Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
Activists' News | Nuclear | Depleted Uranium | Military | Police
Alternative Energy Etc. | From Subscribers
NUCLEAR
Fears over Sellafield's 'dirty' pond
Energy bills to give pollution details
Van with depleted uranium stolen
UK on alert as 30 lb of depleted uranium gets stolen
TERROR BOMB ALERT
TERRORISTS DESPERATE TO GET HOLD OF NUKE WASTE
Iran considers withdrawal from NPT
Korea: Ominous removal of America's 'tripwire'
Report of North Koreans' Claim on Nuclear Rods
Beyond Nuclear Blackmail
N Korea 'reprocesses' nuclear rods
Rumsfeld and Rice Adjust Defense of Iraq-Africa Claim
Bush Aides Seek to Put Out Credibility Firestorm
In Her Own Words An excerpt from Carol Moseley Braun's stump speech
Gephardt Calls for Probe on Iraq Issues
Kerry and Dean Set on a Collision Course
MILITARY
Afghans Said to Drive Out Pakistanis
Small-scale fighting taking place in Laos: Thai, Vietnamese sources
Core of weapons case crumbling
Blair ignored CIA weapons warning
Britain Denies U.S. Rift Over Iraq Intelligence
Britain defends uranium data on Iraq
Britain Denies U.S. Rift Over Iraq Intelligence
Italy denies uranium claims role
Khatami offers to resign to public will
Outrage at US plan to mortgage Iraqi oil
Members List of Iraq Governing Council
U.S. Mounts Bid to Quash Iraq Insurgency
Iraqi governing council about to take control
U.S. Military Kills 4 in New Push Against Iraqi Resisistance
Sharon in interview
Hamas, Islamic Jihad Threaten to End Israeli Truce
Israel Calls Arafat Obstacle to Peace Effort
Warships suggest discarded pacifism
Washington Seeking Cairo's Backing for New Council
NATO leader sues newspaper for libel
Arsenal detonates near Russian resort
Bush lavishes Tenet, CIA with support
CIA Stopped Iraq Nuclear Mention in Oct. Speech
Argentina Reviews a Clumsy Case by Its Spies
A New Name Puts a Pentagon Agency on the Map
Newest of Iraq Intelligence in Question
The other side of news
POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS
For Democrats Challenging Bush, Ashcroft Is Exhibit A
ACTIVISTS
Protest Bush's Plans for a New Nuclear Bomb Factory & New Nuclear Weapons!
Iran Professor's Sentence Cut to 4 Years
People Rally for Democracy in Hong Kong
Gates Aims Billions to Attack Illnesses of World's Neediest
Patriot Act battle is fought locally
-------- NUCLEAR
-------- britain
Fears over Sellafield's 'dirty' pond
Leaked report reveals discrepancies in estimates of amount of nuclear material put in open pool
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor
Sunday Herald
13 July 2003
http://www.sundayherald.com/print35261
Huge discrepancies in estimates of how much plutonium, uranium and radioactive waste was placed in an open pond at the Sellafield nuclear complex have alarmed the European Union's safety watchdog.
Confidential documents leaked to the Sunday Herald reveal that British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL), the state-owned company than runs the Cumbrian plant, has no clear idea how much nuclear material is in the pond. It only takes a few kilograms of plutonium to make a nuclear bomb capable of wiping out a city. Official estimates for uranium metal in the pond range between 300 and 450 tonnes.
As a result, inspectors from the EU's Euratom Safeguards Agency are worried they are unable to verify that Sellafield's plutonium is not being diverted for use in weapons. This guarantee is at the heart of international attempts to stem the spread of nuclear weapons to countries like Iraq, Iran and North Korea.
Critics point out that Britain's failure to control hundreds of tonnes of nuclear materials makes a mockery of its insistence that other countries take good care of every gram. 'Britain, as an existing nuclear power, can play fast and loose with the safeguards authorities,' alleged Dr David Lowry, an expert nuclear consultant.
The revelations are now to be raised with the EU by the Green MEP for Leinster in Ireland, Nuala Ahern. 'This is another example of Sellafield's serious mismanagement, which frightens so many people in Ireland,' she said.
The Sellafield pond, known officially as B30 and unofficially as 'dirty thirty', was built in 1959 to store and unpack uranium fuel rods burnt in Britain's first generation of military and civil reactors.
The water was used to cool the hot fuel and to shield workers from its intense radiation. After some fuel started corroding in the 1970s, the pond was phased out and eventually closed down in 1992. But it has been left with a huge legacy of nuclear waste under the water, which is slowly leaking into the surrounding air and earth.
The secret BNFL report discloses the major problems the company has had in identifying exactly what is still in the pond.
'There is a large uncertainty to this figure arising from corrosion losses, historical errors and [the fact that] at various times during the operational life, skips have been toppled, losing their contents to the pond floor,' says the report.
'Individual elements have also fallen from various process operations. Poor pond visibility and accumulated sludge in the pond make it difficult to retrieve spilt fuel and undertake visual inspections.'
Fuel rods have been in the water for so long that most of their magnesium alloy cladding has rotted away. 'Corrosion of the uranium has significantly reduced individual rod weights and in the extreme may have reduced some rods to little more than shards of metal.'
Along with the uranium, the pond contains significant amounts of plutonium, as well as a host of other radioactive wastes like caesium and strontium. It is all meant to be under strict safeguards and inspected by Euratom to provide an assurance that it is only used for civil purposes.
The aim is to demonstrate good faith to countries like Iran and North Korea, which are both currently suspected of using their civil nuclear programmes as a cover for making nuclear weapons. It is part of the deal enshrined in the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which came into force in 1970 to try to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.
But the leaked BNFL report reveals: 'The uncertainty surrounding the total inventory of B30 is a cause for concern with Euratom. This variance must be resolved at the earliest opportunity.'
The report, dated 1999, is marked 'BNFL only' on every page. 'This document is 'BNFL only' because it contains undeclared details of B30 fuel inventory discrepancy and also commercially sensitive information,' it states.
The report also divulges that the pond contains spent fuel from the Tokai Mura reactor in Japan, a country that has historically been anxious to ensure a clear distinction between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. But, claims Lowry, the pond's 'murky mixture' must have made it 'impossible for Euratom to ensure the segregation of civil and military material'.
BNFL insists that Euratom is satisfied there is no evidence that nuclear material is being diverted for defence purposes. 'In fact in recent years the amount of nuclear materials under safeguards has increased as material surplus to defence requirements has been brought into safeguards following the 1998 strategic defence review,' said a company spokesman.
But in its latest report on safeguards in Europe, Euratom concluded that there was 'an important verification problem' with the storage of some plutonium at Sellafield. 'Difficulties of access and handling due to radiation protection and safety reasons do not permit full routine safeguards activities to be performed. However, the status quo was preserved by containment and surveillance systems,' the report said.
BNFL accepted that radiation was seeping through cracks in the concrete walls of the B30 pond and was being blown into the air from the water's surface. But the levels were very low and had 'no significant impact off the Sellafield site', it claimed.
The company has refused to publish any detailed information on the structural flaws of B30 for fear the information could be of use to terrorists. It has been accused by former UK environment minister, Michael Meacher, of using security considerations to cover up environmental risks.
The problems surrounding B30 have also upset local environmentalists. 'We are very worried at the chronic state of this 44-year-old store with its cocktail of corroded and highly radioactive sludges,' said Martin Forwood, campaign coordinator with Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment (CORE).
'Even more frightening is that Euratom inspectors appear to be in the dark about exactly what's in B30, so we'll never know whether any plutonium or uranium has been diverted for weapons use.'
----
Energy bills to give pollution details
EU plan that electricity companies must disclose source of power is set to increase nuclear industry's woes
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor
Sunday Herald
13 July 2003
http://www.sundayherald.com/print35258
The pollution caused by the power you buy for your home is going to be put on your electricity bill -- and this could spell more problems for the ailing nuclear industry.
Under the terms of a new European directive, bills will have to include whether electricity is generated by nuclear energy, coal, gas or renewable energy sources such as hydro, wind and waves. They will also have to indicate how much long-lived radioactive waste and how much climate-wrecking carbon dioxide has been created by providing the power.
But according to a major survey of public opinion across Europe, this will hit nuclear suppliers worse than other power companies. Two thirds of those questioned said they would be unlikely to buy nuclear electricity, while four fifths said they would be likely to buy renewable power.
'Consumers are saying to us that they would rather not have nuclear power,' said Dr Brenda Boardman from Oxford University's Environmental Change Institute, which helped carry out the survey for the European Union.
'They rate nuclear power as a greater problem than climate change. For the government, that is a problem. A programme to promote nuclear power could well be unpopular with voters.'
The European parliament and the Council of Ministers agreed last month to a new directive governing the disclosure of information within the electricity market. It says that electricity suppliers must specify with each bill the contribution of different energy sources in the last year.
There must also be a reference to information on 'the environmental impact, in terms of, at least, emissions of carbon dioxide and the radioactive waste resulting from the electricity produced by the overall fuel mix of the supplier over the preceding year'.
The UK government now has to pass legislation by July 2004, introducing a scheme for UK consumers soon after that. The format in which the information will have to appear is still being worked out.
Boardman and her colleagues in Oxford, however, are proposing that a glossy leaflet should be included with every bill, with detailed information on radioactive waste and carbon pollution.
They have suggested a system of colour indicators like those used for the energy efficiency of consumer appliances like washing machines and fridges. Big red arrows would mean that power companies produce a lot of radioactive waste or carbon dioxide (see graphic).
'Consumers are very interested in the environmental impact of their energy and I think they would like to be fully informed,' said Boardman . 'If the leaflet is visually powerful, it could have a substantial effect over time.'
Along with five other agencies from throughout Europe, Boardman's Oxford institute has been investigating consumer choice, electricity and pollution for the European Union. They interviewed over 2000 members of the public from 10 countries, including the UK, as well as 1000 small and medium-sized businesses.
Those questioned showed an overwhelming preference for renewable energy sources such as hydro, wind and wave because they are much cleaner than the alternatives. Next they preferred gas, then coal, leaving nuclear power as the least-liked energy source.
Among consumers, 43% said they were 'extremely unlikely' to buy nuclear electricity and 24% said they were 'unlikely' to do so. In contrast, 47% said they were extremely likely to buy renewable electricity and 33% said they were likely to do so.
Only 26% said they were 'extremely unlikely' to buy electricity generated by burning coal, which releases large amounts of carbon dioxide, a major cause of climate change. For gas-fired electricity, the figure was 12%.
Friends of the Earth Scotland has been calling for the clear labelling of power, according to its source of generation, for many years. 'We know the public wants green electricity but currently the choices are limited and are often vague about how the power was generated,' said the environmental group's chief executive, Duncan McLaren.
'Any move to give the public more information about the source of their electricity can only be bad news for nuclear power. The public has made it abundantly clear that they wish Scotland to move away from polluting nuclear and fossil fuels,' he added.
'Multi-million pound government bailouts may be keeping the Torness and Hunterston nuclear stations open for the moment. However, once labelling is in place, the public will finally be able to pull the plug on nuclear and turn on to renewable energy.'
The power companies all said they welcomed the new labelling regulations and will abide by them. British Energy, the debt-ridden company that runs the nuclear stations at Torness in East Lothian and Hunterston in North Ayrshire, says it already provides its customer with similar information.
ScottishPower, which runs Scotland's coal-fired power stations at Longannet and Cockenzie on the Firth of Forth, is planning to increase its proportion of electricity from renewable sources to 10% by 2010. The company is waiting for decisions from the government's Department of Trade and Industry about exactly how the new labelling arrangements will work.
'If this information is going to be helpful to customers, we will be happy to provide it,' said a ScottishPower spokesman.
-------- depleted uranium
Van with depleted uranium stolen
By Neil Mackay, Home Affairs Editor
Sunday Herald
13 July 2003
http://www.sundayherald.com/print35269
A VAN loaded with depleted uranium (DU), which can be turned into a 'dirty bomb', has been stolen sparking a nationwide hunt.
