|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Iraq I: Powell Says United States “Will Not Shrink From War”The United States “will not shrink from war” if Iraq refuses to abandon its weapons of mass destruction, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote in a commentary in today’s Wall Street Journal (see GSN, Jan. 31). Iraq has not taken U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 seriously and has responded, “with empty claims, empty declarations and empty gestures,” Powell said. “Iraq has failed the resolution’s two tests — to disclose and to cooperate,” Powell said, adding that the United States plans to discuss the next step in the Iraq confrontation with its allies. “A peaceful outcome to this situation is possible if Iraq cooperates with the U.N. and disarms. Unfortunately, [Iraqi President] Saddam [Hussein] seems to be leading his nation down another path. The U.S. seeks Iraq’s peaceful disarmament. But we will not shrink from war if that is the only way to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction” (Colin Powell, Wall Street Journal, Feb. 3). Meanwhile, Powell is preparing to brief the U.N. Security Council Wednesday, when he will provide transcripts of electronically intercepted Iraqi conversations, the London Sunday Telegraph reported today. “They’re saying things like, ‘Move that,’ ‘Don’t be reporting that,’ and ‘Ha. Can you believe they missed that?’” said a U.S. official. Powell will also describe al-Qaeda attempts to cooperate with Iraq on chemical and biological weapons efforts, the Telegraph reported today (Colin Brown, London Sunday Telegraph/Washington Times, Feb. 3). In his commentary, Powell reiterated U.S. President George W. Bush’s claim that Iraq has ties to terrorist organizations, including al-Qaeda (Powell, Wall Street Journal). Meanwhile, a British intelligence document said that Iraq pressured scientists not to talk to weapons inspectors. “We have no evidence that a threat was made, but the threat was there,” said a spokesman for British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Iraq has also used ground-penetrating radar to ensure that buried weapons caches cannot be found, the Telegraph reported (Brown, London Sunday Telegraph/Washington Times). A top Iraqi official said yesterday the evidence Powell would present to the Security Council Wednesday would be false. “I think they will be fabricated,” said Gen. Hossam Mohamed Amin. “They will be space photos, aerial photos, of some vehicles that could be interpreted in different ways just to create suspicion around the Iraqi declaration. They will not be real evidences because we have nothing. We have no weapons of mass destruction,” he added (Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post, Feb. 3). Satellite photographs will be a key component of Powell’s briefing, the London Times reported Saturday. “The real killer stuff is going to be the satellite images indicating pretty clearly that Iraq was actively moving things around while UNMOVIC (United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspections Commission) was visiting different sites,” said a U.S. official. “It’s pretty clear. While the inspectors are getting into cars, the Iraqis are in full panic moving boxes, crates, bulldozers and a couple of huge vans which look like mobile labs,” the official added (Elaine Monaghan, London Times, Feb. 1). Powell might not present an overwhelming case to the Security Council, instead leaving that to Bush in a later speech, the New York Times reported. “You won’t see Powell swing for the fences,” said an administration official. “It will not be the end-all speech. The president will do that. The president has to lay it out in a more detailed way,” the official added (Risen/Johnston, New York Times, Feb. 2). Mohamed al-Douri, Iraq’s U.N. ambassador, will ask to attend the Security Council briefing and speak after Powell’s presentation, the Associated Press reported. “We will assert our position that we have no link with al-Qaeda, whatever Mr. Colin Powell says,” al-Douri said. “We will also assert our position to be fully cooperative with the inspectors, and we will state that the meeting on Feb. 8-9 (with top weapons inspectors Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei) will produce positive results,” he added Associated Press/New York Times, Feb. 3). A U.N. spokesman said it was not clear that Iraq had complied with Blix’s demand that Iraq increase cooperation before he visited (Ian Fisher, New York Times, Feb. 2). Russian U.N. Ambassador Sergei Lavrov said the U.N. Charter allows Iraq to participate. “It’s their sovereign right,” Lavrov said. “I don’t think anyone can dispute that the charter says if you consider a dispute involving a particular country they shall participate,” he added. It was unclear, however, whether al-Douri would be able to speak at the meeting (Associated Press/New York Times). Meanwhile, some U.S. intelligence officials expressed doubt about the Bush administration’s attempts to link Iraq with al-Qaeda, the New York Times reported. “We’ve been looking at this hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don’t think it’s there,” said a U.S. official (Risen/Johnston, New York Times). When he attempts to define the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda, Powell will focus on Abu Mussab al-Zarkawi, who was reported to be in Baghdad after fleeing Afghanistan, the Financial Times reported. Interviews with al-Qaeda detainees linked Al Zarkawi with al-Qaeda attempts to develop chemical weapons between 1999 and 2001 (Mark Huband, Financial Times, Feb. 1). Iraq to Get Six More Weeks U.S and British officials will try to allow U.N. weapons inspectors six more weeks in Iraq, the Los Angeles Times reported today. In that time, inspectors could report to the Security Council twice on Iraq’s cooperation, the Times said. British officials will take the lead in brokering a second Security Council resolution with France. “I believe there will be a second resolution,” Blair said. “I think it will be very plain to people whether Saddam is cooperating or not in the next few weeks. If he does not comply, we have to act,” he added. The United States will not seek a second resolution, officials said. “We’re in a position of strength, so we’re not asking for a second resolution. But we’re letting the conversations drift that way. We have a red line: Another resolution has to include the idea of imminent serious consequences,” said a U.S. official (Robin Wright, Los Angeles Times, Feb. 3). An Iraqi official, meanwhile, threatened suicide attacks across the region if the United States attacked. “Martyrs, perpetrators of suicide attacks, are our new weapons, and they will not only take action in Iraq,” said Taha Yassin Ramadan, an Iraqi vice-president who is thought to be one of Hussein’s top aides. “The whole region will be set ablaze. This part of the world will become a sea of resistance and danger for Americans,” he added (Fisher, New York Times). U.S. officials, meanwhile, are training Iraqi dissidents in self-defense, small arms use, first aid, detecting land mines and the Geneva Convention at a facility in Hungary, the Associated Press reported. Hungary will allow up to 3,000 Iraqis and several dozen volunteers arrived at the base last week (Karl Kirk, Associated Press/Newsday, Jan. 31).
From February 3, 2003 issue.Iraq II: Blix and ElBaradei to Meet With Iraqi Officials in BaghdadThe heads of the U.N. weapons inspections teams in Iraq — chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei — are tentatively scheduled to travel to Baghdad Feb. 8 to meet with Iraqi officials and discuss unresolved inspections issues, Iraqi and U.N. officials said Saturday (see related GSN story, today). “They’ll be discussing all the outstanding issues, including interviews with Iraqi scientists,” Iraqi U.N. Ambassador Mohammed al-Douri told the Associated Press. Iraq issued the invitation to Blix and ElBaradei last week, but the U.N. officials said they would only travel to Baghdad if Iraq first agreed to certain conditions, such as allowing inspectors to conduct private interviews with Iraqi scientists and agreeing to U.S.-piloted U-2 surveillance flights (see GSN, Jan. 31). Blix and ElBaradei are still awaiting a response from Iraqi officials, said U.N. spokesman Ewen Buchanan. Iraq needs to clarify “the purpose of the visit” and “how to achieve prompt progress in the resolution of open disarmament issues,” Buchanan said. Blix said Friday he was encouraged Iraq wanted to discuss “transparency,” and if given the chance, he would tell Iraqi President Saddam Hussein the current situation is “dangerous” and that he must quickly and fully disclose Iraq’s WMD efforts. It is unlikely, however, that Blix and ElBaradei will meet with Hussein, said Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz. “I don’t think that’s going to happen,” Aziz said. “Mr. Blix has a certain mission and that mission could be dealt with the experts who will talk to him about technical matters,” he added (Dafna Linzer, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Feb. 1). Maj. Gen. Hossam Mohamed Amin, chief Iraqi liaison with U.N. inspectors, indicated yesterday that Iraq might be willing to compromise, saying Baghdad was “keen to resolve any pending issues.” “We shall do our best to make his (Blix’s) visit successful,” Amin said (Charles Hanley, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Feb. 3). Defector Could Provide “Smoking Gun” Meanwhile, one of Hussein’s former bodyguards has provided Israeli intelligence with information on WMD sites that inspectors have not yet visited — information that one former inspector called a “smoking gun,” the Australian Herald Sun reported yesterday. Abu Hamdi Mahmoud, a senior bodyguard, has provided Israeli intelligence with information on several sites, including an underground chemical weapons site at the southern end of the Jadray peninsula in Baghdad, a Scud assembly site near the city of Ramadi and two underground bunkers containing biological weapons in western Iraq, the Herald Sun reported. Mahmoud also told Israeli intelligence about five bunkers hidden beneath man-made sand dunes that contain empty WMD warheads, similar to those recently discovered by inspectors, and an underground complex in the town of Ouja, north of Tikrit (see GSN, Jan. 17). “The complex was built five years ago with help from Chinese engineers,” Mahmoud said. “The entrance to the site is through a house in Tikrit. It is the home of one of Saddam’s cousins and is more than half a mile from where the weapons are stored,” he added. Mahmoud’s information is “the smoking gun” needed to prove Iraqi noncompliance with U.N. resolutions, said former inspector William Tierney. “Once the inspectors go to where Mahmoud has pointed them, then it’s all over for Saddam,” he said. Mahmoud was debriefed by Israeli intelligence last week at a high-security facility in the southern Negev Desert, according to the Herald Sun. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has so far given permission for only small amounts of Mahmoud’s information to be shared with the U.S. and British intelligence agencies. “Sharon intends to shatter the growing anti-war movement,” a source close to the Israeli prime minister said. “He plans to call all those European leaders who are wavering to let them know how Saddam has continued to fool Hans Blix and his weapons inspectors,” the source added (Herald Sun, Feb. 2). Inspections U.N. inspectors yesterday visited a university located in the Kurdish-controlled northern section of Iraq, angering local officials, according to the New York Times. The inspectors visited the chemistry and biology laboratories of the College of Science at Salahaddin University in Erbil, the capital of Kurdish-controlled Iraq, according to the Times. After arriving on the scene, university President Saedi Barzinji ended the inspections because of the presence of Iraqi minders, saying they could be Iraqi intelligence agents. Kurdish officials were angered by the inspection, and the implication they might be collaborating with Hussein to develop weapons of mass destruction, the Times reported. Iraq attacked the Kurdish village of Halabja with chemical weapons in 1988, causing as many as 5,000 casualties, according to the Times. “This is not just an insult, it is pouring salt on our wounds,” said Sami Abdul Rahman, deputy prime minister for the Kurdistan Democratic Party, which controls the western Kurdish zone (C.J. Chivers, New York Times, Feb. 3). On Saturday, inspectors visited at least 12 suspect Iraqi sites, according to an IAEA press release. Missile experts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission visited the Waziriyah Industrial Complex to obtain clarifications on the present status of al-Samoud ballistic missile guidance and control activities, as well as on the January semi-annual declaration for the site. UNMOVIC missile teams also visited the al-Mamoun Factory and the headquarters of the al-Raya General Company to obtain clarifications on the latest declarations for the sites, the IAEA release said. UNMOVIC biological inspectors visited three sites in Baghdad — the Biotechnology Department of the College of Science at Saddam University, the Biology Department of the College of Education at Saddam University and the Eastern Distillery Company. UNMOVIC chemical inspectors visited the al-Shaheed State Company, according to the IAEA release. Inspectors traveled to the Tuz Airfield via helicopter to interview the senior officer present and to inspect the site’s ammunition storage areas and aircraft shelters. IAEA inspectors visited the Tho al-Fiker industrial machining and manufacturing facility north of Baghdad and the Colleges of Science and Engineering at Saddam University. IAEA inspectors also conducted a motorized radiation survey southeast of Baghdad (International Atomic Energy Agency release, Feb. 1). Weapons experts inspected at least nine suspect Iraqi sites Friday, according to an IAEA statement. UNMOVIC biological inspectors conducted for the first time aerial inspections of several sites, including Fallujah 2, Fallujah 3, the Agricultural and Biological Research Center, the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center and former biological research facilities at Salman Pak. U.N. inspectors also visited the Abu Ghraib Ammunition Factory, where they inspected the site’s production area, quality control, computer system and several warehouses (International Atomic Energy Agency, Jan. 31). For further information, see:
From February 3, 2003 issue.Romania: Launches WMD Warning SystemRomania has launched a WMD detection and warning system, Bucharest Mediafax reported Thursday (see GSN, Nov. 19, 2002). The system, which was inaugurated by Defense Minister Ioan Mircea Pascu and chief of the General Staff Mihail Popescu in Bucharest Thursday, will collect and process data regarding WMD events, according to Mediafax. The system will also work with local and federal agencies to monitor Romanian territory for the development or existence of any weapons of mass destruction (Bucharest Mediafax, Jan. 30 in FBIS-EEU, Jan. 30).
