White House, Senate Republicans Lash Out at Kennedy Over Iraqi War “Fraud” Comments

The White House and Senate Republicans yesterday criticized Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) for his recent comments alleging that the Bush administration chose to go war with Iraq for political gain, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, Sept. 19).

In an interview with the Associated Press last week, Kennedy called the war a “fraud,” saying the decision to invade Iraq was “made up in Texas” to aid Republicans politically.  Kennedy also said the White House could not account for billions of dollars being spent in Iraq, suggesting that some of the money is being provided to foreign leaders, “bribing them to send in troops.”

White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan yesterday said Kennedy’s “bribes” were, in fact, standard foreign aid.

“As any member of Congress knows or should know, foreign assistance to friends and allies has been a staple of America’s international policy for decades,” Buchan said.  “Reducing the discourse to this level is a real disservice to the American people,” she said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-Va.) yesterday also lashed out at Kennedy for his comments.

“Stop to think of the reaction of a young wife surrounded by small children, not knowing from day to day whether her husband will survive another day’s engagement in Afghanistan or Iraq,” Warner said.  “And they hear that this whole thing has been a fraud perpetrated upon this family and was made up in Texas.  I find that very painful,” he said.

Some Senate Democrats yesterday, such as Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) rose to Kennedy’s defense, according to the Post.  During a press conference, Daschle said it was “McCarthyesque” to criticize those who vocally oppose White House policies.

“It seems like anyone who comes to the floor to express concern or to express his views or her views on Iraq is now the subject of attack,” Daschle said.

Kennedy himself defended his remarks on the Senate floor yesterday.

“Many Americans share my views, and I regret that the president considers them uncivil and not in the national interest,” Kennedy said.  “The real action that was not in the American interest was the decision to go to war unilaterally, without the support of our allies and without a plan to win the peace,” he said (Dewar/Loeb, Washington Post, Sept. 24).

Back to top

Herd Mentality Led to Iraqi WMD Conclusions, Former Official Says

The conventional prewar assumption that Iraq held stocks of weapons of mass destruction was the product of a herd mentality in the intelligence and defense communities, according to a commentary this week by retired Deputy Defense Secretary John Hamre.

Describing his experience with analyzing intelligence reports, Hamre said, “Once a general proposition was accepted as valid, it was usually repeated without question in subsequent analyses.”  Hamre, who served under former President Bill Clinton, is now president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 

“As we saw recently, the entire intelligence community and the policy community — and I include myself here — were convinced we would find major stocks of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.  We have not,” he added.

Speaking of intelligence reports more generally, Hamre said that during his time in the Pentagon, his access to information was necessarily limited by aides, who might have weeded out alternative theories on intelligence issues before they reached him.

“Someone who works for you is deciding if you need to see it and when you need to see it.  This is not a bad thing.  This is just a fact of life,” he added.

Hamre said also that aides tailor presentations to fit the secretary and deputy secretary’s interests, which might have also sifted out alternative hypotheses on Iraq.

To free the Pentagon from the “group think” mentality, Hamre recommended several measures, including continuing the intelligence community’s “redundant analytic capabilities” that can offer competiting intelligence assessments, drawing more from open sources and nongovernment analysts, improving the understanding of how group dynamics can affect judgments, and continuing to ask hard questions (John Hamre, Aviation Week & Space Technology, Sept. 22).

Back to top

Bush Calls for U.N. Resolution Against WMD Proliferation

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

U.S. President George W. Bush today called on the United Nations to pass an “anti-proliferation resolution” urging nations to adopt more stringent measures to curb the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

“The resolution should call on all members of the U.N. to criminalize the proliferation of weapons, weapons of mass destruction; to enact strict export controls consistent with international standards; and to secure any and all sensitive materials within their own borders,” Bush told the U.N. General Assembly in New York.  The United States is prepared to help countries draft such new laws and to aid in their enforcement, Bush said.

Bush also highlighted several international efforts already underway to reduce WMD proliferation, including the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative, an 11-nation effort to interdict shipments of WMD-related cargo (see GSN, Sept. 17).  Bush also called on countries to join a nonproliferation partnership created last year by the Group of Eight — Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.  Under the partnership, G-8 members agreed to provide $20 billion over 10 years to combat WMD proliferation (see GSN, June 5).  Since the partnership began, several additional countries outside the G-8 have joined. 

“The deadly combination of outlaw regimes, and terror networks and weapons of mass murder is a peril that cannot be ignored or wished away,” Bush told the assembly.

“If such a danger is allowed to fully materialize, all words, all protests, will come too late.  Nations of the world must have the wisdom and the will to stop grave threats before they arrive,” Bush said.

Back to top

Iraq Strategies Debated by Bush, Chirac

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — In diplomatic but pointed language, U.S. President George W. Bush and French President Jacques Chirac this morning laid out their competing visions of the role of the United Nations in rebuilding Iraq.  In addresses on the opening day of the General Assembly’s annual debate, both leaders said the United Nations should be more involved in Iraq, but Bush outlined a limited role while Chirac spoke of more comprehensive U.N. responsibilities.

Bush said the United States is working with other members of the Security Council on a new resolution “which will expand the U.N.’s role in Iraq.  As in the aftermath of other conflicts, the United Nations should assist in developing a constitution, in training civil servants and in conducting free and fair elections.”  He made no mention of an administrative role for the United Nations, something many members of the council say they want to see.

In an obvious reference to Chirac’s proposal for a rapid turnover of responsibility to Iraqis, Bush said, “The primary goal of our coalition in Iraq is self-government for the people of Iraq. … This process must unfold according to the needs of Iraqis, neither hurried nor delayed by the wishes of other parties.”

Speaking less than 30 minutes after Bush, Chirac said, “In Iraq, the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis, who must have sole responsibility for their future, is essential for stability and reconstruction.  It is up to the United Nations to give legitimacy to this process.   It is also up to the United Nations to assist with the gradual transfer of administrative and economic responsibilities to the present Iraqi institutions according to a realistic timetable and to help the Iraqis draft a constitution and hold elections.”

Iraq’s seat in the General Assembly Hall is being held by members of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, including Ahmad Chalabi, who hold the rotating presidency of the council, and Adnan Pachachi, a former foreign minister.

Iraq “needs and deserves our aid and all nations of good will should step forward and provide that support,” Bush said.  The United Nations in Iraq is “carrying out vital and effective work everyday,” in health care and medical aid, he said, while the “coalition is meeting its responsibilities.  We are conducting precision raids against terrorists and holdouts of the former regime. … They have made Iraq the central front in the war on terror and they will be defeated.”

Success, Bush added, “will be watched and noted throughout the region.”

In the debate leading up to the war, the United States made much of its case for preventive action on Saddam Hussein’s links to the al-Qaeda terror network and his possession of weapons of mass destruction.  Bush’s references to those issues today were less emphatic than earlier this year.  He said the Hussein government “cultivated ties to terror,” without specifying al-Qaeda and said the United States was conducting investigations “to reveal the full extent of its weapons programs and its long campaign of deception.” Chirac did not address these issues.

This difference of interpretation extended into how Bush and Chirac framed the divisive Security Council debate leading up to the war.  Bush said the council “was right to be alarmed” about Hussein’s behavior and “right to demand that Iraq destroy its illegal weapons.”  He added, “Because a coalition of nations acted to defend the peace and the credibility of the United Nations, Iraq is free.”

On the other hand, Chirac said, “The United Nations has just weathered one of the gravest trials in its history.  The debate turned on respect for the Charter and the use of force.  The war, embarked on without Security Council approval, has undermined the multilateral system.  Having taken stock of this crisis, our organization can now resume its onward march.”

Secretary General Kofi Annan said the United Nations “is prepared to play its full part in working for a satisfactory outcome in Iraq … pulling together on the basis of a sound and viable policy,” but did not say what he thought the U.N. role should be.  “If it takes extra time and patience to forge a policy that is collective, coherent and workable, then I for one would regard that time as well spent.”

In a solemn address opening the debate, Annan said, “The last 12 months have been painful for those of us who believe in collective answers to our common problems and challenges.”  Without specifying the United States, he said some believe they may act unilaterally in self-defense even if they are not attacked.

“Rather than wait for that to happen, they argue, states have the right and obligation to use force pre-emptively, even on the territory of other states, and even while weapons systems that might be used to attack them are still being developed.”

“This logic represents a fundamental challenge to the principles on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability have rested for the last 58 years,” Annan added.  “My concern is that, if it were to be adopted, it could set precedents that resulted in a proliferation of the unilateral and lawless use of force, with or without credible justification.”

Annan also said he will appoint a new high-level panel which will report back to him before the 2004 General Assembly on four issues: challenges to peace and security; the contribution of collective action in addressing those challenges; the functioning of the major U.N. organs and the relationship between them; and ways to strengthen the United Nations through reform of its institutions and processes.

Other heads of state speaking on this opening day include President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva of Brazil, President Alejandro Toledo of Peru, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, President Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia, President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria and Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada.

Back to top

U.S. Senator Calls for Worldwide WMD Accountability System

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) yesterday called for an international accountability system for weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, Aug. 5).

Lugar represented the United States yesterday at a conference on terrorism in New York hosted by Norway, Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel and the International Peace Academy.  U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan also addressed the meeting.

In his remarks, Lugar called for a system that would require every country to account for and safely secure its WMD stockpiles and related materials.  The international community should provide financial assistance to those countries lacking the resources to join such a system, Lugar said.

“This process will be expensive and painstaking, but international security and prosperity hang in the balance.  We must commit the resources and political will required to preserve modern society and the futures of our children and grandchildren,” Lugar said.

Lugar said all peaceful means available should be used to persuade countries to account for WMD stockpiles.  The U.S. Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which seeks to secure and dispose of Soviet-era WMD stockpiles in Russia, could be used a model for similar relationships with other countries, he said (see GSN, Aug. 18).  Lugar’s statement also warned, however, that the United States and other countries “must not rule out the use of military force” if countries refuse to account for weapons of mass destruction.

Lugar also warned of the consequences of terrorists obtaining weapons of mass destruction — both in terms of lives lost and economic damages.

“Weapons of mass destruction have made it possible for a small nation, or even a subnational group, to kill as many people in a day as national armies killed in months of fighting during World War II,” Lugar said.

Yesterday’s conference was attended by leaders and senior officials from more than 20 countries, according to reports.  In opening remarks before the conference, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan told the conference that the international war on terrorism must not infringe on human rights.

“I believe that there is no trade-off to be made between human rights and terrorism,” Annan said.  “Upholding human rights is not at odds with battling terrorism:  On the contrary, the moral vision of human rights — the deep respect for the dignity of each person — is among our most powerful weapons against it,” he said.

Annan also said that military force alone would not defeat terrorism.

“We must articulate a powerful and compelling global vision that can defeat the vivid, if extreme, visions of some terrorist groups.  We must make clear, by word and deed, not only that we are fighting terrorists, but also that we are standing, indeed fighting, for something – for peace, for resolution of conflict, for human rights and development,” Annan said.

The Washington Post reported today that Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf told the conference yesterday that the U.S. war on terrorism has led to a perception among Muslims worldwide that “Islam, as a religion, is being targeted and pilloried.”

[EDITOR'S NOTE:  Richard Lugar is on the board of directors of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, the sole sponsor of Global Security Newswire, which is published independently by the National Journal Group.]

Back to top

Former U.N. Inspector Says Iraq Did Not Store Banned Weapons

Former chief U.N. weapons inspector Rolf Ekeus has said that prewar Iraq had wanted the ability to produce weapons of mass destruction, but did not develop stockpiles of such weapons, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, Sept. 19).

Coalition forces operating in Iraq have been unable so far to find evidence of alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction because there is no evidence, Ekeus said during an interview with PBS’s Newshour With Jim Lehrer.  Ekeus said he based his assessment on several factors, such as the presence of U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq following the 1991 Gulf War and the rate at which biological and chemical weapons break down, which Iraq learned of during its war with Iran from 1980-1988.

“My feeling is very clearly that the Iraqi policy long before the war was to build capabilities to produce weapons ... for the conflict situation, not to produce for storage and create a problem or storage management,” Ekeus said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Sept. 23).

Hoon Allowed WMD Misimpression

Meanwhile, British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon said yesterday that he made no attempt to correct the false impression created by a claim included in a British September 2002 dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that Iraq could launch a biological or chemical weapons attack within 45 minutes, according to the Financial Times (see GSN, Sept. 16).

Hoon told a parliamentary inquiry that the media had “exaggerated” the 45-minute claim, which had only referred to tactical weapons and not long-range weapons.  Hoon also said that the government had not been obligated to correct media reports that suggested that the 45-minute claim referred to long-range weapons.

“I’m certainly suggesting that it was an exaggeration but it’s not unusual for newspapers to exaggerate,” Hoon said (Jean Eaglesham, Financial Times, Sept. 22).

Back to top

Iraq Posed “No Imminent Threat,” Kennedy Says

U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) sharply criticized Operation Iraqi Freedom yesterday, saying the Bush administration fabricated its justification for beginning hostilities (see GSN, Sept. 18).

During an interview with the Associated Press, Kennedy accused Bush administration officials of using “distortion, misrepresentation [and] a selection of intelligence” for justifying the war with Iraq.

“There was no imminent threat.  This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically.  This whole thing was a fraud,” Kennedy said.

Kennedy also said that a recent Congressional Budget Office report found that the White House could account for only about $2.5 billion of the $4 billion being spent per month on Iraq.

“My belief is this money is being shuffled all around to these political leaders in all parts of the world, bribing them to send in troops,” he said.

The White House focus on Iraq has resulted in less attention being paid to more direct threats to the United States, such as al-Qaeda, the nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula and the continuing instability in Afghanistan, Kennedy said.

“I think all of those pose a threat to the security of the people of Massachusetts much more than the threat from Iraq,” he said.  “Terror has been put on the sidelines for the last 12 months,” Kennedy added (Associated Press/Washington Times, Sept. 19).

Former Iraqi Defense Minister Surrenders to U.S. Forces

Meanwhile, former Iraqi Defense Minister Gen. Sultan Hashim Ahmad surrendered today to U.S. forces in northern Iraq, according to the Washington Post.

Ahmad surrendered to Maj. Gen. David Petraeus after weeks of negotiations, said Kurdish mediator Dagwood Bagistani, who arranged the surrender.  In exchange for Ahmad’s surrender, the U.S. military agreed to remove his name from the list of 55 most-wanted former Iraqi officials, Bagistani said.

“We trust the promise,” Bagistani said.

U.S. forces will only hold Ahmad until his interrogation is complete, according to Bagistani.  Ahmad will not face prosecution, Bagistani said (Associated Press/New York Times, Sept. 19).

In addition, U.S. forces in Mosul have also reportedly been close to capturing Izzat Ibrahim, former vice chairman of the Iraqi Revolutionary Command Council, Reuters reported (Khudeir Majeed, Reuters, Sept. 19).

Back to top

Top U.N. Disarmament Official Calls for U.S., Russian Action

By Joe Fiorill

Global Security Newsire

MOSCOW — U.N. Undersecretary General for Disarmament Affairs Nobuyasu Abe said here today that a “collapse” of the international nonproliferation regime is possible without concerted action, notably by the United States and Russia (see GSN, April 1).

Speaking to top experts and officials from 36 countries at a PIR Center-Carnegie Endowment for International Peace nonproliferation conference, Abe cited complaints that disarmament by nuclear weapon states “proceeds at a snail’s pace.”  While calling the charge “legitimate,” Abe said it should not serve as an excuse for other countries to “renege on nonproliferation obligations.”

“The United States and the Russian Federation,” Abe said, “bear a special responsibility as the world’s two superpowers” to contribute to strengthening international norms of disarmament and nonproliferation.  The recent Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty is a significant step, he said, “but we want more.”

Abe — a Japanese diplomat who assumed his position July 1, succeeding longtime disarmament official Jayantha Dhanapala of Indonesia — said the bolstering of international monitoring and verification efforts the most urgent need at the moment in the field.  He said the cases of Iraq and North Korea demonstrate the insufficiency of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards arrangements but that the Additional Protocol to those agreements can be expected to “greatly enhance” such efforts.

Among other remarks, Abe called for innovative means to prevent biological weapons proliferation in the absence of an effective monitoring system, better physical protection of WMD materials against acquisition by “nonstate actors,” strengthened export controls, better education to “build … a strong norm of prohibition,” and international organization reforms to address a “crisis of multilateral enforcement mechanisms” that encourages unilateralism and coalition-based action.

Back to top

United States to Offer Immunity to Iraqi Scientists for Information

Senior U.S. officials have said Washington plans to offer former mid-level Iraqi scientists immunity from possible prosecution if they provide information on Iraqi WMD programs, the Financial Times reported today (see GSN, Sept. 17).

The Bush administration determined that CIA envoy David Kay, who heads the Iraq Survey Group searching for evidence of alleged Iraqi WMD efforts, needed to offer the former scientists immunity to overcome their reluctance to provide information, according to the Times.  While some scientists have said that Iraq previously destroyed its WMD stockpiles, the White House hopes that such statements are merely bargaining positions and that the scientists might provide information if given immunity (Khalaf/Dinmore, Financial Times, Sept. 18).

Kay left Iraq yesterday to travel to Washington and is expected to present a report on the Iraq Survey Group’s finding as early as next week, a senior U.S. intelligence official said.  The report is expected to focus on evidence of Iraqi plans to resume WMD programs on short-notice and long-range plans to develop and produce weapons of mass destruction if U.N. sanctions against the sale of dual-use items were lifted, U.S. officials said.  No stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction have yet to be found in Iraq (Bob Drogin, Los Angeles Times, Sept 18).

Meanwhile, former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix has said the United States and the United Kingdom overinterpreted prewar intelligence on Iraqi WMD efforts.

“They were convinced that Saddam was going in this direction and I think it is understandable against the background of the man,” Blix said during an interview BBC Radio 4’s Today program.  “But in the Middle Ages people were convinced there were witches.  They looked for them and they certainly found them,” he said (BBC News, Sept. 18).

Back to top

Cheney Defends Pre-Emption Doctrine

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The United States needs to continue to pursue a strategy of pre-emptive action against both terrorist groups and countries that sponsor them to prevent future attacks, U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney said yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 1).

During a speech before a U.S. Air Force Association conference, Cheney said the United States has learned that terrorist groups are attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction.  He warned that if they were to do so, “ they will use them, launching attacks far more deadly than anything we’ve ever experienced.”

To prevent such an attack, “we need a strategy that puts us on offense, that lets us go after those who pose a threat to the United States or our friends and allies, a strategy that allows us to destroy the terrorists before they can launch attacks against us,” Cheney said.

While the Bush administration has worked “aggressively” to improve U.S. defenses against terrorist attacks, “the 1 percent that gets through can still kill you,” Cheney said.  He also discounted strategic approaches used during the Cold War-era to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction, such as arms control agreements and the concept of deterrence.

“The kind of strategy we used against the Soviet Union during the Cold War, where we put at risk those things they valued in order to deter them from ever launching an attack against the United States, simply will not work where terrorists are concerned,” Cheney said.  “There is nothing they value highly enough that we can put at risk to keep them from launching an attack against the United States,” he added.

While the concept of pre-emptive attacks against other countries has been considered to be in violation of international law, Cheney yesterday brushed aside criticism of the White House doctrine.

“Some people, both in this nation and abroad … suggest that somehow it’s wrong for us to strike before an enemy strikes us.  But as President Bush said, if the threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words and all recriminations would come too late,” he said.

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP