|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
U.S. Response: CIA Issues Latest Global WMD Threat AssessmentBy David Ruppe The semiannual report said North Korea had been seeking centrifuge-related materials in large quantities to support a uranium enrichment program. The country also had obtained equipment suitable for use in uranium feed and withdrawal systems, the report says. “During this time frame, Pyongyang has continued attempts to procure technology worldwide that could have applications in its nuclear program,” the report says. Reciting previous intelligence estimates, the report says North Korea probably has produced enough plutonium for at least one, and possibly two nuclear weapons and that spent fuel rods stored in accordance with the 1994 Agreed Framework contain enough plutonium for several more weapons. Suppliers Going beyond North Korea’s nuclear aspirations, the report lists Russia, then North Korea, China, and unspecified Western countries as key global WMD and missile proliferators. “Western countries are an important source for the proliferation of WMD-related information and training,” and access to technology and training there may have enabled terrorist organizations to develop weapons of mass destruction more quickly, the report says. India, Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan, traditional recipients of WMD technology, are also growing as suppliers, the report says. Differing from previous such reports, the agency said unmanned aerial vehicles and cruise missiles present “a serious and growing threat” for delivering weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, Aug. 19, 2002). Concerns About al-Qaeda The report offers new commentary on suspected unconventional threats posed by terrorist groups. It says the stated readiness of al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to attempt unconventional attacks is “one of our highest concerns,” noting a statement by Osama bin Laden that such attacks were a “religious duty,” and testimony of a bin Laden associate that the group had chemical and biological weapons. “Documents and equipment recovered from al-Qaeda facilities in Afghanistan show that bin Laden has a more sophisticated biological weapons research program than previously discovered,” it says. The report says al-Qaeda had ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons and was “receptive to” any assistance it could find to acquire or develop them. It says radiological terrorism is considered “a highly credible threat,” and that terrorists might try to attack chemical or nuclear infrastructure in the United States. Developments in Iraqi Missile Development The agency reports suggests that Iraq is making advances in its solid-propellant ballistic missile program, despite being greatly constrained by U.N. prohibitions. It says Iraq has two new solid-propellant “mixing” buildings at a plant that “appear especially suited to house large, U.N.-prohibited mixers of the type acquired” for a previous, banned program. “In fact, we can find no logical explanation for the size and configuration of these mixing buildings other than an Iraqi intention to develop longer-range, prohibited missiles (that is, to mix solid propellant exclusively geared for such missiles),” the report says. It says also Iraq has begun reconstructing a facility that was previously used to “cast and cure” parts for proscribed missile motors. The CIA said, as it had previously, that international sanctions on Iraq were dampening the country’s progress on missile development. “If economic sanctions against Iraq were lifted, Baghdad probably would increase its attempts to acquire missile-related items from foreign sources, regardless of any future U.N. monitoring and continuing restrictions on long-range ballistic missile programs. With substantial foreign assistance and an accommodating political environment, Baghdad could flight-test an MRBM [medium-range ballistic missile] by mid-decade,” according to the report. The report says Iraq “continued to pursue” a biological weapons program. Iranian Programs The report says Iran was “vigorously” pursuing programs to indigenously produce chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and their delivery systems. To that end, Iran had obtained foreign assistance enabling it to produce some or all of such weapons, focusing its efforts on getting help from Russia, China, North Korea and Europe. The report says the United States is “convinced” Iran is violating the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and pursuing nuclear weapons, and that efforts to bolster its domestic nuclear fuel cycle capabilities can also support fissile material production for a program (see GSN, Dec. 13, 2002). Russia, which has been supplying a large part of that assistance, has continued to deny it is supporting an illicit program. The report says the International Atomic Energy Agency should be allowed to inspect a production site for zirconium fuel cladding and that site, produced through Chinese assistance, should be declared to the agency. Also during the last half of 2001, Iran sought Chinese and Russian assistance that could further efforts to develop an indigenous capability to produce nerve agents, it said. Other Issues The report says, as previous versions have, that North Korea was gaining raw materials and components for ballistic missile programs from “various foreign sources, especially through North Korean firms based in China.” With respect to Libya, the report says the country and others in 2001 “reportedly” used their secret services to try to obtain technical information on the WMD development, including nuclear weapons. The report provides a small bit of new commentary on Pakistan’s nuclear program. During the reporting period, Pakistan “continued to acquire nuclear-related equipment, some of it dual-use, and materials from various sources — principally in Western Europe. If Pakistan chooses to develop more advanced nuclear weapons, seeking such goods will remain important,” it said.