The van contained 15 kilos of the nuclear waste. A police memo warning of the theft and headed 'Stolen Depleted Uranium' reads: 'Your attention is drawn to a stolen white Citroen Berlingo diesel van index T11 WOS. Vehicle stolen from Purfleet, Essex on 07.07.03
'When stolen, vehicle contained 15kgs of depleted uranium. This material may become radioactive if ignited. Vehicle must not be approached by police.'
The intelligence services and armed forces have been alerted, and police are giving out few details.
The theft of the van, which was stolen from an industrial estate, triggered a nationwide alert to all police forces, who are now searching for the van.
Depleted uranium is used to make tank shells and has been blamed for causing a wide variety of illnesses, including cancers and birth defects.
It is believed that the keys were left in the ignition and the van was taken from an unnamed firm at Purfleet Industrial Estate. The company uses DU on a daily basis.
Essex police said the DU was in 'metallic form and the size of a wine bottle', adding it would pose a risk 'if you could generate enough heat, such as in an industrial kiln which could melt down metal and change its form'.
----
UK on alert as 30 lb of depleted uranium gets stolen
Press Trust of India London,
July 13
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_306720,00050003.htm
Police have issued a national alert after 30 lbs of depleted uranium was stolen in a raid on a radioactive waste processing firm in Essex, a leading London daily reported on Sunday.
Though senior intelligence officials have played down the security implications of the theft, the first of its kind, nuclear experts say that if such a large quantity of uranium got into the wrong hands it could be used to make a terrorist "dirty bomb", The Sunday Times, stated.
The alert was sent to all police forces in England and Wales last Monday after a van containing the uranium was stolen from the firm's depot on an industrial estate in Purfleet. The vehicle had been left unlocked and the keys were in the ignition.
Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist branch and Special Branch officers have been briefed on the theft. Special Branch officers say it was captured by CCTV cameras.
The daily quoted Dr Frank Barnaby, a nuclear physicist, as saying that it could cause chemical and radiological damage if particles were inhaled. "Terrorists might want to use the material in a dirty bomb" he said.
Depleted uranium is mildly radioactive in its solid form but only becomes a real danger when it is involved in a fire or explosion. Then it can cause damage to the liver, kidneys and lungs. It is a heavy substance, nearly twice as dense lead, and is commonly used on the tips of artillery shells to penetrate heavy armour.
----
TERROR BOMB ALERT
EXCLUSIVE: POLICE HUNT 15KILOS OF URANIUM STOLEN FROM WHITE VAN
Derek Alexander,
July 13, 2003
UK Sunday Mail
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/content_objectid=13171465_method=full_siteid=86024_headline=-TERROR-BOMB-ALERT-name_page.html
A WHITE van loaded with nuclear waste capable of being used to make a terrorist "dirty-bomb" has been stolen.
A nationwide hunt was launched after the van containing 15 kilos of depleted uranium was snatched.
A secret police memo warns: "This material may become radioactive if ignited ... vehicle must not be approached by police."
All police forces in the UK, including the eight in Scotland, have been alerted to keep a lookout for the van, a T-reg Citroen Berlingo.
The intelligence service MI5 and defence chiefs have been alerted.
Nuclear experts last night warned the missing material could be used by terrorists in an attack on cities.
Police yesterday admitted the van and the uranium had gone missing but refused to give any more details.
The radioactive waste is carried for miles in the atmosphere if detonated with a conventional explosive. Small particles of depleted uranium dust lodge in victims' lungs and it has been blamed for causing cancer.
The van was stolen from an industrial estate last Monday.
The theft happened in the Purfleet area of Essex before police raised the alarm around the country.
The substance - which is used to make shells and other ammunition - has been blamed for causing illness among hundreds of Gulf War veterans and civilians in Iraq.
Last night, depleted uranium expert Professor Malcolm Hooper said: "Terrorists would want to obtain this. Our government and the United States have warned it could be used in a terror attack."
Professor Hooper, of Sunderland University, added: "This is very serious and the authorities will be keen to track down the depleted uranium and identify the people who have it.
"It's difficult to say how much damage 15 kilos of depleted uranium would cause.
"But it could certainly be converted to make an effective `dirty bomb'.
"A lot of depleted uranium is stored in the United Kingdom but it has to be securely protected."
A "dirty bomb" is easy to construct if terrorists have access to any form of uranium.
The weapon would have a devastating effect and cause widespread panic.
The nuclear waste product is the prize of terror fanatics such as Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organisation.
A contaminated area could be uninhabitable for years and victims exposed to radiation would have to be monitored for the rest of their lives.
There have been around 180 cases of terrorists trying to smuggle radioactive material since 1993, most of it depleted uranium, known as U-238.
The material is widely used by the military and is used as balance weights in heavy aircraft.
However, the growing concern about it falling into the hands of terrorists has prompted a huge security crackdown to ensure it is held safely.
DU is a waste product of the process that produces enriched uranium for use in atomic weapons and nuclear power plants.
Much like natural uranium, it is both toxic and radioactive.
Half a million tons of DU exists in the US and must be safely stored or disposed of by the Department of Energy. It has a half-life of 4.5billion years.
Yesterday, Dr David Sanderson, of the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre, said: "I'm astonished that depleted uranium was in the back of a van in the first place.
"It can be a very harmful substance, depending on what form it's in.
"Shavings of depleted uranium or the substance in its powder form is very dangerous.
"Even if the quantity missing is in solid metal form, it's very easy to process it to powder."
The Government gives DU to arms manufacturers.
Because it is extremely dense, when turned into a metal, it can can be used to make a shell that penetrates steel.
In addition, when it strikes steel, heat from the friction causes it to burn.
When DU burns, it spews tiny particles of poisonous and radioactive uranium oxide in aerosol form, which then travels for miles in the air.
Humans can inhale the small particles, which lodge in vital organs.
DU is also considered at least a contributing cause in more than 130,000 reported cases of Gulf War Syndrome.
The chronic symptoms include increases in cancers to memory loss, acute pain, fatigue and birth defects in veterans' children.
Essex police said they believe the van was stolen by an opportunist thief. But a spokeswoman admitted the van and its alarming contents have yet to be traced.
She said: "A van containing a small amount of depleted uranium was stolen. Inquiries are continuing." The movement of uranium is what sparked the latest row over the war in Iraq after the government claimed Saddam Hussein was trying to buy it from Niger.
The claim, in a controversial document outlining the justification for attacking Iraq, was that Saddam wanted the uranium for his weapons of mass destruction programme.
But yesterday, it emerged the CIA had backtracked after using the same claim, saying the evidence came from a dubious source.
Yesterday, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw admitted the CIA raised concerns about the claim in the Iraqi dossier.
----
TERRORISTS DESPERATE TO GET HOLD OF NUKE WASTE
July 13, 2003
UK Sunday Mail
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/content_objectid=13171499_method=full_siteid=86024_headline=-TERRORISTS-DESPERATE-TO-GET-HOLD-OF-NUKE-WASTE-name_page.html
STOLEN uranium has become one of the biggest threats from terrorists in the world today.
It can be used to form the core of the "dirty bomb" - a crude yet terrifying weapon which could bring death and chaos to cities across Europe and America.
Although Uranium-238, known as depleted uranium, has only very low levels of radiation, it would still be a coup for any terrorist organisation to obtain it.
If conventional explosives were used to detonate a device laced with Uranium- 238, the radiation would immediately be detected in the atmosphere sparking panic and a massive emergency response by the authorities.
Depleted uranium is a by-product of nuclear power generation and the manufacture of nuclear weapons.
It is effectively the solid material left after all the highly radioactive material used to develop nuclear energy is sucked out.
It is used extensively in weaponry by the Americans and the British. Because it is hugely strong and dense, it is used to make the core of tank shells and bullets - making them capable of shearing through armour.
It has been used extensively in both Iraq wars, Afghanistan and Kosovo, but there is widespread concern about its impact on health and the environment.
Studies have confirmed the explosions and fires which follow shell bursts contain uranium aerosol which could be harmful.
Studies of troops in friendly fire incidents involving DU shells have so far discovered no cancers or significant health risks.
But scientists say it could take years before the harmful effects of DU are discovered.
However, when Uranium-238 was discovered in barrels in an al-Qaeda base in Afghanistan two years ago, the site was immediately sealed off by American military scientists.
It was the first evidence that Osama bin Laden's fanatics were trying to gather material to make a dirty bomb.
-------- iran
Iran considers withdrawal from NPT
Sun, 13 Jul 2003
Middle East Nenewsline
http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2003/july/07_14_1.html
NICOSIA [MENL] -- Iran is considering withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent international inspections of Teheran's suspected nuclear weapons program.
A leading Iranian official has urged the ruling clergy to follow the steps of North Korea and withdraw from the NPT. The official said the NPT will be used by the United States to provide full access to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to Iranian nuclear facilities.
"The best and reasonable solution for Iran is withdrawing from the NPT," Hossain Shariatmadari, editor of the Kayhan daily and a leading aide to Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei, said.
Kayhan is regarded as the voice of Khamenei and the ruling clergy. Khamenei is said to have control over Iran's nuclear and other strategic programs.
-------- korea
Korea: Ominous removal of America's 'tripwire'
By Ted Galen Carpenter,
Jun 13, 2003
Asia Times
(Republished with the permission of the Cato Institute)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/EF13Dg07.html
During his recent visit to South Korea, US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz announced Washington's intention to "reposition" some of its military forces stationed in South Korea. Currently, most US troops are deployed in the northern part of the country, between the capital, Seoul, and the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) that separates South Korea from communist North Korea. The redeployment would entail moving those forces farther south.
Wolfowitz offered only a vague justification for such a move, contending that repositioning forces would make them more effective in meeting the threat posed by North Korea. That is a curious argument. Since the end of the Korean War in 1953, the principal rationale for stationing the troops near the DMZ has been that they would serve as a tripwire in case of a North Korean attack, guaranteeing US involvement in any conflict. North Korea, knowing that it would then face war not only with South Korea but also with the United States, would be deterred from taking such a reckless gamble.
Why is the administration of US President George W Bush proposing to abandon the long-standing tripwire function of US forces in South Korea? There is one unsettling possibility: The administration is considering a preemptive military attack on North Korea's nuclear installations and wants to move US troops out of harm's way. Even the most hawkish US experts on Korea concede that if the United States did launch such an attack, the North would likely respond with an intense artillery and missile barrage of the Seoul metropolitan area and, possibly, with a ground attack through the DMZ. US troops stationed between Seoul and the DMZ could easily end up being dead tripwire forces.
True, Bush administration officials have stated that they want to solve through diplomacy the crisis created by North Korea's resumption of its nuclear-weapons program. But those same officials have stressed that all options, including the use of military force, remain on the table. When South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun went to the United States in May, he sought an assurance that the controversial doctrine of preemptive war embedded in the administration's national-security strategy would not apply to North Korea. US officials rebuffed his request.
Indeed, the national-security strategy document approved in September 2002 clearly would seem to apply to the North Korean situation. "We must be prepared to stop rogue states and their terrorist clients before they are able to threaten or use weapons of mass destruction against the United States and our allies and friends," the document affirmed. The administration's policy on combating weapons of mass destruction, adopted in December 2002, stated the point even more succinctly, emphasizing that the United States would not "permit the world's more dangerous regimes" to pose a threat "with the world's most destructive weapons". Nuclear weapons in the hands of secretive, Stalinist North Korea fill that category.
Even if one takes the Bush administration at its word that it wants to settle the crisis through diplomacy, it begs a crucial question: What does the United States do if diplomacy (or diplomacy combined with economic pressure) fails to induce North Korea to abandon its nuclear program? Is the administration prepared to live with a North Korea armed with nuclear weapons? The statement issued by Bush and Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi after their recent summit suggests otherwise. The two leaders stated bluntly that they "would not tolerate" a nuclear-armed North Korea.
If diplomacy fails, it is not clear how that result can be prevented except through military force. The Bush administration may not be committed to such a course yet, but in deciding to move US forces away from the DMZ, it is creating a precondition for pursuing that option. South Koreans, who know how horribly their country would suffer if the United States launched preemptive strikes on the North, now have reason to be very, very nervous.
