Iraq:  Libya Behind Forged Nigerien Documents, Italian Sources Say

Italian sources have said that Libyan intelligence services are responsible for a set of forged documents that purported to show an Iraqi attempt to purchase uranium in Niger, Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily reported today (see GSN, July 25).

According to Italian sources, the Libyan External Security Organization passed the documents to an Italian intelligence agency through a Libyan source in an attempt to discredit U.S. decision-making, according to Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily.  The documents were later distributed to the United States and the United Kingdom, where they were used to bolster claims that Iraq sought to obtain uranium from Africa.  Once the International Atomic Energy Agency discovered the Nigerien documents were forgeries, however, those claims were disputed.

Sources have said that Libya was, in fact, purchasing uranium from Niger for Iraq during the U.N. embargo, according to Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily.  The uranium was used in joint Libyan-Iraqi nuclear weapons research conducted at two Libyan facilities  (Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily, July 29).

Niger Denies Uranium Claims

Meanwhile, Nigerien Prime Minister Hama Hamadou has called on the United Kingdom to offer evidence of its continuing claims that Iraq sought to purchase uranium there.

While the United States has backed away from the Niger uranium claim since its documentation was proven false, the United Kingdom has maintained that intelligence received from other sources supports the claim, according to the London Sunday Telegraph.

In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, Hamadou criticized the United States and the United Kingdom for the claim.  He noted that Niger had been one of the first African nations to participate in the 1991 Gulf War in Iraq.

“We were the first African country to send soldiers to fight against [former Iraqi President] Saddam [Hussein] after the invasion of Kuwait in 1991,” Hamadou said.  “Would we really send material to somebody whom we had fought against and who could … destroy half the world with a nuclear bomb?  It is unthinkable,” he said (David Harrison, London Sunday Telegraph I, July 27).

In addition, executives and workers at Niger’s two uranium mines — Somair and Cominak — also denied any attempt to provide uranium to Iraq.

“We were amused and a bit puzzled when we first heard about this,” said Bernard Debacque, the production director at Somair.  “We wondered what it was all about.  It is impossible for anything to go missing from here.  Everything is strictly controlled,” he said.

In the more than 40 years that uranium has been mined from the two Nigerien facilities, there has never been a “single case of uranium being lost or stolen,” said Somair Director General Serge Martinez.  He also denied that uranium from the mines could be illegally sold to Iraq, noting that they are closely monitored by both the international consortiums that own them and the IAEA.

“It is checked again and again, in Niger, in Benin and in France.  If any were to go missing, it would be known very quickly.  We are not talking about moving consignments of peanuts,” Martinez said (David Harrison, London Sunday Telegraph II, July 27).

Back to top

China:  Beijing Must Improve Nonproliferation Efforts, U.S. Official Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — A senior U.S. official last week called on China to improve its nonproliferation efforts, and in particular to curb its ballistic missile exports.  Citing such exports as the “most significant proliferation concern” the United States has with China, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance Paula DeSutter said, “The government of China has not done enough to ensure that all Chinese entities abide by the nonproliferation commitments the Chinese government has made” (see GSN, July 3).

During a hearing of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, DeSutter outlined China’s efforts to stem WMD and ballistic missile proliferation, as well as continuing U.S. concerns.  China is of particular concern to the United States because of its advanced technological capabilities, DeSutter said.

“While there are many buyers in the market for WMD and missiles, there are only a handful of states with the capability to be dealers in that market,” DeSutter told the commission.  “China’s sophistication with many of these technologies has made it possible for Chinese entities to become key exporters of WMD and missile technology,” she said.

Missile Proliferation

In August 2002, China released its missile export control list, a move that came as a “significant and welcome step,” DeSutter said (see GSN, Sept. 3, 2002).  She added, however, that the United States has several concerns about remaining deficiencies in China’s missile export control system.  For example, the Chinese control list is not as comprehensive as the annex of the Missile Technology Control Regime, which seeks to reduce missile proliferation by establishing common export-control regulations among members.  In addition, DeSutter said, the Chinese regulations do not prohibit the export of complete missile-production facilities, as does the MTCR.

