Iraq I:  Hussein Might Have Link to Al-Qaeda; Post-Hussein Costs High

A senior Bush administration official said that, despite doubts within the CIA and FBI, evidence “holds up” that alleged al-Qaeda member and Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague five months before the attacks on New York and Washington, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, May 9).

Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross said in October 2001 that Atta had flown to Prague in April 2001 and met with Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, a vice consul at the Iraqi Embassy who was later expelled from the Czech Republic on suspicion that he was an intelligence agent.  If true, the meeting might provide a link between Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s regime and al-Qaeda, possibly justifying a U.S. military campaign to overthrow Hussein, according to the Times (see GSN, July 29).

The CIA and FBI, however, decided previously that there is no hard evidence behind the Czech report.  There is evidence Atta had “passed through” Prague in 1999 and 2000, and it is possible that he visited again in spring 2001, but there is no hard evidence to substantiate that he met with al-Ani, a U.S. intelligence official said.  The CIA has not been asked to reevaluate the case, the official added, and the agency had found “no known support by Saddam for al-Qaeda cells.”

On the other hand, a federal law enforcement official said yesterday that the FBI has been reviewing a possible Atta-Iraq link with “renewed vigor” in the last few weeks.  The official said that he does not know whether the FBI has found any clear connections but that the case is one of the “more urgent” priorities.

The administration official said Hussein poses several threats to the United States, including links to international terrorism.

“There is growing evidence that that includes organizations like al-Qaeda.  That would be a mortal threat to the United States,” the official said.

Other threats include “spreading terror” in the Middle East by actions such as paying money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers and posing a “tactical threat,” including firing on U.S. and British planes patrolling U.N.-mandated zones in northern and southern Iraq.

Iraq has “a relationship” with al-Qaeda, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Tuesday, but he refused to provide details (see GSN, June 21). 

“I mean, we’re not on the ground” in Iraq, he said.  “But are there al-Qaeda in Iraq?  Yes.  Are there al-Qaeda in Iran?  Yes.  Are there al-Qaeda in the United States?  Yes” (see GSN, July 12; Bob Drogin, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 2).

Price Tag on Occupying Iraq

Meanwhile, analysts told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday that maintaining stability in Iraq after a U.S. ouster of Hussein would be expensive and would require years of U.S. involvement.  A long-term U.S. commitment would be necessary to prevent Iraq from spiraling into chaos or to avoid the rise of a regime no better than Hussein, panelists said.

“If firm leadership is not in place in Baghdad on the day after [Hussein loses power], retribution, score-settling, blood-letting, especially in urban areas, could take place,” said Phebe Marr, a specialist on Iraq at the National Defense University.

The United States would have to maintain a security force of 75,000 troops in Iraq for at least one year after removing Hussein from power at a cost of $16.2 billion a year, said retired Col. Scott Feil, former head of the Pentagon’s joint staff’s strategy division.  At least 5,000 U.S. soldiers would have to stay in Iraq for up to 10 years as peacekeepers, he added (Miami Herald, Aug. 2).

A source familiar with the Pentagon’s planning said Feil’s estimate might be too low.  An 80,000-troop force costing $20 billion annually might be necessary, the source said.

A U.S. peacekeeping force in Iraq would have to minimize infighting among Iraqi factions, prevent internal strife from spilling into other countries, secure Iraqi chemical and biological weapons sites, patrol the Iranian border and guard major oil fields, USA Today reported.

Some senators expressed surprise at the potential cost.

“There is an enormous commitment of expense and people for a number of years,” Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) said (John Diamond, USA Today, Aug. 2).

Debate Over Congressional Approval

Meanwhile, two Democratic senators introduced a resolution to the Senate Tuesday to call on the president to obtain congressional statutory authorization or a declaration of war before using military force against Iraq.

“Should Iraq be unwilling to live up to its obligations and the president determines that there is just cause for military action against Iraq, I urge him to come before this Congress, to come before the American people, to make his case and let us in turn discharge our constitutional duty to debate and vote on the authorization of the use of force,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who introduced the resolution (U.S. State Department release, Aug. 1).

U.S. Renews Embargo

U.S. President George W. Bush renewed the U.S. economic embargo against Iraq for another year today.

“I am continuing for one year the national emergency with respect to Iraq,” he said in a letter to Congress, adding that the country “has continued to engage in activities hostile to U.S. interests.”

