Monthly Analysis: February 2006
By: RYAN MAURO (TDCAnalyst@aol.com)
Iraq
The testimony of General Georges Sada, the former #2 man in charge of the Iraqi Air Force, and close advisor to Saddam Hussein, continues to confidently state that Saddam’s WMD was moved to, and concealed in, Syria. In an exclusive report that I prepared recently, another Iraqi general, known as the “Butcher of Basra”, also confirmed that the Saddam’s WMD are being concealed in Syria. Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, who defected in 1991, claims he has deep sources inside Iraq, including some of Saddam Hussein’s former scientists. He also confirmed that, in the mid-1990s, Iraq, under Hussein, developed a relationship with Al-Qaeda.
On a recent radio program, General Sada stated that, in 1984 or 1985, he personally observed Osama Bin Laden in Iraq, at the Iraqi Air Force headquarters. He stated that Bin Laden was seeking contacts for the purpose of building airfields. Sada stated that he doesn’t know if Bin Laden’s presence in Iraq, at that time, was the result of an alliance with Iraq.[1]
The “Saddam tapes” were revealed at the 2006 International Intelligence Summit, at which I also spoke recently. On the tapes, Saddam Hussein and his advisors, as well as some scientists not known to UN inspectors, laugh off the UN inspections process, and discuss an advanced plasma enrichment program commonly utilized in producing nuclear weapons. The tapes that discuss the nuclear program were recorded in the 2000. In one recording, the Iraqis also explain how they can call upon assistance from Brazil and Russia in dealing with the United Nations.
Also on the tapes are statements from throughout the 1990s, including a statement by Saddam Hussein, predicting an attack on Washington D.C., utilizing WMD. He states “this story is coming” but it won’t be from Iraq. Hussein also explains how easy it would be to smuggle weapons and explosives into the US – Hussein queries, “Shouldn’t we consider this possibility?” The Iraqis also discuss “proxies” and how a regime’s involvement in such an operation could be concealed.
Bill Tierney, the senior UNSCOM inspector, who revealed the tapes, interprets the talk as indicating Iraq planned to use “proxies” to attack the United States, and speculates that the 2001 anthrax attacks were an Iraqi plot. On the tapes, the Iraqis even discuss how the US could be made to suspect that the anthrax originated domestically, and noted the Ft. Detrick facility as a site that might be made to appear to be the source. After the 2001 anthrax attacks, the FBI immediately zeroed in on this site -- just as the Iraqis had suggested on the tape.
Others feel that Hussein was simply predicting acts of terrorism, and in stating that “the story won’t come from Iraq,” is clearly ruling out Iraqi participation. It will be interesting to observe the debate over the meaning of that one conversation in the tapes -- if any debate even ensues.
David Gaubatz, a former member of the Air Force’s Office of Special Investigations, who has numerous medals, was in charge of attempting to locate top Iraqi regime figures and Saddam’s WMD. He has reported to the media that, between March and July 2003, Iraqi sources took him to four WMD locations. Three were located around Nasariya, and one was near Umm Qasr. Nearby residents also stated that chemical and biological weapons and long-range missiles were concealed there. At one of the sites, there was a rock with “Death to America” written on it, and an imprint of an al-Samoud missile in the ground.
Gaubatz has described in detail how the Iraqis drained canals, temporarily diverted entire portions of rivers, built tunnels underneath them, then built concrete structures, and let the water flow back in. He also reported that the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) never properly investigated these sites because they were focused on sites in the north of the country. The ISG arrived late after the war began, and was ill-equipped. Gaubatz remains convinced that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, indeed possessed WMD and, that the ISG failed in its mission to locate them.
At the recent Intelligence Summit, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John Shaw spoke regarding the Russian role in relocating Saddam’s WMD to Syria and Lebanon. My book, “Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq” was the first published account, utilizing open-source intelligence, of Russian involvement in the disappearance of Saddam’s WMD.
Shaw stated that Russian Spetsnaz units, dressed as civilians, moved the material and assisted in cleansing Iraq of evidence of illegal WMD activity. There were multiple sightings of loaded trucks moving into northern Syria and returning empty, he said. Information regarding “steel drums with painted warnings” being placed in a hospital cellar, in Beirut, Lebanon, was also received, but dismissed by the Defense Intelligence Agency as Israeli propaganda.