From February 3, 2003 issue.Iraq III: 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 29, 2003 issue.U.S. Response: Energy Department to Seek 30 Percent Increase in Nonproliferation FundsBy Bryan Bender The Bush administration’s fiscal 2004 budget submission, to be delivered to Congress Monday, will request more than $1.3 billion for nuclear nonproliferation programs, Abraham told a luncheon hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (see GSN, Jan. 22). The department last year requested a little over $1 billion, he said. “This unprecedented level of funding comes just months after our successful effort to establish the G-8’s [Group of Eight] Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction,” Abraham said (see GSN, Dec. 20, 2002). He said the budget request, combined with the G-8 pledge to add $20 billion for nonproliferation programs during the next 10 years, demonstrates “how far this nation is prepared to go individually and collectively to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials.” The United States has already pledged to fund half of the G-8 program. Beefing Up Current Efforts and Initiating New Ones Some of the new budget resources for the coming year will be used to begin securing nearly all of the estimated 600 metric tons of nuclear weapons-usable materials remaining in Russia, a priority Abraham said he hopes to complete during the next few years, “in many cases ahead of previous schedules.” The increased funding will also help secure an additional 18 sites in Russia housing dangerous radiological materials, collect 225 orphaned or surplus radioactive materials in the former Soviet Union, and boost U.S. funding for the International Atomic Energy Agency’s nuclear safeguards efforts by 17 percent, Abraham said (see GSN, Oct. 23, 2002). The United States will cosponsor an international conference on securing radiological materials along with the IAEA in March in Vienna (see GSN, Nov. 14, 2002). In the new budget, $110 million will also be used to help spot nuclear proliferation by developing technologies for long-range detection and by improving the ability to identify the origin of nuclear weapons and materials after they might be confiscated or used, Abraham said. “We will also continue to refine our ability to detect illicit trafficking of nuclear materials at our own borders, and be looking at ways to make those borders even more secure,” Abraham said (see GSN, Oct. 21, 2002). Meanwhile, a new Energy program will seek to prevent “export control failures” by anticipating where WMD technologies are most vulnerable to theft or illicit transfer, he said. Russia Top Priority, But Expansion Necessary Abraham said Russian stocks of nuclear weapons and materials remain the top priority. With fiscal 2004 funding, the United States plans to begin building facilities for disposing of surplus plutonium from Russian weapons, working to shut down Russia’s plutonium reactors, and implementing a “modest new program” to purchase additional Russian uranium derived from nuclear weapons for use in a strategic U.S. reserve (see GSN, Oct. 4, 2002). In addition, the department hopes to fund efforts to improve security at Russian nuclear sites — including disposing of 1,200 Russian naval warheads — and to strengthen Russian border security. “The United States and Russia have taken major steps to secure Russian materials, but there is much more to be done,” Abraham said. Beyond Russia, Abraham said the department would seek to help strengthen regional nuclear security in the Middle East and Asia, through venues such as the Cooperative Monitoring Center at Sandia National Laboratory, which is responsible for understanding the evolving threat and reducing the incentives for states, such as North Korea, to acquire weapons of mass destruction. The new budget reflects Bush’s comments in last night’s State of the Union address to Congress. “Today, the gravest danger in the war on terror, the greatest danger facing America and the world, is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons,” Bush said. “These regimes could use such weapons for blackmail, terror and mass murder. They could also give or sell those weapons to terrorist allies, who would use them without the least hesitation.” “We are strongly supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency in its mission to track and control nuclear materials around the world,” Bush added. “We are working with other governments to secure nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union and to strengthen global treaties banning the production and shipment of missile technologies and weapons of mass destruction.” The new Energy budget “signals our intention to lead as we move ahead with this long, complex and costly process” of reducing the threat of weapons of mass destruction, Abraham said today. He said the budget priorities reflect the “10 principles” of nuclear and radiological security that he outlined last fall (see GSN, Nov. 15, 2002).
From January 29, 2003 issue.Iraq I: Powell to Present Evidence to U.N. Security CouncilU.S. President George W. Bush said last night he will send Secretary of State Colin Powell to the U.N. Security Council next Wednesday to present evidence of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs (see GSN, Jan. 28). Powell will “present information and intelligence about Iraq’s illegal weapons programs, its attempts to hide those weapons from inspectors and its links to terrorist groups,” Bush said during his annual State of the Union address (see GSN, Jan. 29, 2002). The U.S. evidence is expected to include satellite imagery and photographs that show Iraqi trucks moving materials away from suspect sites shortly before the arrival of U.N. arms inspectors, U.S. intelligence sources told the Chicago Tribune. Powell is also expected to present photographs taken over the last two years that show dump trucks being converted to missile launchers and other vehicles being fitted to transport biological and chemical agents. “It’s photographic evidence of the shell game the Iraqis have always employed,” a senior U.S. intelligence official told the Los Angeles Times. The images suggest a “sanitation of sites,” which is supported by intercepted Iraqi communications detailing a concealment operation, the source said (Howard Witt, Chicago Tribune, Jan. 29). Bush said he would ask the Security Council to convene a special meeting next Wednesday so Powell can make his presentation. Powell’s presentation is part of the White