|
|
|
Tuesday, December 31, 2002
After more than a month inside Iraq, U.N. inspectors have found little evidence that Baghdad has maintained or rebuilt it weapons of mass destruction programs — instead finding only two apparent technical violations of U.N. resolutions, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, Dec. 30).
“If our goal is to catch them with their pants down, we are definitely losing,” an inspector said. “We haven’t found an iota of concealed material yet,” the inspector added.
So far, biological, chemical and nuclear weapons experts have failed to find any conclusive evidence that Iraq has continued to develop weapons of mass destruction, the Times reported. The chemical experts have yet to find any evidence that Iraq actually possesses tons of chemical agents as suspected, the inspector said. While the biological experts have taken samples, most biological agents do not last long and have probably been buried or destroyed, the Times reported.
Nuclear experts have found that old Iraqi uranium-enrichment sites have not been disturbed since 1998, which has led to conclusions that the old sites have not been used, according to the Times. Inspectors are still searching Iraq, however, for secret caches of enriched uranium that could be hidden anywhere within the country.
“I must say that if we were to publish a report now, we would have zilch to put in it,” the inspector said.
Inspectors have only discovered two possible Iraqi violations of U.N. resolutions — attempts to obtain ballistic missile components and alterations of others without first notifying the United Nations, according to the Times.
Inspectors have said that to conduct their work effectively within Iraq, they need intelligence information from U.N. Security Council members, including the United States, which has put the most pressure on inspectors to find something.
“We can’t look for something which we don’t know about, the inspector said. “If the United States wants us to find something, they should open their intelligence file and share it with us so that we know where to go for it,” the inspector added.
The United States has provided inspectors with “high-quality” intelligence information, but they have yet to use it, a senior Bush administration official said yesterday. “They have gotten some intelligence, and they will get more,” the official said.
During the previous rounds of inspections, Iraqi defectors from WMD programs provided some of the most useful information, according to the Times. While the United States has urged inspectors to remove Iraqi scientists and their families for interviews, some inspectors doubt the effectiveness of this measure.
The interviews are “a very difficult and complex thing,” the inspector said. “I took part in such interviews in 1998 ... These interviews didn’t get us anywhere then. They will not take us anywhere now. The risk for their [Iraqi scientists’] lives and the lives of their relatives is great, and we can’t do anything to create a normal situation,” the inspector added.
The inspector said he doubted that inspectors would be able to remove Iraqi scientists from the country.
“It’s stupid to think that we can offer them to go abroad to testify,” the inspector said. “Once any of them expresses a desire to go abroad for an interview, his brains will be kicked out in no time — his and his entire family’s,” the inspector added (Loiko/Farley, Los Angeles Times, Dec. 31).
U.S. intelligence officials have said that Iraq is hiding at least two of its WMD scientists in palaces belonging to President Saddam Hussein, according to the Washington Times. The scientists, a suspected nuclear weapons scientist and a suspected biological and chemical weapons expert, have been hidden in an apparent attempt to prevent inspectors from interviewing them, the officials said.
There is also evidence that the Iraqi military has recently moved chemical and biological weapons materials to underground storage sites that are unknown to the U.N. inspectors, the U.S. intelligence officials said (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Dec. 31).
War Costs
Mitchell Daniels, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, estimated yesterday that the costs of a war with Iraq could range from $50 billion to $60 billion — an estimate far lower than those previously released by White House officials (see GSN, Sept. 17).
Daniels did not provide specific costs for either a short-term or long-term conflict with Iraq. The White House is budgeting for both though, and the previous estimate of a cost ranging from $100 billion to $200 billion, issued by former White House chief economic adviser Lawrence Lindsey, was too high, Daniels said.
It is impossible to determine the ultimate end costs of any military action against Iraq, Daniels said.
“This is nothing more than prudent contingency planning,” Daniels said. “At this point there is no war,” he added.
Daniel’s estimate is similar to the price tag of the 1991 Gulf War, which cost more than $60 billion at the time, or about $80 billion in current dollars, according to the New York Times. The United States only paid for a small fraction of the costs incurred during the Gulf War, however, with allies covering the bulk of the expenses, the Times reported. If the United States opts for war again, Washington will probably be forced to cover most of the expense, diplomats said.