From January 8, 2003 issue.Iraq I: Inspectors Search at Least Eight SitesU.N. weapons inspectors visited at least eight suspect Iraqi sites today, according to Reuters (see GSN, Jan. 7). Meanwhile, there are indications that Middle Eastern leaders are working to persuade Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to voluntarily leave power and enter exile. Experts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission have visited at least four sites today, according to Iraqi officials. An UNMOVIC biological team visited a medical college in Baghdad. UNMOVIC chemical experts visited the al-Tareq public company, about 60 miles northwest of Baghdad, that is believed to produce chemical weapons precursors, Reuters reported. An UNMOVIC missile team inspected the al-Mamoun Plant, about 40 miles southeast of Baghdad, which produces components for several types of solid propellant rockets, according to Reuters. Inspectors also visited a medicine factory located in the northern city of Mosul. Experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency visited three cement factories located in the cities of Samawa, Kofa and Kerbala in southern Iraq Reuters reported. UNMOVIC and IAEA experts visited an Irrigation Ministry repair company located in Baghdad (Reuters, Jan. 8). Yesterday, inspectors visited at least nine suspect Iraqi sites, according to an IAEA press release. An UNMOVIC missile team tagged critical equipment at the al-Mamoun missile facility. Missile experts also went to the al-Samoud Factory to inspect two missile engines scheduled to be static-tested by Iraq soon, the IAEA release said. UNMOVIC inspectors traveled to the Ukhaider Ammunition and Missile Storage Area (IAEA release, Jan. 7). Element of Surprise Inspectors also used helicopters for the first time yesterday to visit the Qaim State Company for Phosphates, located at a uranium mine near the Syrian border. U.N. officials hope that the continued use of helicopters will enable inspectors to visit sites with little advance warning and provide an element of surprise, according to the Washington Post. For example, when IAEA inspectors visited the site last month, it took them six hours to arrive by car, while it only took inspectors two hours to arrive yesterday by air. “We were taken by surprise,” said the factory’s assistant director, Ryadh Aziz Gassin. “We didn’t know until we saw the helicopters flying over the complex,” Gassin added (Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post, Jan. 8). Exile Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is leading an Arab effort to persuade Hussein to step down from power to prevent a U.S. invasion of Iraq, according to the Christian Science Monitor. A senior Saudi army official attached to the Saudi Interior Ministry traveled to Baghdad last month to determine if the Iraqi leader would be willing to step down, according to Arab diplomatic sources. The Saudi official was scheduled to meet with Hussein, but the outcome of any such meeting is still unknown, the Monitor reported. In August, Qatari Foreign Minister Hamad bin Jasim al-Thani traveled to Baghdad to meet with Hussein to discuss, in part, an offer of exile. Qatari and Iraqi officials, however, denied such reports (Nicholas Blanford, Christian Science Monitor, Jan. 8). Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher has said his country is not engaged in any efforts to convince Hussein to go into exile. “The reports on this issue are completely false,” Maher was quoted as saying by the al-Mussawar daily newspaper. “We do not interfere in the affairs of other states, and we do not interfere in the choice of the president of a country. It is for the Iraqi people to decide this,” Maher added (AFXpress, Jan. 8). In addition to the rumored initiative by Middle Eastern leaders, a group of leading Arab intellectuals has prepared a petition, scheduled to be released this week, calling for Hussein to step down, according to the Monitor. “The immediate resignation of Saddam Hussein, whose rule for over three decades has been a nightmare for Iraq and the Arab world, is the only way to avoid more violence,” it says. U.S. officials support the idea of Hussein being peacefully removed from power, but have denied that the United States is aiding efforts to prepare an offer of exile, the Monitor reported. “I think Secretary [of State Colin] Powell and Secretary [of Defense Donald] Rumsfeld have both said that it’s an opportunity (Hussein) should take advantage of. But we’re not behind those proposals,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said. “But — let’s remember reality here — he hasn’t indicated any desire to do so and nothing in his past behavior would make you think he would,” Boucher added. A number of Arab and Western diplomats agreed that Hussein is unlikely to step down by his own free will. “They are dreaming if they think this man will leave,” says Abdullah Bishara, head of the Diplomatic Center for Strategic Studies in Kuwait. “He will bring down the walls like Samson,” Bishara added (Blanford, Christian Science Monitor). For further information, see:
