[casi] News, 20-27/7/02 (3)

[Peter Brooke <pbrooke@DELETETHISukonline.co.uk>]

News, 20-27/7/02 (3)

IRAQI OPPOSITIONS

*  Jury out on anti-Saddam move by Prince Hassan
*  Iraq opposition aims for territorial base
*  Iraqi Opposition Delays Announcement of "Provisional Govt."
*  Iraq Rebels, U.S. to Discuss Saddam
*  Iraqi National Movement calls for Provisional Government in Iraq

REMNANTS OF DECENCY

*  Go on, call Bush's bluff

TURKS 'N' KURDS

*  Turkey asks US to pay for losses from Iraq strike
*  Turkey Warns of Lengthy Iraq War
*  Kurdish State without Kirkuk is fine by Turkey
*   'Al Qaeda' influence grows in Iraq
*  Wolfowitz's visit to Turkey sparks debate on Iraq strike, relations with
the West


IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

*  U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq
*  U.S. denies it received Iraqi visa request
*  Annan rejects new talks with Iraq without progress
*  Iraqi health minister, WHO regional official discuss cooperation

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

*  Iraq seeks steel for nukes


IRAQI OPPOSITIONS

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/opinion/24_07_02_b.htm

*  JURY OUT ON ANTI-SADDAM MOVE BY PRINCE HASSAN
by Dr. Fahed Fanek
Daily Star, Lebanon, 24th July

Many people are intrigued as to why Jordan's former Crown Prince Hassan
attended a conference in London of Iraqi military defectors hoping to seize
power in Baghdad.

What caused tongues to wag was the sight of Prince Hassan entering the
conference hall arm in arm with Dr. Ahmed Chalabi, the financier who
appointed himself leader of the Iraqi opposition in exile - thanks to CIA
help and support. Chalabi, after all, has a bad reputation in Jordan, having
been fined millions of dollars by a Jordanian court for allegedly embezzling
money belonging to the Jordanian people when he headed Petra Bank in the
1980s.

Had the Iraqi opposition Prince Hassan supported been honest and patriotic,
then it would have been acceptable for him to attend their meetings. But
everyone knows it to be a puppet offshore opposition, run from Washington by
remote control, and financed courtesy of the CIA.

The self-exiled defectors Prince Hassan met with were not exactly angels
when they were part of the Iraqi regime before they decided to put
themselves at the service of their country's enemies. For its part, the
Jordanian government denied in a statement any prior knowledge of Prince
Hassan's participation in Iraqi opposition activities. The prince, Amman
said, was acting as an ordinary Jordanian citizen representing only himself.
He was by no means a representative of the Jordanian government. Since the
government and the country's leadership - the king - signed the Jordanian
denial, it was inconceivable that the government could have disowned Prince
Hassan's actions without first consulting with King Abdullah and getting his
approval.

The Jordanian press was expected to bitterly criticize Prince Hassan's
participation in the American-sponsored Iraqi opposition conference.

After all, the main purpose of the meeting was to help prepare Arab public
opinion for an imminent US military strike against the Iraqi people. But the
Jordanian Information Ministry "asked" newspaper editors not to discuss the
subject, and only publish the government statement that considered Prince
Hassan's conduct to have been a personal matter.

Yet the issue was the subject of intense debate among Amman's political
elite. Jordanian politicians differed on the interpretation of the prince's
deed, and particularly on its timing. Prince Hassan attended the meeting at
the same time the government was busy denying that it had agreed to provide
bases for an American attack on Iraq.

On the whole, four separate theories emerged to explain why Prince Hassan
decided to attend the questionable opposition meeting, and by extension
involve himself in the internal affairs of another Arab country - in
violation of widespread popular feelings in Jordan against the Iraqi
opposition. To most if not all Jordanians, the Iraqi opposition in exile is
an American pawn whose only function is to carry out Washington's orders -
especially to provide cover for the upcoming American aggression against
Iraq.

The first theory says Prince Hassan would never have traveled to London to
attend the meeting had King Abdullah not mandated him to do so. Proponents
of this theory say Prince Hassan was serving his nephew, sacrificing his own
reputation among the Jordanian people in doing so.