The United States is also concerned with China’s implementation of its missile-related export regulations, DeSutter said.  China is apparently not enforcing controls at its borders, allowing illegal transfers to go undetected, she said.  China also lacks an effective end-use verification system to ensure that legitimate transfers are not diverted, DeSutter said, adding that effective implementation could be a field of cooperation between Beijing and Washington.

China has not done enough to crack down on so-called “serial proliferators” — those Chinese entities that have a record of proliferation activities, DeSutter said.  One such entity is the North China Industries Corp. (Norinco), which the United States has sanctioned several times for alleged exports of missile technologies to Iran, she said.

“For some time, we have been alerting the Chinese government to our concerns about the activities of Norinco,” DeSutter said.  “Nonetheless, the Chinese government appears to have taken no action to halt Norinco’s proliferant behavior,” she added.

Underscoring the various U.S. concerns with China’s attempts to prevent missile proliferation is a concern that China does not take the issue seriously, according to DeSutter.

“The Chinese government appears to view missile nonproliferation, at least in part, not as a goal in and of itself, but as an issue that needs merely to be managed as part of its overall bilateral relationship with the United States,” she said.

WMD Proliferation

The United States also has concerns regarding China’s WMD nonproliferation efforts, according to DeSutter. 

There is concern that Beijing has joined international nuclear nonproliferation regimes in such a way as to allow it to continue to “lawfully circumvent” those regimes’ intentions, DeSutter said.  For example, while China has joined the Zangger Committee, it has not joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group — a “significant” distinction, since this allows China to continue to export nuclear-related items to safeguarded nuclear facilities in countries of concern, such as Pakistan, she said.

Concerning chemical weapons, the United States believes that China has both not revealed the full extent of its chemical weapons program and that it possesses a “moderate inventory” of chemical weapons agents, DeSutter said (see GSN, Oct. 21, 2002).  She said the United States plans to soon discuss with China a proposal, developed by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, to increase industrial inspections at facilities that produce chemicals not directly covered by the Chemical Weapons Convention.

In addition, there is also concern that China has maintained a biological weapons program despite its membership in the Biological Weapons Convention, according to DeSutter (see GSN, Oct. 18, 2002).

“The United States believes that China’s consistent claims that it has never researched, produced or possessed BW [biological weapons] are simply not true,” she said.

Back to top

British Response:  WMD Proliferation Set to Gain Priority in British Defenses

British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon has said that combating the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is set to become an increasing duty of the British military, Navy News Week reported today (see GSN, July 18).

Hoon is expected to publish a report this fall outlining British plans for the military over the next 30 years.  The white paper predicts that the proliferation of WMD-related technologies will make it easier for countries and terrorist organizations to develop such weapons, Hoon said.

“Countering proliferation and terrorism will continue to take up more of the armed forces’ effort,” Hoon said.  “The threat from nonstate actors will continue to require multilateral responses.  There is a danger that the next 30 years will see the emergence of new WMD powers as the technology proliferates and technical advances make production easier,” he said.

Increased WMD proliferation and its impacts will require the British military to be able to respond quickly to unforeseen events, Hoon said.

“We do not have an infallible ability to read the future,” Hoon said.  “We can therefore be clear that the overriding characteristic that we shall look for in our armed services over the next 30 years is the ability to respond to events and security challenges with speed, precision and flexibility,” he said (Gene Koprowski, Navy News Week, July 28).

Back to top

Iraq I:  Niger Envoy Accuses White House of Leaking Wife’s CIA Status

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who traveled to Niger last year to investigate claims that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium there, accused the White House earlier this week of trying to intimidate him by leaking his wife’s name and the fact that she is a CIA operative (see GSN, July 24).