From January 8, 2003 issue.Canadian Response: Canada Wants Chemical Tracking CapabilityCanada plans to acquire meteorological tracking equipment to plot the course of dangerous chemical or biological weapons that could be released into the air in a terrorist attack, the National Post reported today. The equipment, which could cost several hundred thousand dollars, will assist with evacuations, according to Canadian officials. “It would be portable so we could deploy this if there was any kind of event,” said Dave Dockendorff, spokesman for the Meteorological Service of Canada. “You can have an idea where this (biological or chemical agent) is going to go, where it’s going to come down. Further downstream, should we be evacuating from here or there? For instance, if the wind is from the west … there is no point in evacuating people who are west of the incident,” he added. Canadian officials plan to buy ground instruments, computers and devices that are carried on weather balloons from the U.S. company Vaisala. The data would not detect the chemical or biological weapon in the air, but would give officials air temperature, air pressure, humidity and wind speed and allow them to plot the course of the dangerous agents. Funding for the effort has been approved and officials plan to base the equipment in Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax, the Post reported. Dispersing chemical agents in the air, however, presents a major challenge to terrorists, some experts noted. “In an outdoor attack such as this, 90 percent of the (chemical) agent is likely to dissipate before ever reaching its target,” according to the Henry L. Stimson Center in Washington (Tom Blackwell, National Post, Jan. 8).
From January 8, 2003 issue.Iraq II: Summary of InspectionsExperts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have conducted hundreds of inspections in Iraq since resuming the post-Gulf War inspection regime Nov. 27. More than 100 inspectors are now based in the country at two facilities in Baghdad and Mosul. The following chart summarizes some of the inspectors’ reported activities.
From January 7, 2003 issue.Iraq I: Inspectors Begin Air Operations as United States Denies Spying AllegationsU.N. weapons inspectors used helicopters for the first time in Iraq today to visit a uranium mine, and the United States denied Iraqi allegations that the inspectors were engaged in spying activities (see GSN, Jan. 6). The inspectors traveled to the Akashat uranium mine in al-Qaim, located about 260 miles west of Baghdad near the Syrian border, according to the Iraqi Information Ministry (CNN.com, Jan. 7). Two helicopters from the Iraqi Monitoring Directorate — the Iraqi liaison office with inspectors — followed the inspectors’ helicopter, according to Reuters. Inspectors also drove today to at least five other Iraqi sites, Reuters reported. Missile experts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission visited the al-Mutasim missile plant in Jurf al-Sakhr, about 30 miles south of Baghdad. An UNMOVIC biological team visited a cancer research center in the capital. Inspectors also began inspecting the University of Mosul in the northern part of the country, according to Reuters. A team from the International Atomic Energy Agency inspected a cement factor in Kbeisi, about 120 miles west of Baghdad, and a nearby air force base (Reuters, Jan. 7). Yesterday, inspectors visited seven sites, according to an IAEA release. An UNMOVIC biological team visited the bin Seena Center, which produces veterinary drugs. UNMOVIC missile experts traveled to an army base located far south of Baghdad and began tagging surface-to-surface solid propellant al-Fatah rockets, according to the agency release. Inspectors are slated to tag Iraq’s remaining al-Fatah rockets by the end of the week. Inspectors also visited the maintenance section of the al-Fao Company, in northern Baghdad, the agency release said. The IAEA also provided more detail on the inspectors’ visit yesterday to the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center. While there, inspectors visited a number of locations, including