HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
CIA
Warned White House Last Oct. That
Iraq/Uranium
Claims Based On Forged Documents
by
Jason Leopold
July
15, 2003
The
CIA successfully got the White House last October to omit references to Iraq’s
alleged attempts to purchase uranium from Niger because the agency concluded
that the documents used to back up the allegations were forgeries, according to
two Democratic members of the Senate’s intelligence committee, both of whom
were briefed by the CIA in classified hearings last year about the uranium
allegations.
But
it still remains unclear how, after briefing the White House and the intelligence
committee that the documents about Iraq’s attempt to procure uranium from Niger
wound up in President Bush’s State of the Union address in January.
Bush
and his top White House advisers said last week the CIA cleared the erroneous
information referenced in the State of the Union address. But White House
officials did not disclose that the British intelligence documents Bush cited
were known forgeries. The claims that Iraq tried to buy uranium from South
Africa was a key point the Bush administration used in trying to sway the
public to support a war against the country.
George
Tenet, director of the CIA, took responsibility Friday for allowing Bush to use
the information in his State of the Union address in January. Still, Democrats
and a handful of Republicans want a broader probe on pre-war intelligence
information used by the White House to build a case for war against Iraq.
British
Prime Minister Tony Blair first mentioned the allegations last September about
Iraq trying to obtain large quantities of uranium from a South African country
just three hours before a Commons debate on whether Britain would use military
force and back the United States in a war against Iraq.
In
an exclusive interview last week, the two Democratic U.S. Senators said the CIA
tried to get Blair to remove the uranium reference from a dossier released by
British intelligence officials because the documents used to support the
allegations were “crude forgeries,” the Senators said.
The
Senators said they could not speak “on the record” because the information the
CIA shared with the intelligence committee is still considered classified.
A
spokesperson for Blair and the CIA would not return numerous calls for comment.
These
members said the Senate Intelligence Committee accused the CIA last September
of withholding information the committee requested on U.S. military action in
Iraq and that after the accusations were made publicly, the CIA briefed the
committee on the existence of the phony uranium documents and other
intelligence information
The
British dossier, which said Iraq had sought large quantities of uranium from
South Africa in an effort to jump start its nuclear weapons program, were
quickly dismissed as forgeries last October in a private meeting in Vienna at
the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to the head of the IAEA,
Mohammed ElBaradei.
The
IAEA quickly realized that the documents handed over by the U.S. and British
were phony after finding one letter purportedly signed by a Nigerian minister
who had been out of office for 10 years.
“The
IAEA was able to review correspondence coming from various bodies of the
Government of Niger, and to compare the form, format, contents and signatures
of that correspondence with those of the alleged procurement-related
documentation,” ElBaradei said in a statement in March. “Based on thorough
analysis, the IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that
these documents - which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium
transactions between Iraq and Niger - are in fact not authentic.”
The
IAEA said the documents in the British dossier included a letter discussing the
uranium deal supposedly signed by Niger President Tandja Mamadou. The IAEA
described the signature as "childlike" and said that it clearly was
not Mamadou's.
Another
document, written on paper from a 1980s military government in Niger, bears the
date of October 2000 and the signature of a man who by then had not been
foreign minister of Niger in 14 years.
A
U.S. intelligence official told CNN in March that the documents were passed on
to the IAEA within days of being received last September with the comment,
" 'We don't know the provenance of this information, but here it is.'
"
The
IAEA had dismissed another erroneous report about Iraq’s nuclear weapons
program earlier in September. The IAEA said that a report cited by President
Bush as evidence that Iraq in 1998 was "six months away" from
developing a nuclear weapon did not exist.
"There's
never been a report like that issued from this agency," Mark Gwozdecky,
the IAEA's chief spokesman, said in a Sept. 26 telephone interview with the
Washington Times.
In
a Sept. 7 news conference with Prime Minister Blair, Bush said: "I would
remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied —
finally denied access [in 1998], a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA
that they were six months away from developing a weapon.”
The
White House told the Washington Times that Bush was referring to an earlier
IAEA report.
"He's
referring to 1991 there," said Deputy Press Secretary Scott McClellan.
"In '91, there was a report saying that after the war they found out they
were about six months away."
But
Gwozdecky said no such report was ever issued by the IAEA in 1991.
