Iraq:  Hussein Destroyed Weapons in Mid-1990s, Aide Says

An aide to former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has said Iraq destroyed its WMD stockpiles years prior to the recent war with the United States, but maintained an ambiguous stance over their existence in an effort to appear strong, the Associated Press reported Friday (see GSN, Aug. 1).

By the mid-1990s, “it was common knowledge among the leadership” that Iraq had destroyed its stockpiles of chemical weapons and had discontinued its biological and nuclear weapons programs, according to the aide.  Hussein believed, however, that a deliberate ambiguity over the fate of the weapons of mass destruction would deter a U.S. attack, the aide said.

“He repeatedly told me:  ‘These foreigners, they only respect strength, they must be made to believe we are strong,’” the aide said.

Some experts believe that Iraq released false information about its WMD programs to help create the impression that it still possessed such weapons, U.S. Defense Department intelligence experts said.

“That explanation has plausibility,” said Robert Einhorn, a former assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation.  “But the disposition of those missing weapons and materials still has to be explained somehow,” he added (Slobodan Lekic, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Aug. 1).

Niger Repeats Denial of Uranium Sale to Iraq

Meanwhile, Nigerien President Mamadou Tandja yesterday reiterated that his country did not attempt to sell uranium to Iraq, as has previously been alleged by the United States and the United Kingdom (see GSN, July 29).

Prior to the war, both the United States and the United Kingdom cited Iraq’s alleged attempts to obtain uranium from Africa as evidence that Hussein was seeking to relaunch his nuclear weapons program.  However, a major piece of evidence used to back that claim — documents purporting to show an attempted Iraqi purchase of uranium from Niger — was later determined to be false (see GSN, July 30).

Tandja yesterday again denied that his country had any involvement in a uranium sale to Iraq.

“Against our wishes our country has been front-page news over an affair of the sale of uranium from Niger to Iraq: this affair is nothing else than an accusation without foundation,” Tandja said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Aug. 3).

Tandja also called on the International Atomic Energy Agency to publicly clear Niger of any involvement.

The IAEA should “publicly wash Niger of all suspicions before the U.N. Security Council,” Tandja said.  “Without that, our country can only remain harmed and hampered by a situation in which it isn’t implicated in any way,” he said.

The IAEA refused yesterday to comment on Tandja’s request, saying it still needed to be formally made.

“It’s an unusual request,” IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said.  “We’d have to get it formally in writing and then see what we would do with it,” she said (Associated Press/Globe and Mail, Aug. 3).

Back to top

International Response:  Legal Authority Is Uncertain for U.S.-Led Cargo Interdiction Effort

U.S. officials have said there is debate over how much legal authority exists under which to conduct the Proliferation Security Initiative — a U.S.-led effort to interdict suspect shipments of WMD-related cargo, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, July 23).

Some U.S. officials have said that current laws allow for most of the effort, and all that is needed is better coordination and enforcement.  Legal experts, however, differ over what existing laws allow, the Post reported.

Under current international law, countries may board ships with the permission of the country whose flag the ship is flying, or if the ship is unmarked, according to the Post.  Ships carrying illicit cargo — such as illegal drugs — or those transiting between countries with established agreements, can also be stopped and captured.

“The plan is to use existing authorities in the first instance, because if you do that in a proactive way by sharing information with others and being prepared to move, you’ll have an 80 to 85 percent solution,” a White House official said.

However, there currently is no international ban on shipments of WMD-related materials, according to the Post.  To address this, some legal experts have recommended that the United States work within the United Nations to expand the current legal authority.

“More important than adding one country after another to the president’s initiative, you need to get something through the U.N. Security Council,” said Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.  “The reason is, if you’re going to get international common usage, that is the most efficient way to make that happen,” he said.

U.S. officials said the Bush administration has no plans to seek U.N. approval for seizures of WMD-related cargo because of concerns that such a move would trigger debate over what would qualify for interdiction.  They also said that the initiative would not result in the creation of a large-scale international system, such as a task force or an enforcement mechanism.

“It’s not like there’s going to be some big unveiling, where the marker will come down and all of a sudden we’re going to be out there looking for bad guys shipping around bad things,” a U.S. Defense Department official said.  “We’re doing that now,” the official said.

There are also concerns over the U.S. motive for the initiative, according to the Post.  While Bush administration officials have said the initiative is meant to be a global effort, some countries are concerned that it is a covert attempt to establish a blockade around North Korea, the Post reported.  In a speech last week, U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton explicitly linked the effort to both North Korea and Iran. 

Initiative members are planning to enlist more members by targeting costal Asian and Middle East countries, as well as those countries whose flags are most often used by traffickers, officials said (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, August 3).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Scientists Studying Use of Fish to Detect Biological, Chemical Agents

Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s Center for Water Security are examining whether a species of fish could be used to help detect toxins placed in the U.S. drinking water supply by terrorists, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, May 29).