House effort to increase domestic and international support for possible military action against Iraq, according to the Washington Post. He and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld are to brief House of Representatives members today on Iraq. Bush and Powell are also to meet with foreign leaders through the week to drum up international support. Bush met Monday with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and is to meet tomorrow with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. Bush is taking an active role in the discussions because it is believed it would be difficult for foreign leaders to deny a direct appeal from him, administration officials told the Washington Post. Powell met with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw yesterday and is to speak with Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri today. Bush and Powell are also scheduled to meet with British Prime Minister Tony Blair Friday at Camp David — a session considered to be one of the most crucial meetings, according to the Post. “All of this now is about waiting for Tony Blair,” said an unnamed Bush administration official. “The meeting at Camp David is incredibly important for what happens next,” the official said. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday a new Security Council resolution authorizing military action against Iraq would be “desirable, but it is not mandatory.” The United States would act even if a new resolution were not approved, he added. So far, no decisions have been made on the details of any new resolution, including any kind of deadline for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to comply fully with inspections, White House officials said, adding there was little patience within the administration for a long council debate. Options include an early resolution authorizing force, which is considered to be unlikely; agreement to establish a deadline for Iraq after members agree military action is needed, or a decision to merely set a deadline, according to U.S. and diplomatic sources (Glen Kessler/Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, Jan. 29). Bush’s State of the Union and Iraq Bush last night lashed out at Iraq for failing to cooperate with inspections, saying Hussein has shown “utter contempt for the United Nations.” “Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead utter contempt for the United Nations, and for the opinion of the world,” Bush said. “The 108 U.N. inspectors were ... not sent to conduct a scavenger hunt for hidden materials across a country the size of California. The job of the inspectors is to verify that Iraq's regime is disarming. It is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons, lay those weapons out for the world to see, and destroy them as directed. Nothing like this has happened” (White House release, Jan. 28). Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence sources suspect Iraq is learning the sites inspectors plan to visit in advance, U.S. diplomatic and intelligence officials said yesterday. It is still unknown how Iraq might be obtaining information on what sites are to be visited, sources told USA Today. Iraq might have bugged the inspectors or found one willing to provide such information. The possibility that Iraq has been able to infiltrate the inspections teams is one reason why the CIA has hesitated at providing inspectors with more intelligence information. Inspectors have noticed that Iraqis have conducted cleanup operations at sites prior to their arrival, which would be possible with inside information, but such actions have not raised concerns of Iraqi spying, a U.N. spokesman said. “Clearly we understand that the Iraqis would have a great interest in finding out our plans,” said U.N. spokesman Ewen Buchanan. “We take the best measures we can to protect the data we have and our transmissions,” he added (John Diamond, USA Today, Jan. 29). Iraqi Cooperation Iraq is ready to cooperate more with inspectors and to explain the outstanding issues raised by U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix during his Security Council briefing Monday, Iraqi presidential adviser Lt. Gen. Amir Rashid said yesterday. “We are ready to cooperate more to resolve the issues through technical discussions and other means, said Rashid, a former oil minister and director of Iraq’s military industry. Iraq is ready to “provide more clarification” on its past chemical and biological weapons programs in order to resolve concerns that Iraqi weapons declarations have been incomplete, Rashid said, adding that compliance with inspectors is “in our interest as a country.” “We are ready to put extra effort,” Rashid said. “Complete is never complete, as you know,” he added (Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post, Jan. 29). No Proof of Iraq-Al-Qaeda Ties Analysts today challenged Bush’s claim last night of evidence that Iraq has aided terrorist groups including al-Qaeda, which was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks against the United States. Intelligence information shows that Hussein “aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda,” Bush said. “Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own,” he added. While Iraq has had occasional contacts with terrorist groups, such as al-Qaeda, there is no evidence that the two cooperated on the Sept. 11 attacks or any other operations, unnamed U.S. officials told Knight Ridder News Service. “We’re saying there’s contacts, there’s channels,” a senior U.S. State Department official said. “We’re not trying to overplay that one.” The possible evidence centers on the Islamic militant group Ansar al-Islam, according to the news service. Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, an al-Qaeda operative, is believed to have fled to Iraq from Afghanistan last year in order to have a leg amputated and then moved to the northern part of the country, where the group is based (Warren Strobel, Knight Ridder News Service, Jan. 29). However, United Press International reported that the CIA has been skeptical of any connection between Ansar-al-Islam and Iraq. Instead, UPI suggested another possible link — Abu Wa’il, an al-Qaeda financier who has also funded Ansar al-Islam and is suspected of being in the employ of Hussein (Eli Lake, United Press International, Jan. 28). No Evidence of Nuclear Program, IAEA Says; Inspections After two months of inspections and interviews with Iraqi officials, there is no evidence that Iraq is trying to relaunch its nuclear weapons program, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said yesterday. “Systematic” inspections of eight sites connected by U.S. and British intelligence to Iraq’s nuclear efforts found nothing to support those claims, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei told the Washington Post. There is also nothing to support U.S. and British claims that Iraq tried to obtain weapons-grade uranium from a source in Niger, ElBaradei said. Even though the IAEA has made a number of requests for additional information, “we haven’t gotten anything specific. Niger denied it, Iraq denied it, and we haven’t seen any contracts.” The lack of inspectors’ findings did not mean, however, that Iraq had completely abandoned the idea of developing nuclear weapons, ElBaradei said. He blamed Iraq for not providing more “proactive cooperation.” Maintaining inspections has the best chance of deterring Iraq from trying to relaunch its WMD programs, ElBaradei said. “We are not getting optimal cooperation,” ElBaradei said. “But still we are inching forward, and we still believe that barring something exceptional, we should be able in a few months to come to a conclusion on Iraq’s nuclear weapons program,” he added (Colum Lynch, Washington Post, Jan. 29). Meanwhile, U.N. inspectors visited at least 11 suspect Iraqi sites yesterday, according to an IAEA press release. Inspectors traveled to the Ukhaider Ammunition and Missile Storage area, where 12 empty chemical warheads had previously been found, to take a sample from the 12th warhead for further analysis. Biological teams from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission visited the Saddam Center for Biotechnology Research at Baghdad University, the 7 Nissan stores and the Grain Board of Iraq’s main depot at Taji, the IAEA release said. UNMOVIC chemical inspectors visited the Furat State Company. UNMOVIC missile inspectors traveled to the al-Harith Missile Maintenance Workshop in Taji to retag SA-2 surface-to-air missiles, which had their tags previously removed in order to conduct maintenance, the IAEA release said. While there, inspectors also removed the tags from other SA-2 missiles scheduled to have maintenance performed on them within the coming week. IAEA inspectors visited the Nassr industrial machining and foundry facility north of Baghdad and conducted a motorized radiation survey in the Iraqi capital, according to the agency release. IAEA inspectors also visited the College of Science, College of Education and the College of Engineering at the University of Babylon. Inspectors yesterday were again denied a private interview with an Iraqi individual, the IAEA release said. So far, inspectors have tried to conduct private interviews with 16 people to no avail (International Atomic Energy Agency release, Jan. 28). For further information, see:
From January 29, 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 28, 2003 issue.Iraq I: U.S. Army Gave CBW Training to Iraqi Officers in 1960sBy David Ruppe While the training was described as mostly defensive, it also included offensive instruction in such subjects as principles of using chemical, biological and radiological weapons, and calculating chemical munitions requirements, according to a Dec. 12, 1969, letter from then-Army Chief of Legislative Liaison Col. Raymond Reid to then-U.S. Representative Robert Kastenmeier (D-Wisc.). The letter was published later that month in the Congressional Record. Iraqi and other foreign officers received the free instruction through the Pentagon’s Military Assistance Program, according to the letter, at a time when the United States was seeking to counter Soviet power and influence around the world. Iran, then a close U.S. ally, and up to three dozen other countries, mostly Western countries, also received such instruction from the early 1950s through 1969, the letter said. The training was provided at the U.S. Army Chemical School at Fort McClellan, Ala., it said. The instruction for Iraq was provided before U.S.-Iraqi diplomatic relations were severed at the time of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, and prior to Saddam Hussein taking power in Baghdad, first as vice president in 1968. “It was obviously very thorough instruction we provided them,” said Raymond Zilinskas, director of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Nonproliferation Program at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, after seeing the letter recently. The letter prompted criticism from Kastenmeier, a prominent critic of U.S. chemical warfare policy at the time. “I am disturbed over some of the more specific implications of the facts provided me by the Army, and I question the overall utility of continuing to disseminate offensive expertise in these forms of warfare so widely,” he said on the House floor later that month. Offensive Training A small percentage of the training provided Iraq was devoted to offensive instruction, according to Reid’s letter. Iraqi officers took two types of courses. One was called Chemical Officer Orientation, which provided general military education training such as map reading, weapons familiarization and also “unconventional warfare” including “principles of CBR [chemical, biological and radiological weapons] employment,” “conducting CBR training,” “calculation of chemical munitions requirements,” intelligence organization and operations, and various CBR protective instruction. Other course elements included “defense against biological attack,” “fundamentals of nuclear weapons effects,” and “CBR protective devices and equipment.” Seven percent of the instruction was offensive in nature, according to the letter. The other course, called Chemical Officer Career Associate, included “all categories of training,” with 4 percent of the course offered offensive instruction, the letter said. Despite the small percentages, Reid’s letter noted a difficulty in differentiating offensive and defensive instruction. “As you will note from the course descriptions, the emphasis is on defensive aspects. However, it is not possible to separate offensive tactics from defense since some knowledge of the offense is necessary to prepare an adequate defense,” he wrote. “In addition, there can be no absolute guarantee that defensive tactics will not have some utility in framing offensive tactics,” he wrote. The instruction did not appear to teach participants how to manufacture such weapons, but rather, how to use them, manage