In a July 14 column published in the Chicago Sun-Times, Robert Novak specifically named Wilson’s wife and the fact that she was a CIA operative on weapons of mass destruction, citing “two senior administration officials” as his sources.  In a column published about a week earlier in the New York Times, Wilson had described his February 2002 visit to Niger as a CIA envoy to investigate reports that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium there, during which he determined that it was unlikely that such a transaction had occurred  — helping to discredit one of the Bush administration’s pieces of evidence of Iraq’s renewed nuclear weapons efforts (see GSN, July 7).

Wilson attacked the Bush administration Tuesday, saying the leak damaged both his wife’s career and national security.

“It would be damaging not just to her career since she’s been married to me, but since they mentioned her by her maiden name, to her entire career,” Wilson said on NBC’s Today.  “So it would be her entire network that she may have established, any operations, any programs or projects she was working on.  It’s a breach of national security,” Wilson said.

While the leak had little direct impact on intimidating him, Wilson said it could have a chilling effect.

“What I’m most worried about and most concerned about is that it is probably intended to intimidate others and keep them from stepping forward,” Wilson said.

However, White House press secretary Scott McClellan yesterday denied any intentional attempt by the White House to discredit or intimidate Wilson.

“No one would be authorized to do that within this White House,” McClellan said during a White House press briefing.  “That is simply not the way we operate, and that’s simply not the way the president operates,” he added. 

Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Project on Government Secrecy, told Global Security Newswire yesterday that the leak lends itself to an interpretation of a White House attempt at either retribution or intimidation.

“At a minimum,” the leak reflected poor judgment, Aftergood said.  “At a maximum, it’s a criminal act,” he said.

According to Aftergood, the leak could be a violation of the Intelligence Identity Protection Act of 1982, which prohibits the disclosure of names and identities of intelligence agents working undercover.  The law carries penalties of up to 10 years in prison for the disclosure of the names and identities of intelligence agents by those who have access to classified information that identifies covert agents; and up to five years in prison for disclosure of information by those who learn the identities of covert agents through access to classified information.

The law also carries a penalty of up to three years in prison and a $10,000 fine for the disclosure of information as part of a “pattern” to damage the United States.  This section, however, may not apply to a one-time act, Aftergood said.

John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, told GSN yesterday that it would be up to a court to decide whether or not the law was applicable to the leak, as well as which section and resultant penalties would apply.  “That’s what we have trial by jury in this country to find out,” he said.

Official investigations into media leaks, however, “never go anywhere,” Pike said.

Pike also played down the significance of the leaked information, describing it as “little tidbits that tumble out” during conversations between officials and reporters.  Media reports would be “pretty boring” if it were not for such leaks of classified information, Pike said.

McClellan indicated yesterday the White House would not be pursuing an investigation into whether there was a deliberate intimidation attempt.

“If I thought that there was any reason to believe that something like that had happened, I would … try to get to the bottom,” McClellan said.  “I have no reason to believe that there is any truth that that has happened,” he said.

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) called on FBI Director Robert Mueller yesterday to begin an investigation into whether Bush administration officials violated U.S. law by leaking information about Wilson’s wife.

Schumer condemned the leak yesterday.

“This is one of the most reckless and nasty things I’ve seen in all my years of government,” Schumer said in a press statement.  “Leaking the name of a CIA agent is tantamount to putting a gun to that agent’s head.  It compromises her safety and the safety of her loved ones, not to mention those in her network and other operatives she may have dealt with.  On top of that, the officials who have done it may have also seriously jeopardized the national security of this nation,” he said.

Back to top

Iraq II:  Ignoring Iraqi Threat Would Have Been “Irresponsible,” Cheney Says

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney yesterday defended the Bush administration’s decision to go to war with Iraq, saying it would have been “irresponsible in the extreme” to ignore the threat that was posed by former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (see GSN, July 24).

“The regime of Saddam Hussein is gone forever.  And at a safe remove from the danger, some are now trying to cast doubt upon the decision to liberate Iraq,” Cheney said in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute.  “The ability to criticize is one of the great strengths of our democracy.  But those who do so have an obligation to answer this question.  How can any responsible leader have ignored the Iraqi threat?” he said.