Ted Galen Carpenter is vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and is the author or editor of 15 books on international affairs including Peace & Freedom: Foreign Policy for a Constitutional Republic. This article is republished with the permission of the Cato Institute.
----
Report of North Koreans' Claim on Nuclear Rods Appears in South
July 13, 2003
New York Times
By DON KIRK
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/13/international/asia/13CND-KORE.html
SEOUL, July 13 - North Korea claims to have reprocessed all its spent nuclear fuel rods while restarting a small experimental reactor and working on two much bigger reactors, a South Korean report said today.
Chang Sung Min, a former member of South Korea's national assembly, said that a high-level United States official had quoted North Korean diplomats as saying the North had finished reprocessing its 8,000 spent fuel rods by the end of last month, according to Yonhap, the semi-official South Korean news agency.
Mr. Chang said North Korea's two top representatives at the United Nations made the claim on July 8 in a meeting in New York with Jack Pritchard, the American envoy assigned exclusively to the North Korean issue, and David Straub, director of the Korean desk at the State Department, Yonhap reported.
Mr. Chang, a member of South Korea's ruling Millennium Democratic Party, with close ties to Kim Dae Jung, the former South Korean president who initiated the South's policy of reconciliation with North Korea, reportedly was briefed in Washington.
In the conversation, according to Yonhap, the North Koreans said that scientists and engineers at the Yongbyon complex 50 miles north of Pyongyang had restarted a five-megawatt experimental reactor from which it is possible to extract the plutonium for nuclear warheads. At the same time, the report said, the North said it had resumed work on two large reactors, one with a capacity of 200 megawatts, the other just 50 megawatts.
All work at the Yongbyon complex was frozen under terms of the 1994 Geneva framework agreement, which fell apart last fall after the North acknowledged the existence of an entirely separate program for developing nuclear warheads from enriched uranium.
South Korean officials declined to comment today on the report or on another report, carried by Japan's Kyodo news agency, that said American analysts had taken air samples over the Yongbyon complex that showed a substance known as krypton 85, a byproduct of reprocessing.
Although the report of krypton 85 indicated the North Koreans were indeed working on the spent fuel rods, analysts and officials have been highly uncertain as to whether their claims of going ahead with reprocessing were true or part of the negotiating process - or both.
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said on the NBC News program "Meet the Press" that the North Koreans "told us they have nuclear weapons" and had "made assertions to the pace at which they're reprocessing" but acknowledged the doubts. "Some people believe what they are saying," he said. "Other people don't believe what they are saying."
North Korea has demanded bilateral talks with the United States on halting its program while spurning multilateral talks that would include South Korea, Japan, China and possibly Russia at the table.
North Korean negotiators steadfastly refused last weekend to agree on a place for South Korea in talks on nuclear weapons but left open the possibility of a face-saving way out of the impasse.
Hopes for the multilateral talks were raised just slightly after an overnight debate between North and South Korean cabinet members that resulted Saturday in a six-point communiqué that began with the two sides agreeing "to resolve the nuclear issue peacefully through appropriate dialogue." The two sides, the communiqué added, would work together for "peace and security on the Korean peninsula."
Official South Korean spinmasters promptly saw the bright side of what some reports called the failure of the negotiators to come to terms on the multilateral talks to which North Korea has said it will never consent. The North Korean position is that it will negotiate only with the United States on its nuclear weapons program.
Shin Eon Sang, spokesman for the South's delegation, told South Korean reporters it "would not be correct" to say the agreement to engage in "appropriate dialogue" was the fruit of the South's "unending persuasion" to get the North to agree on multilateral talks. The inference was the North Koreans saw the necessity for multilateral talks even if were not authorized to include the term in the agreement.
The agreement seemed to indicate the North's desire for improving relations with the South despite the nuclear issue.
Negotiators agreed on another round of reunions of families separated by the Korean War at the Mount Kumkang resort in North Korea during the Korean thanksgiving holidays in September and on more talks on North-South economic cooperation in late August.
The agreement, however, also included provisions that were sure to arouse controversy here, including formation of a committee on social and cultural exchanges and cooperation on joint ceremonies on Aug. 15, the date of the Japanese surrender in 1945 that ended 35 years of Japanese rule over the Korean peninsula.
Conservatives have charged that North Korea turned previous joint ceremonies into forums for propaganda that appealed to South Korean leftists opposed to the United States military alliance with South Korea.
----
Beyond Nuclear Blackmail
By Cheol-Hwan Kang
Sunday, July 13, 2003
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A46071-2003Jul11?language=printer
No regime in the world today is more evil than the one in North Korea. It operates a system of slave labor camps that can be compared only to the worst nightmares of Stalin's gulag and the Nazis' places of confinement and death. To make matters worse, North Korea has weapons of mass destruction, with which the dictator Kim Jong Il intimidates his neighbors like a schoolyard bully.
In the face of all this, the international community has treated Kim's government far too generously. More important, it has failed to recognize the vital link between the issues of human rights and nuclear weapons.
The record shows that Kim Jong Il cannot be trusted or bargained with. His nuclear weapons program exists for one purpose: to threaten the international community and thereby blackmail it into providing aid. It is time for South Korea, Japan, the United States and other countries to stop dancing to North Korea's nuclear tunes and pursue a strategy that will bring about real change. That strategy must link future aid to fundamental reform: not just a cessation of the nuclear weapons program but abolition of the concentration camps and of the spectacularly failed collective farms, which are the cause of the widespread starvation.
A new international strategy must be based on what is happening inside North Korea. The country is a giant concentration camp, the world's last totalitarian regime. Without warning, appeal or reason, any North Korean can be sent to a slave labor camp for such "crimes" as reading a foreign newspaper, listening to a foreign broadcast, complaining about the food situation or refusing an arbitrary request from an official. Some 200,000 North Koreans are held in these camps, in horrifying conditions of torture, harsh labor, hunger and summary execution. In the past three decades, several hundred thousand North Koreans have died in the camps.
The existence of the concentration camps is an open secret. The United States and South Korean governments have satellite photographs documenting them in detail. They should show these photographs to the world, present specific evidence of the atrocities and demand that Kim Jong Il close down the camps in a verifiable way -- by opening them to international inspection.
Economically, North Korea is bankrupt, with a classic Stalinist system in need of sweeping reform. During the 1990s, famine killed hundreds of thousands of people.
But instead of learning a lesson from a crisis that drove the country to the brink of collapse, North Korea wasted five years rebuilding its old system with international aid, including extensive, unconditional giveaways by Kim Dae Jung's government in South Korea.
Today international food aid keeps the North Korean army fed and loyal, and the country barely afloat. But the people continue to suffer from hunger and oppression. And Pyongyang resorts to nuclear blackmail to extract even more international aid, while retreating from a very tentative agenda of structural reform and opening-up that the regime saw as a threat to its survival.
Defeating this nuclear blackmail requires a strategy that reaches beyond the nuclear program itself to the fundamental nature of the totalitarian regime. The regime is adept at playing the nationalist card with its nuclear program, propagandizing to its people that the country must have nuclear weapons in order not to be made "America's slaves."
What the North Korean government fears most is that its people will awake from their isolation and ignorance. That is why it imprisons those who listen to foreign broadcasts. Yet more and more are doing so. Despite the regime's cruel suppression, people's desire to know about the world continues to grow.
Kim Jong Il's regime is in an advanced state of decay. Bribery and corruption are rampant. So is organized crime. The regime is so desperately short of resources it cannot even pay and equip its security apparatus properly. More and more North Koreans (in the tens of thousands) have escaped across the border to China. A few, like me, have made their way eventually to South Korea or to other destinations. The regime is sustained only by force, fear and external resources. It is time to deny it that last prop.
The United States should increase radio broadcasting to the North, expose the regime's human rights atrocities and condition economic assistance on a complete closure of the concentration camps and a transparent and direct distribution of food to those North Koreans really in need. If other key states cooperate in these actions, the regime will be faced with a choice of fundamental change or collapse.
Cheol-Hwan Kang, who writes for the Chosun Ilbo newspaper in Seoul, spent 10 years in a North Korean prison camp, where he and his family were sent when he was 9. He defected to South Korea in 1992. He and two other prison camp survivors will be honored July 16 by the National Endowment for Democracy for their work on behalf of human rights in North Korea.
----
N Korea 'reprocesses' nuclear rods
Fuel rods at Yongbyon nuclear facility
Sunday, 13 July, 2003
BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3062171.stm
The North is thought to have stored 8,000 spent fuel rods North Korea is claiming to have reprocessed nuclear fuel rods that could produce enough plutonium for several atom bombs, according to a South Korean news agency.
It follows earlier reports from intelligence agencies that the process appears to be under way.
The US and South Korean governments have yet to confirm that North Korea is pushing ahead with the development of nuclear weapons. But on Sunday, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said he was concerned that tensions over Pyongyang's nuclear programme could deteriorate into outright hostilities.
Mr Howard, speaking in Australia before leaving for a visit to the Philippines, Japan and South Korea, said North Korea was a rogue state and "clearly in breach of international obligations".
This is a very dangerous situation Australian Prime Minister John Howard
Timeline: Nuclear crisis Since international monitors were expelled from North Korea six months ago, it has been hard for the outside world to know exactly what is happening at the country's nuclear facilities.
American satellites and spy planes have been keeping watch, but US officials concede their intelligence is imperfect.
Elaborate bluff?
But in recent days there have been a series of reports that the North has reprocessed spent nuclear fuel - the final step in the creation of weapons-grade plutonium for atom bombs.
The South Korean news agency, Yonhap, says North Korean diplomats told US State Department officials in New York that the process was completed on 30 June.
Japanese newspapers earlier quoted US intelligence as saying that a by-product of reprocessing, known as Krypton 85, had been detected in the air near the North's nuclear plants.
Mr Howard said diplomatic pressure was needed to return North Korea to the international community.
"We're dealing with a country that is not operating, as it were, within the square. This is a very dangerous situation," Mr Howard told reporters last week.
South Korea's intelligence agency believes reprocessing has begun, but the BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says there is still confusion and ambiguity.
None of the governments in the region has officially accused the North of reprocessing.
The South Koreans say the evidence is still inconclusive and may even be part of an elaborate bluff by the regime in Pyongyang.
A decade ago the US made it clear that North Korea risked sanctions or even bombing raids if it increased its stockpile of plutonium.
The Bush administration has been less explicit, but diplomats say whatever its real intentions, North Korea is playing an extremely dangerous game.
-------- us politics
Rumsfeld and Rice Adjust Defense of Iraq-Africa Claim
July 13, 2003
New York Times
By JAMES RISEN
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/13/international/worldspecial/13CND-INTEL.html
WASHINGTON, July 13 - Senior Bush administration officials adjusted their defense today of President Bush's claim in his State of the Union address that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa, insisting that the phrasing was accurate even if some of the underlying evidence was unsubstantiated.
Condeleeza Rice, the national security adviser, and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said in separate appearances on Sunday television talk shows that the disputed sentence in Mr. Bush's January speech was carefully hedged, enough that it could still be considered accurate today.
While continuing to acknowledge, as the White House and the Central Intelligence Agency did last week, that the phrase should not have been uttered, they emphasized today that the British had indeed, as Mr. Bush said, reported Iraq's interest in acquiring African uranium.
In his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, Mr. Bush, contended that Saddam Hussein was pursuing efforts to develop a nuclear bomb. Among other elements he cited to make his case, he said, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Dr. Rice, in an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," said: "The statement that he made was indeed accurate. The British government did say that."
And Mr. Rumsfeld said on the NBC News program "Meet the Press": "It turns out that it's technically correct what the president said, that the U.K. does - did say that - and still says that. They haven't changed their mind, the United Kingdom intelligence people."
On the ABC News program "This Week," Mr. Rumsfeld added: "It didn't rise to the standard of a presidential speech, but it's not known, for example, that it was inaccurate. In fact, people think it was technically accurate."
The legalistic defense of the phrasing seemed to signal a shift in the focus of the White House's strategy in dealing with the political fallout over Mr. Bush's public use of evidence that was based in part on fabricated documents and in part on uncorroborated reports from abroad.