Center scientists are studying whether zebrafish could be used to detect the presence of toxins in water, according Michael Carvan, head of the project.  The fish are genetically modified to glow when they encounter different types and levels of chemicals, AP reported. 

For example, scientists expose the fish to high levels of E. coli.  Only those fish with the gene to react to high levels of the bacterium should glow, while others should remain a dull gray, AP reported.

More work still needs to be done, however, before the fish could be used to test water supplies, Carvan said.

“We can get them to light up,” Carvan said.  “But they don’t pass that trait onto the next generation,” he said (Tim Cigelske, Associated Press, Aug. 4).

Researchers at the Office of Naval Research and Duke University are also working on ways to modify organisms to react to the presence of certain materials, such as toxins and pathogens, according to New Technology Week. 

The scientists are working to develop a method to produce proteins that could link to molecules of a substance to be identified.  Those proteins, which could also include a fluorescent molecule to glow in the presence of the substance, could then be inserted into organisms for use as chemical and biological detectors (Dave Ahearn, New Technology Week, Aug. 4).

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Says Talks Will Begin Soon

North Korea said today that it will soon begin negotiations in Beijing with five other nations in an attempt to end the nuclear standoff on the Korean Peninsula (see GSN, Aug. 1).

“Six-party talks for a solution to the nuclear issue between the D.P.R.K. and the U.S. will be held in Beijing soon thanks to the former’s initiative and peaceful efforts,” said a spokesman from the North Korean Foreign Ministry.  “As the multilateral talks are slated to take place as called for by the U.S. side so far, the forthcoming talks will clearly show the world community whether the U.S. has a true willingness to make a switchover in its policy toward the D.P.R.K. or not,” the spokesman added.

A South Korean official said the talks would probably begin this month rather than September, Reuters reported (Reuters/Washington Post, Aug. 4).

North Korea agreed to the talks after Washington said it was willing to meet directly with diplomats from Pyongyang within the multilateral format.  North Korean officials have long demanded direct talks with the United States.

“Some time ago, the U.S. informed the D.P.R.K. through a third party that the D.P.R.K.-U.S. bilateral talks may be held within the framework of multilateral talks,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman said.

U.S. President George W. Bush said the United States will not enter into a “bilateral agreement” with North Korea.

“There are now five nations and North Korea sitting at a table,” Bush said.  “The discussions will be all aimed at convincing (North Korean leader) Mr. Kim Jong Il to change his attitude about nuclear weaponry,” he added (Pan/Kessler, Washington Post, Aug. 2).

North Korea, however, said it would not negotiate with U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton.  During a recent speech in South Korea, Bolton called North Korea’s Kim a “tyrannical dictator.”

“Such human scum and bloodsucker is not entitled to take part in the talks,” said the North Korean Foreign Ministry (Soo-jeong Lee, Associated Press/Chicago Tribune, Aug. 4).

The Foreign Ministry added that due to Bolton’s “political vulgarity and psychopathological condition,” North Korea has “decided not to consider him as an official of the U.S. administration any longer, nor to deal with him” (Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, Aug. 4).

Regardless of who attends the summit on behalf of the United States, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said Washington will not trade aid for security.

“We’re not doing nonaggression pacts … we, as a practice, don’t do that.  But there are ways to talk about security, and there are ways to talk about intent,” he said (Agence France-Presse, Aug. 4).

Washington, Tokyo Consider Inspection Teams

Meanwhile, the United States and Japan are considering whether to form inspection teams — separate from the International Atomic Energy Agency — to investigate North Korean nuclear facilities.  The potential inspection teams could be used if an agreement is reached to end the nuclear standoff and would include experts from the United States, Japan, China, South Korea and Russia.

Although they would be indepentdent, the teams would would cooperate with the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Agence France-Presse reported (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Aug. 3).

Plan for War, Woolsey Says

The U.S. public’s rejection of war on the Korean Peninsula has undermined U.S. officials trying to influence China to intercede with North Korea, according to former CIA chief James Woolsey and retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney.

In a Wall Street Journal commentary, the two said that China is the only nation with any leverage over North Korea, and that improving U.S. readiness to attack North Korea would signal China that the Washington would act if Beijing does not.

As for military planning, the two said the United States cannot limit military action to surgical strikes on nuclear facilities.

“We must be prepared to win a war, not execute a strike,” the two wrote.

Woolsey and McInerney advocated overwhelming air power and improved air defenses.

“The U.S. should begin planning immediately to deploy the Patriot tactical ballistic missile defense system plus Aegis ships to South Korea and Japan, and also to reinforce our tactical air forces by moving in several air wings and aircraft carrier battle groups, together with the all-important surveillance aircraft and drones,” they wrote.  A U.S. air attack would be overwhelmingly successful, they added.

“North Korea’s geriatric air defenses — both fighter aircraft and missiles — would not last long.  As the Iraqis understood when facing our air power, if you fly, you die,” according to the commentary.

The two officials estimated that North Korea could be defeated in 30 to 60 days (Woolsey/McInerney, Wall Street Journal, Aug. 4).