The United States imposed the sanctions and froze Iraqi assets in the United States after Iraq invaded Kuwait 12 years ago.  It has renewed the embargo annually since then (Agence France-Presse/Times of India, Aug. 2).

Back to top

Iraq II:  Sabri Invites Inspectors to Baghdad

Iraq yesterday invited a delegation of U.N. inspectors to Baghdad for talks, reversing refusals since 1998 to allow such inspectors into the country (see GSN, July 31).

Several recent U.N.-Iraqi meetings have failed to reach a resolution, but in a letter yesterday to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri requested further talks “at the earliest agreed time” (Barbara Crossette, New York Times, Aug. 2).

Iraq wants proposed talks with U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission Executive Chairman Hans Blix to focus on outstanding questions about Iraq’s suspected arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and on resolving those questions “when the inspection regime returns to Iraq,” Sabri said (see GSN, July 12).  The Baghdad meeting would be in line with Annan’s suggestion in 1998 “to conduct a comprehensive review … and assess the degree of Iraq’s implementation of its obligations,” Sabri added (Associated Press/Baltimore Sun, Aug. 2).

Blix has said that UNMOVIC must return to Iraq to decide on “baselines” for determining whether the country has completed “key disarmament tasks” in accordance with U.N. resolutions (see GSN, Feb. 21).

Skepticism

The Iraqi request offered hope that inspections might resume, but U.N. officials reacted cautiously, the New York Times reported.

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has tried before to avert disaster, and Iraq’s invitation to inspectors might be a tactic to hold off a major U.S. military campaign, U.N. officials said.  Some U.N. diplomats also questioned whether returning inspectors would have any impact if the U.S. leadership is determined to overthrow Hussein (Crossette, New York Times).

Annan sent the letter to the Security Council and will discuss it with council members Monday.  “While (Annan) welcomes the letter, which is in line with the agreement to maintain contact …, the procedure proposed is at variance with the one laid down by the Security Council,” U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said today.

“He is not predisposed one way or the other; he wants to show it to the council,” Eckhard said” (Jim Wurst, GSN, Aug. 2).

U.S. officials also expressed caution.

“We’re skeptical of the Iraqis’ complying with the Security Council resolutions, but we would welcome any movement,” a U.S. diplomat said last night.  The diplomat expressed doubt, however, that Iraq would provide inspectors with unrestricted access to potential WMD sites.

“At this point, they’re just saying Blix can come back.  They’re not fulfilling U.N. resolutions,” the diplomat said (Associated Press/Baltimore Sun).

Calls for a U.N. Mandate

While some U.S. officials have said renewed inspections might be futile, some analysts have said any potential U.S. campaign would probably need U.N. support, for which inspections would be key.

“To do this right, you need to give Saddam one clear last ultimatum to agree to a serious U.N. arms inspections policy and allow him a chance to give in,” Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution said.  “Otherwise, you’ve go to do this without international support, and it will be a lot harder.”

Several U.S. allies have requested that the United States secure U.N. support before taking any action against Iraq. 

China and Russia yesterday said that the United Nations should take the lead in resolving the Iraqi WMD issue (see GSN, July 9).

“Both sides think the U.N. Security Council should play a major role in the settlement of the Iraq issue,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said after Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan and Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov met during the Association of Southeast Asian Nations forum in Brunei.  China and Russia would prefer to “stress the role of the U.N. Security Council,” Liu said when asked whether Russia and China would object to a unilateral U.S. military campaign.

Annan has told the London Al-Hayat newspaper that he has “neither the desire nor the mandate to prepare the ground for military action” against Iraq, Agence France-Presse reported, according to the International Herald Tribune.  The U.S. policy of regime change in Iraq is not U.N. policy, and the Security Council has not decided on the issue, Annan added.

Caution

Meanwhile, U.S. senators finished hearings on Iraq yesterday after expressing concern that the Bush administration might be moving too quickly on plans to attack Iraq (see GSN, Aug. 1).  Senators said a military operation would have high stakes and costs, would require a plan for maintaining stability in Iraq after Hussein’s removal and would require time to build support for a campaign within and outside the United States.

“If we attack, we’ll win,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden (D-Del.) said Wednesday.  “But what do we do the day after?  We can’t just go in and walk away” (International Herald Tribune, Aug. 1).