Yevgeny Primakov, former Soviet intelligence chief, and a friend of Saddam Hussein, arrived in Iraq in December 2002, to begin the cleansing operations, code-named “Sarandar.” Two former Soviet generals, who were dispatched after a high-level meeting in Baku, were also in Iraq, supervising the operations. In addition to shipments on the ground, Shaw stated two Russian ships left the port of Umm Qasr, headed for the Indian Ocean. Shaw believes these ships also carried WMD.
Since the Ukrainians were grateful to the United States for assisting them in becoming free from Soviet rule, sources inside the Ukraine have also revealed information on the Russian role. The CIA attempted to discredit Shaw and his Ukrainian and British contacts. It appears then, that the story of what happened to Saddam’s WMD has finally come to light.
Middle East
After many months of rejecting the deal, Iran agreed “in principle” to a Russian proposal to allow joint enrichment on Russian territory, ostensibly, to deprive the Iranians of the critical facilities necessary for producing nuclear weapons. However, if a Russian role in the movement and concealment of Saddam’s WMD programs is indeed true, this current scenario with Iran may simply be a ruse to buy time; just enough time, perhaps, for Iran to test a nuclear weapon, a prospect that significant speculation has been indicating may very well happen in the next few months.
Another problem with the proposal is that we still don’t know the full extent of the Iranian nuclear program. There could very well be hidden sites in Iran, as Iranian opposition sources claim, enriching enough uranium for nuclear weapons, while the limited enrichment continues on Russian territory. It is also interesting to note that Iran has reportedly formed a team of nuclear specialists aimed at infiltrating the IAEA.[2]
In the midst of Iranian defiance, it was encouraging to observe Condoleezza Rice finally call for a budget of $75 million for assistance to the Iranian opposition groups in their goal of regime change in Iran, with an additional $5 million to be allocated for Syrian government opposition groups. This is far too meager an amount, but it does demonstrate that the US Administration may have finally realized that it made a tremendous miscalculation by not immediately assisting Iranian opposition groups after 9/11.
$50 million of the budget for Iran would allocated for radio and TV broadcasts, and $10 million for civil society groups and activists. Hopefully, the US will utilize outlets that can be trusted to broadcast a tough, anti-regime message, full of commentary of events inside the regime. By spreading news of abuses by the regime, and news of instability, further destabilization of the current regime may be possible. If the current US Administration takes this approach, possible scenarios are thus:
A) Bomb Iran’s WMD sites and support the Iranian opposition, who will eventually topple the regime.
B) Bomb Iran’s WMD sites and regime targets in order to assist the Iranian opposition to quickly topple the current regime.
C) Employ methods of deterrence so as to avoid a war, while encouraging an internal revolution against the current regime.
At present, it would appear that the last scenario is the current thinking in US policy-making circles. However, an Iranian nuclear test could easily change all that.
Latin America
Hugo Chavez continued to maintain his customary anti-American rhetoric. This month, unfortunately, I was disappointed to witness this personally. Chavez does have some following in the US. We’ve observed US entertainment celebrities, including anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, supporting Chavez, and speaking with him. At the recent Intelligence Summit, at which I spoke, I also delivered an impromptu offering on the subject, with no notes or preparation, and was immediately lambasted by two attendees who support Chavez. One even stated, “I quite like him.”
Unfortunately, too few people consider Latin America a battlefront in the War on Terror. In late January, Colombia announced the arrest of 19 individuals, involved in passport forgery schemes, who were linked to Al-Qaeda and Hamas. Since 2002, the ring has apparently dispatched an unknown number of operatives to Europe and North America. The nationalities of those involved are said to be Iraqis, Egyptians, Pakistanis and Jordanians.[3]
Asia
A very big story was entirely missed – or ignored -- by the mainstream media recently. In early February, there were multiple attacks against North Korean border guards on their northern border. Observers believe it is the work of “The Free North Korean Soldiers Alliance” which, last December, declared armed struggle against the current regime. Reportedly, the group is led by a former captain of the North Korean special forces, Lim Chang-yon.
The US ought to immediately consider alternatives and strategies to exploit the discontent in the North Korean armed services such that more defections occur. As in Iran, the US should also seriously consider supporting opposition groups that aim to change the unstable regime in North Korea.