Iraq:  White House Acknowledges Bush Should Not Have Included Uranium Purchase Claim in State of the Union

The Bush administration yesterday acknowledged that President George W. Bush should not have included a claim in his State of the Union address in January that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium in Africa (see GSN, July 7).

“Knowing all that we know now, the reference to Iraq’s attempt to acquire uranium from Africa should not have been included in the State of the Union speech," a senior Bush administration official said last night in a statement authorized by the White House.

In March, the International Atomic Energy Agency said that the uranium claim, which was based on documents purporting to show Iraqi efforts to purchase uranium from Niger, was based on forged information, according to the Washington Post.  The Niger claim was further debunked after it was reported that the CIA had sent a former senior U.S. diplomat to the country in 2002 to investigate the claim, and that the diplomat had reported that Nigerien officials had denied the sale.

A classified version of a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi WMD programs, completed in September 2002, includes references to intelligence reports that said Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium from three countries, not just Niger, a senior Bush administration official said.  The other two African countries mentioned were Namibia and Gabon, according to intelligence sources.  They said, however, that the reports about the other countries have not been confirmed and that some analysts consider the information unreliable.

There were reports of “possible attempts” by Iraq to purchase uranium, but “they were all somewhat sketchy,” a senior intelligence official said (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, July 8).

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday that the White House’s admission that Bush should not have included the Niger claim was “nothing new.”

“There is zero, nada, nothing new here,” Fleischer said.  “We’ve long acknowledged” that the information on the alleged attempted purchase of uranium from Niger “did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect,” he said (David Sanger, New York Times, July 8).

British Intelligence Review

Meanwhile, in an appearance before a parliamentary committee, British Prime Minister Tony Blair defended his decision to draw the United Kingdom into war with Iraq.

“I am quite sure we did the right thing in removing [former Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein because not merely was he a threat ... to the wider world but it was an appalling regime that the world is well rid of,” Blair told a House of Commons liaison committee today.

Blair also denied allegations that the government had “misled Parliament or the people” (Blitz/Burt, Financial Times, July 7).

In addition, Blair denied that a group of his advisers made crucial decisions alone leading up to the war, saying that both the full Cabinet and Parliament had been involved.

“The idea that you get together a couple of people in your office over a cup of coffee and decide to take the country to war is far-fetched,” Blair said (BBC News, July 8).

Yesterday, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee released a report on the findings of its inquiry into the handling of prewar intelligence on Iraq, according to the London Guardian.

In its report, the committee said that government ministers had not misled Parliament about the threat Iraq posed, but that the “jury is still out” about the accuracy of information contained in a September dossier until evidence of alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, or of their destruction, is found.

In addition, the committee said that the United Kingdom might have relied too heavily on U.S. intelligence in making its decision to go to war.

“We conclude that it appears likely that there was only limited access to reliable human intelligence in Iraq and that as a consequence the United Kingdom may have been heavily reliant on U.S. technical intelligence, on defectors and on exiles with an agenda of their own,” the report says (London Guardian, July 8).

Hussein — Dead or Alive?

The CIA said yesterday that the voice on a tape played last week by the Arab television network Al Jazeera was “most likely” that of Hussein.

“The CIA’s assessment, after a technical analysis of the tape, is that it is most likely his voice,” an agency spokesman said in a press statement.  “The exact date of the recording cannot be determined,” the spokesman said.    

The speaker on the tape, claiming to be Hussein, says the tape was recorded June 14 and that he is in Iraq.  The speaker also denies that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

“What they called the weapons of mass destruction was nothing but a cover for their plans,” the speaker says.  “I ask the invaders:  Where are these weapons of mass destruction?” the speaker adds.

There is significant background noise on the tape and it may have been produced “many months” ago, a U.S. intelligence official said (Guy Taylor, Washington Times, July 8).

Back to top

Iran:  ElBaradei Leaves Today to Push Openness on Nuclear Efforts

International Atomic Energy Chief Mohamed ElBaradei leaves for Iran today to push Tehran to open its nuclear power efforts and prove it is not working on nuclear weapons, Reuters reported (see GSN, July 7).

ElBaradei will meet with Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and Iranian nuclear chief Gholamreza Aghazadeh to urge them to sign the Additional Protocol.

Signing the protocol would “generate additional confidence in the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program,” said IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky.

Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi spoke by telephone today with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and said that Tehran is approaching ElBaradei’s visit with an open mind.

“Tehran is ready to listen to ElBaradei’s views, and we hope that during the negotiations Iran’s concerns and standpoints are also taken into consideration,” Kharrazi said (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters, July 8).

ElBaradei said yesterday that Iran would have “days or weeks” to respond to his requests (Julian Borger, London Guardian, July 8).

Back to top

North Korea:  Seoul, Tokyo Agree to Stop Nuclear Reactor Construction

Japan and South Korea have agreed with U.S. demands to stop construction on a nuclear reactor in North Korea if Pyongyang continues its nuclear weapons development, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, July 7).