It came after a week in which the White House first repudiated the statement and then blamed the Central Intelligence Agency for allowing Mr. Bush to make it. On Friday, George Tenet, director of central intelligence, accepted responsibility, saying, "These 16 words should never have been included in the text written for the president."
But the bout of fingerpointing between the White House and the agency concerning the African uranium only served to intensify the criticism of the administration for its handling of prewar intelligence on Iraq. Rather than quelling the controversy, the White House stoked it through official statements, providing an opening for Democratic leaders to attack the administration's handling of the intelligence. So today effort by Dr. Rice and Mr. Rumsfeld appeared to be a response by the White House to turn down the flame on a hot story that the White House itself had helped ignite just days earlier.
Some White House officials suggested that the public is less interested in the story's ins and outs than the news media and the political opposition, and that this is why the administration has chosen this approach.
In the months before the invasion of Iraq, President Bush and his advisers frequently cited classified intelligence reports that they said provided proof that Iraq was both developing weapons of mass destruction and had links to Osama bin Laden and other terrorists. Mr. Bush and his advisers said the threat posed by Iraq's development of those weapons and the possibility that Saddam Hussein might share them with terrorists made it necessary to start a war to overthrow the Iraqi government.
Since American forces occupied the country, however, they have not discovered conclusive evidence of the existence of such weapons in Iraq's possession, and have also failed to discover conclusive proof that Iraq had forged a terrorist alliance with Al Qaeda.
The failure to discover any weapons of mass destruction has led to intense scrutiny of the administration's approach before the war. A group of retired C.I.A. officers has conducted an internal review at the agency of the prewar intelligence reports on Iraq, and Congress has also begun to investigate the handling of the evidence.
In his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, Mr. Bush cited several reports in arguing that Mr. Hussein was trying to develop a nuclear bomb.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990's that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon, and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb," Mr. Bush stated. "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide."
Since the speech, the evidence concerning both the uranium purchases and the aluminum tubes has come into question. In March, the I.A.E.A. reported that documents that formed the basis for reports that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger were forgeries, though the C.I.A. had doubts about the claims of the African uranium shipments long before that. Intelligence officials say the C.I.A. told British officials last fall that they doubted the evidence on the matter, which London was including in a publicly released white paper.
And in the days before the Mr. Bush's address, government officials say, a proliferation expert from the C.I.A. discussed the evidence on Niger with a proliferation expert from the National Security Council at the White House. The two men now have different recollections of their conversations on the matter, government officials say. Still, the end result was that the phrase in the speech did not refer specifically to Niger, but rather more generally to African uranium. Now, Dr. Rice and other American officials contend that other information about Iraq's efforts to buy uranium from African countries has not been discredited, so that Mr. Bush's statement should be considered accurate.
Dr. Rice sought today both to play down the significance of the reference in the speech and at the same time defend its use.
"It is ludicrous to suggest that the president of the United States went to war on the question of whether Saddam Hussein sought uranium from Africa," Dr. Rice said on Fox. "This was part of a very broad case that the president laid out in the State of the Union and other places."
But she added that "not only was the statement accurate, there were statements of this kind in the National Intelligence Estimate. And the British themselves stand by that statement to this very day."
--------
Bush Aides Seek to Put Out Credibility Firestorm
July 13, 2003
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-iraq-usa-intelligence.html
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top aides to President Bush insisted on Sunday he did not hype Iraq's suspected weapons of mass destruction as they sought to put out a political firestorm ignited by a disputed statement he made in his case for war.
But questions about Bush's credibility persisted, threatening to further erode public support for the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq and create more difficulty at home for U.S. ally British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Appearing on Sunday television shows, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeated that it was a mistake for Bush to cite in his State of the Union address a British finding, which U.S. intelligence was unable to confirm, that former Saddam Hussein sought to buy uranium from Africa for Iraq's nuclear program.
The White House first acknowledged the error last week. CIA Director George Tenet accepted responsibility, saying his agency should not have signed off on the one-sentence inclusion in the president's speech last January.
But Rice and Rumsfeld brushed off suggestions Bush had manipulated intelligence in making his case for war.
``The notion that the president of the United States took the country to war because he was concerned with one sentence about whether Saddam Hussein sought uranium in Africa is clearly ludicrous,'' Rice told CBS's ``Face the Nation.'' ``And this has gotten to that proportion.''
``End of story,'' Rumsfeld declared on ABC's ``This Week.''
On CNN's ``Late Edition'' Rice also said Tenet should not step down. ``Absolutely not. The president has confidence in George Tenet,'' she said.
Yet, with recent polls showing an erosion of support for the Iraqi operation, there was heavy criticism from Democrats, some of whom hope to replace Bush in the White House in 2004.
``This is not an issue of George Tenet. This is an issue of George Bush,'' Florida Sen. Bob Graham, a Democratic presidential hopeful, told NBC's ``Meet the Press.''
``There was a selective use of intelligence -- that is, that information which was consistent with the administration's policy was given front-row seat,'' said Graham, the former chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the senior Democrat on the intelligence committee, said in a radio interview the panel may call Tenet to answer questions this week. But he criticized Rice for being ``dishonorable'' in letting Tenet take the blame and said she must have known about the suspect uranium report long before Bush's State of the Union address.
``The entire intelligence community has been very skeptical about this from the very beginning,'' Rockefeller told National Public Radio's ``All Things Considered'' program.
``And she (Rice) has her own director of intelligence, she has her own Iraq and Africa specialists, and it's just beyond me that she didn't know about this, and that she has decided to make George Tenet the fall person... I think it's dishonorable.''
Rice went to lengths to state that the British intelligence was not inaccurate, just unproven by the United States. ``We have never said that the British report was wrong,'' she said.
Blair arrives in Washington on Thursday for talks with Bush. Both leaders have been criticized for overplaying intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, one of the prime justifications cited in the attack on Iraq. Three months after Saddam's fall, no such weapons have been found.
----
In Her Own Words An excerpt from Carol Moseley Braun's stump speech
Sunday, July 13, 2003
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A47010-2003Jul12?language=printer
George W. Bush has mismanaged the economy in ways that are neither compassionate nor conservative.
To have transformed a budget surplus into a $300 billion deficit in two years gives conservatives a bad name.
To give tax cuts to the richest Americans while passing along a ballooning debt to our children is the opposite of compassionate.
To wreak havoc on the economy, creating the uncertainty that feeds recession and inflation simultaneously, is an outrage, and America deserves better.
Friends, these are costs the American people have every right to question and that we have every reason to oppose.
This administration's extreme political agenda will bleed the very lifeblood of our liberty under cover of war and leave us more vulnerable to surveillance and control than we have ever had to endure in this country. I am running for president, because I don't want my generation to be the first one to leave its children with less liberty, with less economic security, with less opportunity.
I believe we can salvage the freedom, the hope, the opportunity this land can still give. Our government must play its part to prepare Americans for good jobs; to ensure they can earn a living wage; to ensure they can raise their children, live with dignity, and retire with some confidence in their quality of life.
The cornerstone of this American dream is still education. This administration has hijacked the concept of leaving no child behind and turned it into an empty slogan. The very programs they have passed are being cut back in the president's latest budget. Head Start is under attack. After-school programs, which do so much to protect our children from drugs and crime, are to be gutted by 40 percent. Meanwhile, our public schools are still crumbling.
Today, the federal government contributes about 6 percent to the funding of our schools. As long as this is true, no amount of clever experimentation with school choice and mandatory testing will give our children the education they deserve.
As president, I will reform the way we pay for schools, and lift the cost of school funding off of the local property tax. There is no education reform without investment, and I will fight for federal investment to rebuild and equip our schools, so that once again our children can have the world's best education. The rungs of the ladder of opportunity are crafted in the classroom, and our nation's economic security depends on our commitment to quality education for every child and higher education for every person who wants it. Good schools must become a national priority. We can make it so. And when we do, we will build a 21st-century workforce that will keep our country strong.
----
Gephardt Calls for Probe on Iraq Issues
July 13, 2003
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Gephardt-Iowa.html
DUBUQUE, Iowa (AP) -- Rep. Richard Gephardt, challenged on his backing for a resolution authorizing war in Iraq, called Sunday for a ``full, complete, bipartisan'' investigation of the circumstances surrounding Congress' decision to authorize the war.
``We've got to make sure we get all the facts out,'' said the Democratic presidential candidate from Missouri. Advertisement
Gephardt said he's troubled by some of the arguments President Bush used to make his case for war, including a claim in last year's State of the Union speech that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein sought nuclear materials from Africa.
``I want a full, complete bipartisan inquiry into this to find out all the facts,'' he said.
Acknowledging his vote for the resolution authorizing force, Gephardt said he urged Bush to work with the United Nations-led inspection program looking for weapons of mass destruction.
He said he now wants to know whether Bush misled Congress and the country, or if Bush himself was misled by faulty intelligence.
Since the war, no such weapons have been found and questions have been raised about Bush's arguments for war. Intelligence officials have conceded they should have deleted the nuclear claim from Bush's speech because U.S. intelligence sources could not verify it.
Gephardt was questioned about the issue when he appeared at the latest ``Hear it from the Heartland'' forum, sponsored by Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.
While the head of the CIA has taken responsibility for the nuclear claim, Gephardt argued that the president is ultimately responsible.
``There used to be a sign on the president's desk that said 'the buck stops here,''' said Gephardt. ``That sign ought to be back there.''
Gephardt argued that Bush has been ineffective in his effort to combat terrorism and is ``not leveling with us about what needs to be done.''
North Carolina Sen. John Edwards was briefly diverted from touting his economic plan Sunday by an Iowa farmer critical of his agriculture policies.
Jerry Burger, a fourth generation family farmer, stopped the Democratic presidential candidate as he crossed the street Sunday in Waukee and engaged him in a spirited argument. The town of 5,126 is near West Des Moines, one of Iowa's fastest growing cities.
``This is some of the best land in the world and it's getting bulldozed and turned into malls and all kinds of development,'' Burger said. ``All you want is more regulations on livestock production and farm production. Farmers leave faster the more rules you make.''
Edwards, who had just delivered a speech focusing on his economic policies in the town square, told Burger he was wrong.
``We're actually working very hard to protect farmland,'' he said. ``I've worked hard with our farmers in North Carolina to make sure that they stay in business. They're a huge part of what I've done in the United States Senate.''
Edwards introduced environmental initiatives last week calling for limits on air and water pollution from confinement feeding operations and tightening regulations on spraying the waste as fertilizer.
Burger, who raises hogs and crops on a 2,000 acres near Waukee, said Edwards was as ``far left as you can get'' on the environment.
Edwards turned and walked away after it was apparent he wasn't swaying Burger's opinions.
On President Bush's home turf in Austin, Texas, Democratic hopeful John Kerry on Sunday lambasted the president's record on the issues of health care, education and immigration, while making a powerful pitch for the sought-after Hispanic vote.
``Last election, he promised so much to win your votes,'' Kerry said. ``But President Bush won't be running on his rhetoric this time, he'll be running on his record.''
Kerry, one of nine candidates for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, was a speaker at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group.
Howard Dean, another candidate, was scheduled to address the group Monday.
``This president is accountable for making a mockery of the words 'leave no child behind,''' Kerry said, adding that one in four Hispanic children in the United States are without health insurance. Kerry said that, if elected, he would fight to ensure health coverage for every child.
Raul Yzaguirre, president of NCLR, also criticized Bush's record as president, calling his administration ``two and a half years of neglect, disinterest and disrespect.''
Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio blasted the Bush administration Sunday for its handling of intelligence information in the leadup to the war with Iraq.
Kucinich, a Democratic presidential candidate, also criticized the administration for inflating the Pentagon's budget and heightening the nation's fear, which led America into conflict.
``I think the American people are aware this administration has engaged in a pattern of deceit,'' said Kucinich, who spoke at a peace forum at Drake University in Des Moines. ``Our country is being distorted by fear.''
The four-term congressman told reporters that Vice President Dick Cheney put pressure on the CIA to ``come up with intelligence that would fit the administration's preconceived notions'' about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Kucinich also called CIA Director George Tenet, who has been the focus of criticism over intelligence information that President Bush presented in his State of the Union speech this year, a scapegoat.
``Everyone in America knows this,'' Kucinich said. ``Tenet is the fall guy.''
Associated Press writers David Pitt and Amy Lorentzen in Iowa and April Castro in Texas contributed to this report.
----
Kerry and Dean Set on a Collision Course
Pointed Toward Same Democratic Destination, They're Also Vying for Same Voters
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 13, 2003
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A48741-2003Jul12?language=printer
HOPKINTON, N.H. -- They have circled one another warily for months, a study in political contrasts. One is the tall, cool Bostonian who exudes stature and experience in the world; the other the short, intense Vermont transplant who projects energy, passion and a determination to upend the politics of his own party.
Now Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) and former Vermont governor Howard Dean are on a collision course in their bids for the Democratic presidential nomination. They skirmished briefly in the spring over patriotism, courage and the qualities required of a commander in chief in an age of terrorism. With Dean's sudden emergence, a decisive clash appears inevitable, one that will have a significant impact on the outcome of the Democratic race.
Along with Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), Kerry and Dean make up the top tier of the Democratic field of nine candidates, but by dint of geography and demography, the two New Englanders often find themselves fishing in the same pond, fighting over the same voters: white, liberal, moderately affluent, well-educated, mostly antiwar, vehemently anti-President Bush.
These prospective Democratic voters find themselves in a head-vs.-heart debate over whether to support Kerry or Dean. In Kerry, they see someone with the credentials to be president, but they worry about his passion and ability to excite an electorate. In Dean, they see the opposite, a blunt and inspirational politician willing to challenge Bush, but they wonder whether someone with his experience and views can win.
Tony Keefer is one of those conflicted voters. He slapped a "Dean for President" sign on his bicycle the other day and rode it in the Independence Day parade in Ashland, N.H. When more than 200 people gathered for a Dean appearance here in Hopkinton on a lovely New England evening on Thursday, Keefer was among them.
But he said he wasn't ready to make a commitment. "I'm for someone I'm convinced can beat Bush, and I'm not there yet with Dean, nor with Kerry," he said.
"Experience is very important," Keefer added. "Dean has used, quite ineffectively in my opinion, that he wants to make the U.S. Vermont, to do things for the U.S. that he did for Vermont. I find it very specious. Kerry on the other hand has not come across with a dynamic enough approach to turn the heads of people like myself, who were [Sen. John] McCain voters. . . . The guy who can get it can really give Bush a run for the money."
Neither Dean nor Kerry likes to admit how much each stands in the other's path to the nomination, although the regular potshots between their staffs prove that reality. Dean said there are no hard feelings between the men, although their earlier engagement suggested there is hostility coupled with annoyance.
"There's certainly no animosity -- certainly on my side," Dean said last week between fundraising calls at his Burlington, Vt., office.
Kerry, asked about Dean during an interview at The Washington Post on Thursday, refused to be drawn into a discussion about how the Dean insurgency has affected his own candidacy.
Here in New Hampshire, for now at least, the race is a two-man, neighbor-to-neighbor contest, with all the other candidates hoping to profit from the fallout of the expected Dean-Kerry showdown in the fall. In Iowa, Dean and Kerry, looking for an advantage that could help them in New Hampshire, are pressing Gephardt, the favorite there and a candidate appealing directly to the party's blue-collar constituency.
But as they campaigned through New Hampshire last week, it was clear how much they are paying attention to one another.
When Kerry, who last fall voted to give Bush the power to go to war in Iraq, suddenly scheduled a news conference Thursday morning to denounce the administration's postwar policy there, Dean, who opposed the war, laid on a news conference of his own to challenge the administration over misleading the public on the war.
As Dean tried to tone down some of the anger that has marked his rise in the Democratic race, Kerry repeatedly told audiences how angry he was: with Bush's foreign policy, tax cuts and energy policy. And as Dean has begun to mobilize an Internet-organized cadre of supporters and donors around the country, Kerry promised audiences to do the same.
Standing in the American Legion hall in Nashua, N.H., on Wednesday night, Kerry declared, "I'm going to build the greatest grass-roots effort we've ever had in this country in years, and we are going to go out and take back our own democracy."
Dean argues that only he can create that grass-roots following and that he has the only strategy to defeat Bush. "I'm the only one who can bring in legions of disaffected voters. None of the other Democrats can," Dean said in an interview. He said of his opponents: "Their strategy is: 'Let's go to the middle, and the base will follow.' My strategy is: 'Let's get the base energized, and then the independents will follow.' . . . I don't believe Bush can be beaten by doing what we did in 2000."
Whether he can attract independents or moderates is a principal challenge for Dean, given the angry, antiwar rhetoric that has fueled his support. The former governor says that he is not as liberal as he has been portrayed, given his pro-gun and pro-balanced budget views, but other Democrats question whether he can easily move himself toward the center without demoralizing the supporters who have signed on to his campaign.
It doesn't take long to see how much the two candidates are competing with one another for votes. Go to a Dean rally or a Kerry rally, and those in attendance almost universally say the choice is between the two, with occasional interest in one of the others in the Democratic field. "That's all I hear my friends talking about," said Sally Helms, a New Hampshire Democrat who attended a Kerry house party in Concord, N.H., last Tuesday.
Among others there were Paul Hodes, a Concord lawyer, and his wife, Peggo Hartsmann Hodes, a voice teacher in Concord. "I really appreciate that Howard Dean is pushing the envelope and he's pushing the Democratic Party hard," Paul Hodes said. But after supporting Bill Bradley in 2000, he said, "I can't afford to be led only by my heart. I've got to be practical."
He is supporting Kerry. His wife said she sees admirable qualities in Kerry, but she was actively against going to war in Iraq and grilled Kerry about his vote. After he finished, she said she leaned toward Dean because she wanted his ideas to have an impact on the Democratic Party. "In New Hampshire," she said, "you can have an impact on the dialogue. I can support an underdog candidate."
Marian Welton of Nashua came to hear Kerry on Wednesday night, another undecided Democrat looking mostly at Dean and Kerry. She said at this point Kerry looks more like a winner, but that Dean's candor reminded her of Arizona's McCain (R), who won the GOP primary here four years ago, and she regarded that as a plus.
How will she make up her mind in the Kerry-Dean sweepstakes? "When one or the other shows more promise in being able to beat Bush," she replied.
-------- MILITARY
-------- afghanistan
Afghans Said to Drive Out Pakistanis
July 13, 2003
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Pakistan-Afghan-Border.html
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- In days of clashes, Afghan fighters drove out Pakistani soldiers who had crossed the border into Afghanistan, an Afghan commander said Sunday.
Pakistan denies its troops crossed into Afghanistan, though thousands of its soldiers are carrying out a sweep against armed tribesmen on the Pakistani side of the border.
Repeated reports of incursions, however, have sparked protests by Afghans -- including a mob attack last week on the Pakistani Embassy in Kabul, where several hundred Afghans ransacked rooms and smashed windows.
Afghan and Pakistani forces fought for seven days in eastern Afghanistan, leaving three Afghans wounded, until the Pakistanis withdrew, Afghan Gen. Mohammed Mustafa told The Associated Press by satellite telephone from Yaqubi, less than a mile from the border.
``We captured Yaqubi ... We captured their posts,'' he said. ``All kinds of weapons were used. Neither side hesitated to use whatever weapons we wanted.''
He said nearly 1,000 Afghans have left their homes in border villages to avoid getting caught in the crossfire. Mustafa said his unit was deployed to the region two weeks ago after the border clashes were first reported.
He said a Pakistani force of soldiers and paramilitary troops had come several miles into Afghanistan from a region about 60 miles northwest of the border town of Peshawar.
In Islamabad, Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed rejected Mustafa's allegations. ``There is no truth in them,'' he told the AP. ``Pakistan is within its own territory. Pakistan has not gone into somebody's territory. We do not need to go into somebody's territory. We respect the border with Afghanistan.''
Pakistani troops have been carrying out a major assault on tribesmen in a lawless region on its side of the border where tribes hold control and federal forces rarely try to intervene. The region lies just across the frontier from the area where the Afghans reported incursions.
Backed by helicopters, around 4,000 Pakistani paramilitary soldiers are combing parts of the North West Province to hunt down tribesmen suspected of attacking a gas pipeline and carrying out kidnappings and robberies.
The forces have arrested nearly 50 tribesmen in the operation since it was launched Friday, said Capt. Mohammed Imran, a spokesman for the Sindh Rangers.
-------- asia
Small-scale fighting taking place in Laos: Thai, Vietnamese sources
AFP
Sunday July 13
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/030713/1/3cih5.html
Small-scale fighting has broken out in Laos, Thai and Vietnamese sources said, a day after a US-based Lao exile group claimed pro-democracy forces had begun a "revolution" to topple the communist regime.
A military official in Hanoi confirmed skirmishes had broken out in some regions of the country and said the situation was "tense but under control" Sunday.
"We have information that there has been low-key fighting in Laos over the past couple of days," he said requesting anonymity.
The official declined to reveal any more details nor say if Vietnamese troops had been sent to help their Lao allies.
Meanwhile, police in Thailand said an armed Laotian group had Saturday opened fire on an immigration post in the Lao province of Sainyabuli, while Thai forces exchanged fire with a second group inside Thailand.
A police officer in Thailand's northern Chaluamphakeat town said a 12-year-old girl was injured in the checkpoint shooting.
He added that the group involved in the second incident had escaped into Laos after a 10-minute firefight with Thai border forces.
The reported incidents follow claims by the Fact Finding Commission (FFC) exile group that the Lao Citizens Movement for Democracy (LCMD), made up of resistance groups, local militia and army defectors, had begun an uprising on Saturday.
The FFC, which is based in California, said pro-democracy forces had engaged Lao military forces, which are backed up by Vietnamese troops, in 11 provinces across the impoverished country.
Vietnam maintained an official military presence in Laos until 1989 and continues to exert considerable influence over its fellow communist neighbour.
Hanoi has repeatedly denied its troops are still active in the country, helping the secretive Lao regime eliminate the remnants of a US-backed guerrilla army left over from the Vietnam War.
The Lao foreign ministry repeated Sunday its earlier denial that any fighting was underway.
Diplomats in Vientiane also said they had not received reports of clashes, but one western envoy said he heard rumours that "something like this was brewing".
"There is a basis for anti-regime activity in Laos but they have always been extremely low-key and easily suppressed," said Carl Thayer, a Southeast Asia expert at the Australian Defence Force Academy.
"But if the reports have any grain of truth one would expect Laos to turn immediately to Vietnam for assistance and Vietnam would respond positively but quietly."
Sumbun Saiyavoo, an FFC researcher based in Bangkok, said on Saturday that he was informed of the uprising by former Royal Lao Army officer Kham Koie Sanasery, who is reportedly leading the pro-democracy forces.
Confirmation that skirmishes were taking place follows Wednesday's release and expulsion from Laos of two European journalists and their American translator after more than a month in detention.
They were arrested on June 4 after sneaking into the country on tourist visas to report on the desperate struggle of surviving "freedom fighters" who were banded together by the US Central Intelligence Agency to fight its secret war in Laos.
It also follows a handful of deadly attacks on passenger buses this year that the government has blamed on "bandits" but which diplomats believe were the work of anti-government forces seeking international attention.
Spokespeople for the LCMD told the FFC that their goal was to overthrow the authoritarian regime and replace it with a democratically elected government.
"These groups, who are strongly pro-democracy, believe their only chance for survival is to aggressively pursue their enemies and bring an end to an oppressive communist regime," the FFC said in a statement.
"The people in the jungle have been crying out for help. No one seems to have been listening," it added. "For them it is better 'to die today, than die tomorrow'."
Ethnic Hmong made up around 60 percent of the CIA-sponsored army, but other minority groups, as well as lowland Lao, participated in the fight against North Vietnamese troops and Pathet Lao forces during the Vietnam War.
After the 1973 Paris Peace Accord, which paved the way for the US withdrawal from the region, the ragtag fighters were abandoned to their fate.
Belgian photo-journalist Thierry Falise, one of the three foreign nationals expelled from Laos, told reporters in Bangkok on Thursday that the group of 600 Hmong stragglers they met were facing a humanitarian crisis.
-------- britain
Core of weapons case crumbling
By Paul Reynolds world affairs correspondent
BBC News Online
Sunday, 13 July, 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3063361.stm
Of the nine main conclusions in the British government document "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction", not one has been shown to be conclusively true.
The confusion evident about one of the claims, that Iraq sought uranium from Niger despite having no civilian nuclear programme, is the latest example of the process under which the allegations made so confidently last September have been undermined.
The CIA has admitted that the claim should not have been in President Bush's State of the Union speech.
The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa President George W Bush in State of the Union address It turns out that the CIA and the British intelligence agency MI6 passed each other like ships in the night and did not share information.
Correspondents attending a Foreign Office briefing last week were astounded when an official remarked that there had been no duty on Britain to pass its information on Niger, which it obtained from "a foreign intelligence service", to Washington as it was "up to the other intelligence service to do so."
Apparently there is a protocol among intelligence services which could not be broken despite the grave nature of the information and the use to which it was put - in this case, to help justify going to war.
Suspected mobile lab Tests on a suspected mobile lab have not been unambiguous
Even a CIA statement of explanation issued late last week was not quite correct.
It said that the President's famous 16 words were accurate in that the "British Government report said that Iraq sought uranium from Africa."
Mr Bush did not in fact simply mention a British "report" on the uranium.
He actually said that the British had "learned" that Iraq had sought these supplies. He therefore hardened up the position.
Democratic Senator Carl Levin said on Sunday that this suggested intent by the White House to exaggerate the threat from Iraq.
The nine main conclusions and the broad evidence which has emerged about them are these:
1. "Iraq has a useable chemical and biological weapons capability which has included recent production of chemical and biological agents."
No evidence of Iraq's useable capability has been found in terms of manufacturing plants, bombs, rockets or actual chemical or biological agents, nor any sign of recent production.
A mysterious truck has been found which the CIA says is a mobile biological facility but this has not been accepted by all experts.
2. "Saddam continues to attach great importance to the possession of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles... He is determined to retain these capabilities."
He may well have attached great importance to the possession of such weapons but none has been found. The meaning of the word "capability" is now key to this.
If the US and UK governments can show that Iraq maintained an active expertise, amounting to a "programme", they will claim their case has been made that Iraq violated UN resolutions.
3. "Iraq can deliver chemical and biological agents using an extensive range of shells, bombs, sprayers and missiles."
Nothing major has been found so far. There was one aircraft adapted with a sprayer but its capability was small.
4. "Iraq continues to work on developing nuclear weapons... Uranium has been sought from Africa."
The UN watchdog the IAEA said there was no evidence for this up to the start of the war and none has been found since. It is possible, though, that a case could be made from a shopping list of items needed for such a programme.
These include vacuum pumps, magnets, winding and balancing machines - all listed in the British dossier. No details about these purchasing attempts have been provided.
A claim that aluminium tubes were sought for this process was not wholly accepted by the British assessment though it was by the American and has subsequently not been proved.
The uranium claim is currently under question, though the British Government stands by its allegation.
5. "Iraq possesses extended-range versions of the Scud ballistic missile."
No Scuds have been found. The British said Iraq might have up to 20, the CIA said up to 12.
6. "Iraq's current military planning specifically envisages the use of chemical and biological weapons."
That may have been the case but direct evidence from serving Iraqi officers will be needed to prove it.
7. "The Iraqi military are able to deploy these weapons (chemical and biological) within 45 minutes of a decision to do so."
The 45 minute claim is currently under question. It is said to come from "a single source" probably a defector or Iraqi officer. It has not been proven.
8. "Iraq... is already taking steps to conceal and disperse sensitive equipment."
This is a focus of the current American and British investigation being carried out in Iraq by the Iraq Survey Group. One Iraqi scientist has come forward to say that he hid blueprints of centrifuges under his roses but that was in 1991.
If a pattern of concealment can be established, it would add to the credibility of the allegations that Iraq wanted to defy the UN.
9. "Iraq's chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic missile programme are well funded."
Evidence will be needed from serving Iraqi officials backed up by documents. Again, if a pattern of funding can be established, a case against Iraq could be made but if the actual programmes did not exist, was the funding of much use and in any case, how much was it?
President Bush and Prime Minister Blair will be meeting in Washington later this week when they will discuss their strategy to justify the claims.
----
Blair ignored CIA weapons warning
Intelligence breakdown after Britain dismissed US doubts over Iraq nuclear link to Niger
Kamal Ahmed, political editor
Sunday July 13, 2003
The Observer
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,997243,00.html
Britain and America suffered a complete breakdown in relations over vital evidence against Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction, refusing to share information and keeping each other in the dark over key elements of the case against the Iraqi dictator.
In a remarkable letter released last night, the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, reveals a catalogue of disputes between the two countries, lending more ammunition to critics of the war and exerting fresh pressure on the Prime Minister. The letter to the Foreign Affairs Committee, which investigated the case for war against Iraq, reveals that Britain ignored a request from the CIA to remove claims that Saddam was trying to buy nuclear material from Niger, despite concerns that the allegations were bogus. It also details a government decision to block information going to the CIA because it was too sensitive.
As diplomatic relations between America and Britain become increasingly strained over Iraq's WMD, Straw said that the Government had separate evidence of the Niger link, which it has not shared with the US.
The revelations come just four days before Tony Blair travels to America for his toughest visit there since he came to power in 1997. As well as WMD, the Prime Minister will also raise Britain's 'serious concerns' over the treatment of British citizens held at Guantanamo Bay.
Straw's letter reveals:
· That evidence given to the CIA by the former US ambassador to Gabon, Joseph Wilson - that Niger officials had denied any link - was never shared with the British.
· That Foreign Office officials were left to read reports of Wilson's findings in the press only days before they were raised as part of the committee's inquiry into the war.
· That when the CIA, having seen a draft of the September dossier on Iraq's WMD, demanded that the Niger claim be removed, it was ignored because the agency did not back it up with 'any explanation'.
Although publicly the two governments are trying to maintain a united front, the admission two days ago by the head of the CIA, George Tenet, that President Bush should never have made the claim about the Niger connection to Iraq, has left British officials exposed.
Last night, Downing Street and Foreign Office sources said that 'they would not blink' over the Niger claims. One Downing Street figure said that they were based on intelligence from a third country that was reliable. 'We are not backing down,' he said.
Another official said that the claim was based on the 'intelligence assessment' made at the time, leaving the door open to a climbdown if the intelligence is found to be wrong.
'I want to make it clear that neither I nor, to the best of my knowledge, any UK officials were aware of Ambassador Wilson's visit until reference first appeared in the press,' Straw said in the letter.
'The media has reported that the CIA expressed reservations to us about this element [the Niger connection] of the September dossier. This is correct. However, the US comment was unsupported by explanation and UK officials were confident that the dossier's statement was based on reliable intelligence which had not been shared with the US. A judgment was therefore made to retain it.'
Straw said that the Joint Intelligence Committee's assessment of the Iraqi nuclear threat did not just rest on attempts to procure uranium. There was also other evidence of links between the two countries and attempts to sign export deals.
Robin Cook, the former Foreign Secretary who has become a trenchant critic of the Government's case for war against Iraq, said that it 'stretched credibility' to say that the Americans and the British had failed to share such basic information.
'From all I know of the intimate relationship between the CIA and the Secret Intelligence Services, I find it hard to credit that there was such a breakdown of communication between them,' Cook said.
'It is time the Government came clean and published the evidence. The longer it delays, the greater the suspicion will become that it didn't really believe it itself.
'There is one simple question it must answer. Why did its evidence of the uranium deal not convince the CIA? If it was not good enough to be in the President's address, it was not good enough to go in the Prime Minister's dossier.'
Yesterday, in another damaging broadside, Richard Butler, who was executive chairman of the United Nations Special Commission to Iraq from 1997 to 1999, said that anyone who had claimed that there was a link between Niger and Iraq should resign.
Referring to Australian politicians who had made similar claims, only to withdraw them and apologise later, Butler said: 'In the justification for the war, these claims were false and known to be false.
'A Minister who misleads Parliament must accept responsibility for it and resign. Ministers must be held responsible, not public servants.'
----
Britain Denies U.S. Rift Over Iraq Intelligence
Sun July 13, 2003
By Dominic Evans
(Reuters)
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=134GKSWH4O0HACRBAEOCFFA?type=topNews&storyID=3080177
LONDON - Britain tried to brush off reports Sunday of a serious rift with Washington over its intelligence on Saddam Hussein's nuclear ambitions used by the two allies to justify invading Iraq.
The United States, which toppled Saddam with British support three months ago, said last week its claim that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger was based on forged documents.
That embarrassing retreat left Prime Minister Tony Blair, already under fire from domestic critics and former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, increasingly isolated as he refused to withdraw Britain's charge that Saddam sought uranium in Africa.
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said in a letter published on Saturday Britain stood by intelligence it had seen -- but not passed on to its chief ally -- supporting the Niger link and said U.S. doubts had been "unsupported by explanation." His comments triggered speculation of a split between the CIA and Britain's intelligence service, known as MI6, which have traditionally cooperated closely.
"All this stuff about rifts and rows just doesn't hold water," a spokesman for Blair said, insisting that the CIA had not called into question the intelligence Britain had relied on.
Blair flies to Washington Thursday for talks with President Bush, leaving behind calls from a former minister for his resignation and a growing sense of betrayal within his ruling Labor Party, which grudgingly backed the war.
Both Blair and Bush have faced accusations that they manipulated intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to make the case for military action. Three months after Saddam's downfall, no evidence of such weapons have been found in Iraq.
Former foreign minister Robin Cook, who resigned as Blair's leader in parliament on the eve of the Iraq war, urged the government Sunday to publish its evidence supporting the African uranium allegations.
"Why did their evidence not convince the CIA?" Cook told the Independent Sunday. "If it was not good enough to be in the president's address, it was not good enough to go in the Prime Minister's dossier."
Blair's government included the charge that Saddam sought uranium from Niger in a September 2002 dossier setting out the case for military action. Bush mentioned it in a January speech but the White House now says the claim was based on forgeries.
Another of Blair's vocal critics, former aid minister Clare Short, said he should resign before the criticism damaged Labour's re-election prospects. "The best solution for Tony would be if he planned to move on before it gets ever nastier," she told GMTV.
Blix delivered the latest blow to Blair Sunday, declaring in a newspaper interview that Britain committed a "fundamental mistake" when it said Saddam could deploy weapons of mass destruction at 45 minutes notice.
"It seems to me highly unlikely that there were any means of delivering biological or chemical weapon within 45 minutes," Blix told the Independent Sunday newspaper. "That seems pretty far off the mark to me."
----
Britain defends uranium data on Iraq
July 13, 2003
By Beth Gardiner
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030712-104211-3532r.htm
LONDON - Britain snapped back at the Bush administration yesterday after it cited London as the source of questionable information that President Bush used to bolster the case for war against Iraq in his State of the Union speech.
Prime Minister Tony Blair's office insisted that he still believes the disputed charge that Iraq sought uranium in Africa was true, saying Britain has reliable information it cannot share with Washington because it comes from foreign intelligence sources.
For the past week, the White House has faced a storm of criticism after it disavowed the accusation that Saddam Hussein's regime sought to buy uranium from Niger for a nuclear weapons program. The CIA said it had had doubts about the British claim.
In a letter to the House of Commons made public yesterday, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the CIA had expressed doubts to Britain about the uranium charge but did not specify what they were. Britain did not know until recently that the agency had sent an envoy to Niger who investigated the claims and discounted them, he added.
Mr. Straw defended Britain's publication of the claim in September in a dossier on reputed Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Despite the CIA reservations, British officials "were confident that the dossier's statement was based on reliable intelligence, which we had not shared with the U.S.," Mr. Straw wrote. "A judgment was therefore made to retain it."
One of the documents suggesting Iraq sought uranium in Niger for its reputed nuclear weapons program was exposed as a forgery. CIA Director George Tenet took responsibility Friday for including the claim in the president's speech.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair are scheduled to meet Thursday in Washington, where the British leader plans to address a joint session of Congress, according to his office.
Mr. Straw wrote in his letter to the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs that the CIA reservations over the claim were "unsupported by explanation," and that Britain had based its charge in part on intelligence it did not share with the United States.
The letter did not say why Britain declined to share the information with its ally, but Mr. Straw wrote that he had explained the reasons privately to the parliamentary committee.
A Blair spokesman said the information had come from foreign intelligence services and was "not ours to share." He declined to say what country or countries had been the source.
The International Atomic Energy Agency asked for information on the uranium assertions after London's dossier was published, but Britain did not provide any, U.N. officials said.
--------
Britain Denies U.S. Rift Over Iraq Intelligence
July 13, 2003
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-britain-iraq.html
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain tried to brush off reports Sunday of a serious rift with Washington over its intelligence on Saddam Hussein's nuclear ambitions used by the two allies to justify invading Iraq.
The United States, which toppled Saddam with British support three months ago, said last week its claim that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger was based on forged documents.
That embarrassing retreat left Prime Minister Tony Blair, already under fire from domestic critics and former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, increasingly isolated as he refused to withdraw Britain's charge that Saddam sought uranium in Africa.
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said in a letter published on Saturday Britain stood by intelligence it had seen -- but not passed on to its chief ally -- supporting the Niger link and said U.S. doubts had been ``unsupported by explanation.'' His comments triggered speculation of a split between the CIA and Britain's intelligence service, known as MI6, which have traditionally cooperated closely.
``All this stuff about rifts and rows just doesn't hold water,'' a spokesman for Blair said, insisting that the CIA had not called into question the intelligence Britain had relied on.
Blair flies to Washington Thursday for talks with President Bush, leaving behind calls from a former minister for his resignation and a growing sense of betrayal within his ruling Labor Party, which grudgingly backed the war.
Both Blair and Bush have faced accusations that they manipulated intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to make the case for military action. Three months after Saddam's downfall, no evidence of such weapons have been found in Iraq.
Former foreign minister Robin Cook, who resigned as Blair's leader in parliament on the eve of the Iraq war, urged the government Sunday to publish its evidence supporting the African uranium allegations.
``Why did their evidence not convince the CIA?'' Cook told the Independent Sunday. ``If it was not good enough to be in the president's address, it was not good enough to go in the Prime Minister's dossier.''
Blair's government included the charge that Saddam sought uranium from Niger in a September 2002 dossier setting out the case for military action. Bush mentioned it in a January speech but the White House now says the claim was based on forgeries.
Another of Blair's vocal critics, former aid minister Clare Short, said he should resign before the criticism damaged Labour's re-election prospects. ``The best solution for Tony would be if he planned to move on before it gets ever nastier,'' she told GMTV.
Blix delivered the latest blow to Blair Sunday, declaring in a newspaper interview that Britain committed a ``fundamental mistake'' when it said Saddam could deploy weapons of mass destruction at 45 minutes notice.
``It seems to me highly unlikely that there were any means of delivering biological or chemical weapon within 45 minutes,'' Blix told the Independent Sunday newspaper. ``That seems pretty far off the mark to me.''
-------- europe
Italy denies uranium claims role
Sunday, July 13, 2003
(AP)
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/07/13/sprj.irq..italy.uranium.ap/
ROME, Italy -- Italian intelligence services did not give the United States and Britain documents indicating that Iraq sought uranium in Africa to make nuclear weapons, the government said Sunday, denying media reports that it had a role in passing on the disputed claims.
The denial came after Italy's leading Corriere della Sera newspaper said Sunday that Italy's SISMI military intelligence agency had handed America and Britain documents indicating Saddam Hussein's regime wanted to buy uranium from Niger.
This claim -- used to bolster the case for war -- has since been widely questioned.
"The news reported by various information organizations, national and foreign, concerning Italy's claimed transmission to other intelligence organizations of documents of Niger or Iraqi origin, conveying evidence relative to uranium transactions between Niger and Iraq are without any foundation," Premier Silvio Berlusconi's office said in a statement.
"The Italian information services, in fact, never provided any documents having such content and origin," it said.
In Washington, the Bush administration said Sunday that the president's statement in his January 20 State of the Union address about Iraq seeking uranium was accurate and is supported by other British and U.S. information.
In the speech, George W. Bush said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
U.S. intelligence agencies had raised questions previously about assertions of such activity by the Iraqi president. Underlying documents to support the contention proved to have been forged.
In London, critics kept up pressure Sunday on Prime Minister Tony Blair over the disputed intelligence. Blair has stood by the claim that Iraq sought uranium in Africa.
-------- iran
Khatami offers to resign to public will
July 13, 2003
(AP)
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030712-115349-9482r.htm
TEHRAN - Iran's president, Mohammed Khatami, said he would resign if Iranians - dissatisfied over his failure to deliver promised reforms - want him to, according to reports published yesterday.
Mr. Khatami's offer to step down came amid continuing attempts by ruling hard-line clerics to stymie his reform agenda and deepening public discontent over the country's slow pace toward democratic change.
"We are not masters of people, but servants of this nation. If this nation says, 'We don't want you,' we will go," he was quoted as saying by the government-owned newspaper, the Iran Daily.
He made the comments in a speech in Karaj, west of the capital, on Thursday, but the state-run television and radio censored the part about his offer to resign.
Thousands of Iranians held nightly protests for a week last month, railing not only against their usual target - Iran's hard-line Islamic establishment - but also against Mr. Khatami, over his failure to introduce greater political, social and economic freedoms.
Mr. Khatami also came under attack from liberals, including prominent philosopher Aldolkarim Soroush, who accused him of failing to push for reforms since his May 1997 election.
"The peaceful and democratic uprising of the Iranian people against religious dictatorship in May 1997 was a sweet experience," Mr. Soroush said in a letter to Mr. Khatami.
"But your failure to keep the vote and your wasting of opportunities put an end to it and disappointed the nation. Now, failures have turned into unrest," he said in his letter, whose authenticity was confirmed by his relatives.
Mr. Soroush was referring to last month's student-led protests against the ruling Islamic establishment and the continued arrest of student leaders and writers.
On Wednesday, hundreds of riot police and plainclothes agents dispersed more than 2,000 people gathered in front of Tehran University on the anniversary of a 1999 police raid on a student dormitory that killed one person and injured at least 20.
The raid triggered six days of nationwide anti-government protests, the biggest and most violent since the 1979 Islamic revolution.
The liberal-minded Mr. Khatami's hopes for a compromise with hard-liners have been thwarted in recent weeks after the hard-line Guardian Council, which vets all parliamentary legislation, rejected two key reform bills presented by the president.
Those bills would have given greater powers to Mr. Khatami to stop constitutional violations by hard-line opponents and barred the Guardian Council from arbitrary disqualification of candidates in legislative and presidential elections.
"We have to approve the qualifications of various candidates. If the people feel the program they vote for meets obstacles, then they will not participate in the elections," the Iran Daily quoted Mr. Khatami as saying.
Vice President Mohammad Ali Abtahi said he believes hard-liners will reject the bills.
"I've lost my hope that the bills will be approved. Although we continue to talk to the Guardian Council, hopes are slim," Mr. Abtahi was quoted as saying in Thursday's English-language Iran Daily.
Mr. Khatami has repeated in recent years that he has been powerless to stop hard-liners violating the constitution and acting against voted reforms.
The closure of more than 90 pro-democracy publications in the past three years, the arrest of dozens of prominent intellectuals and writers, and closed trials without jury were open violations of the constitution, he said.
The president also has said he was responsible under the constitution to stop such violations, but the hard-line judiciary has ignored his warnings.
-------- iraq
Outrage at US plan to mortgage Iraqi oil
Faisal Islam, economics correspondent
Sunday July 13, 2003
The UK Sunday Observer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,997055,00.html
American plans to mortgage Iraq's future oil supplies to pay for expensive postwar reconstruction work risk a repeat of mistakes made with Germany after the First World War, debt relief campaigners said this weekend.
Much of the revenue will be securitised over at least a decade under the proposals being pushed by the US Export Import Bank, the Bush administration's trade promotion body, and a lobbying group that includes key American contractors Bechtel and Halliburton.
Reports suggest that $30 billion of loans will be backed by Iraq's reserves, the second biggest in the world.
Anne Pettifor, head of the Jubilee Plus debt relief campaign, said 'It is outrageous that the poor people of Iraq will be lumbered with billions of dollars of debt that will be used to boost the share prices of Wall Street financiers and US construction giants.'
She warned against the coalition 'using the instrument of debt to control Iraq', after it leaves. Such a motive was behind the way Germany was treated after 1918, provoking resentment that eventually encouraged the rise of Adolf Hitler.
The World Bank has said such commitments should only be made by a sovereign Iraqi government. The plans will complicate a conference on Iraq's existing $120bn debt, which the US wants European powers to cancel.
The Department for International Development would not rule out British participation in the scheme.
----
Members List of Iraq Governing Council
July 13, 2003
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iraq-Council-List.html?8bl
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Here is a list of the members of the Iraq Governing Council that held its inaugural meeting Sunday. The council has 13 Shiites, 5 Kurds, 5 Sunnis, 1 Christian and 1 Turkoman, including three women, in an attempt to reflect the country's diverse demographics. Shiites make up about 60 percent of Iraq's 24 million people, but they have never ruled the country.
--Ahmad Chalabi, founder of Iraqi National Congress, Shiite
--Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, a leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, Shiite
--Ibrahim al-Jaafari, Dawa Islamic Party, Shiite
--Naseer al-Chaderchi, National Democratic Party, Sunni
--Jalal Talabani, Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, Sunni Kurd
--Massoud Barzani, Kurdistan Democratic Party, Sunni Kurd
--Iyad Allawi, leader of the Iraqi National Accord, Shiite
--Ahmed al-Barak, human rights activist, Shiite
--Adnan Pachachi, former foreign minister, Sunni
--Aquila al-Hashimi, female, foreign affairs expert, Shiite
--Raja Habib al-Khuzaai, female, maternity hospital director in south, Shiite
--Hamid Majid Moussa, Communist Party, Shiite
--Mohammed Bahr al-Uloum, cleric from Najaf, Shiite
--Ghazi Mashal Ajil al-Yawer, northern tribal chief, Sunni
--Mohsen Abdel Hamid, Iraqi Islamic Party, Sunni
--Samir Shakir Mahmoud, Sunni
--Mahmoud Othman, Sunni Kurd
--Salaheddine Bahaaeddin, Kurdistan Islamic Union, Sunni Kurd
--Younadem Kana, Assyrian Christian
--Mouwafak al-Rabii, Shiite
--Dara Noor Alzin, judge
--Sondul Chapouk, female, Turkoman
--Wael Abdul Latif, Basra governor, Shiite
--Abdel-Karim Mahoud al-Mohammedawi, member of Iraqi political party Hezbollah, Shiite
--Abdel-Zahraa Othman Mohammed, Dawa Party, Shiite
----
U.S. Mounts Bid to Quash Iraq Insurgency
BORZOU DARAGAHI
Associated Press
Sun, Jul. 13, 2003
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/6293453.htm
BALAD, Iraq - Facing an increasingly organized and violent resistance, the U.S. Army stepped up pressure on pro-Saddam Hussein holdouts Sunday with a fourth large offensive in central Iraq.
At least four suspected loyalists were killed and big weapons caches were captured in the operation, called Ivy Serpent, which aims to blunt potential anti-American attacks ahead of now-banned holidays of Saddam's Baath Party.
Meanwhile, the military announced that one soldier was killed and two others injured early Sunday when a tractor trailer crashed accidentally into their vehicle, parked at a checkpoint outside a base in Diwaniyah, 100 miles south of Baghdad. The names of the soldiers were withheld pending family notification.
Also Sunday, Iraqi police and coalition forces exchanged fire at a military checkpoint in the Iraqi capital, witnesses said. They said a police vehicle drove up to a coalition checkpoint and started shooting, and U.S. soldiers returned fire. It was not clear if there were casualties, and the U.S. military had no immediate comment.
