- - - - - - - - - -
August 29, 2010
How Iraq became the first country caught violating the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty
Richard Rhodes' new book 'The Twilight of the Bombs' begins in Iraq, the first country caught violating the treaty and trying to build an atomic bomb after pledging not to do so.
Rhodes opens with a rather familiar account of the 1990-91 Persian Gulf war, but he then moves to the quiet, but more interesting, story of the weapons inspectors who patrolled the country between that war and the next one, in 2003.
The book's most dramatic passage covers the day in September 1991 when inspectors entered Baghdad's Design Center compound. At first, their search seemed futile. Someone had removed the good stuff from the files. But after four hours, the inspectors stumbled into a basement room that had apparently been missed. And there, in one of the first boxes they opened, was a vivid, damning and thorough six-month interim report on Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program. "The message came over the secure radio: 'we found it.' This was one of the best moments of my nonproliferation life," one of the discoverers recalled. They smuggled the material out with the help of a medical team, perhaps violating the Geneva Conventions. The next day brought more drama: the inspectors were taken hostage, in a parking lot. They were held four days before being released.
Source: Nicholas Thompson (senior editor at The New Yorker), "Nuclear Family" [book review of "THE TWILIGHT OF THE BOMBS: Recent Challenges, New Dangers, and the Prospects for a World Without Nuclear Weapons" by Richard Rhodes, The New York Times, August 29, 2010, p. BR17]
---sbs---
February 21, 2008
This is top story on the front page of today's The Guardian, of Manchester and London, England.
January 26, 2008
This is from the front page of today's The Eagle, of Bryan-College Station, Texas.
June 30, 2007
Russia still wonders what happened to stuff we knew was in Iraq, but has not yet been found
You may have heard the adage "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away". Well, that's what came to mind in reading this morning's Montreal Gazette. There's a story on p. 20, written by Agence France-Presse reporter Gerard Aziakou that is headlined "UN aborts search for weapons of mass destruction | SHUTS DOWN IRAQI INSPECTION PROGRAM | Iraqi capabilities 'overestimated'".
The story is about a vote yesterday in the UN Security Council. Russia's abstention kept the vote from being unanimous. Here's how the story describes the Russian ambassador's explanation: "...Vitaly Churkin ... said he abstained because the resolution 'does not provide for certification regarding the closing of the Iraqi file,' with questions remaining about the fate of Iraqi military items under observation, the stockpile of other weapons and the program of dual-use weapons. He said there was still 'a lack of clarity about the fate of several dozen Iraqi missiles' which UN inspectors had not been able to destroy."
The Associated Press version of the story, titled "U.N. Closes Down Iraq Weapons Monitoring", provided some more detail on Russia's reasoning: "UNMOVIC's Acting Executive Chairman Demetrius Perricos warned the council in a final briefing Friday that the possibility of terrorists or insurgents getting their hands on toxic chemical agents 'is real,' especially in the present security environment in Iraq. He also cited a number of outstanding issues that 'cannot be resolved and therefore contribute to the residue of uncertainty' about Iraq's chemical, biological and missile programs. These included the fate and whereabouts of 25 Al Samoud II missiles that were not destroyed before inspectors left in 2003, 326 SA2 missile engines, the status of the Muthanna chemical weapons facility, and the fate of liquid anthrax dumped in Baghdad in 1991. Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin objected to the council's failure to comply with previous resolutions demanding that the inspectors certify that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction before terminating their mandate. 'The adoption of this resolution does not give any clear answers to the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,' Churkin said."
Compared to these news stories, the Voice of America piece by Peter Heinlein, titled "UN Closes Iraq Weapons Inspection Unit" seems quite obfuscatory: "Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, objected that the inspectors had not fulfilled their mandate of officially certifying that Iraq, at present, has no weapons of mass destruction. But he said Russia is willing to accepts that UNMOVIC serves no further purpose. 'The fact that this issue has been with us for a very long time and some of those requirements have been taken into account did allow us not to block this resolution, but in a situation where some of the requirements have not been taken care of, we decided to abstain,' he said."
October 25, 2006
*
President Bush stumps for Buchanan in first area visit since 9/11
Centre Daily Times (PA)
... If US pulls out too early and destabilizes Iraq, the result will be an Iran with nuclear weapons, an Israel surrounded by enemies and terrorists in control of ...
*
Candidate profile: Tom Allen, Democrat for US House (1st District)
Bangor Daily News (ME)
... against giving the president the authority to go to war,' Allen said, concluding that Iraq had no ties with al-Qaida and that the country had no nuclear weapons ...
*
US exit from Iraq will affect Musharraf's future: Cheney
Zee News (India)
... Justifying US actions in Iraq, Cheney said the world is better off with Saddam Hussein in jail rather than he trying to develop nuclear weapons in Baghdad ...