For further information, see:

UNMOVIC

U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime)

U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”)

U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Iraqi Sanctions Revisions

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Senate Passes $355.4 Billion Defense Appropriations Bill

The U.S. Senate passed a $355.4 billion fiscal 2003 defense appropriations bill yesterday, granting many of President George W. Bush’s requests and $34.4 billion more than fiscal 2002 appropriations (see GSN, Aug. 1).

The bill, passed in a 95-3 vote, includes $6.9 billion for developing a national missile defense system and matches Bush’s request for $417 million to help former Soviet states dismantle and secure nuclear weapons.

In a measure that Bush has said he opposes, the bill would provide $814 million that the president could choose to use for either missile defense, which would match the administration’s full request, or for combating terrorism.

Neither the Senate bill nor the previously passed House bill provides $10 billion for an anti-terrorism contingency fund that Bush requested, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, June 28).  Bush has said he wants authority to spend the money, but members of Congress have expressed reluctance to give him the purse strings, according to the AP.  Lawmakers might provide the funds later but probably with certain conditions (Alan Fram, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Aug. 2).

Despite disagreeing with some measures, Bush said he supported the Senate’s passage of the bill.

“I applaud the Senate for answering my call to quickly pass the defense appropriations bill,” he said (White House statement, Aug. 1).

For further information, see:

MDA Basics of Missile Defense

MDA Missile Defense System

U.S. Missile Defense 2002 Budget

U.S. Defense Department CTR Site

Back to top

Iran:  U.S.-Russian Talks Yield No Progress

U.S.-Russian talks in Moscow this week made no progress toward resolving the two countries’ dispute over Russian nuclear assistance to Iran, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Aug. 1).

Cooperation on constructing nuclear power reactors, which the United States fears will help Iran develop nuclear weapons, dominated meetings between U.S. and Russian officials, the Times reported.  Russia announced last week that it would help build a total of six reactors in Iran (see GSN, July 29).

“We told them how unhappy we were about the announcement,” a Bush administration official said yesterday.  “We felt blindsided and angry.”

Some Russian officials appeared to have been surprised by the announcement, indicating that there might be divisions within the Russian government on the issue, the administration official said.

“The public line is that Russia opposes the proliferation of nuclear weapons and that they are not cooperating with Iran in building them,” the official said.  “The problem is that Russian entities, with or without cooperation of the government, are working with the Iranians.”

During the meetings, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton also raised concerns about Russian assistance with Iranian programs for developing chemical, biological and advanced conventional weapons, the Times reported.

U.S. and Russian officials said they would hold more talks on the issue later this month or next month to focus on tightening export controls on items and expertise with potential uses related to nuclear weapons (Myers/Tavernise, New York Times, Aug. 2).

Back to top

United States I:  Officials to Begin Deactivating Missiles in October

U.S. military officials plan to begin deactivating Peacekeeper missiles at Wyoming’s Warren Air Force Base in October, Inside the Air Force reported today (see GSN, June 3).

The base’s 50 missiles that are currently on constant alert are all slated for deactivation — 17 each in fiscal 2003 and 2004, plus 16 in fiscal 2005.  Officials plan to keep each missile on alert until it is disassembled, the newsletter reported (see GSN, Aug. 1).

Each deactivation is scheduled to last 17 days, said Maj. Rick Allen, Air Force Space Command’s Peacekeeper and Minuteman program element monitor.  Technicians plan to separate the missiles’ three booster stages and support equipment from their silos.  They plan to transfer the booster parts to the Rocket Systems Launch program for possible future use and to maintain the silos, preserving them from corrosion and other weathering effects, Air Force officials said.  The silos will not maintain nuclear certification after they are disassembled, the officials said.

The Pentagon plans to add the warheads to the Energy Department stockpile, according to the newsletter.

Bunker-Busting Minutemen

Meanwhile, the next generation of intercontinental ballistic missiles might be equipped to carry conventional weapons, 20th Air Force commander Maj. Gen. Tim McMahon said Monday.  Defense analysts plan to begin a formal one-year study in fiscal 2004 on the missiles, informally called Minuteman IVs, the newsletter reported.

“There is probably a good chance we will see a lot of work going on in Minuteman IV that deals with conventional munitions,” McMahon said.  In particular, planners are considering using conventional ICBMs to penetrate deeply buried bunkers, he said (see GSN, July 24).

Engineers might begin developing them as soon as fiscal 2006, said Lt. Col. Bill Hughes, the future concepts branch chief of the Peacekeeper and Minuteman program (Inside the Air Force, Aug. 2).