To illustrate the threat posed by Iraq, Cheney read from portions of an October 2002 CIA national intelligence estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, sections of which were declassified last week.  U.S. intelligence agencies had “high confidence” that Iraq was continuing its WMD efforts, Cheney said.

“This warning could hardly be more blunt or disturbing,” Cheney said.  “To shrug off such a warning would have been irresponsible in the extreme, and so President [George W.] Bush faced that information and acted to remove the danger,” he said.

Cheney did not read, however, the sections of the NIE that cast doubt on the now-disputed claims that Iraq had sought to obtain uranium from Africa, according to Reuters (Adam Entous, Reuters, July 25).

Cheney’s speech yesterday was intended to help counter increased questions as to how the African uranium claim came to be included in Bush’s State of the Union address, Bush administration officials said.  One official described the speech as an attempt at “steadying the ship.”

The speech was also meant to act as a warning to congressional Democrats that the White House plans to combat criticism over its Iraq policy, aides to Bush said.  Bush plans to give a major speech next month to update progress in the war on terrorism, aides said (Mike Allen, Washington Post, July 25).

Failed WMD Hunt Could Illustrate “Massive” Intelligence Failure

Meanwhile, former CIA Director John Deutch told the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence yesterday that a failure by coalition forces to find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction would illustrate “an intelligence failure … of massive proportions.”

“It means that … leaders of the American public based (their) support for the most serious foreign policy judgments — the decision to go to war — on an incorrect intelligence judgment,” Deutch said.

Deutch also warned the committee that the failure to find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction could have an impact on future U.S. efforts to combat proliferation.

“The next time military intervention is judged necessary to combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction — for example in North Korea — there will be skepticism about the quality of our intelligence,” Deutch said (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, July 25).

No Evidence of Al-Qaeda Link, Former CIA Official Says

There is probably no evidence of connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda, as the Bush administration claimed prior to the war, because coalition forces have had ample time to discover if such links existed and have so far reported nothing, according to a former CIA official.

U.S. forces have had time to interrogate captured Iraqi intelligence officials and to examine recovered intelligence documents, and would have publicly released by now any information demonstrating a link between Hussein and terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden, said former CIA official Ray McGovern.

The U.S. evidence of purported connections between Hussein and bin Laden connections was “fragmentary and strained beyond credibility,” McGovern said.  He added that the White House had already decided that such a connection existed and “what was needed was evidence.”

White House press secretary Scott McClellan defended yesterday the White House allegations, saying that up until the start of the war Iraq “sheltered and supported terrorists … who directed violence against Iran, Israel and Western governments” (Carlos Hamann, Agence France-Presse, July 25).

Back to top

Iraq I:  Detention of Iraqi Scientists, Officials, Raises Human Rights Concerns

The continued detention of Iraqi scientists and officials by coalition forces in an attempt to gain evidence on Iraqi WMD efforts has begun to raise human rights concerns, the London Observer reported Sunday (see GSN, July 18).

The International Committee of the Red Cross has called on the United States to clarify the status of 36 Iraqi scientists and officials in custody, the Observer reported.  There has been no word on where these Iraqis are being detained, nor have journalists been allowed to see them.  Some of the scientists and officials are suspected of being imprisoned in solitary confinement or in tents near the U.S. base at the Baghdad airport, according to the Observer.

The wife of Amer al-Saadi, the former Iraqi liaison to U.N. inspectors, said it has been “more than three months” since her husband turned himself in to coalition forces for questioning.

“I don’t want to aggravate the Americans or make them feel provoked, but I’ve had no official notification of why he is being held or what charges he’s facing,” Helma al-Saadi said (Jonathan Steele, London Observer, July 20).