the Nuclear Physics Academic Research Center, the Physics Research Materials and Electronics Studies Center and the Laser and Plasma Research Center, to ascertain the level of activity (IAEA release, Jan. 6). Inspectors have so far found no evidence that Iraq lied in the declaration of its weapons of mass destruction programs that it submitted to the United Nations, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said yesterday. There is currently no “smoking gun,” ElBaradei said, adding that inspections were still in the early stages (CNN.com). Washington Denies Spying The United States yesterday denied Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s recent allegations that the inspectors were using their mission to engage in spying activities. Hussein’s charges were “baseless and false,” U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said. He added that such accusations might be considered as noncompliance with U.N. resolutions. “It is not the way to solve this situation,” Boucher said. “His [Hussein’s] accusations are untrue and may indicate an intention not to comply,” he added (G.G. LaBelle, Associated Press, Jan. 7). U.S. President George W. Bush said Hussein’s accusations were just another indication of Iraq’s unwillingness to peacefully disarm. “Well, I thought that was an interesting statement on his part,” Bush said, referring to the spying allegations made by Hussein. “When you combine that with the fact that his declaration was clearly deficient, it is discouraging news for those of us who want to resolve this issue peacefully,” Bush added (White House release, Jan. 6). Fortress Baghdad Meanwhile, Iraq has begun developing a two-layered defense around Baghdad in preparation for a U.S. invasion, according to U.S. intelligence officials. The establishment of the defensive rings around the city has been going on since November, and has involved the deployment of both regular Iraqi military units and Republican Guard units in an outer ring, according to the Washington Times. An inner ring is being established using Iraqi Special Republican Guard units, which are responsible for protecting the Iraqi leadership, according to officials. The Iraqi military believes that U.S. troops will penetrate the first ring, but will be held back by the elite Special Republican Guard forces, the officials said. The Iraqi defense appears to be an attempt to trap U.S. forces, military experts said. The two-ring defense might be meant to lure U.S. and allied troops toward Baghdad and then attack them with chemical and biological weapons, the Times reported. It would be difficult for the United States to respond to such an attack with a tactical nuclear strike without causing large-scale civilian casualties. The two-layered defense is probably meant to defend Baghdad from both U.S. forces and defecting Iraqi military units, said retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis. “I don’t put a lot of credence to the outer ring,” Maginnis said. “But it’s the inner ring and the paramilitary forces scattered around the city that are going to be the real problem,” he added (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Jan. 7). For further information, see:
From January 7, 2003 issue.Iraq II: Summary of InspectionsExperts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have conducted hundreds of inspections in Iraq since resuming the post-Gulf War inspection regime Nov. 27. More than 100 inspectors are now based in the country at two facilities in Baghdad and Mosul. Today, inspectors used helicopters for the first time to travel to an inspection site. The following chart summarizes some of the inspectors’ reported activities.
From January 7, 2003 issue.U.S. Export Controls: Court Approves Settlement in Silicon Graphics CaseA U.S. federal court yesterday approved a settlement between Silicon Graphics Inc. and the Justice Department for export control violations related to the company’s 1996 transfer of computers to a Russian facility (see GSN, Nov. 19, 2002). Under the settlement, the company agreed that it should have applied for an export license for the transfer of four deskside computers to a Russian laboratory involved in both civil and military activities, according to an SGI release. SGI has agreed to pay $100,000 in fines for two export licensing violations. SGI has also reached an agreement with the Commerce Department to pay a $182,000 fine to resolve administrative claims related to the 1996 transfer, the release said. Commerce will also review certain exports the company made to Russia for a period of three years (SGI release, Jan. 7).