U.S. President George W. Bush has been kept informed about the budget projections and has yet to make any decision, Daniels said. “At this point our position is that the president has made no decision,” he said (Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times, Dec. 31).
Oil-For-Food
The U.N. Security Council voted 13-0 yesterday to adopt a U.S.-sponsored resolution that added a number of dual-use items to the U.N. Goods Review List of items that Iraq may not import without council approval, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, Dec. 11). Both Russia and Syria abstained, the Post reported (Colum Lynch, Washington Post, Dec. 31).
Russian U.N. Ambassador Sergei Lavrov explained his abstention by saying the resolution was too restrictive and would affect imports that were specifically civilian in nature. Lavrov also said he objected to new restrictions on the imports of trucks, which would be detrimental to the distribution of humanitarian goods.
Iraq’s cooperation with weapons inspectors should result in a lifting of sanctions, not further restrictions, said Mikhail Wehbe, Syrian ambassador to the United Nations. The Security Council also did not have adequate time before the vote to properly examine the proposed changes, he said (M2 Presswire, Dec. 31).
The United States was forced to compromise on some issues to get the council’s approval. In particular, the final measure did not include an earlier U.S. proposal to regulate Iraqi imports of atropine, which can be used as both a heart medication and a nerve gas antidote, the Washington Post reported. After facing opposition from France and Russia — Iraq’s two main suppliers of the drug — the United States agreed to a compromise that would allow Iraq to import without council approval atropine doses typically used for medical purposes and limited numbers of atropine autoinjectors. Imports of larger atropine doses, of the size commonly used as a nerve gas antidote, will require Security Council approval.
Over the past five years, Iraq has imported more than 3.5 million vials of atropine, primarily from French and Russian companies, according to the Post. Of these, more than 3.4 million vials contained a dose of 0.6 milligrams of atropine — consistent with that provided to heart attack victims. A nerve gas victim would require a dose of at least 2.0 milligrams of atropine for treatment, the Post reported.
U.S. diplomats said they were pleased at the results of yesterday’s Security Council vote.
“The United States is pleased with the outcome today; it meets the goals we set for ourselves,” said James Cunningham, deputy U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (Lynch, Washington Post).
Inspections
U.N. inspectors visited at least eight suspect Iraqi sites today, according to Reuters. Experts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission visited a military base in Fallujah, about 30 miles northwest of Baghdad, witnesses said. UNMOVIC missile experts visited the al-Mansour Company in Tajiyat, just outside of Baghdad, and the al-Maamoun plant in Youssefiyah, about 20 miles south of Baghdad, Iraqi officials said.
UNMOVIC biological teams traveled to a pharmaceutical research center and the Baghdad offices of the bin Sina Company, Reuters reported. UNMOVIC chemical experts visited a petrochemical research center and a military engineering company, both located in Baghdad.
A team of International Atomic Energy Agency experts visited a plant operated by the bin Younees Company, located outside of Baghdad (Reuters, Dec. 31).
Yesterday, UNMOVIC and IAEA inspectors visited six sites, according to an agency press release. UMOVIC biological teams visited the Central Public Health Laboratory in Baghdad and the Plant Protection Division No. 1 of the Abu Ghraib plant.
An UNMOVIC chemical team visited the al-Nidaa State Company, which produces dual-use items made out of corrosion-resistant materials. UNMOVIC missile inspectors conducted a repeat inspection of the al-Samood factory to conduct an accurate count of missile engines, according to the IAEA release. UNMOVIC experts also visited the al-Mahamoudiayah water treatment plant, which is a central chlorine storage site for Baghdad water treatment facilities.
An IAEA team visited the al-Sawary Est-Jihad site, which consists of two factories — the Resin Plant and the Fiberglass Plant. While there, inspectors worked to determine if any changes had been made to the site since 1998 (IAEA release, Dec. 30).
For further information, see:
U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime)
U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”)
U.N. Resolution 706 (Oil-for-Food Program)