Senior Spanish Official Says No Proof of Iraqi Nuclear Weapons Program

Meanwhile, Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio said yesterday that, while it was presumed before the war that Iraq had a nuclear weapons program, there had been “no proof.”

“There was a presumption that there was a nuclear program going on,” Palacio said in an interview with the Washington Times.  “There were no evidences, no proof, but yes, a pervasive idea that they were, that [former Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein was in a way or other involved in a nuclear program,” she said (Sharon Behn, Washington Times, July 24).

Hussein Regime Not Coming Back, Bush Says

U.S. President George W. Bush said yesterday that the deaths of Hussein’s sons Qusay and Uday during a U.S. military raid Tuesday would send a signal to Iraqis that Hussein’s regime “will not be coming back” (see GSN, July 23).

“Saddam Hussein’s sons were responsible for torture, maiming and murder of countless Iraqis,” Bush said.  “Now more than ever all Iraqis can know that the former regime is gone and will not be coming back,” he said.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair yesterday also welcomed the news of the deaths of Hussein’s two sons, saying it was a “great day for the new Iraq.”

“These two particular people were at the head of a regime that wasn’t just a threat because of its weapons program, but was also responsible for the torture and killing of thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqis,” Blair said (Spiegel/Clover, Financial Times, July 23).

Back to top

Iraq II:  Democrats Demand to Know Why Niger and African Uranium Claims Were Made Public

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Three leading Democratic members of Congress this week called on the Bush administration to further explain how now-disputed claims that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Niger and other countries in Africa came to be included in administration documents (see GSN, July 23).

Earlier this week, Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, called on the U.S. State Department to explain why the Niger uranium claim was included in a December 2002 department fact sheet on Iraq’s WMD efforts.

In addition, Senators Edward Kennedy (Mass.) and Carl Levin (Mich.), the top Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee, respectively, called on U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday to explain how the overall African uranium claim came to be included in a Jan. 20 report to Congress.

Niger Uranium Claim

In a letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell dated July 21, Waxman asked for further explanation as to how the Niger uranium claim came to be specifically mentioned in a Dec. 19, 2002, fact sheet that was issued in response to a declaration of WMD-related information Iraq submitted to U.N. weapons inspectors earlier that month.  The fact sheet, which listed a number of alleged omissions from the Iraqi declaration, had only one charge under its “Nuclear Weapons” heading — that Iraq had failed to account for its attempts to purchase uranium from Niger.

“The declaration ignores efforts to procure uranium from Niger,” the fact sheet said.  “Why is the Iraqi regime hiding their uranium procurement?” it added.

However, the Niger uranium claim became discredited in March when International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei publicly announced that documents offered to support the allegation were, in fact, forgeries.

In his letter to Powell, Waxman said he first raised the issue in a March 17 letter to U.S. President George W. Bush, in which he asked if the CIA had any role in the preparation of the fact sheet.  On April 29, Waxman received a reply from Paul Kelly, assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, who said that Bush had asked State to reply on his behalf.  In his letter, Kelly said the fact sheet was “a product developed jointly by the CIA and the State Department.”

Both State’s own intelligence service and the CIA, however, had doubts about the Niger uranium claim.  For example, an October 2002 national intelligence estimate on Iraq’s WMD programs prepared by the CIA included a footnote that said that State’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research considered the claims that Iraq had sought to obtain uranium from anywhere in Africa to be “highly dubious.” 

“I believe that understanding how the State Department Fact Sheet was crafted — despite the objections of CIA and State Department intelligence experts — will provide crucial insights into controversy over the president’s State of the Union address,” Waxman said, referring to the ongoing controversy over the inclusion of the now-disputed claim in Bush’s January address.

Waxman said in his letter that there has been “speculation both inside and outside” of State that Undersecretary of State John Bolton was responsible for the inclusion of the African claim into the State of the Union.  Waxman called on Powell to either confirm or deny Bolton’s role and his level of involvement, if any. 