From January 6, 2003 issue.Iraq I: Inspectors Continue Operations Under Allegations of SpyingWhile Iraq criticized U.N. weapons inspectors, alleging that they were engaged in spying activities, inspectors visited at least four suspect Iraqi sites today, according to Reuters (see GSN, Jan. 3). Experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency visited the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, believed to be the main facility in Iraq’s nuclear program. IAEA inspectors have visited buildings at the site repeatedly since inspections resumed in late November. Teams from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission have visited at least three sites today, according to Iraqi officials. Two UNMOVIC teams visited the bin Bitar research center, located about five miles north of Baghdad; and the Fallujah 3 pesticide factory, located about 55 miles northwest of the Iraqi capital, Reuters reported. UNMOVIC inspectors also visited a free-trade zone in Faydah, about 240 miles north of Baghdad (Reuters/MSNBC.com, Jan. 6). Yesterday, inspectors visited 16 sites within Iraq, setting a one-day record, according to Iraqi officials. The sites included a graphite facility, a hospital in the northern city of Mosul and a university and a hospital in the southern city of Basra, according to Reuters. Inspectors also visited a food laboratory, a glass research center and four state-owned companies — al-Basel, al-Khawarizmi, al-Tabani and al-Majd — at the National Monitoring Directorate complex in Baghdad (Reuters/Los Angeles Times, Jan. 6). While there, inspectors exercised their authority to close all entrances and exits to a site, according to the New York Times. The lockdown of the complex detained Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammed al-Douri, who criticized the inspectors’ action. “I think their behavior was unjustified, and the inspection teams could behave in a more civilized way,” al-Douri said. Gen. Hussam Mohamed Amin, chief Iraqi liaison with the inspectors, said the UNMOVIC chemical team visiting the complex was merely flexing its muscle by locking down the site. “They wanted to exercise their maximum intrusiveness, the toughest implementation possible of Resolution 1441,” Amin said, referring to the U.N. resolution that established the latest inspection regime. The directorate complex, which contains about 50 buildings, was locked down so inspectors could make an overall assessment of how the site’s research facilities might be connected, U.N. spokesmen said. “They froze the entire site because they wanted to do an overall technical assessment of its capabilities, and not just pinpoint here and there,” UNMOVIC spokesman Ewen Buchanan said. U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix is scheduled to update the U.N. Security Council Thursday on the status of the inspections (Neil MacFarquhar, New York Times, Jan. 6). Spying Allegations Meanwhile, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein accused inspectors today of using their mission to conduct “intelligence work.” The inspectors are trying to acquire the names of Iraqi scientists, asking them questions that indicated “hidden agendas” and trying to obtain information on military facilities, Hussein said in his annual Army Day speech. “All or most” of such activities “constitute purely intelligence work,” Hussein said. An IAEA spokeswoman denied Hussein’s charges and said inspectors were collecting information meant solely for the United Nations. “We certainly flatly reject any accusation that we work for any government or provide direct information to any single government,” IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said. In his speech, Hussein also predicted a victory for Iraq if the United States chose to invade. “We are in our country and whoever is in his own homeland ... and is forced to face an enemy that stands on the side of falsehood and comes as an aggressor from beyond seas and oceans will no doubt emerge triumphant,” Hussein said (Sameer Yacoub, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Jan. 6). U.S. Covert Action About 100 U.S. special forces members and more than 50 CIA operatives have been operating within Iraq for at least the past four months, according to intelligence officials and military analysts (see GSN, Oct. 18, 2002). While the covert Iraqi missions are separate from the actions of U.N. inspectors, the two groups might be conducting parallel operations, a U.S. intelligence official said. The