August 28, 2006
Iraq will never be Minnesota
George Friedman, head of the Austin, Texas-based private intelligence company Stratfor, felt early on that the U.S. made strategic sense in Iraq, both in its injecting a U.S. military presence into the middle of the oil-rich Middle East and in encouraging key players such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to cooperate with it in the war on terror. As an exponent of realpolitik, he never put much truck in U.S. pretexts for invasion such as eliminating weapons of mass destruction or bringing democracy to the Middle East. Even as recently as this June, Friedman was still somewhat sanguine about the possibility of a political settlement in Iraq, one that the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds would all buy into. At the time, Sunni opposition' seemed to be wavering. Someone in that camp appeared to have tipped off U.S. forces as to the location of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leading to his elimination. Within hours, a Sunni was appointed to the key cabinet position of minister of defense. But in recent weeks, sectarian violence in Iraq has escalated into a full-scale civil war, largely, in Friedman's view, because an emboldened Iran has pushed its Shiite clients in Iraq to rise up. Shiite politics in Iraq are murky. Yet Stratfor has picked up rumors that Iranian-backed factions are doing their best to undermine the new Shiite-led Iraqi national government. "The war in Lebanon has knocked out the struts of U.S. policy in Iraq," he says. In Friedman's view, the current civil war renders the U.S. military presence in Iraq untenable. The military's mission is to fight wars, not police the streets of Baghdad and provide internal security. The recent decision to redeploy some troops to patrol Baghdad bespeaks "panic" on the part of the U.S. military, according to Friedman. As a result, the U.S. should give up on transforming Iraq into a beacon of democracy in the Middle East and pull the bulk of its forces into the unpopulated area of Iraq west of the Euphrates River. From here, the U.S. could both minimize casualties and exercise some control over the future of Iraq, whether it busts up into three different sectarian countries or evolves into an Iranian-influenced Shiite federal structure. "In short, Iraq will never be Minnesota," he notes wryly. Yet, says Friedman, there's no way that the U.S. can withdraw precipitously from Iraq. It must remain if only to counter the forces of Shiite fundamentalism led by Iran that could engulf such areas as Kuwait, the Emirates and even the oil-rich areas of Saudi Arabia. In our absence, the Iranian army would be the strongest military force in the region. Shiite coreligionists predominate in many of the oil-production areas in Saudi Arabia and other Sunni nations on the east side of the Persian Gulf.
[Source: Jonathan R Laing, "Why the Cease-Fire Won't Hold for Long", Barron's (New York, N.Y.), v86 n35, August 28, 2006, p.Ê17]
* [2006-05-25] Bush, Blair to gloss over Iraq debacle
IRNA
* [2006-05-15] Researchers find no signs of "Iraq War Syndrome"
Patricia Reaney, Reuters
* [2006-05-07] Iraq Crisis Adds to Blair's Troubles
Tariq Panja, Guardian
* [2006-05-05] International neocon ploy to discredit anti-US politicians
Online Journal (FL)
... major political supporters are tied to the Russian-Israeli-Ukrainian mafia that has been capitalizing on the Iraq war, nuclear proliferation involving the AQ ...
* [2006-05-05] Vote smarter
Pasadena Star-News (CA)
... that 'thousands of tons of biological warheads had been shipped out of Iraq to other countries in the Middle East...and there were nuclear reactor vessels and ...
* [2006-05-05] Rumsfeld Protester Injured, Gives Insider Account
Atlanta Progressive News (Georgia)
... ÒI screamed, You lied to the American public You lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction. You lied about Iraq having a nuclear program. ...
* [2006-05-05] Down to the wire
Dailyrecord.com (NJ)
... These included reducing nuclear weapons, Iraq withdrawal date, warrantless wiretapping, Jessica's Law, state control of the board of education and weighted ...
* [2006-05-05] Vote smarter
Pasadena Star-News (CA)
... that 'thousands of tons of biological warheads had been shipped out of Iraq to other countries in the Middle East...and there were nuclear reactor vessels and ...
* [2006-05-05] Rumsfeld Protester Injured, Gives Insider Account
Atlanta Progressive News (Georgia)
... ÒI screamed, You lied to the American public You lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction. You lied about Iraq having a nuclear program. ...
* [2006-05-05] Down to the wire
Dailyrecord.com (NJ)
... These included reducing nuclear weapons, Iraq withdrawal date, warrantless wiretapping, Jessica's Law, state control of the board of education and weighted ...
* [2006-05-04] Cheney has no regrets over Iraq invasion
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington, The Guardian
* [2006-05-04] Iraq: Get out now
William E. Odom, Los Angeles Times
* [2006-04-29] Al-Qaeda leader: US broken in Iraq
Associated Press/Tehran Times
Al Qaeda's #2 (al-Zawahri, an Egyptian militant believed to be hiding in Afghanistan or Pakistan) also denounced the leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq as "traitors" and called on Muslims to rise up and "confront them". He claimed that al-Qaeda in Iraq "alone has carried out 800 martyrdom operations (suicide attacks) in 3 years, besides the sacrifices of the other mujahadeen, and this is what has broken the back of America in Iraq."
* [2006-04-25] IAEA to help Iraq in radiation safety areas
Alarab
* [2006-04-25] Iraq: Radioactivity poses risk to population, warns UN nuclear agency
IRINnews
* [2006-04-24] 1,000 Iraqis at risk of nuclear contamination, says IAEA
Ian Traynor, The Guardian
* [2006-04-24] IAEA acts to clean up Iraq atom site, 1,000 at risk
Reuters
* [2006-04-22] CIA warned Bush of no WMD in Iraq: retired official
Agence France Presse/Yahoo! News
* [2006-04-17] The Real WMD's in Iraq - Ours
Douglas Westerman, American Chronicle
* [2006-04-13] New Questions Raised About White House Role in Leaking Classified Iraq Intelligence
Congressman Henry A. Waxman (D-CA)
* [2006-04-12] Bush Statement on Iraq WMD Later Debunked
Nedra Pickler, Las Vegas SUN
* [2006-04-09] Documents were faked in Rome over Iraq-Niger uranium claims: newspaper
Yahoo! News
* [2006-04-09] Iraq Findings Leaked by Cheney's Aide Were Disputed
David E. Sanger, New York Times
* [2006-04-08] Is Iraq worth it?