Back to top

Pakistan:  Smugglers Sought Heavy Water, U.S. Officials Say

U.S. officials are reexamining a recent arms smuggling case on the suspicion that dealers attempted to buy items that could be used to produce plutonium for Pakistan’s intelligence service (ISI), the Washington Post reported today.

A convicted criminal turned informant introduced Diaa Mohsen, an Egyptian-born U.S. citizen, to Dick Stoltz, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent who was working undercover as an arms dealer, according to the Post, which received its information through an investigation by Dateline NBC.

Mohsen brought Stoltz several potential clients, including Mohammed Malik, a New Jersey deli owner originally from Pakistan.  Mohsen said Malik could connect to “the intelligence of Pakistan,” who he said was close to the then-ruling Afghanistan Taliban regime and to al-Qaeda.

Malik met with Stoltz several times and said his contacts in Pakistan wanted a variety of artillery and military equipment, as well as heavy water, a material used in some nuclear reactors that can produce plutonium.  Pakistanis who said they represented the ISI met with Stoltz in Florida.  The ISI wanted weapons for the Pakistani military and for militants in the disputed Kashmir territory, the representatives said (see GSN, July 29).

U.S. investigators decided that Malik and the Pakistani representatives were “associates of Middle Eastern terrorists” and had “associations with militants and arms trafficking groups,” Stoltz said.  Malik and the middlemen began arranging for a $32 million payment in January 2001 for weapons to go to “Kashmir or in defense of the Taliban,” a U.S. official said.

The deal appeared to die after delays, however, and U.S. authorities arrested Mohsen and Malik in June 2001.  The Pakistani middlemen, who had left the country, were not arrested, according to the Post.

Mohsen, who pled guilty to trying to export Stingers and night-vision goggles without a license, is serving a 30-month sentence.  He is cooperating with U.S. officials who are still investigating the Pakistani connection, said his attorney, Val Rodriguez.

Malik is free, and the court files related to him have been sealed.

“None of those people who came over from Pakistan were government officials who could get an arms deal done,” said Jim Eisenborg, Malik’s attorney.  Pakistan does not “buy weapons on the black market … The government of Pakistan had nothing to do with this, so maybe it was rogues,” Pakistani Embassy spokesman Asad Hayauddin said.

A Counterterrorism Matter?

Meanwhile, some federal officials have been frustrated that the FBI did not declare the case a counterterrorism issue, the Post reported.  Marking the case as a counterterrorism matter would have provided Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms officials with better access to FBI information.

“Had more attention been paid to this inside the government, the case agents in the trenches would have had more information on who these Pakistani people on U.S. soil were,” said Stoltz, who is now retired.

The case “was handled appropriately,” but some FBI agents think their headquarters “could have been more aggressive,” an FBI official said.  Federal investigators began reexamining the case after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to the Post (John Mintz, Washington Post, Aug. 2).

Back to top

United States II:  Plutonium Is Moving, Energy Official Says

The U.S. Energy Department has begun shipping plutonium to its Savannah River Site in South Carolina from the Rocky Flats former nuclear weapons plant in Colorado, a department administrator said this week (see GSN, June 24).

“Shipment of plutonium from Rocky Flats to Savannah River is under way,” said Ed Siskin, assistant deputy administrator for the Office of Fissile Material Disposition, in a presentation to a National Academy of Sciences panel.  Siskin did not say whether any shipments have arrived in South Carolina, according to the Associated Press.  The department declined to comment further.

“I can’t confirm anything,” Energy spokesman Joe Davis said.  “We don’t talk about shipments of weapons-grade plutonium.”

Engineers have completed 70 percent of the design of a planned mixed-oxide nuclear fuel facility to burn the plutonium, Siskin said, and officials are considering where to test fuel samples (see GSN, July 29; Associated Press, Aug. 2).

Back to top

Anthrax:  Agents Invoke Search Warrants in Two States, Sources Say

Federal agents investigating last year’s anthrax attacks obtained warrants to search properties in Maryland and Florida yesterday, the Baltimore Sun reported (see GSN, July 12).  Both search sites are possibly tied to former U.S. military biologist Steven Hatfill, according to the Baltimore Sun (see GSN, July 8).

In Maryland, investigators searched parts of the Detrick Plaza Apartments in Frederick.  Until July, Hatfill had lived at the complex, which is beside the main gate to his former employer, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.  Hatfill recently took a job as associate director of Louisiana State University’s National Center for Biomedical Research and Training, the Sun reported.

Agents at the Frederick complex appeared to search two large trash bins and Hatfill’s former third-floor apartment, according to the Sun.  According to the Associated Press, the agents were acting on a search warrant, but the FBI has declined to comment on that information, the Sun reported.  Hatfill gave agents permission when they searched his apartment in late June (see GSN, June 26).

In Florida, investigators acted on a warrant to again search a storage facility where Hatfill had once rented a unit.  The agents searched a unit other than the one they had searched previously, according to the Sun.

Investigators have never identified Hatfill as a suspect, according the Sun (Frank Roylance, Baltimore Sun, Aug. 2). 

One law enforcement official, however, indicated that authorities were focusing more on Hatfill. 

“We’re obviously doing things related to him that we’re not doing with others,” the official said.  “He is obviously of more interest to us than others on the list at this point” (Jackman/Eggen, Washington Post, Aug. 2).

Hatfill has done nothing wrong, said his lawyer, Thomas Carter.

“He’s a patriot — he’s going to continue to cooperate in every way,” Carter said.

Meanwhile, Federation of American Scientists analyst Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, who has been outspoken about the FBI investigation of the anthrax attacks, said agents also visited her in New York yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 4, 2001).

“They asked me what evidence I felt they should be pursuing,” she said.  Officials are pressuring investigators to identify the person responsible for the attacks by their one-year anniversary in mid-September, the agents told Rosenberg.

“One of them said, ‘Every time my boss passes my desk he points to the calendar,’” she said (Roylance, Baltimore Sun).

For further information, see:

CDC Frequently Asked Questions About Anthrax

FBI Amerithrax Investigation

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax

GSN Anthrax Attack Chronology (Dec. 12, 2001)

Back to top

Hamas:  Palestinian Planned Cyanide Attack, Officials Charge

Israel yesterday charged a Palestinian man with assisting suicide attacks against Israel and planning to use cyanide gas in a mass attack (see GSN, June 6).

In February 2000, alleged Hamas leader Abas al-Sayyad tried to acquire a bottle of cyanide from an accomplice, according to an indictment of al-Sayyad submitted to the Tel Aviv District Court yesterday.  Sayyad told the accomplice that he planned to use the cyanide for a major attack, the indictment says (Itim News Agency/Jerusalem Post, Aug. 2).

A Palestinian suicide bomber killed 29 Israelis March 27 at the Park Hotel in Netanya, Israel, and the indictment alleges that al-Sayyad, a leader of Hamas in the West Bank town Tulkarm, was behind the bombing.  Maj. Gen. Aharon Zeevi, Israel’s military intelligence chief, told the Knesset’s security committee in June that the Park Hotel bomber had planned to release cyanide gas during the attack but failed due to a technical problem, the Associated Press reported.  Investigators found no cyanide at the scene of the bombing.

Cyanide gas can be lethal in an enclosed space, according to the AP.  No Palestinian group has ever carried out any mass poisoning, Israeli officials said (Jack Katznell, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Aug. 1).

For further information, see:

CDC List of Chemical Agents

Federation of American Scientists Information on Chemical Weapons

Back to top

Ukraine:  U.S. Uses NATO Prospects to Force Tightened Security

The United States has told Ukraine that it must increase security over its missiles and other sensitive technologies or risk losing the opportunity to join NATO, a senior State Department official said yesterday (see GSN, July 16).

Primarily related to missiles, the sensitive technologies include precision instruments, gyroscopes and nuclear expertise, the official said.

Iranian and Iraqi delegations have both visited Ukrainian missile personnel, the official said.  The United State has no evidence that Ukraine has sold technology to Iraq, but an investigation into the practices of Ukrainian entities that trade with Iraq is pending, the Associated Press reported.

Meanwhile, U.S. officials are working with Ukrainian authorities to improve security at nuclear power plants and facilities that contain sensitive materials, the official said.  Officials are also considering how to tighten security along the country’s border with Russia and the Black Sea to prevent smuggling of nuclear weapons.

Technology transfers and nonproliferation are important matters on the U.S. agenda, State Department spokesman Philip Reeker said.

“It’s … certainly a subject that we discussed with many countries, including Ukraine,” he said.

Ukraine announced in May that it plans to try to join NATO and is working to meet the organization’s economic and political standards.  The country decided to give up its nuclear weapons when it gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 (Sonya Ross, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Aug. 1).

Back to top