U.S. operatives are believed to be working in northern Iraq, near the southern city of Basra, in the western desert neighboring Jordan and even close to Baghdad itself, according to analysts. In those areas, U.S. forces are conducting a number of missions, including searching for Scud ballistic missile launchers, monitoring oil fields, identifying minefields and helping pilots attack Iraqi air-defense systems, according to the sources. In the desert near Jordan, the U.S. mission is “to identify likely areas for mobile missile operations,” said Daniel Goure of the Lexington Institute (John Donnelly, Boston Globe, Jan. 5). Post-Hussein Iraq The White House national security team is finalizing a plan for the administration of Iraq and its transition to a democratic government after the fall of the Hussein regime, according to the New York Times (see GSN, Nov. 11, 2002). The plan, which has been discussed in detail with U.S. President George W. Bush, envisions a large U.S. military presence in Iraq for a period of time following Hussein’s ouster, war crime trials for only the most senior Iraqi officials and a quick capture of the country’s oil fields to help fund its reconstruction, the Times reported. The Pentagon has begun preparing to maintain military control of Iraq for at least 18 months — with U.S. troops searching for senior Iraqi officials, weapons of mass destruction and working, as a White House adviser said, to “keep the country whole.” The plan also calls for a civilian administrator, possibly chosen by the United Nations, to head Iraq’s economy and reconstruction, the Times reported. While those sections of the Iraqi government most closely linked to Hussein, such as the special security organization, would be discarded, “much of the rest of the government will be reformed and kept,” the White House plan says. The White House has also given up the idea of establishing a provisional Iraqi government prior to any possible military action, according to the Times. The plan is likely to include a number of contingencies that will depend on how Hussein is overthrown, officials said. “So much rides on the conflict itself, if it becomes a conflict, and on how the conflict starts and how the conflict ends,” one of Bush’s senior advisers said. There are no plans to keep U.S. troops in Iraq any longer than is absolutely necessary, White House officials said. “I don’t think we’re talking about months,” one of Bush’s top advisers said. “But I don’t think we’re talking a lot of years, either,” the adviser added (Sanger/Dao, New York Times, Jan. 6). For further information, see:
From January 6, 2003 issue.Iraq II: Summary of InspectionsInspectors from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have now visited more than 100 Iraqi sites in the round of post-Gulf War inspections that resumed Nov. 27 after a four-year lapse. The following chart summarizes some of their reported activities.
From January 6, 2003 issue.Kuwaiti Response: Attack Preparations Increase After Poorly Run DrillKuwaiti officials are buying 2 million gas masks and trying to educate residents on how to respond to a chemical or biological weapons attack, the New York Times reported Saturday (see GSN, Dec. 31, 2002). Officials are conducting attack drills at schools, amusement parks and oil facilities in the wake of a poorly executed exercise last month, the Times reported. Kuwait is distributing the gas masks through local supermarkets and residents are being told to stock up on food and tape windows to prepare for an attack from Iraq. Photographers hindered the December drill at a beachside hotel, the Times reported, by instructing emergency workers to stage good pictures. Police and civil defense authorities reportedly were engaged in heated discussions on where to direct escaping hotel guests and workers, and “survivors” of the drill were sent to a dessert table for coffee and cookies instead of being directed to a decontamination tent. “This is rubbish,” said Maj. Abdulaziz Malallah, of the Kuwait City Fire Department. “It may be all right for the movies, but this really won’t do,” he added. While officials insist that the new steps will better prepare Kuwait for an attack, some Kuwaiti lawmakers are skeptical. “There may be enough gas masks, but people aren’t trained to use them,” said Abdullah Nibari, a liberal member of the National Assembly. “It’s a question of organization. And maybe they don’t want to get the people too worried,” he added (Clifford Krauss, New York Times, Jan. 4).