Frank Newport, Los Angeles Times
* [2006-04-08] 'Forgers' of key Iraq war contract named
Michael Smith, Sunday Times
* [2006-04-06] Bush authorized leaks on Iraq: court documents
Agence France Presse/Yahoo! News
* [2006-04-06] Bush Recognizes Fears About Iraq
Nedra Pickler, Las Vegas SUN
* [2006-04-03] US and UK try to break Iraq delay
BBC News
* [2006-03-31] Rice admits multiple Iraq errors
BBC News
* [2006-03-30] The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war
The Independent
* [2006-03-21] Documents Show Saddam's WMD Frustrations
Charles J. Hanley, Guardian
March 27, 2006
* Saddam-terror link: conventional wisdom is wrong
* "Iraqi Perspectives Project" study released by Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Virginia
* Iraq-terror link - US intelligence community didn't see any reason to be concerned
* Saddam and al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden - post-Jan 1997
* Saddam and al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden - 1995-1996
* Saddam's terrorist training camp - 10 miles outside Baghdad
* 9/11 Commission report wasn't portrayed as definitive regarding Iraqi involvement with al Qaeda
* [2006-03-27] America puts talks with Tehran on hold
Jonathan Steele, The Guardian
* [2006-03-25] Bush's PR push on Iraq seen as a tough sell
Edward Epstein, San Francisco Chronicle
* [2006-03-22] Iraqi Official, Paid by C.I.A., Gave Account of Weapons
Scott Shane, New York Times
* [2006-03-21] Iraqi diplomat gave U.S. prewar WMD details
Aram Roston and Lisa Myers, MSNBC
* [2006-03-17] China and Iraq to top three-nation security talks: Rice
Yahoo! News
* [2006-03-16] America still ready to strike first, confirms Bush
The Guardian
* [2006-03-14] Tapes discovery endorse Bush's WMD claim vs Hussein
J. Grant Swank, Jr., American Daily
...In addition, there are thousands upon thousands of supportive Iraqi documents now analyzed by US officials. In part, they say that Hussein was proceeding with uranium connections in Africa during the mid-1990s. The Hussein papers also reveal buried "prohibited missiles."
* [2006-03-14] Release of Secret Saddam Tapes May Give Clues to Weapons Cache
Eli Lake, The New York Sun, p. 6
The millions of documents, videos, and audio recordings captured in Iraq during the war will be released to the public. "By placing these documents online and allowing the public the opportunity to review them, we can cut years off the time it will take to gain knowledge from this potential treasure trove of information", said House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence chair Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI). Mr. Hoekstra has said that the largely untranslated and unexploited material could provide keys to the whereabouts of the weapons of mass destruction American intelligence believed Saddam had before the invasion.
Meanwhile, the next issue of Foreign Affairs will include an analysis of a secret study of Saddam's regime based on seized documents and prisoner interviews. In a press release last week, the council said the analysis will say Saddam did not have an active weapons of mass destruction program before the war, the same conclusion reached by the team of American weapons inspectors in 2004.
* [2006-03-14] US Said To Misread Hussein On Arms; Report Cites Suspicions of Ruse
Walter Pincus, Washington Post
Piece by piece, the intelligence presented that day by Powell has been shown to have been wrong, and the newly released Joint Forces Command report of lessons learned from the Iraq war, completed in late 2003, adds to that embarrassing record.
* [2006-03-14] MP's cloak and dagger mission: ask Dr Germ about Iraq's weapons
Rajeev Syal, The Times (London), p. 4
In the early 1980s, Ian Gibson, now MP for Norwich North, was a senior biological scientist at the University of East Anglia. One of his doctoral students was Rihab Taha, who later became the Iraqi senior biological weapons expert known as Dr Germ. In early 2003, the UK government flew Dr. Gibson to a clandestine meeting with his former student, to ask her 'Are you working on biological warfare?' She said, 'No, we have stopped all that and stopped it for some time.' Dr Gibson said that he is still trying to figure out what the British agents thought they would gain from the meeting. "Maybe they wanted an admission that there were weapons of mass destruction. Maybe they wanted to see her reaction to the question... Thinking back, we were not going to get any answer that could be relied on anyway, but I didn't feel as if I was being lied to." Dr Taha was featured in the US authorities' pack of cards of the regime's 52 most wanted members. She was captured in November 2003 but was freed without charge last December.
* [2006-03-14] US misinterpreted Iraqi compliance with UN inspectors
Yahoo! News
* [2006-03-09] Passage Urged for $91B War Spending Bill
Lolita C. Baldor, Guardian
* [2006-03-05] Students study bomb making
Knoxville News Sentinel (subscription) (TN)
WASHINGTON - If a nuclear-free Iraq graduates from President Bush's 'axis of evil' list, could Georgetown University gain admission? ...
* [2006-03-05] BUSH KNEW, BUSH LIED, BUSH MUST BE IMPEACHED
uruknet.info (Italy)
... yesterday that the president was specifically told before he went to war that aluminum tubes obtained by Iraq probably weren't meant for nuclear weapons and ...
* [2006-03-05] 28 US Reps Want Bush Impeachment Probe
American Chronicle (CA)
... ÒThe American people deserve an answer to why the Bush administration decided, in the absence of an imminent nuclear threat, the absence of an Iraq-al Qaeda ...
* [2006-03-04] Don't wait for God. We will judge you
Mary Riddell, The Observer
* 2005-03-29: Panel's Report Assails C.I.A. for Failure on Iraq Weapons
David E. Sanger and Scott Shane, New York Times
* 2005-03-28: Troops could be at cancer risk in Iraq
Ninemsn
* 2005-03-27: Loose Ends In Iraq Weapons Hunt
CBS News
* 2005-03-21: Legal rules for Iraq war 'stretched by Blair'
Brendan Carlin, Daily Telegraph
* 2005-03-16: Radioactive weapons have finally been discovered in Iraq
Dr. Doug Rokke, Casa Grande Valley Newspapers
* 2005-03-13: Looting at Iraq Weapons Plants After Invasion: NYT
Reuters
* 2005-03-12: Looting at Weapons Plants Was Systematic, Iraqi Says
James Glanz and William J. Broad, New York Times
* 2005-03-08: Federal row over role of Australian troops in Muthanna, Iraq
Catherine McGrath, ABC
* 2005-03-08: Uranium threat to Iraq unit
Luke McIlveen, Melbourne Herald Sun
* 2005-03-05: UN Inspectors: 90 Dangerous Sites Looted in Iraq
Evelyn Leopold, Reuters
December 14, 2004
* McCain Has 'No Confidence' in Rumsfeld
Beth Defalco, Las Vegas SUN
McCain estimated that an additional 80,000 Army personnel and 20,000 to 30,000 more Marines would be needed to secure Iraq.