Diplomats from the three nations discussed the issue and reached a consensus during talks in Washington in early July.  Officials will reportedly “monitor the situation for another month,” according to the Jiji Press agency in Tokyo.

U.S. officials had previously said that the Washington meeting was “a brainstorming session” that had not produced a specific agreement (Agence France-Presse, July 8).

China, South Korea Wants Talks

China and South Korea agreed to push for multilateral talks with North Korea in an effort to resolve the nuclear crisis.

 “(Chinese) President Hu Jintao and I agreed to make efforts for the early resumption of direct talks among concerned parties in the North Korean nuclear issue,” said South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun after two hours of talks in Beijing with his Chinese counterpart.  “I agreed with President Hu that in order to fully and satisfactorily resolve the North Korean nuclear issue, we must open up channels between all concerned parties as soon as possible, and in order to reach a consensus, all sides need to make relentless efforts,” he added.

Hu said China supports a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the crisis, but North Korea’s fears must be addressed.

“We think we must earnestly consider and resolve the security concerns of North Korea.  This is our principled position,” he said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, July 8).

Australia Meeting Begins Tomorrow

Meanwhile, Australia will host a meeting tomorrow of 11 countries focused on stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

A senior Australian diplomat said that current international regulations are not sufficient to stop weapons proliferation, particularly from North Korea (Radio Australia/BBC Monitoring, July 8).

Back to top

United States I:  Judge Overrules Proposed Energy Department Regulation to Reclassify Wastes

A U.S. federal judge last week rejected a proposed U.S. Energy Department regulation that would have reclassified some of the millions of gallons of radioactive waste currently stored at U.S. nuclear weapons sites in Idaho, South Carolina and Washington, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, April 10, 2002).

U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled last week that the department had overstepped its authority in the proposed regulation, which would have sought to reclassify some of the waste at the three sites so it would not have to be removed.  Energy is removing approximately 99 percent of the radioactive waste at the three sites — which is stored in tanks — for processing.  The department’s proposed regulation would have reclassified some of the remaining waste as low-level waste, which Energy then would have encased within the storage tanks and left in place.

The department has not yet decided whether to appeal the ruling, which could delay plans to clean up the three sites, Energy spokesman Joe Davis said yesterday.

Winmill’s decision “means the liquid wastes are going to stay in those tanks longer,” Davis said.  “It’s going to create a tremendous burden on the taxpayers and jeopardize our ability to clean up the sites,” he said.

Geoffrey Fettus, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said that Energy’s proposed regulation would have resulted in millions of gallons of dangerous wastes being left behind in aging storage tanks.

“Now, they’ve got to go back and do what everybody thought they were going to do for the last 50 years, which is to clean up the wastes, package them and ship them to a deep repository,” Fettus said.  “It is an egregious example of the Department of Energy and the nuclear industry trying to solve a problem by relaxing regulatory standards, rather than cleaning up the mess,” he said (John Wiley, Associated Press, July 8).

Back to top

United States II:  Protesters Criticize Plutonium Pit Production

Seventy protesters traveled from Atlanta to North Augusta, S.C., yesterday to denounce an Energy Department plan that could restart the production of triggers for nuclear weapons at the Savannah River Site (see GSN, July 7).

Energy is considering five sites to produce the triggers, or “pits,” including Amarillo, Texas; Carlsbad, N.M.; Los Alamos, N.M.; the Nevada Test Site; and South Carolina’s Savannah River.  A new plant would begin production in 2020, and the United States says the prospective facility must produce at least 125 pits every year to maintain the nation’s nuclear stockpile.

“I don’t know if there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but we do know there are weapons of mass destruction in the United States,” said the Rev. Joseph Lowery.

Georgia state Representative Nan Grogan Orrock (D) said the Savannah River Site has contaminated Georgia’s groundwater for decades (Milo Ippolito, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 8).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Pentagon Pursues New Nuclear Planning

The U.S. Defense Department is pursuing a $200 million, eight-year project to expand and streamline nuclear war planning, according to a Los Angeles Times column published Sunday (see GSN, June 20).

In May, defense contractors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin received contracts to design the new nuclear planning tools, according to the column, by military analyst William Arkin.  The new tools were first detailed in the 2002 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review and are needed because “the current process has no growth capability to handle the increasing target requests, which are projected to grow tenfold by 2007,” according to military documents.

The new planning will make the military “more flexible and adaptable” in response to an increase in the “number of threat countries,” the documents say.

The eight-year effort will result in “point-and-click” nuclear planning for military and civilian leaders, according to Arkin.  The effort will streamline communications and modernize the system that handles presidential orders to launch a nuclear strike.

After the planning is complete, Defense officials hope to produce systems that will be able to operate following a nuclear attack, Arkin wrote.  As part of the new system, the Pentagon plans to launch up to five $400 million satellites to ensure secure communication between the president and the nation’s nuclear forces.

The new system will also incorporate 69 “transportable terminals.”  Small enough to be operated by one person, the communications terminals are intended to “reliably operate in pre- through post-nuclear environments,” according to a document outlining the effort.

In the event of nuclear war, mobile teams using the communications terminals would transport nuclear weapons to units that are still able to fire them.

“The military is clearly moving quickly to implement the Nuclear Posture Review’s recommendations,” Arkin wrote.  “Let’s hope that in doing so, they don’t also increase the likelihood that the U.S. will initiate a nuclear war,” he added (William Arkin, Los Angeles Times, July 6).

Back to top

Pakistan:  Musharraf Reiterates Nonproliferation Stance

Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf said yesterday that his country’s nuclear weapons program is under strict control and that Pakistan would not aid other countries in obtaining nuclear weapons (see GSN, June 27).

“Pakistan will never proliferate,” Musharraf said during an address at a university near Islamabad.  “Pakistan’s nuclear potential is under very strong custodial control,” he said.

During a visit to the United States last month, Musharraf met with U.S. President George W. Bush, who proposed a $3 billion U.S. economic and security aid package for Pakistan.  Pakistani opposition leaders have charged that Musharraf agreed to reduce Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program in exchange for the proposed aid — allegations Musharraf has denied, according to the Associated Press (Munir Ahmad, Associated Press, July 7).

Back to top

Russia:  Moscow to Destroy RS-20 ICBM Silo today

Russia is expected today to destroy a RS-20 ICBM silo in the Chelyabinsk region, according to ITAR-Tass (see GSN, May 19).

The silo is being destroyed under the auspices of START, the 1991 strategic arms treaty that restricts the United States and Russia to deploying no more than 6,000 strategic nuclear warheads, according to ITAR-Tass.  Under the treaty, the destroyed silo will remain open to U.S. technical observation for 90 days (Vladislav Kuznetsov, ITAR-Tass, July 8).

Back to top

Iran:  United States, Israel, Concerned Over Shahab 3 Missile Test

U.S. and Israeli officials have expressed concern over an announcement yesterday by Iran that it had conducted the final test of its Shahab 3 long-range ballistic missile, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, July 7).

“We have long had very serious concerns about Iranian missile programs,” U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.

U.S. officials said the latest Shahab 3 test was one of several conducted in recent years and was not a surprise.  Iran’s ballistic missile program poses “a threat to the region and a threat to U.S. interests in the region,” and would be addressed with various forms of pressure with “like-minded countries,” Boucher said.

Israel is also concerned about Iran’s progress in the development of the Shahab 3, which would have the ability to hit targets there, according to the Times.

“We are very concerned, especially since we know that Iran is seeking to acquire the nuclear weapon,” Israeli government spokesman Avi Pazner told Agence France-Presse.  “The combination of Shahab 3 and the nuclear weapon would be a very serious threat on the stability of the region,” he said (Nazila Fathi, New York Times, July 8).

Israel’s Arrow missile interceptor system is capable of providing full protection against the Shahab 3, said Arye Herzog, head of the Homa Missile Defense program (see GSN, June 2).  Herzog added, however, that Israel still lacked full protection against the Shahab 4, a more advanced ballistic missile Iran has been reported as trying to develop (Israel Defense Forces Radio/BBC Monitoring International, July 8).

Back to top

Taiwan:  Taipei Developing Missile Defense System

Taiwan is increasing the pace of its missile defense program in response to new cruise missiles that China plans to deploy in 2005, the South China Morning Post reported today (see GSN, May 9).

The missile defense system is reportedly a combination of antiaircraft artillery, aircraft and sea-based defenses, according to officials in Taipei.

Taiwan is also developing cruise missiles to launch against China, the newspaper reported.

“The government-funded Chinese Institute of Science and Technology has succeeded in developing a prototype which is capable of making land strikes,” according to a Taiwanese military source (Joe Tang, South China Morning Post, July 8).

Back to top

Radiological Weapons:  Concerns Remain on Safe Shipment of Radioactive Materials, ElBaradei Says

While the current radioactive material transportation regulatory system has an “excellent” safety record, concerns remain, the director of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said yesterday (see GSN, June 2).

“Despite the strong safety record and general good performance in this area, some concerns remain regarding the transport of radioactive material,” International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei told the opening session of a weeklong conference in Vienna on the safe transport of radioactive materials.

ElBaradei said he hoped the conference would examine the application of the current regulatory system and possible new measures to improve the system.  One concern is how information on radioactive material shipments is transmitted between countries and between governments and the general public, he said.

“Clear advance notification of shipments is clearly desirable; however, this objective competes with the need, from a safety and security perspective, to withhold such information from all but authorized government personnel,” ElBaradei said.  “This issue requires further in-depth discussion, with a view to reaching an agreed understanding on how to reconcile the need for transparency with the requirements for security,” he said (U.N. release, July 7).

Back to top