Waxman also asked Powell to name the CIA officials responsible for approving the inclusion of the Niger reference into the fact sheet, as suggested by Kelly’s April 29 letter.  In addition, Waxman asked for details of any communications between State and White House or National Security Council officials regarding the inclusion of the claim.

State has yet to reply to the letter, Waxman’s press secretary Karen Lightfoot told Global Security Newswire Tuesday, but said one is expected.

State Attempts to Explain

State spokesman Richard Boucher attempted last week to explain how the fact sheet was prepared, saying the department’s Public Affairs Bureau used both classified and unclassified information prepared by other department’s bureaus, “including information that had been cleared and was consistent with” the CIA’s October national intelligence estimate  There were reports that Iraq had dispatched agents to other countries to purchase uranium, which was not addressed in the declaration, Boucher said, adding that the purpose of the fact sheet was to call on Iraq to account for such deficiencies.

“If we’re getting reports and others are getting reports that Iraq is trying to procure uranium, it’s really for the Iraqis to explain at that point in their declaration that they didn’t explain anything with, rather than for us to have to explain at that stage,” Boucher said.  “So I think that we probably would have put something in there about Iraq’s attempts to acquire uranium,” he said.

Boucher did indicate, however, that the specific mention of Niger in the fact sheet might have been a mistake.

“I probably would not have mentioned Niger or might have even worded it differently,” Boucher said.

Lightfoot, however, dismissed Boucher’s explanation, saying State was “trying to tamp it [the issue] down and make it go away.”

White House Report to Congress

Meanwhile, Kennedy and Levin announced yesterday that they had sent a letter to Bush calling on him to explain how the now-disputed claim that Iraq had sought to obtain uranium from Africa came to be included in a Jan. 20 report to Congress that was required under the congressional resolution that authorized military action against Iraq.

So far two Bush administration officials — CIA Director George Tenet and deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley — have taken responsibility for the inclusion of the African uranium claim into Bush’s State of the Union address, which the president gave soon after the report on Iraq’s WMD programs was submitted to Congress.  Kennedy said, however, that it was up to Bush himself to take responsibility and explain how the claim came to be included in both the report and the State of the Union.

“The buck does not stop with CIA Director George Tenet, and it does not stop with deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley,” Kennedy said during a joint press conference with Levin at the U.S. Capitol.  “The buck stops with the president,” he said.

Kennedy and Levin’s letter calls on Bush to provide copies of all memos from the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies regarding the issue.  Hadley said Tuesday that he had received two memos from the CIA in October 2002 saying that intelligence on Iraq’s attempts to purchase uranium in Africa was weak, according to reports. 

Both Kennedy and Levin said they also supported the idea of Bush holding a press conference to clarify how the African uranium claim came to be included into both texts. 

Kennedy said an inquiry is needed into whether the Bush administration politicized intelligence on Iraq to justify going to war, Kennedy said.

“Congress and the American people have the right to know whether intelligence was politicized to justify the decision by the president of the United States to send the American troops to war.  This statement that he sent to Congress is really the issue of war and peace, life and death,” Kennedy said.

“What we are asking for is, when he makes the statements for the reason of sending American troops into war, we want to know what the basis of his statements … that are included in this report are based upon,” Kennedy said.  “And the American people ought to know that as well,” he said.

“Everybody Makes Mistakes,” Clinton Says

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton Tuesday night issued a surprising defense of the inclusion of the Africa uranium claim into the State of the Union, saying, “everybody makes mistakes.”

“I thought the White House did the right thing in just saying ‘we probably shouldn’t have said that,’” Clinton was quoted yesterday by CNN.com as saying during a telephone interview with CNN’s Larry King.

“You know, everybody makes mistakes when they are president,” Clinton said.  “I mean, you can’t make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in awhile.  The thing we ought to be focused on is what is the right thing to do now.  That’s what I think,” he said.

Back to top

Iraq:  White House Adviser Takes Responsibility for African Uranium Claim

U.S. deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley took responsibility yesterday for allowing U.S. President George W. Bush’s January State of the Union address to include the now-disputed claim that Iraq sought to obtain uranium from Africa, according to the New York Times (see GSN, July 22).