September 22, 2004
* Iran doesn't want Iraq to succeed
* Seabrook plant - Iran and al Qaeda's attack plans and prep
June 13, 2004
Saddam spoke of duty to attack US; attracted terrorists like al-Zarkawi
In a May 2001 interview with PBS, Sabah Khadada, an Iraqi military officer, said that Saddam had told him and his colleagues: ÒWe have to take revenge from America. Our duty is to attack and hit American targets. ... ThatÕs how Saddam was able to attract those (foreign) Arabs and Muslims who came to train, because thatÕs exactly what they want to do.Ó
Among those foreign terrorists was Abu Musab al-Zarkawi, an Iraq-based associate of Osama bin Laden, who a few weeks ago severed the head of American Nick Berg. This war was necessary Ð Saddam was not a hornet that would have stayed in his nest but for President Bush shaking it.
[Source: Clifford D. May (president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies), "War to oust Saddam still makes sense", The Journal Gazette (Fort Wayne, Indiana), June 13, 2004]
June 5, 2004
Islamo-fascism will, if not defeated, take the Middle East, and maybe a lot of others, back into the dark ages
President Bush told reporters before leaving [for D-Day anniversary activities in France] that he will try to persuade Europeans of "the need for us to understand that democracy can take hold in the Middle East". The message the American president wants to convey to European leaders is that his war against terrorism is morally equivalent with the struggle of the Allies against fascism in the second World War. Senior members of his cabinet have been pushing the line that his alliance with Tony Blair is akin to that between Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt in the second World War, and that he will be seen in history as a leader of vision. Bush "doesn't believe that that struggle is finished just because Europe is whole and free," said an administration official. "This is now a struggle against another kind of tyranny, one that would take certainly the Middle East, and maybe a lot of others, back into the dark ages." Bush will respond to demonstrators by reminding them that "the people in Baghdad can actually also go out into the street and protest", the official added.
[Source: Conor O'Clery (The Irish Times' North America Editor), "Bush's 'friendship' tour: George Bush's 'European month' is an attempt to mend fences over Iraq", The Irish Times, June 5, 2004, p. 52]
March 24, 2004
* Iraq invasion - Libya wouldn't have disarmed if Saddam were still around
March 19, 2004
Osama bin Laden tied to Iraqi Intelligence Service by 1993 document
A 1993 document from the files of the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) provides new evidence of links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. The document is a list of IIS agents who are described as "collaborators". Among the collaborators, on page 14, is "the Saudi Osama bin Laden". The document states that bin Laden is a "Saudi businessman and is in charge of the Saudi opposition in Afghanistan." "And he is in good relationship with our section in Syria," the document states, under the signature "Jabar." The document, in Arabic, bears the logo of the Iraqi intelligence agency and is labeled "top secret" on each of its 20 pages. The document was obtained by the Iraqi National Congress and first disclosed on the CBS program "60 Minutes" by INC leader Ahmed Chalabi. Pentagon reporters Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough report that a U.S. official said the document appears authentic.
[Source: Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough (Inside the Ring columnists), "Iraq-al Qaeda link ", The Washington Times, March 19, 2004]
March 18, 2004
* Pakistan - US mistreatment led to its n-sales, and paltry current US aid risks worse
* US terrorism incubator, says Rep. Owens - half of NYC black males are unemployed
* Bush Administration lies, including about Iraq WMD, warrant independent counsel, says Rep. Nadler
* Iraq Intervention Benefits: Libya, North Korea, Pakistan/India, says Rep. Foley
October 17, 2003
Iraq - prewar WMD intelligence was exactly as described by Clinton, Albright and Berger in 1998, sez Sen. Bond
Mr. BOND (p. S12778)
... the distinguished Senator from New Jersey [(Mr. Corzine) said] that the [prewar WMD] intelligence was faith based. He insinuated that intelligence had been changed somehow perhaps by the administration. Let me first point out that this intelligence has been acted upon by previous administrations.
I quote from President Clinton, 1998: 'If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.'
Madeline Albright, Secretary of State, February 18, 1998: 'Iraq is a long way from here, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.'
Sandy Berger, National Security Adviser, same day: 'He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983.'
- excerpted from Senate floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - US deception undermines future ability to sound alarm based on intelligence, sez van Hollen
Mr. VAN HOLLEN (p. H9669)
... The Administration's misleading statements about the nature and magnitude of the Iraqi threat have undermined our credibility around the world. Secretary of State Powell's report to the United Nations prior to the war relied on forged documents and information we later admitted to be unreliable. The nuclear specter that Administration officials pointed to has been discredited. Even more recently, Administration Inspector David Kay has been forced to back down from post-war claims that two mobile trailers found in Iraq were used for making biological weapons. The huge credibility gap that now exists for the Administration undermines our future ability to sound the alarm based on sensitive intelligence matters. Future claims about Iran, North Korea and others will be viewed with deep suspicion by a more skeptical public and an international community that, as the Economist described, sees the Bush Administration as having its own arsenal of WMD -- 'Wielders of Mass Deception.'
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - bring in UN inspectors, for credibility, sez Rep. van Hollen
Mr. VAN HOLLEN (pp. H9632-3)
... The President should immediately invite the existing team of United Nations' inspectors--known as UNMOVIC--to participate in the search for WMD in Iraq. The U.N. has a pool of inspectors who have 12 years of experience investigating Iraq's programs and many of whom speak Arabic. According to its most recent report, UNMOVIC has a roster of 354 trained experts available to serve in Iraq at short notice. This important resource should be put to use, allowing us to reduce the size and costs of our team of inspectors.
What would it cost us to engage these trained experts? Nothing. The costs of UNMOVIC are borne by the United Nations and paid for through the dues of the member nations.
Engaging the U.N. weapons inspectors in the search for WMD would also get us something that money can't buy--credibility. With respect to the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the Bush Administration has lost its credibility with the American people and has undermined American credibility in the international community. Before the war, our Secretary of State told the United Nations that the Iraqis were attempting to import nuclear weapons material from Africa. The U.N. inspectors reviewed the evidence and determined the claims were based on forged documents. The U.S. conceded the point and, worse, it turns out that agencies within the U.S. government had already questioned the veracity of the documents. Our Secretary of Defense told the world that we knew the location of the weapons of mass destruction. We now know that was untrue. In the aftermath of the war, the President claimed that two mobile trailers found in Iraq were evidence of a biological weapons program. Our inspection team has recently had to retreat from that claim. Again and again, Administration officials from the President on down have made false claims about Iraqi WMD. Even the Economist magazine, which had been a booster of the war, has stated that the Bush Administration is seen around the world as having its own arsenal of WMD--Wielders of Mass Deception.
The only way to restore confidence in the search for WMD is to bring in an impartial team of international inspectors. David Kay, the leader of our team, is stuck in a fundamental contradiction. He wears two hats, serving as both fact finder and salesman for the Administration. No matter how high his personal integrity, this dual role undermines the credibility of any findings his team may make.
It is critical to the integrity of the process that independent U.N. weapons inspectors be invited to participate in the search and given the opportunity to independently evaluate any claims made by David Kay and the Iraq Survey Group. The American people should not be asked to spend an additional $600 million to fund a search that is widely perceived to be an effort to provide cover for an Administration that has lost its credibility on this issue at home and abroad.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - search for WMD is now obsession to save face, sez Rep. Paul
Mr. PAUL (p. H9684)
... what if you do find something? What does it prove? Does it prove that he was a threat to our national security? No way. Does it prove that it was a relationship to Iraq and 9/11? No way. So this obsession is for saving face and nothing more. If there was a major nuclear or chemical weapon available that was about to be unleashed against us, it would have surely been found by now, but that was not debated, but I am sure that search will go on, and "when something is found," and I put that in quotes, there will be a lot of questions asked. More questions will be asked than answers given.
- excerpted from special order speech titled "Misguided Policy of Nation Building in Iraq", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - the mushroom clouds we feared were only vapors of the mind, sez Sen. Byrd
Mr. BYRD (p. S12800)
... We were told that we were threatened by weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but they have not been seen... We were told in 16 words that Saddam Hussein tried to buy 'yellow cake' from Africa for production of nuclear weapons, but the story has turned into empty air. We were frightened with visions of mushroom clouds, but they turned out to be only vapors of the mind.
- excerpted from Senate floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - prewar WMD risks were exaggerated by Bush administration, sez Sen. Leahy
Mr. LEAHY (p. S12824)
... The administration said, over and over, that the reason we had to invade Iraq was because of weapons of mass destruction. The Vice President said, 'We believe he [Saddam Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons,' although there was apparently virtually no evidence to support that.
But after blaming the United Nations inspectors for being duped, and after months of searching without any interference, the administration has yet to find any weapons of mass destruction. And now, as reported in the press, they want to spend another $600 million to continue the search.
Not long ago, the Secretary of State said the weapons were the chemical weapons used against the Kurds in 1988, before the first gulf war. The gassing of the Kurds was a horrific war crime, but as much as I respect the Secretary, it is absurd, and contrary to everything we were told a year ago, to use an atrocity of 15 years ago to justify a pre-emptive war.
- excerpted from Senate floor speech on "Passage of S. 1689" during debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - horrible misjudgements every step of the way, sez Rep. Hastings of Washington
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington (p. H9649)
... at this point it is critical to take some of the control away from the people who have made horrible misjudgments at every step of the way, who misled the American people and the Congress about the need for war, and who ignored warnings from inside and outside the administration. Either they knew the truth, chose to mislead us, or they did not take the time to adequately assess and plan for the true situation. Either way, senior members of this administration were not doing their jobs.
That is why before any appropriations are sent to rebuild Iraq, the Congress and the American people need to see an independent investigation in progress, looking deeply into several questions: whether U.S. intelligence reports were manipulated in order to misrepresent the threat Saddam Hussein posed to American interests; whether the costs and dangers of invading and occupying Iraq were deliberately understated; whether American officials who offered differing views of Iraq became the victims of inappropriate or illegal retaliation; and whether one or more individuals within the administration is or are responsible for the leak of classified information regarding intelligence reports and the veracity of accounts as to the purchase of 'yellowcake' for nuclear weapons production.
If any of these allegations are proved true, those responsible must be held accountable. I am concerned that there has been a methodical and undemocratic effort to mislead and intimidate the American people and the world in order to march us into this war. And now we are being given an $87 billion bill to pay for that effort.
As we move forward in Iraq, unfortunately, we have severely limited options. Because people like Secretary Rumsfeld have used reckless speech that has angered and exasperated our allies, many of our most staunch allies are now reluctant to get involved in stabilizing and reconstructing Iraq. While our State Department has been reaching out around the world with a hand of cooperation and partnership, Mr. Rumsfeld has proudly displayed his arrogance and disdain for anyone not walking lockstep with him.
Too much is at stake to distance ourselves from those whose help we need. People from democracies around the world are now being asked to trust this administration with the lives of their sons and daughters in the military, by sending them to fight under a U.S. command whose leaders show them blatant disrespect. They are being encouraged to send their hard-earned money to reconstruct Iraq under the authority of this administration that gives the largest contracts to its political supporters, that seems to have no credible plan for the future, and that ignores the advice of even the most trusted experts on the world stage. It is not surprising that they are not stepping up with money and troops.
I think the problem is basically a lack of trust. I can't blame them. I do not trust this administration to do the right thing in Iraq either. I do not intend to vote to send another dime to Iraq until the President takes some dramatic steps to restore credibility to his Administration:
First, I want to see new faces in top positions, starting with Donald Rumsfeld. We need people who choose integrity over politics and respect over arrogance...
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Providing for Further Consideration of H.R. 3289, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq did not pose clear and present danger, sez Rep. Oberstar
Mr. OBERSTAR (p. H9667)
... Last year, Congress abdicated its constitutional responsibility by approving a deeply-flawed resolution that gave the President the power to initiate a preemptive war against Iraq, which, in my judgment, expressed at that time, did not pose a clear and present danger to the United States. I opposed that resolution in the strong belief that Congress should have required the President to seek a formal declaration of war because the President had failed to demonstrate a link between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist attacks of September 11, failure to prove the presence in Iraq of chemical, biological weapons of mass destruction, a nuclear capability, or the capacity to deliver such weapons against the United States.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - the two fundamental rationales for war were false, sez van Hollen
Mr. VAN HOLLEN (p. H9669)
... Six months ago, the President informed the American people that Saddam Hussein posed such a dangerous threat to the Untied States that we had to wage war in Iraq to protect our national security. The President and his advisors sold the Iraq war to the American people primarily based on the argument that Saddam Hussein was a ticking time bomb; that he posed a serious and growing danger to America; and that the only way to eliminate the threat was to eliminate Saddam Hussein.
The Administration's argument was based on the marriage of two claims. The first was the claim that Iraq possessed an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons and would soon obtain a nuclear weapons capability. The second was the claim that Saddam Hussein was in league with Al Qaeda. Taken together, these claims painted a very ominous picture. While many in the international community--and here at home-- had strong doubts about the nature, magnitude and imminence of the threat posed by Saddam, in its rush to war, the Administration exploited the fears of a post 9/11 America. They portrayed the United Nations Security Council, the U.N. weapons inspectors, most of the international community, and critics here at home as a bunch of spineless procrastinators who wanted to look the other way in the face of a growing Iraqi threat.
It now appears that the Administration's two most fundamental arguments for war were false. After interviewing hundreds of former Iraqi military personnel and allowing more than 1,200 of our own inspectors to roam across Iraq over the last six months, we have failed to uncover any actual weapons of mass destruction. The interim report submitted by Dr. David Kay, the Administration's own arms inspector, provides no hard evidence to support the kind of danger President Bush depicted when he made the case for immediate military action. In the absence of evidence of actual weapons, U.S. officials have shifted their rhetoric to focus on ``weapons programs'' and ``the intent'' of the pre-war Iraqi regime. And while it may be true that Iraq was not in full compliance with U.N. Security Council resolutions, it also appears that the sanctions regime, coupled with the inspectors deployed under Resolution 1441, was successful at containing Iraq's ambitions to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Time has also not borne out the Administration's claim that Al Qaeda was in league with Saddam Hussein. There is no credible evidence of any collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. This argument, made over the objections of many in the intelligence community and most regional experts in this town, was a calculated effort to establish a false link in the minds of the American people between the terrible terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the need to go to war in Iraq. This strategy of fear was not based on the facts, but on a desire to do whatever it would take to win public support for the war.
It is undeniable that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator. However, the security threat he posed to the United States was grossly exaggerated by the President and his public relations gurus.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
October 16, 2003
Iraq CBN WMD - Kay team has uncovered 95% of a smoking gun, sez Rep. Sweeney
Mr. SWEENEY (p. H9551)
... David Kay recently issued a statement that his team has indeed found substantial evidence that Iraq had many programs hidden from view to produce nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and had active illegal programs to deliver them using ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles. I believe this is 95 percent of a smoking gun.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
Terror and WMD relegates one John Adams' notion obsolete, that "America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy", sez Rep. Feeney
Mr. FEENEY (p. H9567)
... I remember in Washington's first farewell address, he warned all of us about entering into "entangling alliances" oversees. The second President of the United States, John Adams, said "America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy." But on September 11, all of us recognized that this is a much smaller world, because monsters found America and tried to destroy us, and they are going to do it again. The next attack could be from a vial of nerve gas, a nuclear weapon, a chemical or other biological weapon that may be built in the hills of Afghanistan or the deserts of Iraq. We understand that. We recognize that, and we fully support the prosecution of the war.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
Laugh of the day*: Rep. McDermott proposes adding asterisks to 2003 State of Union speech in the permanent Congressional Record
Mr. McDERMOTT, "Question of Privileges of the House",
Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p H9509
Mr. Speaker, this is a resolution correcting the Record of Tuesday, January 28, 2003.
Resolved, That an asterisk be placed in the permanent Record of Tuesday, January 28, 2003, noting that the following statements contained in the State of the Union Address by the President of the United States are inaccurate:
One, "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Two, "Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
Three, "From intelligence sources, we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspections sites, and monitoring the inspectors themselves."
Four, "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda.".
* nuclear.com is sympathetic to expanding this idea. How about putting asterisk next to Rep. McDermott's votes against impeachment, and those stonewalling fellow travelers of his in the Senate too. After all, it seems quite unusual that the fellow who was deemed unfit to practice law in the State of Arkansas was considered fit enough to keep finger on the nuclear button.
VP Cheney admits he was wrong about Iraq having nuclear capability, sez Rep. Moran
Mr. MORAN of Virginia (p. H9536)
... We were told by the Vice President that they had nuclear capability. Now, he admits he misspoke. That is not acceptable. This is a bad precedent.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
Iraq policy lies and miscalculations stir up 'the ghosts of Vietnam' in Congress, sez Rep. Pastor
Mr. PASTOR, Arizona (p. H9516)
... this administration misinformed the American people and misinformed this Congress for the reasons to go to Iraq. Weapons of mass destruction, the nuclear plan, the chemicals, the biological, we have yet to see any of that. Yet, he continues to tell us a story that is not true. This administration miscalculated what we would do in Iraq. He said that we would be seen as liberators and, in fact, to date, Mr. Chairman, they see us as invaders. I believe that this administration and the policy it has towards Iraq and its construction is misguided. The plan right now, if there is a plan, is not working. The ghosts of Vietnam are around this Congress and this city.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003
Bush and Cheney fooled me on Iraq nukes and imminent threat, sez Rep. Waxman, but 'I won't make that mistake again'
Mr. WAXMAN (p. H9519)
... I voted for the Iraq resolution last year. I relied on the President's representations about the imminent threat Iraq posed to the United States. And I relied on the statements that other senior administration officials, including the Vice President, made regarding Iraq's nuclear capability. I will not make that same mistake again. They have squandered their credibility and the normal deference we give to any administration, Democratic or Republican.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003
Iraq - nuke threat was justification for war, and it has evaporated, sez Sen. Leahy
Mr. LEAHY (p. S12650)
... The justification for the war, that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of having nuclear weapons, has evaporated... Did he have nuclear weapons? Of course not.
- excerpted from Senate floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003
Iraq - trumped-up reasons for war have collapsed, including n-weapons, sez Sen Kennedy
Mr. KENNEDY (p. S12638)
... The trumped-up reasons for going to war have collapsed. All the administration's rationalizations as we prepared to go to war now stand revealed as "double-talk." The American people were told Saddam Hussein was building nuclear weapons. He was not. We were told he had stockpiles of other weapons of mass destruction. He did not. We were told he was involved in 9/11. He was not. We were told Iraq was attracting terrorists from al-Qaida. It was not... Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorism. Our invasion has made it one...
- excerpted from floor speech on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003
August 2, 2003
*
Iraq: A Dangerous Place To Do Business
Pamela Williams, Australian Financial Review, p. 23 (fee required)
This article questions whether non-USA companies will be willing to invest in Iraq anytime soon. The author discusses some very interesting matters, but her conclusion, that players like BP and Shell are willing to leave Iraq, with possibly the world's largest oil resource, to their competitors, is about as silly a conclusion as nuclear.com can imagine.
July 11, 2003
UK continues to stand behind its Iraq-Niger link
The US was never made privvy to the particular intelligence information which the UK continues to stand behind. Back in September 2002, the CIA urged UK to drop the claimed link, but UK was confident that they had info that the CIA did not have, and thus refused to follow CIA's advice.
[Source: Walter Pincus (Washington Post staff writer), "CIA Asked Britain To Drop Iraq Claim; Advice on Alleged Uranium Buy Was Refused", The Washington Post, July 11, 2003, p. A1]
Highlights
* Iraq-Niger Uranium Link - CIA, in Sept 2002, urged UK to drop it from dossier
* Iraq-Niger Uranium Link - Bush administration wasn't trying to mislead, sez Powell
* Iraq-Niger Uranium Link - UK stands behind its 2002 conclusions; never shared the basis with USA
* Iraq-Niger Uranium Link - how it evolved in speechwriting for 2003 State of the Union address
* Iraq-Niger Uranium Link - UK might yet be right, sez Powell
July 10, 2003
Iraq - Niger link - Ambassador Wilson's 2002 report didn't mention forgery angle
He reported that Niger's government denied the purported uranium sale. Press Secretary Fleischer notes that such an official denial was not an earth shaking surprise, certainly not enough to reverse intelligence assessment.
[Source: Richard W. Stevenson, "Bush Skirts Question on 'Evidence' and Defends War", New York Times, July 10, 2003, p. 13]
Highlights
* Iraq - Niger link - Bush brushes off question of accuracy
* Iraq threat inaccurately portrayed by Bush administration, sez recently retired State Dept official
* Iraq - Niger link shuldn't have been in speech, sez Fleischer
* Iraq - Niger link - forgeries weren't the only evidence, sez Fleischer
June 27, 2003
The WMD Gap
Slate online magazine article by Fred Kaplan. Have you noticed, as nuclear.com has, that the same folks who were so vociferous about giving Hans Blix and his team lots more time to inspect are now the ones who are ready to declare that there's been enough time to label President Bush a failure and a liar?
June 13, 2003
* Iraq - Africa uranium link was backed by more than the fake Niger documents
May 22, 2003
* Iraq - fire 10 Baathist senior atomic scientists, new AEA chair urged
* Iraq - health concerns after 1/5 of radioactive materials missing after looting at Tuwaitha
* Iraq - Tuwaitha looters could have been received life-threatening doses while inside the plant
* Iraq - 1000 radioactive materials sites (industry & medicine)
May 12, 2003
The Wall Street Journal reports pretty matter-of-factly that "Major oil companies are unwilling to invest the billions of dollars needed to develop large new oil fields until Iraq has a stable government, enacts a law governing the petroleum industry and negotiates sustainable deals -- developments that could take three years or longer." [Source: Bhushan Bahree, "Oil Income Alone May Not Rescue Iraq's Economy --- Output of $15 Billion a Year Won't Solve Pressing Needs Of Poor Nation, Experts Say", Wall Street Journal, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
nuclear.com humbly disagrees with the Journal on this. Iraq's oil resource may exceed that of Saudi Arabia. The oil companies will put a price on the risk, but you can be sure that they will be running into each other in pursuit of competitive edge.
May 11, 2003
Radioactive materials amongst the stuff looted
The May 19 issue of Newsweek describes the following: The Al Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, about 12 miles south of Baghdad, had nearly two tons of partially enriched uranium, along with significant quantities of highly radioactive medical and industrial isotopes, when IAEA officials made their last visit in January. By the time US troops arrived in early April, armed guards were holding off looters -Ñ but the Americans only disarmed the guards, Al Tuwaitha department heads told NEWSWEEK. "We told them, 'This site is out of control. You have to take care of it'," says Munther Ibrahim, Al TuwaithaÕs head of plasma physics. "The soldiers said, 'We are a small group. We cannot take control of this site'." As soon as the Americans left, looters broke in. The staff fled; when they returned, the containment vaultsÕ seals had been broken, and radioactive material was everywhere... Last week American troops finally went back to secure the site. Al TuwaithaÕs scientists still canÕt fully assess the damage; some areas are too badly contaminated to inspect. "I saw empty uranium-oxide barrels lying around, and children playing with them," says Fadil Mohsen Abed, head of the medical-isotopes department. Stainless-steel uranium canisters had been stolen. Some were later found in local markets and in villagersÕ homes. "We saw people using them for milking cows and carrying drinking water," says Ibrahim. The looted materials could not make a nuclear bomb, but IAEA officials worry that terrorists could build plenty of dirty bombs with some of the isotopes that may have gone missing. [Source: Rod Nordland (Newsweek), "WMDs for the Taking?", Newsweek, May 19, 2003]
May 6, 2003
Example of Iraq saying no to uranium offer from holy warrior in 2001
In a secret police headquarters building in Baghdad, American soldiers from MET Alpha, the "mobile exploitation team" that has been searching for nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in Iraq for the past three months, found a "top secret" intelligence memo, written in Arabic and dated May 20, 2001, from the Iraqi intelligence station chief in an African country. The memo described an offer by a "holy warrior" to sell uranium and other nuclear material. The bid was rejected, the memo states, because of the United Nations "sanctions situation." But the station chief wrote that the source was eager to provide similar help at a more convenient time.
[Source: Judith Miller (NYT reporter-Baghdad), "Iraqi Documents on Israel Surface on a Cultural Hunt", The New York Times, May 7, 2003 8:59 AM ET] April 23, 2003
Iraq: Blix sez Bush lacks credibility in WMD hunt
For the first time since the toppling of Saddam Hussein, Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, confronted the Americans openly yesterday, accusing the Bush administration of lacking credibility in its efforts to hunt down Iraq's banned weapons.
Mr Blix, 74, derided by Washington for his failure to find the "smoking gun" that would have convinced the UN to give legal backing to the war, also accused Washington and Britain of deliberately undermining his efforts before the war.
... Mr Blix ... could now be the biggest obstacle to the removal of sanctions... He warned the Security Council that only UN inspectors, and not the teams being assembled by America, would be able to provide an objective assessment of any materials that might be found in Iraq...
Mr Blix, who is said to be livid that the US is assembling its own inspection teams, said: "We may not be the only ones in the world who have credibility, but I do think we have credibility for being objective and independent." ...
London and Washington had built the case for invading Iraq on "very, very shaky" evidence, he said. He referred to documents alleging that Iraq had imported uranium for nuclear weapons from Niger that he later revealed to have been faked.
"I think it's been one of the disturbing elements that so much of the intelligence on which the capitals built their case seemed to have been shaky," he said, hinting that Britain the US might have allowed the information to surface to undermine inspections.
Mr Blix would not rule out that evidence of banned weapons might yet be uncovered. But he added that it was "conspicuous that so far [US inspectors] have not stumbled upon anything evident". He cautioned the Americans to "examine everything critically", noting that some Iraqis might be motivated to claim more than they knew.
Even in Washington, officials spoke of fears that inspectors deployed by the US might never find evidence of weapons of mass destruction that constituted the main political justification for invading Iraq. US officials are worrying out loud that Iraqi agents might have been able to destroy incriminating materials in the days of chaos that followed the taking of Baghdad. Senior officials believe the US military might have contributed to the difficulties by failing to secure potential weapons or intelligence sites during the frenzied looting.
... Peter King, a Republican congressman, flatly dismissed Mr Blix's claims, accusing him of "manipulating evidence".
[Source: David Usborne (New York correspondent), "Hans Blix vs the US: 'I was undermined'", The Independent (UK), April 23, 2003]
Iraq: Diplomatic bloodletting again at UN? France joins in call to end sanctions now, but USA stands alone in rejecting current return of UN inspectors
... the diplomatic blood-letting seen in the run-up to the conflict risk[s] resurfacing with the first full discussion by the Council on the next steps in Iraq.
The Council's members sparred openly over the role of the UN in identifying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...
The new standoff in the Security Council is about whether UN inspectors, told to pack their bags and leave Iraq 24 hours before the first bombs fell on Baghdad, should be sent back in to identify any weapons finds now being made. The US, determined to keep the anti-war camp out of the decisions on Iraq's future, stands alone in resisting calls from other members, notably Russia, to send UN inspectors back.
The role of Mr Blix is directly linked to the issue of when UN sanctions on Iraq can be lifted. President Bush asked the UN last week to end the sanctions. But Russia has argued strongly that under UN resolutions, sanctions can only be lifted once Iraq is certified as weapon-free and that that can only be completed by Mr Blix.
Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, said yesterday: "We are looking forward, not backward. Saddam Hussein's regime is gone, and we will need to reassess the framework design to disarm the regime given the new facts on the ground." In a sideswipe at Mr Blix he said: "I think it's unfortunate if Hans Blix would in any way criticize the US at this juncture. The US is working with Iraqis to build a new country for them." ...
John Negroponte, the US ambassador to the United Nations, said: "For the time being, and for the foreseeable future, we visualize that [inspections] as being a coalition activity," he said. "The coalition has assumed responsibility for disarming of Iraq."
This puts the US directly at odds with the remaining members of the Security Council. Even Britain is making behind-the-scenes efforts to argue the case for giving Mr Blix a role in looking for weapons and certifying that they have been eradicated or do not exist. France took other members by surprise by asking for an immediate suspension of UN sanctions on Iraq. That move may be designed to mend fences with Washington, which has also called for an end to the sanctions. But France is also insisting on the return of UN inspectors.
[Source: David Usborne (New York correspondent), "Hans Blix vs the US: 'I was undermined'", The Independent (UK), April 23, 2003]
Archive
* "Iraq - 3,000 chemists, physicists working on chemical, biological weapons; nuclear program shelved"