From January 3, 2003 issue.U.S. Response: British Lawmakers Criticize Bush Policies on Use of ForceBy David Ruppe The report, issued Dec. 19 by the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Commons, mainly addressed the British government’s role in U.S.-led international efforts to deal with terrorism. It expressed support for the United Kingdom’s close relationship with the United States in its efforts to combat terrorism. “We fully support the government’s decision to align itself closely with the United States in the war against terrorism,” the report said. The bipartisan committee took issue, however, with the Bush administration’s policies on using pre-emptive force against another country (see GSN, Dec. 5, 2002), conducting targeted killings of terrorists, using nuclear weapons in response to a WMD attack, (see GSN, Feb. 27, 2002) and asserting that Iraq has been collaborating with al-Qaeda terrorists (see GSN, Dec. 12, 2002). It further concluded that neither the administration’s interpretation of justifiable pre-emption nor Iraqi violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions currently provide sufficient authority for a war on Iraq. “I welcome the latest report from the Foreign Affairs Committee. It is a serious contribution to debate about counterterrorism policy,” British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said in a statement following the report’s release. “The committee and we share many of the same conclusions. In particular, we share the view that failure to address the threat from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction could pose very high risks to the security of British interests in the Middle East and Gulf region,” he said. As usually occurs with respect to the semiannual report, Straw has promised a more detailed response. Targeted Killings The committee criticized a November CIA attack on a vehicle containing al-Qaeda suspects in Yemen using an unmanned aerial vehicle. In a section titled “U.S. attacks by unmanned aerial vehicles: extrajudicial killings?” it noted U.S. officials previously had criticized Israeli targeted killings of Palestinian terror suspects. “This attack raises further legal questions about the United States’ conduct of the war against terrorism,” the committee said. It cited State Department spokesman Richard Boucher’s Nov. 5 comment that reasons given previously for criticizing Israeli targeted killings “do not necessarily apply in other circumstance.” The report recommended the British government state its own policy on targeted killings. Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction The British legislators wrote they were under the impression the Bush administration was considering a change in nuclear posture that would make available “all our options,” including nuclear options, in response to any weapon of mass destruction attack (see GSN, Dec. 13), and was considering developing a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons (see GSN, April 5, 2002). “In our view, this would have significant implications for arms control policy,” the committee wrote. There were news reports last year of British plans to develop new low-yield nuclear weapons, perhaps in cooperation with the United States. Blair government statements persuaded the committee that neither the United Kingdom nor the United States was developing tactical nuclear weapons, though the committee wrote the United States was evaluating whether to modify nuclear weapons “to make them more effective,” quoting U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell. A State Department spokesman said last February the Bush administration would continue to honor a 1995 pledge not to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state, first made in 1978, which is considered an important reason why most of the world has been willing to renounce nuclear weapons. He also, though, restated another longstanding policy that the United States would not rule out using nuclear weapons in response to a chemical or biological weapons attack by a non-nuclear state against U.S. interests or allies. The committee members asked to be informed if the British government changes its nuclear posture or the United States plans a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons. Critique of New Pre-Emption Policy The committee further challenged the Bush administration’s “extended” interpretation of the international norm on pre-emptive use of military force, saying it has “significant potentially dangerous consequences in international law.” “This assertion of the right to act pre-emptively to address potential rather than imminent security threats arguably constitutes a challenge to established international law governing the legitimate use of force by states, as set out in the Charter of the United Nations,” the committee said. For more than a century, it has been generally accepted that a nation can attack another in self-defense if there is evidence of a mounting, imminent attack. The Bush administration, in a new National Security Strategy document released Sept. 20, contended that rule should be amended to enable countries to act pre-emptively even when there is not sufficient evidence of an imminent WMD attack, as such an attack might be effectively concealed. “We must adapt the concept of imminent threat to the capabilities and objectives of today’s adversaries,” it said. The British government has appeared to agree with that view. The committee concluded there was not an international consensus on the definition of pre-emption and advised that the understanding of imminence be reconsidered in light of new types of threats. It recommended the British government “work to establish a clear consensus” on the circumstances in which pre-emptive action may be taken. No Authority Yet for Attacking Iraq The report says the Bush administration has sugge | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Back to top