Back to top

Iran:  French Officials Report Advanced Iranian Nuclear Program

French officials completed a classified report in May that claims that Iran is close to developing a nuclear weapon, the Los Angeles Times reported today.

The report calls on other nations to practice “the most serious vigilance on their exports to Iran and Iranian front companies.”

Iranian officials have also been receiving extensive assistance from foreign experts, according to the Times.  North Korean scientists have been working in Iran, and Iranian officials reportedly established a resort on the Caspian Sea for their exclusive use, according to sources in the country and foreign intelligence agencies.  Abdul Qadeer Khan, a Pakistani nuclear scientist, has also been assisting the Iranian program, according to the Times.

“Pakistan’s role was bigger from the beginning than we thought,” said a Middle Eastern intelligence official.

Russia has been working with Iran to build a nuclear reactor at Bushehr.  Iran, however, is also building a heavy-water reactor that is more likely to be used in weapons development.  Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the president of Iran’s atomic energy agency, said the heavy-water reactor is for research purposes and could be used to make radioisotopes for medical applications.

Experts, however, said the reactor causes concerns.

“For Iran, there is no justification whatsoever to have a heavy-water plant,” said Gary Samore, director of nonproliferation programs at London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies and a former Clinton administration security official.

A senior U.N. official said “the heavy-water plant sticks out like a sore thumb” (Douglas Frantz, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 4).

Back to top

United States:  Pentagon Considering Development of “Hypersonic” Bomber

U.S. Defense Department officials last week met with representatives from defense contractors to discuss plans to build a “hypersonic” bomber to help combat WMD proliferation, according to the London Sunday Times (see GSN, July 14).

Project Falcon [Force Application and Launch from the Continental United States] calls for developing the Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle, to be designed to fly at a top speed of 6,000 miles per hour directly from the United States to attack countries threatening to use weapons of mass destruction, according to the Sunday Times.  The HCV, expected to be operational by 2025, would take off from a conventional runway and could carry up to 12,000 pounds of bombs.

Prior to the launch of the HCV, the Pentagon first plans to construct a smaller Common Aero Vehicle, which is scheduled to be operational by 2010, the Sunday Times reported.  The CAV would be launched from a rocket or from a conventional airplane and would fly at the HCV’s top speed.  It would also be able to carry up to 1,000 pounds of weapons (Peter Almond, London Sunday Times, Aug. 3).

Back to top

U.S. Plans:  Officials Might Expand Airborne Laser Mission

U.S. Defense Department officials are considering using the developing Airborne Laser system to defend against a broad spectrum of missiles, Space & Missile reported today (see GSN, July 24).

The Airborne Laser is currently being developed to defend against theater ballistic missiles, but it could be used against intercontinental ballistic missiles, according to Air Force Col. Ellen Pawlikowski.

“With the ABM [Antiballistic Missile] Treaty going away, we are looking now at the full spectrum of missiles, not just the theater class, and how we best fit in with other members of the ballistic missile defense system,” she said.

However, Pawlikowski said the program will require some minor improvements.

“There will be certain things that will be redesigned, smaller pieces and components, but we’re sticking with the same basic design,” she said (Ray Nelson, Space & Missile, Aug. 4).

Back to top

Radiological Weapons:  United Kingdom Had Evidence of Iraqi Dirty Bomb

David Kelly, a British former U.N. weapons inspector, had accumulated evidence that showed that Iraq had built and tested a “dirty bomb,” the London Sunday Times reported yesterday (see GSN, May 5, 2003).

In an interview with the Times in June, Kelly said the dirty bomb — which combines conventional explosives and radioactive materials — was originally built for use against Iran during the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s.  He also said that Iraq still “possessed the know-how and the materials to build a radiological weapon.”

While Kelly recommended that the bomb be included in a dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction released in September 2002, it was left out of the report, according to the Times.  Kelly said he did not know why the bomb had been left out of the dossier, but added that some British officials doubted the effectiveness of such a weapon.

The bomb might have been left out of the dossier because Iraq ceased testing of it in the late 1980s, according to the Times.  A British defense source said, however, that in 1987, when Iraq was testing the weapon, British scientists were interested in the results.

John Maples, a member of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee that investigated British prewar intelligence on Iraq, said he did not know why the British government had left the bomb out of its dossier. 

“They (the government) were obviously looking for ways of making the dossier as attractive as they could, and as threatening as they could, and you would have thought Iraq’s ability to let off a dirty nuclear weapon was pretty serious,” Maples said (Nicholas Rufford, London Sunday Times, Aug. 3).

Kelly was found dead near his home in mid-July from an apparent suicide, according to Agence France-Presse.  Prior to his death, he had been identified as the source for a BBC story in May that the British government had misrepresented intelligence on Iraq to strengthen support for going to war, AFP reported.  A funeral for Kelly is scheduled to be held Wednesday (Robert Macpherson, Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Aug. 4).

Back to top