them and defend against them. “If they were trained by the U.S. military, it would be unlikely they got any training in development [or] production,” said Terence Taylor, president of the Washington office of the International Institute for Strategic Studies and a former U.N. arms inspector in Iraq. The Training in Context The principal objective for such programs at the time, said Jeffrey Bale, an analyst at the Monterey Institute, was to counter Soviet and allied influence and capabilities. “During the Cold War, the United States government provided all sorts of training to military personnel … and I think the primary motivation at the time was to train these people to make them more effective to potentially resisting any kinds of Soviet military operations or subversive activity,” he said U.S. military officials at the time believed that the Soviet Union had an advanced chemical weapons program and had been supplying Middle Eastern countries with defensive equipment. The U.S. assistance, Bale said, followed “a typical alliance pattern dating back to antiquity,” of working with real or potentially unsavory regimes because it might offer help against a more serious threat. Chemical and biological weapons at the time did not have the stigma for the military they have today, according to Harvard professor Matthew Meselson, co-director of the Harvard-Sussex Program on CBW Armament and Arms Limitation. “We [the United States] were very open, we advertised it because we wanted public approval. We needed funding. It was advertised as being humane, less expensive. The argument was you would lose fewer American lives if you fought a war because you would knock the enemy out right away,” he said. A prominent 1968 book by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Army had sponsored a publicity campaign arguing biological and chemical weapons were a humane and effective deterrent. “The Hiroshima argument I understand. Why would one ever train anyone else in offensive CW, BW use? That is bizarre,” said Tim Trevan, a former spokesman for the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq. “It is not a humane way of killing people … I can’t imagine a humane way of dying with chemical weapons” or from “using biological weapons under any circumstance,” he said. All training was first approved, Reid’s letter said, by the U.S. ambassador and the chief military representative in the requesting country, as well as by the senior military commander responsible for the geographic region in which the country was located, the Army, and the assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs in coordination with the State Department. Approval from the latter, Reid wrote, was intended to ensure that “training is conducted within the overall foreign policy objectives of the United States.” More Iraqi officers were among those receiving the training than any other Middle Eastern nationality during that period. Of 36 Middle Eastern officers who attended the training, 19 were from Iraq. One Israeli received instruction during the period, according to the letter. The 36 participating countries requested the training and were not solicited by the United States, according to Reid’s letter. Lessons Not Learned Well Iraq’s use of chemical weapons suggests it probably applied its U.S. instruction poorly if at all, experts said. “The tactics they developed during the Iran-Iraq war [were] something that didn’t exist during the first few years of the war,” Zilinskas said. In the early years, they used chemical weapons “indiscriminately,” he said. “After about four years, they started to use them more reliably. It seemed to me they developed that pretty much as they went along,” he said. “They seemed to be on a pretty steep learning curve on the tactical use of chemical weapons,” said Jonathan Tucker, a visiting senior fellow at the United States Institute of Peace. “They used some on their troops by mistake. It doesn’t appear that they learned very much from the training they’d received,” he said. Tucker noted, for instance, an Iraqi mistake in which forces fired mustard gas onto an Iranian position on a hill, “and as the gas was heavier than air, it floated down into the trenches where the Iraqi forces were based.” Iraqi forces eventually used multiple chemical agents, including mustard, tabun and sarin, to cause more than 20,000 Iranian casualties during the war and used mustard and other agents in 1988 to kill an estimated 5,000 Iraqi Kurds at Halabja, according to a British government report published last year. Chemical and Biological Warfare Cancelled Kastenmeier, in his comments in 1969, expressed concern that the Army’s acknowledgement of the offensive components of the programs would “seem to weaken existing deterrents against the use of CBW [chemical and biological weapons]” and undermine new policies enunciated by then-President Richard Nixon restricting chemical and biological weapons use by U.S. forces. There was underway at that time a major U.S. policy shift against using chemical and biological weapons in combat that would eventually lead to the United States signing the Biological Weapons Convention in 1972. Only a few weeks before Reid sent his letter, Nixon issued a statement on Nov. 25 saying the United States opposed first use of lethal chemical weapons and incapacitating chemicals and announcing that he would ask the Senate’s approval to ratify the Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibiting the first use of chemical and biological weapons. Nixon also then signed the Biological Weapons Convention and vowed to renounce the use of lethal biological agents and weapons, and all other methods of biological warfare, and confine biological research to defensive measures. “Mankind already carries in its own hands too many of the seeds of its own destruction. By the examples we set today, we hope to contribute to an atmosphere of peace and understanding between nations and among men,” Nixon said in a much-quoted passage from the statement. It is not clear when Army training of foreign nationals in offensive chemical, biological and radiological warfare was discontinued. A spokesman for the Pentagon’s military assistance agency said the agency had no records on hand dating back to the time of the program. The Army Chemical School, where the training was provided in the 1960s, continues today, providing U.S. soldiers and a detachment of foreign nationals defensive training at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo.
From January 28, 2003 issue.U.S. Response: Bush Expected to Expand Nonproliferation ProgramsBy Bryan Bender The redoubled commitment — details of which were not available prior to Bush’s speech — comes as a growing chorus of arms control experts are calling for a much more aggressive U.S. effort to secure nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere. Administration officials told Global Security Newswire yesterday Bush would dramatically increase spending for Energy Department nuclear nonproliferation programs in his fiscal 2004 budget request, to be submitted to Congress next week. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is expected to detail the White House request following the president’s address, which is expected to only refer to administration plans. “Abraham’s remarks … will highlight the administration’s expanded and accelerated commitment to nuclear nonproliferation efforts,” an Energy Department official told GSN. The fiscal 2004 budget request “will be a substantial increase from last year’s request,” the official said. Abraham is expected to unveil the budget plans tomorrow to a select group of nonproliferation experts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, according to knowledgeable sources. In his fiscal 2003 budget, Bush proposed a little over $1 billion for nuclear nonproliferation programs managed by Energy. In the previous year, funding for such programs totaled $750 million (see GSN, Jan. 10, 2002). Both the Energy Department and the Pentagon fund nonproliferation programs in the former Soviet Union. It is unclear how much additional spending will be requested for Pentagon programs. Matching Rhetoric with Reality A new commitment would follow recent complaints by nonproliferation experts over what they see as a lack of sufficient commitment in Washington to what Bush himself as described as the “highest priority,” keeping weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists. This is especially true, the experts said, with war clouds looming in Iraq over its refusal to forgo its alleged WMD programs. While the extent of Iraqi weapons remains unknown, the nuclear, biological and chemical weapons legacy of the Soviet Union and its successor states has largely been documented. “I don’t believe we have matched our rhetoric with funding levels,” Karl Inderfurth, former assistant secretary of state for South Asia, said in an interview. “We are hoping he [Bush] will make reference [in the State of the Union] to doing more about WMD around the world, but also that he will make reference to a further commitment to increase budgetary resources for this.” “It continues to be our view that while the United States has focused on Iraq’s potential for WMD and the fear they could be used against us or sold to groups or states that wish us ill, the fact is we know where [former Soviet] materials are and have a government in Russia that is willing to help us,” added Inderfurth, who is also a senior advisor to the Nuclear Threat Reduction Campaign. “We ought to be doing more in that regard. We don’t need [chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans] Blix to do an inspection of Russia.” The NTRC is urging Bush to take more dramatic steps to secure former Soviet arsenals. “NTRC remains hopeful that that the president will also acknowledge that our first line of defense in homeland security must be making sure that the world’s most dangerous people do not acquire the world’s most dangerous materials — nuclear, biological and chemical weapons,” the group said in statement Monday. Lugar Seeks to “Expand and Globalize” Effort Other officials say the lack of sufficient commitment is the result of both White House and congressional inaction. “Contrary to the media-inspired illusion that foreign policy is determined by a series of decisions and responses to crises, most of the recent failures of U.S. foreign policy have far more to do with our inattention and parsimony between crises,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) wrote in the Washington Post yesterday. “For example, in 2002, amid speculation about terrorists acquiring weapons of mass destruction, inaction by Congress effectively suspended for seven months new U.S. initiatives to secure Russia’s immense stockpiles of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons,” Lugar wrote. “Congressional conditions have also delayed for years a U.S.-Russian project to eliminate a dangerous proliferation threat: 1.9 million chemical weapons housed at a rickety and vulnerable facility in Russia,” he wrote. Lugar said one of five “campaigns” he will lead as chairman of the foreign relations panel will be to “expand and globalize the Nunn-Lugar program,” as the overall threat reduction effort in the former Soviet Union, sponsored in 1991 by Lugar and former Senator Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), is called. “Since 1991 the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program has worked effectively to safeguard and destroy the immense stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union,” according to Lugar. “We need to redouble these efforts and expand the process to all nations where cooperation can be secured.” Inderfurth said funding increases in nonproliferation programs should at least match the overall increase — as much as 6.5 percent — expected in Bush’s 2004 defense budget request. “We are hoping there will be a comparable increase for Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction programs, as opposed to flatlining at $1 billion,” he added. The administration has already pledged a total of $1 billion a year during the next 10 years for Nunn-Lugar programs — running the gamut of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons — as part of the Group of Eight’s $20 billion plan to dramatically expand threat reduction programs over the next decade in Russia and other former Soviet states.
From January 28, 2003 issue.Iraq II: United States Prepares to Present Intelligence InformationWashington is preparing to release some of its intelligence information on Iraq’s purported caches of weapons of mass destruction, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Jan. 27). The move comes less than 24 hours after U.N. weapons inspectors told the U.N. Security Council they need more time to fully investigate U.S. and British allegations that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been developing illicit weapons of mass destruction. In a bid to increase support for possible military action against Iraq, U.S. President George W. Bush and his senior advisers have decided to declassify some of the information and release it to the public, perhaps as soon as next week, officials said. The information will show what Iraq is “doing, what they’re not doing, how they’re deceiving,” a senior U.S. State Department official said. “We will lay out the case that we can, and we will leave it to others to judge,” the official said. “When you listen to it, it should be disturbing to those people who listen objectively. To those who have made up their minds and want to duck their heads in the sand, it will pass right over them,” the official added. The Bush administration believes the intelligence demonstrates that senior Iraqi officials and military officers ordered the movement and concealment of WMD stockpiles or knew of the plans, sources said. The conceal | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Back to top