civil Affairs Operations,” U.S. Army Field Manual 3-05.40, September 2006 (183 pages, 4 MB PDF file).

The Congressional Research Service has recently updated several publications on Afghanistan, including these (all pdf).

“NATO in Afghanistan: A Test of the Transatlantic Alliance,” updated July 16, 2007.

“Afghanistan: Post-War Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy,” updated June 21, 2007.

“Afghanistan: Narcotics and U.S. Policy,” updated June 19, 2007.

“Afghanistan: Government Formation and Performance,” updated June 15, 2007.

Recent reports from the Congressional Research Service concerning China include these (all pdf).

“Hong Kong: Ten Years After the Handover,” June 29, 2007.

“China’s Economic Conditions,” updated July 13, 2007.

“Taiwan: Major U.S. Arms Sales Since 1990,” updated July 12, 2007.

“China-U.S. Trade Issues,” updated July 11, 2007.

“China-U.S. Relations: Current Issues and Implications for U.S. Policy,” updated June 14, 2007.

“Food and Agricultural Imports from China,” updated July 17, 2007.

“The Southwest Pacific: U.S. Interests and China’s Growing Influence,” July 6, 2007.

“China’s Currency: A Summary of the Economic Issues,” updated July 11, 2007.

The Congressional Research Service, at congressional direction, does not permit direct public access to its products. Members of the public must connive or contrive to gain such access. So we do.

Some recent CRS reports that caught our eye include these (all pdf).

“Presidential Claims of Executive Privilege: History, Law, Practice and Recent Developments,” updated July 5, 2007.

“The Palestinian Territories: Background and U.S. Relations,” July 5, 2007.

“Restructuring EPA’s Libraries: Background and Issues for Congress,” updated June 15, 2007.

“U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF): Background and Issues for Congress,” updated June 28, 2007.

“Airborne Laser (ABL): Issues for Congress,” updated July 9, 2007.