Hadley said the CIA had sent him two memorandums in October 2002 saying that intelligence on Iraq’s attempts to purchase uranium in Africa was weak.  Hadley also said that while he received the memos before Bush gave a speech on Iraq in October, he did not remember them when the African uranium issue came up during the preparation of the State of the Union.  The two CIA memos were discovered within the last three days, Hadley said.

“I should have asked that the 16 words be taken out” of the State of the Union address, Hadley said.  “I failed in that responsibility,” he added (Sanger/Miller, New York Times, July 23).

The first CIA memo, dated Oct. 5 and addressed to Hadley, Bush’s main speechwriter Michael Gerson and other White House officials, objected to a line in a draft of Bush’s October speech that said Iraq “has been caught attempting to purchase” uranium in Africa, according to the Washington Post.  The memo said that the amount of uranium in the alleged purchase was in dispute and that it was disputed that uranium “can be acquired from the source.”

A CIA memo the next day, addressed to Hadley and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, said there was “weakness in the evidence” to support the claim and that the alleged purchase “was not particularly significant,” Hadley said.

White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett said that while Bush is “obviously not pleased” with the controversy that has arisen over the State of the Union, he “accepts the explanation” offered by his aides.  Bush also has “the highest level of confidence” in his staff, Bartlett said (Milbank/Pincus, Washington Post, July 23).

Iraqi Militias Beware

Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell yesterday said Iraqi militia groups should not “welcome” the controversy over the intelligence-handling issue in the United States and the United Kingdom.

“To the extent that they believe (British Prime Minister Tony) Blair and President Bush have been weakened in some way, I think that gives them certainly something they would welcome,” Powell said in an interview with the Washington Times.  “But they are deceiving themselves if they welcomed it for very long because I think this will all pass in due course.  People will see that what President Bush, Prime Minister Blair and other members of the coalition did was right,” he said.

Powell also said he expected the controversy over Bush’s State of the Union to “fade into insignificance” as more evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the crimes of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s regime come to light.

“As more graves are opened, as more mass killings are made known and as Mr. (David) Kay (the former United Nations weapons inspector heading the U.S. search) completes his work in Iraq searching for the evidence needed to make clear to everybody that we knew what we were talking about with respect to weapons of mass destruction, I think this issue of what was in the State of the Union address will fade into insignificance,” Powell said (Fran Coombs, Washington Times, July 23).

Hussein’s Sons Killed

Hussein’s sons Uday and Qusay were killed yesterday during a U.S. military operation in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq said (see GSN, April 8).

U.S. forces raided a mansion in Mosul yesterday after receiving a tip from an informer Monday night that Hussein’s sons were there, said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez.  Four U.S. soldiers were wounded in the attack, according to the Washington Post.

“We are certain that Uday and Qusay were killed today,” said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez.  The bodies were “in a condition where you could identify them,” and were confirmed to be Hussein’s sons by “multiple sources,” he said (Sullivan/Chandrasekaran, Washington Post, July 23).

Back to top

International Response:  United States Prepared to Intercept Illicit Shipping

As part of an 11-nation coalition intended primarily to curb North Korean WMD exports, the United States is now prepared to act quickly to clamp down on WMD-related shipments on the high seas, USA Today reported today (see GSN, July 11).

Joining the United States in the so-called Proliferation Security Initiative are Poland, Japan, Australia, France, Germany, United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, Bulgaria and Spain.

“We’re ready to rock and roll right now,” said a State Department official.  “All we need is actionable intelligence,” he added (Barbara Slavin, USA Today, July 23).

Participating countries would use their own domestic laws to intercept illicit shipments, Asahi Shimbun reported.  The proposal was brought forward during a Proliferation Security Initiative meeting this month in Brisbane, Australia (Asahi Shimbun, July 23).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP