Posted on 02/13/2003 4:52:38 PM PST by Utmost Certainty
CIA 'sabotaged inspections and hid weapons details' By Andrew Buncombe in Washington 14 February 2003
Senior democrats have accused the CIA of sabotaging weapons inspections in Iraq by refusing to co-operate fully with the UN and withholding crucial information about Saddam Hussein's arsenal.
Led by Senator Carl Levin, the Democrats accused the CIA of making an assessment that the inspections were unlikely to be a success and then ensuring they would not be. They have accused the CIA director of lying about what information on the suspected location of weapons of mass destruction had been passed on.
The row is of heightened significance given the Bush administration's preparations to argue later today before the UN Security Council that the inspections have run their course and it is now time to move to military action.
France, Russia, Germany and other members of the Security Council are likely to back a counter-proposal to increase the number of inspectors, providing them, if necessary, with the support of armed UN soldiers, as a means of avoiding a military strike.
The accusation of US sabotage emerged from a series of Senate hearings on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, George Tenet, the CIA director, told the armed services committee panel that the agency had provided the UN inspectors with all the information it had on "high" and "moderate" interest locations inside Iraq ? those sites where there was a possibility of finding banned weapons. But Mr Tenet later told a different panel that he had been mistaken and that there were in fact "a handful" of locations the UN inspectors may not have known about.
Senator Levin, from Michigan, responded by saying the CIA director had not been telling the truth. Citing a number of classified letters he had obtained from the agency, he said it was clear the CIA had not shared information with the inspectors about a "large number of sites of significant value".
He said the CIA had told him additional information would be passed to the inspectors within the next few days.
Mr Levin pushed Mr Tenet on whether he thought the inspections had any value. The CIA director replied: "Unless [President Saddam] provides the data to build on, provides the access, provides the unfettered access that he's supposed to, provides us with surveillance capability, there is little chance you're going to find weapons of mass destruction under the rubric he's created inside the country ... The inspectors have been put in a very difficult position by his behaviour.
Mr Levin said later he believed the CIA had, in effect, taken the decision to undermine the inspections. "When they've taken the position that inspections are useless, they are bound to fail," he told The Washington Post. "We have undermined the inspectors."
Mr Levin has raised his concerns with the White House. In a letter to President Bush, the senator asked that America provide the inspectors with as much information as available.
He wrote: "The American people want the inspections to proceed, want the United States to share the information we have with the UN inspectors and want us to obtain United Nations support before military action is used against Iraq."
How about a bump for the new 'U.N. Iraqi Oil Company'.
/sarcasm
Unbelievable.
Last week on Fox News Sunday Levin stated that he voted No on Gulf War '91 because Colin Powell privately was telling Dems to continue diplomatic and embargo efforts. When asked about this Monday Powell emphatically denied it. Levin has been unavailable for comment to Fox since. What a jerk.
To put it simply: Suppose that Saddam has banned weapons in 100 sites, and the CIA knows where 10 of those sites are. If the CIA keeps this info to itself, then and only then can we know if Saddam has given up all his weapons (as he is supposed to). Saddam, not knowing which 10 we know about, must give up all or virtually all his weapons to ensure that we do not know that he is cheating (and could prove it with a commando raid or in the aftermath of an aerial bombardment).
But if the CIA announces those 10 sites, Saddam can probably get the weapons out of most of them before the inspectors can get to them. And even in the unlikely case that the inspectors get all 10, then we have only reduced Saddam's arsenal by 10% (something we could do with aerial bombing anyway, at our leisure if we don't tell all). Worse, Saddam now knows that the rest of his weapons are safe, provided he keeps them in place and prevents new defections. And he can keep them without fear of exposure.
So it would be hugely stupid for the CIA to tell the inspectors where they think weapons are. (Perhaps they could try a site or two, that they know the inspectors can get to quickly, but they certainly shouldn't "shoot their load.") And Levin is another of Saddam's useful idiots.
In his bizzaro world it is the CIA he holds accountable. Somehow he thinks that Iraq producing, storing, and hiding WMD is not the biggie, and if only the CIA had tipped off the inspectors the inspections would then have "worked".
The accusation of US sabotage emerged from a series of Senate hearings on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, George Tenet, the CIA director, told the armed services committee panel that the agency had provided the UN inspectors with all the information it had on "high" and "moderate" interest locations inside Iraq ? those sites where there was a possibility of finding banned weapons. But Mr Tenet later told a different panel that he had been mistaken and that there were in fact "a handful" of locations the UN inspectors may not have known about.
Senator Levin, from Michigan, responded by saying the CIA director had not been telling the truth. Citing a number of classified letters he had obtained from the agency, he said it was clear the CIA had not shared information with the inspectors about a "large number of sites of significant value".
1. The Iraqis don't have anything so the CIA can't tell them where to find something. (not likely)
2. The Iraqis have WMD, but the CIA doesn't have a handle on exact locations. Then we don't give false info to the UN because not finding anything would set us back.
3. We know where it is and the inspectors will leak it when they find out so the Iraqis will move it. We need to have recon available to watch it be moved.
4. We know where it is and the Iraqis refuse admission.
5. We know where it is and the inspectors find it.
In the last 3 cases we need to have aircraft and troops to be ready to start the war that day or very soon afterwards. Therefore we don't give the info to the UN until we are ready for war. I don't think that will be next week. Maybe the end of February or early March, but not right now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.