In this issue:

Iraq, Israel, and the Bush Administration Crisis

Bush Wants No Iraq War in Near Future; Sees Diplomacy in North Korea

U.S. Challenged To Come Forward with Iraq Intelligence

Le Monde Says Likelihood of War Recedes

Chickenhawks Push Interrogation of Iraqi Scientists to Sabotage UN Mission

From Volume 1, Issue Number 41 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published Dec. 16, 2002
MIDEAST NEWS DIGEST

Iraq, Israel, and the Bush Administration Crisis

In the Dec. 10 internal briefing for our staff, Jeffrey Steinberg summed up comments by Lyndon LaRouche, EIR founder and chairman of the EIR Editorial Board, relating to the Iraq war buildup, and the reality of the economic disintegration faced by the United States. What follows is an excerpt from that briefing:

"LaRouche noted last evening (Dec. 9) in discussions that the dynamic around the Iraq war has been reversed, and the war party is now in trouble, defensive, and going berserk. The return of the UN inspectors, the Iraqi cooperation with those inspections, and yesterday's challenge by Blix to the United States, to produce whatever documentation the Administration has of Iraqi violations, all mean that war is not on the agenda at this moment.

"Therefore, the Chickenhawks are desperate. They have been temporarily defeated, but not eliminated. For this reason, we much watch the situation in Israel very carefully. The Sharon gang, with their American friends, could very well launch a false-flag terrorist atrocity to get the war that they so desperately want. In this context, the exposé over the weekend, by the Palestinian Authority, of the Mossad 'al-Qaeda' cell being set up in the Gaza Strip is a strategic development of the first magnitude. It is not yet clear if this Mossad-run terror cell was being prepared to carry out the mega-terror attack. But either way, this is a phase change. They got caught! Watch the Israelis very closely!

"LaRouche returned to the actions by Blix, demanding that the U.S. publicly disclose any evidence it has against Iraq. Kofi Annan and the Iraqis all made the same demand. This means that it becomes nearly impossible for the U.S. to hold back information, and then spring it at a later point as the pretext for war. This would backfire. The Iraqis submitted their 12,000-page report on their weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program with, in LaRouche's words, 'malice and forethought.' They are demanding information from the United States. This added to the Chickenhawk freakout.

"Now, with the revelations of the Mossad scheme to create an 'al-Qaeda' countergang in the Gaza Strip, LaRouche says that we must doubt the veracity of everything the Israelis, under Sharon, say and do, particularly their actions against the Palestinians. The danger is that the Israelis might stage a Gulf of Tonkin incident. The danger is great, but the danger of this exists precisely because we have set back the war drive.

"The second interconnected crisis that LaRouche discussed on Monday night was the onrushing financial and economic collapse. The powers that be in the United States know that the situation is totally falling apart. They are going to need a stimulus package, and they know it. A tax cut won't work. They are floundering for a new policy. Thus, they have selected two new clowns, two new hacks, to promote a new policy that has not yet been designed. They do, however, see the enormity of the crisis. They know they must act! Look at the United Airlines bankruptcy filing on Monday. This is really big. The fall of United, which could be forced into liquidation, is a reflection of the collapse of the entire global airline sector. Olympic Airways is another big airline set for the chopping block. Look at the state of the states: 46 of 50 are officially bankrupt. Look at Amtrak. It's bankrupt. Look at New York City—bankrupt.

"LaRouche's assessment is that the worst is yet to come—and we should look for explosive developments at year-end."

Bush Wants No Iraq War in Near Future; Sees Diplomacy in North Korea

ABC's Barbara Walters interviewed President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush last week, in an interview broadcast on ABC's "20/20" program Dec. 12. Her first question was, "Mr. President, what is on everyone's mind, obviously, is Iraq. And the Iraqis of course say they have no weapons of mass destruction. Do you think that Saddam Hussein is lying?"

He answered, "Too early to tell. He certainly has deceived the world in the past, and, time will tell. The issue is, what should be on people's mind is peace, how to achieve peace in a dangerous world."

Walters: "What is your gut feeling? You're a man who talks about your instincts and your gut. What's your gut feeling about this report?"

Bush: "I don't want to prejudge the report. But my gut feeling about Saddam Hussein is that he is a man who deceives, denies."

Later, Walters returned to the question.

Walters: "Well, if you were certain that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, would you go ahead with the war on Iraq without the support of the United Nations?"

Bush: "You're doing a fine job of trying to pin me down on the hypothetical—and I will deal with those issues if they come. But let me talk about war in general, if you don't mind. War is my last option, not my first option. See, it's easy in this town for people to commit troops, the U.S. troops, to combat [i.e., in theory], through opinion and the noise you hear in Washington. But there's only one person who is responsible for making that decision, and that's me.... It's hard to know that you've sent a loved one into battle, and the loved one doesn't return.

"Obviously, therefore, you know, when people talk about war here in Washington, you got to know I think awfully hard about the commitment of troops. And obviously if troops are committed to Iraq, I will have made the decision that we will save more lives by military action than otherwise. In other words, the commitment of troops will be to not only enforce doctrine, but more importantly ... to enforce peace, so that peace lasts."

A later question from Walters: "On the subject of defense—the ballistic missiles discovered on a ship from North Korea. Why aren't they as big a threat to us as Iraq?"

Bush: "Well, first of all, I hope the American people are beginning to see we deal with each issue different ways. In other words, not every issue requires a potential military response. There's ways to keep the peace through diplomatic pressure, through alliance, and that's what we're doing in the Korean Peninsula.

"I view this as an opportunity for the United States to work not only closely with, of course, South Korea and Japan to make sure that the Korean Peninsula is nuclear-weapons-free, but also it's a unique moment for us to work with the Chinese and to forge a different relationship to solve a common problem, as well as work with the Russians. And I'm hopeful that the diplomatic pressure and our working together will convince the North Koreans that they should abandon any hopes for the development of a nuclear weapon."

U.S. Challenged To Come Forward with Iraq Intelligence

Iraq's Science Adviser, Gen. Amer al-Saadi, said Iraq's 12,000-page report given to the UN on Dec. 7, one day ahead of the deadline, is complete, but that there is no new information on Iraq's WMD programs (all allegedly terminated in 1991) because all that information had already been provided to the UN. He challenged those with contrary evidence to "come forth with it." On atomic weapons, the London Times of Dec. 9 quoted Gen. al-Saadi saying, "We have the complete documentation from design to all the other things. We haven't reached the final assembly of a bomb, nor tested it. It is for others to judge how close we were."

Then, following extensive U.S. pressure, in an unexpected move, UNMOVIC chairman Hans Blix released the report to the United States for "copying," reportedly even before UNMOVIC evaluated it. This contravened the Security Council's vote on Dec. 6, that the report should first be reviewed by the inspectors, a process estimated to take seven to 10 days.

The master copy was snatched up by the U.S. late on the night of Dec. 8, and copies made available the other four permanent Security Council members—Russia, France, Britain, and China—on the following day. Furthermore, it was announced that the 10 elected members of the UNSC would receive only a redacted copy of the report, and only later. The rotating president of the Security Council, Colombia's Alfonso Valdivieso, said Colombia had made a "political decision" to accede to U.S. demands, and to ignore objections from other Security Council members, especially Syria.

Reportedly, Colombia was threatened with withdrawal of U.S. financial aid. According to the Washington Post, "U.S. diplomats accompanied Valdivieso [to Blix's office] to inform him of the decision." The reason given for this illicit procedure, was that the report might contain "sensitive" information on nuclear weapons, which could jeopardize non-proliferation efforts.

To be sure, the report most probably contains explosive material, not only relative to Iraq's weapons programs over the past decades, but to foreign companies and persons who made the programs possible. The table of contents which appeared in the press included, in the part on chemical weapons, chapters on technical assistance from abroad, relations to firms and single individuals (20 pages long), and the type and amount of imported chemical materials, installations and munition of the former chemical weapons program (86 pages).

As EIW reported weeks ago, Iraq was readily supplied with weapons from a variety of sources, including the United States. The current Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was photographed in an amicable embrace with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein back in 1983, at the time such deliveries were being organized.

Le Monde Says Likelihood of War Recedes

The Dec. 10 issue of France's Le Monde ran a major piece entitled, "Why We Will Not Make War." Author Joseph Cirincione, a top Nuclear Proliferation/Weapons of Mass Destruction expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, pointed to the fact that, with UN inspectors on the ground, war is not likely. More important, he stressed that "numerous military leaders, actively in service or retired, think that the war is neither necessary nor simple," and cited critiques by former Reagan-era Secretary of the Navy James Webb, and former Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. Anthony Zinni. In addition, there are "strong economic arguments against the war," including crash scenarios.

Thus, he wrote, numerous "Republicans of the Old Guard" have advised Bush not to go to war, fearing that it could "ruin an already weak American economy, as well as the political future of the Republicans."

Chickenhawks Push Interrogation of Iraqi Scientists to Sabotage UN Mission

There is a nasty tale of neo-conservative/Israeli rightwing plotting for war behind the Washington Post story of Dec. 12, entitled "White House Orders Plan To Debrief Iraqi Scientists." Quoting one of the usual "unnamed" senior officials of the Bush Administration, the Post says that the UN inspections have to become "a little rough," and "a little brutal," by removing Iraqi scientists during inspections. It also reports that National Security Adviser Condi Rice is preparing "orders" on how to get Iraqi scientists out. The scheme is the work of "top civilians in the Defense Department," (that is the Likudnik cabal in the DOD of Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas J. Feith, and Richard Perle,) who see this tactic as their only chance to escape the inspections "quagmire," (as they call it.) The article admits that pro-war chickenhawks are completely dispirited, and see this as "possibly providing a 'way out' " of the UN resolution, which they see as only a "trap to put off a U.S. invasion." Through whatever means they can, the war hawks are attempting to use this abduction of Iraqi scientists—and their families—as the "red line," to move the Iraq war.

But there is a lot of opposition to it, and the Washington Post sources say it is simply "the same internal battle [inside the Bush Administration] being fought on new terrain."

Informed Washington "beltway" observers say that the NSC move in the direction of such plans, comes from Wolfowitz's new agent-in-place at the NSC, convicted Iran-Contra criminal Elliott Abrams, who arranged for millions of dollars of covert funds for Ollie North's "Enterprise,"from 1984-86, then lied to Congressional Committees, was convicted, and finally pardoned by George Bush "41." In the last week, it was announced that the tainted Abrams was promoted to be the head of Near East affairs for the NSC. Abrams is working the Iraq war issue, even planning in detail how the U.S. will take over the Iraqi oil fields and run them with the military (see upcoming EIW.) Abrams comes from the same network of neo-con thinktanks that sheltered the Wolfowitz cabal members during the Clinton Administration, when they, as nominal Republicans, considered themselves "exiles."

The logic behind this utopian "seize the inspectors" tactic—which has been kicked around the neo-conservative thinktank circuit for the AEI/Heritage/Weekly Standard for months—is that once some Iraqis defect, others will follow in droves. In effect, it's an extension of the "war is a cakewalk" view from the Defense Policy Board. The traditional uniformed military sector of the United States considers this utopian thinking to be infantile and dangerous to the welfare of the nation.

In fact, there was even a neo-con bill in the Senate called the "Iraqi Scientists Liberation Act of 2002" that was introduced into the Senate in the frantic weeks before the pre-election Congressional recess, by Senators Joe Biden (D-Del) and Arlen Spector (R-Penna). The bill was passed through the Senate on Nov. 20 by voice acclamation, with no dissensions noted. It was not taken up by the House, and therefore did not become law. However, it is expected that the neo-cons will push the bill through Congress in January.

Meanwhile, the same chickenhawk network is on a campaign, through their media network including the New York Post, the Weekly Standard, the Moonie Times, and the National Review, to constantly attack the competence of Dr. Hans Blix, the head of the UNMOVIC inspection organization. Blix has said that the UN body is not an "abduction" outfit.

All rights reserved © 2002 EIRNS