The
IAEA also took issue with a Sept. 9 report by the International Institute for
Strategic Studies — cited by the Bush administration — that concludes Saddam
"could build a nuclear bomb within months if he were able to obtain
fissile material," the Washington Times reported
"There
is no evidence in our view that can be substantiated on Iraq's nuclear-weapons
program. If anybody tells you they know the nuclear situation in Iraq right now,
in the absence of four years of inspections, I would say that they're
misleading you because there isn't solid evidence out there," Gwozdecky
told the paper.
"I
don't know where they have determined that Iraq has retained this much
weaponization capability because when we left in December '98 we had concluded
that we had neutralized their nuclear-weapons program. We had confiscated their
fissile material. We had destroyed all their key buildings and equipment,"
he said.
Gwozdecky
said there is no evidence about Saddam's nuclear capability right now — either
through his organization, other agencies or any government.
A
few weeks later, on Sept. 25, 2002, just three hours before a crucial debate in
the House of Commons on whether the British would support a U.S. led coalition
to disarm Iraq by force, Blair publicly released a dossier, much of which was
based on already available public information, but included the frightening
claim that Iraq could launch a nuclear missile in 45 minutes and that the country
sought 500 tons of Uranium from South Africa.
Father
of the House Tam Dalyell, MP for Linlithgow, slammed the cynical timing of the
document's publication saying, "I now understand very clearly why the
Government wanted to produce this report at 8a.m. on the morning of the debate,
rather than subject it to the anvil of expert scrutiny by publishing it a week
in advance.”
The
White House said the findings in the British dossier were “frightening” and
proved that Iraq was an imminent threat to its neighbors in the Middle East and
to the U.S.
But
a day after the dossier was released, Aziz Pahad, South African Deputy Prime
Minister of Foreign Affairs, dismissed the report as a fake. Pahad said the
IAEA had already rejected the claims that Iraq could have obtained uranium from
Africa to make nuclear weapons.
“The
agency (IAEA) had said there was no substance to the report. Four African
countries produced uranium -- South Africa, Namibia, Niger and Gabon -- but
South Africa was the only one capable of producing the enriched uranium for use
in nuclear weapons,” Pahad said in a Sept. 26, 2002 prepared statement.
The
IAEA also said in a statement in September 2002 that it is keeping an eye on
stores of uranium that could be used for nuclear weapons in Africa–and they
would know if any went missing.
Indeed,
in a report by UPI in October 2002, the news service said, “It seems unlikely,
all the same, that the South African government has sold uranium to Iraq.
(Former South African President) F.W. De Klerk, apprehensive about what might
happen with South Africa's nuclear capabilities under an African National
Congress government -- now the ruling party -- had made provision for tight and
regular inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the IAEA
seems happy that its controls are adequate.”
But
the British and top officials in the White House continued to harp on the
uranium allegations, despite the fact that the IAEA had dismissed the documents
as forgeries. When Iraq delivered its 12,000 page weapons report to the United
Nations in December, the U.S. State Department released a fact sheet asking why
hasn’t Iraq accounted for uranium it tried to obtain from Niger.
Secretary
of Defense Donald Rumsfeld also highlighted Iraq’s alleged uranium purchases
from Africa during a Jan. 29 briefing with reporters and called for the U.N. to
support the U.S. in the event of war.
Paul
Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, said Jan. 23, in a speech before
the Council of Foreign Relations in New York that Iraq’s 12,000 page weapons
report to the U.N. was unacceptable because “there is no mention of Iraqi
efforts to procure uranium from abroad.”
The
timing of the statements by Bush’s top advisers was crucial because the U.N. was
gearing up to hold a vote on whether to find Iraq in material breach of a U.N.
resolution calling for the country to disarm, which if U.N. countries voted in
favor of would have allowed the U.S. to start a war with Iraq with the full
support of U.N. member countries.
National
Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice, in a Jan. 23 New York Times op-ed column
headlined “Why We Know Iraq is Lying,” accused Iraq of filing a “false
declaration to the United Nations that amounts to a 12,200-page lie.”
“For
example, the declaration fails to account for or explain Iraq's efforts to get
uranium from abroad,” Rice said in the column.
Jason Leopold, formerly the bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires, is
a freelance journalist based in California. He is currently finishing a book on
the California energy crisis. He can be contacted at jasonleopold@hotmail.com.