U.S. forces also detained nine "high-value targets" in raids near Mosul, in northern Iraq, none of them on the list of 55 most-wanted Iraqis from Saddam's old regime.
Ivy Serpent, launched late Saturday in Sallahadin and Diala provinces, has so far yielded over 50 detainees in about a dozen raids before key holidays supported by Saddam loyalists. The four suspected anti-American militants were killed when they opened fire on Army scouts near Baqouba, military officials said.
The Army said insurgents planned a series of attacks against U.S. soldiers to commemorate the July 14, 1958, overthrow of Iraq's King Faisal and the July 17, 1968, Baath Party coup.
"We want to get within the enemy's temple, disrupt his timing," said Col. David Hogg, commander of 4th Infantry Division, 2nd Brigade.
The July 17 holiday was one of six banned Saturday in the first action of Iraq's new government council, which also named a national holiday marking Saddam's ouster.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warned Sunday that attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq may worsen this summer. "There's even speculation that during the month of July, which is an anniversary for a lot of Baathists events, we could see an increase in the number of attacks," Rumsfeld said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
At least 31 U.S. soldiers have been killed in hit-and-run small-arms assaults in Baghdad and central Iraq since President Bush declared major fighting over May 1. In response, the army has launched a series of high-profile operations - Peninsula Strike, Desert Scorpion, Sidewinder and now Ivy Serpent - to crush the insurgency.
The operations have been complex, high-tech nighttime affairs and have produced mixed results.
In Saturday's night raids, AC-130 gunships flew over the sites, as Apache and Kiowa helicopters hovered. Tanks established security cordons, and Humvees and Bradley fighting vehicles carrying infantrymen stormed houses and walled compounds. Unmanned aerial reconnaissance vehicles gave commanders and tacticians at headquarters a bird's-eye view of the action.
In some raids, U.S. forces acted on specific intelligence and detained many suspects.
In the village of Mutlaq Nayif, just north of Taji along Highway 1, loudspeakers ordered residents to get out of their homes. After searching the tall grass surrounding the homes, soldiers walked out with armfuls of assault rifles, machine guns, stocks of ammunition, camouflage military uniforms and the black robes used by Fedayeen warriors. Rudesheim said 35 people were detained.
In the Tigris River town of Hassan bin Mahmud, which Rudesheim described as "the village that time forgot," a monument to Saddam remained standing in the town square. Locals cursed arriving American soldiers, said Rudesheim, whose men blew up the statue of the ousted Iraqi leader.
In Muqtaria, north of Baquba, a group of armed men fled into fields as the Americans approached. Soldiers searched the area, ultimately detaining 10 men. "It was a cat and mouse game all night," Hogg said.
Near Balad, servicemen found two anti-aircraft guns which they destroyed. Near Baqouba, soldiers raided two houses producing anti-American propaganda. They captured a former general in Saddam's Fedayeen militia, a former air force general and the former number two in the Diala province Baathist party. All are suspected of organizing anti-U.S. violence.
----
Iraqi governing council about to take control
July 13, 2003
By Paul Haven
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030712-115353-1403r.htm
BAGHDAD - Iraqi political leaders and the U.S.-led provisional authority are in the final stages of setting up Iraq's new governing council, the first post-Saddam Hussein body, which could be announced as soon as today, diplomats said yesterday.
In another step forward, the U.S. military said it was turning control of a restive western city over to Iraqi police, the first time coalition forces have agreed to leave security in the hands of local law enforcement in a major population center.
Iraq's seven main groups that opposed Saddam's rule and other political leaders met yesterday in Baghdad and were hoping to hold a final organizational meeting in the capital today, said Adel Noory Mohammed, a leader of the Kurdistan Islamic Union.
He said final details, such as how to announce the council, were still being worked out.
Many Iraqi political leaders want the council to announce itself, to give the appearance of independence from the occupying powers. Others want to hold a joint news conference with top U.S. officials to highlight cooperation.
The council will consist of 25 to 30 prominent Iraqis and will have the power to name ministers and select an independent central bank governor. It will be consulted by Iraq's U.S. leaders on all important issues and is meant to be the forerunner of a larger constitutional assembly that will have about a year to draft a new constitution.
National elections to select a fully sovereign Iraqi government are expected to follow sometime in late 2004 or early 2005.
A Western diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, stressed that the timing of an announcement of the council depended on the outcome of the meetings.
"We are in the final stages of getting the governance council together," he said. "It will take as long as it takes."
Iraq's American administrator, L. Paul Bremer, had scheduled a news conference yesterday at which he was expected to announce the makeup of the council, but the meeting was canceled and no reason was given.
The Bush administration promised a constitutional assembly would be set up within weeks in the aftermath of Saddam's ouster in April, but it revised its plans several times.
The governing council had at first been envisioned as a consultative panel, but Mr. Bremer later acceded to Iraqi demands for real political power.
U.S. backtracking on the issue has fueled a growing perception among Iraqis that the American mission amounts to colonization rather than liberation, and U.S. troops have become the daily targets of a growing insurgency.
"If the Americans do not get this done quickly, they will lose even more legitimacy and popularity in the eyes of the Iraqi people and they will put themselves under enormous pressure," said Mr. Mohammed of the Kurdistan Islamic Union.
"The new government, if it is a strong government, will have the respect of the Iraqi street, and people will obey it," he said.
The council is expected to have a Shi'ite majority. Sixty percent of Iraq's 24 million people are Shi'ite Muslims, but the country has been ruled for decades by minority Sunnis led by Saddam.
Internationally known former exiles such as Ahmed Chalabi of the Iraqi National Council and former Foreign Minister Adnan Pachachi, and Kurdish leaders Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani are expected to be on the panel. Groups that remained in Iraq during Saddam's 23-year rule will have a more prominent role, the Western diplomat said.
Women, who make up 55 percent of Iraq's population after decades of war, and minorities also will be represented.
In another sign of America's emerging attitude of compromise, the military said yesterday it was sharply cutting back its presence in Fallujah at the request of police and the U.S.-appointed mayor after several attacks in the town by Saddam loyalists.
Police in the city demanded Thursday that American forces withdraw from their station, saying they feared being caught in the cross fire if insurgents attacked again. Americans went one step further, turning the entire city of 200,000 over to the Iraqi forces.
Iraqi police were widely deployed on the roads and downtown. Some of them were directing traffic while others protected government buildings.
The military said it would "allow the Fallujah police to patrol the streets themselves instead of jointly with military police." It said it would keep a quick-reaction team on call in case the police needed help.
People in Fallujah said they were pleased with the American pullout.
"The American decision to withdraw is a good step, and we have the capabilities to protect the city," policeman Walid Jasim said.
Also yesterday, former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, who is overseeing Iraq's Interior Ministry, said that U.S. and Iraqi forces had arrested five former members of Saddam's personal security forces, four of whom were cousins of the former dictator.
Authorities seized pictures that showed the four cousins torturing an unidentified man, Mr. Kerik said.
He also called on former Iraqi police officers dismissed on political grounds in the past 10 years to apply for reinstatement. He said those younger than 45 years old should apply at police stations from Aug. 15 to Nov. 1.
--------
U.S. Military Kills 4 in New Push Against Iraqi Resisistance
July 13, 2003
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iraq-US-Operation.html?hp
BALAD, Iraq (AP) -- Facing an increasingly organized and violent resistance, the U.S. Army stepped up pressure on pro-Saddam Hussein holdouts Sunday with a fourth large offensive in central Iraq.
At least four suspected loyalists were killed and big weapons caches were captured in the operation, called Ivy Serpent, which aims to blunt potential anti-American attacks ahead of now-banned holidays of Saddam's Baath Party.
Meanwhile, the military announced that one soldier was killed and two others injured early Sunday when a tractor trailer crashed accidentally into their vehicle, parked at a checkpoint outside a base in Diwaniyah, 100 miles south of Baghdad. The names of the soldiers were withheld pending family notification.
Also Sunday, Iraqi police and coalition forces exchanged fire at a military checkpoint in the Iraqi capital, witnesses said. They said a police vehicle drove up to a coalition checkpoint and started shooting, and U.S. soldiers returned fire. It was not clear if there were casualties, and the U.S. military had no immediate comment.
U.S. forces also detained nine ``high-value targets'' in raids near Mosul, in northern Iraq, none of them on the list of 55 most-wanted Iraqis from Saddam's old regime.
Ivy Serpent, launched late Saturday in Sallahadin and Diala provinces, has so far yielded over 50 detainees in about a dozen raids before key holidays supported by Saddam loyalists. The four suspected anti-American militants were killed when they opened fire on Army scouts near Baqouba, military officials said.
The Army said insurgents planned a series of attacks against U.S. soldiers to commemorate the July 14, 1958, overthrow of Iraq's King Faisal and the July 17, 1968, Baath Party coup.
``We want to get within the enemy's temple, disrupt his timing,'' said Col. David Hogg, commander of 4th Infantry Division, 2nd Brigade.
The July 17 holiday was one of six banned Saturday in the first action of Iraq's new government council, which also named a national holiday marking Saddam's ouster.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warned Sunday that attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq may worsen this summer. ``There's even speculation that during the month of July, which is an anniversary for a lot of Baathists events, we could see an increase in the number of attacks,'' Rumsfeld said on NBC's ``Meet the Press.''
At least 31 U.S. soldiers have been killed in hit-and-run small-arms assaults in Baghdad and central Iraq since President Bush declared major fighting over May 1. In response, the army has launched a series of high-profile operations -- Peninsula Strike, Desert Scorpion, Sidewinder and now Ivy Serpent -- to crush the insurgency.
The operations have been complex, high-tech nighttime affairs and have produced mixed results.
In Saturday's night raids, AC-130 gunships flew over the sites, as Apache and Kiowa helicopters hovered. Tanks established security cordons, and Humvees and Bradley fighting vehicles carrying infantrymen stormed houses and walled compounds. Unmanned aerial reconnaissance vehicles gave commanders and tacticians at headquarters a bird's-eye view of the action.
In some raids, U.S. forces acted on specific intelligence and detained many suspects.
In the village of Mutlaq Nayif, just north of Taji along Highway 1, loudspeakers ordered residents to get out of their homes. After searching the tall grass surrounding the homes, soldiers walked out with armfuls of assault rifles, machine guns, stocks of ammunition, camouflage military uniforms and the black robes used by Fedayeen warriors. Rudesheim said 35 people were detained.
In the Tigris River town of Hassan bin Mahmud, which Rudesheim described as ``the village that time forgot,'' a monument to Saddam remained standing in the town square. Locals cursed arriving American soldiers, said Rudesheim, whose men blew up the statue of the ousted Iraqi leader.
In Muqtaria, north of Baquba, a group of armed men fled into fields as the Americans approached. Soldiers searched the area, ultimately detaining 10 men. ``It was a cat and mouse game all night,'' Hogg said.
Near Balad, servicemen found two anti-aircraft guns which they destroyed. Near Baqouba, soldiers raided two houses producing anti-American propaganda. They captured a former general in Saddam's Fedayeen militia, a former air force general and the former number two in the Diala province Baathist party. All are suspected of organizing anti-U.S. violence.
-------- israel / palestine
Sharon in interview: I will solve the Palestinian problem in four years
By Arnon Regular, Amos Harel and Aluf Benn,
Sunday, July 13, 2003
Haaretz Service and Agencies
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/317088.html
The Observer on Sunday quoted Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as saying that he will solve the Palestinian problem in four years.
Sharon gave a joint interview to The Observer magazine and the Daily Telegraph in his Jerusalem office before leaving for London on Sunday for a trip that includes a meeting Monday with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, before heading on to Norway.
'It is our generation's role to try to achieve this peace," Sharon told the magazine.
'As one who participated in all the wars of the state of Israel, I saw the horror of wars. I saw the fear of wars. I saw my best friends being killed in battles. I was seriously injured twice ... I believe I understand the importance of peace, not more but not less than many of the politicians who speak about peace, but never had this experience' Sharon told the paper.
Sharon on Saturday criticized ongoing European contacts with Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, telling the British newspaper the Daily Telegraph that they were undermining the authority of Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas.
"He [Ar