The second theory says the decision to participate in the opposition meeting
was Prince Hassan's alone, taken without the king's knowledge. His
intention, believers in this theory suggest, was to show the Americans and
Israelis that he was more audacious than King Abdullah in serving their
interests. In other words, Prince Hassan was acting against the king's
wishes by going to the meeting.

The third theory says Prince Hassan is ambitious to be crowned king of Iraq
if the Americans decided to restore the monarchy in Baghdad. But would the
Jordanian prince accept a ride to Baghdad in an American tank?

The fourth theory says Prince Hassan behaved like he did because of his
psychological craving for publicity. For 34 years, while he served as crown
prince, he was the focus of media interest. But this died down after he was
passed over in favor of Abdullah.

Lonely and feeling isolated, Prince Hassan decided to regain center stage by
going to the London meeting. If this was the case, then he did succeed
somewhat.

It has to be mentioned at this point that Prince Hassan is much too
intelligent and worldly wise to undertake such an action without thinking it
through. He was Jordan's No. 2 man for many decades, and is an accomplished
intellectual to boot. He founded and heads the Arab Thought Forum, and
chairs the Club of Rome, a global think tank and center of innovation and
initiative. During his long career in power, Prince Hassan sat on the boards
of many universities and scientific forums. He chaired countless
intellectual seminars and wrote books on politics. He has met with Eastern
and Western government officials. It is therefore inconceivable that he
should waste his standing in Jordanian society - painstakingly built over 34
years - with one rash move.

The big question is whether Prince Hassan was furthering Jordan's - as
opposed to his own - interests. But Jordan's interests are well known, and
have been endorsed by King Abdullah, the government and the people. So how
could Prince Hassan permit himself to oppose the will of his people and his
own family? And is it in Jordan's interests that the Americans invade Iraq?
In fact, such a scenario would pose grave threats to Jordan's vital
interests.

Prince Hassan's statements to the press did nothing to reveal his true
motives. He said that he attended the meeting because he was invited and
that his real motive was to end the suffering of the Iraqi people. But he
failed to explain how attending an opposition conference in London would
help the Iraqi people. And was he not worried that the Americans might use
his attendance to convey an impression of Arab backing for war on Iraq?

Prince Hassan has a long history of opposing American aggression against
Iraq since 1991. He has long opposed interference in the internal affairs of
Arab countries. On the whole, he has been renowned for his pan-Arab
positions. That was why people were puzzled by his decision to take part in
the London meeting of dissident Iraqi officers.

Only time will reveal his true intentions. Judgment must be reserved till
then.

Dr. Fahed Fanek is one of Jordan's leading economics and media consultants.
He wrote this commentary for The Daily Star


http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,763283,00.html

*  IRAQ OPPOSITION AIMS FOR TERRITORIAL BASE
by Brian Whitaker
The Guardian, 26th July

The US-funded Iraqi opposition will today announce plans to set up a
provisional government "on any free ground" in Iraq.

Its aim is to establish a territorial base, gain international recognition
and create a framework for government.

But some in the opposition say the move is more likely to inflame political
rivalries than hasten the downfall of Saddam Hussein.

The plan will be unveiled today at a press conference in Kensington town
hall in London. It will be presented by Ahmad Chalabi, the head of the Iraqi
National Congress, and Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein, a claimant to the Iraqi
throne who is also a leading figure in the INC. They will be joined by
representatives of a new opposition group, the Iraqi National Movement.

Although sources say the provisional government would not be proclaimed
"until the moment fighting starts", there are fears that the preparations
will lead to squabbling.

"It's a stupid thing," said Saad Jabr, of the London-based Free Iraqi
Council.

"It's too early, too premature. The guys who are not in it - they'll all be
against it. If you announce a government in exile, other groups can do it
too."

The plan seeks to include all the main political groups in the provisional
government, but sources close to the opposition doubt that is possible.

The exiled opposition consists of dozens of groups which regularly
subdivide, while opponents of the regime inside Iraq cannot be involved
openly - at least, not yet.

A meeting of exiled Iraqi officers in London earlier this month encountered
similar problems. It salvaged unity by electing an unnamed committee without
a chairman.

Opposition insiders say there has been friction between Dr Chalabi and
Sharif Ali in the past, although they now appear on good terms.

The obvious base for an alternative government would be in the Kurdish areas
of northern Iraq, where Baghdad has no control. But the Kurds already have
their own system of government and there are conflicting claims as to
whether Jalal Talabani, leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, has
agreed to let it operate from there.

Some see the INC's move mainly as an attempt to improve its standing in
Washington: "They want to show they're doing something," Mr Jabr said. As
the main umbrella group for the Iraqi opposition, the INC has been heavily
supported by US taxpayers over the years, but has run into arguments about
its accounting practices.


http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=7/27/02&Cat=4&Num=7

*  IRAQI OPPOSITION DELAYS ANNOUNCEMENT OF "PROVISIONAL GOVT."
Tehran Times, 27th July

LONDON -- Exiled members of the Iraqi opposition meeting in London Friday
postponed an expected announcement of plans for a "provisional government"
in their country, a delay that appeared to reinforce reports of splits in
their ranks.

A new government in Iraq is being planned as an alternative to the regime of
President Saddam Hussein, according to press reports, amid speculation the
United States is planning action against Baghdad as the next target in its
"war on terror".

However, despite being buoyed by U.S. President George W. Bush's pledge to
use "all tools" at his disposal to remove Saddam, opposition factions appear
divided.

Some among them argue that preparations for an alternative administration
are more likely to inflame internal political rivalries than precipitate
Saddam's downfall.

The Iraqi National Congress (INC), one of the principal opposition groups in
exile, was planning a press conference in London Friday, at which it was due
to "announce a plan for a provisional government", a spokesman told AFP.

INC spokesman Faisal Qaragholi said that opposition figures were holding
talks about "a provisional government based on Iraqi soil, in the north of
Iraq".

Earlier this month, after three days of meetings in London, former Iraqi
officers in exile called on the Iraqi Army to topple Saddam, and said they
were setting up a war council to help do so.

But minutes before Friday's conference was due to be held, the INC issued a
statement that it had been postponed "until further notice, to enable
further discussion among Iraqi opposition groups".

No date was given for a further press conference.

As well as the INC, an umbrella group which brings together figures aiming
to topple Saddam, another opposition group -- the Iraqi National Movement --
was to have taken part in the meeting with journalists. According to the
"Guardian" newspaper, a provisional government would not be formally
proclaimed "until the moment fighting starts."

[.....]

Meanwhile, there is also dispute over how representative the exiled
opposition factions are and how much support they could muster inside Iraq.

Last month, an Iraqi opposition figure told AFP that a U.S.-sponsored Iraqi
opposition conference which was to have been held in late June or early July
was postponed indefinitely, and would be replaced by meetings of working
groups aimed at organizing an enlarged gathering.

Ghassan al-Atiyyah said a wing of the U.S. administration had obstructed the
State Department's efforts to organize the meeting because it feared it
would marginalize the INC.

The State Department had reportedly planned to spend five million dollars
(euros) on a conference at which both Iraqi dissidents and experts would
look into how to govern Iraq if President Saddam Hussein is removed from
office.


http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2002/jul/27/072708603.html

*  IRAQ REBELS, U.S. TO DISCUSS SADDAM
Las Vegas Sun (from ASSOCIATED PRESS), 27th July

LONDON- The United States has invited six Iraqi opposition groups to
Washington next month for talks on removing Saddam Hussein, spokesmen for
three of the factions said Saturday.

The State Department confirmed a meeting was planned either Aug. 9 or Aug.
16 to coordinate "our work with the Iraqi opposition."

A spokesman for the Iraqi National Congress, Nabil Mousawi, said in London
that the congress, an umbrella group of dissident parties, would accept the
invitation.

"It is the first time that the U.S. administration has issued a joint letter
from the Pentagon, the State Department and other agencies," Mousawi said.
"Finally we have one intended policy from all sections of the
administration."

He said the opposition groups wanted to hear confirmation that the Bush
administration is committed to overthrowing Saddam.

"We will hear from them how this is going to be coordinated between the
Iraqi opposition and the U.S. government," Mousawi said.

President Bush has described Saddam as a menace and said he wants him
removed, but Iraqi dissidents want to know how far the United States is
prepared to go to accomplish that.

State Department spokesman Frederick Jones said the meeting would be hosted
by Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman and Undersecretary of Defense
Douglas J. Feith.

The leader of the small Constitutional Monarchy Movement, Sharif Ali Bin
Al-Hussein, said in London that his party had accepted the invitation.

In Damascus, the Syrian representative of the Supreme Council for Islamic
Revolution in Iraq, Bayan Jabber, said his group was invited, but had not
yet decided whether it would attend. The council draws its support from
Iraq's Shiite Muslim majority.

Jones said the other parties invited are the Iraqi National Accord, another
umbrella group, and the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union
of Kurdistan.

The Kurd groups are the two main powers in the Kurdish zone of northern
Iraq, which is beyond the control of the Baghdad government. Spokesmen for
the groups in London and Ankara, Turkey, said they heard of the meeting, but
could not confirm their leaderships had been invited.

Representatives of the Iraqi National Accord could not be reached Saturday.

The Iraqi National Congress, which is based in London, took part in a
meeting of former Iraqi military officers and opposition groups in the
British capital earlier this month.

Representatives of the State Department and Pentagon attended the meeting.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said afterward that it was "a
useful tool."

In June, Bush administration officials discussed preparations for a
post-Saddam Iraq with representatives of the two Kurdish groups, the supreme
council, the national accord and other groups.


http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=2750

*  IRAQI NATIONAL MOVEMENT CALLS FOR PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT IN IRAQ
Kurdmedia.com, 28th July

London, Al-Zaman -- The Iraqi National Movement (a civilian-military
opposition movement) has announced that it has held consultations with the
two members of the Iraqi National Congress presidency, Ahmad al-Jalabi and
Al-Sharif Ali Bin-al-Husayn, with the aim of calling for the formation of a
provisional government in Iraq.

The intention is that this provisional government will include figures from
inside and outside Iraq.

Dr. Mudar Shawkat, official in the INM Executive Committee, said that the
INM will announce the details of its proposal at a news conference to be
held in London soon. He added that the INM Executive Committee will hold its
first meeting in London tomorrow and the day after "in which it will discuss
several issues, including some that are to do with the officers' conference
held earlier this month." He added that the INM has studied the minutes of
the conference and has formulated its comments and that these will be
discussed with the military council which emanated from the officers'
conference."

The INM -- which is headed by Major General Hasan al-Naqib -- includes 100
figures, most of whom are officers. Its members include Deputy Secretary
General Hatim Mukhlis; Major Gen. Mahdi Abdallah; Maj. Gen. Sa'ib Hilmi;
Baha Shabib; Maj. Gen. Bara al-Rubay'i; Brigadier General Ahmad al-Samarra'
i; Colonel Adil al-Juburi; Maj. Gen. Khalid al-Ubaydi; Brig. Gen. Imad
al-Ansari; and others.

In statements to Al-Zaman yesterday, Shawkat added that "there is a dialogue
at the leadership level between quarters from the INM, the INC, and the
military council, aimed at agreeing on common denominators and broadening
the military council to include a larger number of officers.

Asked why the INM did not take part in the officers' conference, Shawkat
said: "The conference came as a surprise, given that we did suggest
postponing it to allow the idea to mature and enable all officers -- and not
only some of them -- to take part." He added that "the formation of a
military council was not on the cards and came as a surprise to us."

He went on: "The closing statement of the conference which included
political resolutions that are at odds with the principle put forward by the
statement itself -- namely that the military should not intervene in
politics -- also came as a surprise to us." He also mentioned another point
of disagreement which is to do with the INM's insistence that the military
council should have a chairman "given that it is not a political council
which can have a collective leadership. We believe that Maj. Gen. Hasan
al-Naqib meets the requirements that qualify him to head the council."


REMNANTS OF DECENCY

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4466040,00.html

*  GO ON, CALL BUSH'S BLUFF
by Hans von Sponeck
Guardian, 22nd July

During the 17 months of the Bush administration just about everything has
gone wrong for the US government in preparing the public for military
strikes against Iraq. Convincing friendly governments and allies has not
fared much better. Acts of terrorism against US facilities overseas and the
anthrax menace at home could not be linked to Iraq. Evidence of
al-Qaida/lraq collaboration does not exist, neither in the training of
operatives nor in support to Ansar-al-Islam, a small fundamentalist group
which allegedly harbours al-Qaida elements and is trying to destabilise
lraqi Kurdistan.

In the aftermath of the carnage of September 11, the political landscape in
the Middle East has changed dramatically. Years of US double standards in
dealing with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict have taken a heavy toll. The
Arab, Turkish and Kurdish public in the area is wary of facing more turmoil,
suffering and uncertainty.

The Beirut summit of the Arab League in March signalled that all 22
governments want to see an end to the conflict with Iraq. Saudi Arabia and
Iraq have since reopened their border at Arar and Saudi businessmen are
selling their wares in Baghdad. Iraq has agreed to return Kuwait's national
archives and to discuss the issue of missing Kuwaitis. Iran and Iraq have
accelerated the exchange of refugees. Syria has normalised its relations
with Iraq. Lebanon has done the same. Hardly a week passes without Turkish
and Jordanian officials and business delegations visiting Iraq. Jordan's
national airline flies five times a week between Amman and Baghdad. Airlinks
exist between Damascus and Baghdad. Iraqi Kurdistan maintains contacts with
Baghdad at scientific, cultural and sports levels and tries to make the best
out of its present (albeit tenuous) local stability. Iraq's political and
economic isolation in the Middle East is all but over.

A wave of senior US visitors has tried to dislocate these trends towards
normalisation and reconciliation in this troubled region. The US
administration has put the UN secretary general on a short leash in his
meetings with the Iraqi authorities. The only topic worthy of discussion
according to the Americans is the return to Iraq of the UN arms inspectors.
This became most apparent during the recently concluded talks with the
Iraqis in Vienna.

Europe is increasingly uncomfortable with this unilateral insistence on
solving the Iraqi conflict militarily. In varying degrees the same applies
to countries in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has served notice that the
Sultan air base near Riyadh will not be available for a new US offensive
against Iraq. Under severe US pressure, Qatar has agreed to permit the
transfer of logistics from Saudi Arabia to its territory. A political crisis
is looming in Jordan as a result of US demands to use Jordan as a possible
staging area in a war against Iraq. A similar debacle will face the Turkish
government once the prime minister, Bulent Ecevit, decides to relinquish his
post and fresh elections are scheduled. An entire region is being
destabilised to suit American preferences for political change in Iraq.

Concurrently, a systematic dis- and mis-information campaign, one of the
biggest ever undertaken by the US authorities, is intensifying. The US and
the international public are being sedated daily with increasing doses of
propaganda about the threat Iraq poses to the world in 2002. In the
forefront of those advocating war against Iraq has been the US deputy
secretary of defence, Paul Wolfowitz, who sees a military solution as the
only option. On July 14 he stated in Istanbul: "President Bush has made it
clear how dangerous the current Iraqi regime is to the United States and
that it represents a danger we cannot live with indefinitely."

To make such statements without offering supporting evidence is
irresponsible. It promotes government-induced mass hysteria in the US and is
meant to garner bipartisan support for military action. A war on Iraq
justified by conjecture is politically foolish and morally repugnant. In the
words of the Archbishop of Wales, Dr Rowan Williams: "It is deplorable that
the world's most powerful nations continue to regard war, and the threat of
war, as an acceptable instrument of foreign policy."

The US Department of Defence and the CIA know perfectly well that today's
Iraq poses no threat to anyone in the region, let alone in the United
States. To argue otherwise is dishonest. They know, for example, that
al-Dora, formerly a production centre for vaccine against foot and mouth
disease on the outskirts of Baghdad, and al-Fallujah, a pesticide and
herbicide manufacturing unit in the western desert, are today defunct and
beyond repair. The UN concluded the former had been involved in biological
agent research and development and the latter in the production of materials
for chemical warfare. UN disarmament personnel permanently disabled al-Dora
in 1996. During a visit with a German TV crew to al-Dora in mid-July - a
site chosen by me and not the Iraqi authorities - I found it in the same
destroyed condition in which I had last seen it in 1999. Al-Fallujah was
partially destroyed in 1991 during the Gulf war and again in December 1998,
during operation desert fox. In between a UN disarmament team disabled all
facilities in any way related to weapons of mass destruction there,
including the castor oil production unit. My visit this month disclosed
beyond any doubt that the castor oil unit was inoperable. Remnants of other
production facilities are used to manufacture herbicides and pesticides for
plant protection and household use.

One does not need to be a specialist in weapons of mass destruction to con
clude that these sites had been rendered harmless and have remained in this
condition. The truly worrying fact is that the US Department of Defence has
all of this information. Why then, one must ask, does the Bush
administration want to include Iraq in its fight against terrorism? Is it
really too far-fetched to suggest that the US government does not want UN
arms inspectors back in Iraq? Do they fear that this would lead to a
political drama of the first order since the inspectors would confirm what
individuals such as Scott Ritter have argued for some time, that Iraq no
longer possesses any capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction? This
indeed would be the final blow to the "war against Iraq" policy of the Bush
administration, a policy that no one else wants. The Iraqis would be well
advised to seize this opportunity and open their doors without delay to
time-limited arms inspectors, thereby confirming that they indeed have
nothing to hide.

This would make a US war against Iraq next to impossible and start the long
journey towards the country's return to normality. What was it that Paul
Wolfowitz said on the west front of the US Capitol on April 15? "May God
bless all the peacemakers in the world." He still has a chance to be among
them.

Hans von Sponeck was the UN humanitarian aid coordinator for Iraq from
1998-2000 and has just returned from a two-week stay in Iraq


TURKS 'N' KURDS

http://www.dawn.com/2002/07/21/int1.htm

*  TURKEY ASKS US TO PAY FOR LOSSES FROM IRAQ STRIKE
Dawn, 21st July, 10 Jamadi-ul-Awwal 142

ANKARA, July 20: The US should compensate for any damages Turkey would incur
in a possible military operation against its neighbour Iraq, Turkish Prime
Minister Bulent Ecevit said on Saturday.

"The United States is our closest ally. And we are situated in a very
critical location," Ecevit said in an interview with the mass-circulation
daily Sabah.

"Whether there is an operation in Iraq or not, whether Turkey participates
in such an operation or not, we believe the US should meet as much as
possible the sacrifices that we would endure," Ecevit said.

Turkey has urged the US to keep up intense consultations on possible
military operations on Iraq, which it fears could spell dire consequences
for its crisis-hit economy and regional political balances.

Given Washington's determination to get rid of Saddam Hussein, Ankara's
position has now focused on demanding economic and political guarantees from
the US rather than opposing an operation, observers say.

US Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz met Turkish leaders in Ankara
this week, and his talks were widely interpreted to have resulted in a
softening in Ankara's stiff opposition to a military move against Iraq.


http://cgi.wn.com/?action=display&article=14759501&template=baghdad/indexsea
rch.txt&index=recent

*  TURKEY WARNS OF LENGTHY IRAQ WAR
The Associated Press, 21st July

ANKARA: Turkey's embattled prime minister on Sunday warned the United States
risked becoming bogged down in a long war if it moves ahead with plans to
topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

"Iraq is ... so developed technologically and economically despite the
embargo, that it cannot be compared to Afghanistan or Vietnam,'' Prime
Minister Bulent Ecevit said in an interview on state-run television.

"It will not be possible for the (United States) to get out of there
easily,'' Ecevit said after a recent visit to the crucial NATO-member
country on Iraq's northern border by Deputy Defense Minister Paul Wolfowitz.
The Pentagon No. 2 was in Turkey to lobby for it's assistance in any U.S.
move against Saddam.

Ecevit said he did not know when the action might occur or what shape it
might take. President Bush has said U.S. policy demand's the Iraqi leader's
ouster.

He said the United States should consider measures other than a military
action in Iraq, but did not elaborate.

[.....]

"There is a de facto Kurdish state in northern Iraq, we cannot allow this go
any further,'' Ecevit said.

[.....]


http://www.kurdmedia.com/reports.asp?id=970

*  KURDISH STATE WITHOUT KIRKUK IS FINE BY TURKEY
 by R. M. Ahmad
KurdishMedia.com, 21st July

Informed Sources state that Hussein Qifriq Aughlu, a high ranking officer in
Turkish army, has told Paul Wolfowitz, the Assistant Secretary of USA
Defence Minister, that Turkey would interfere directly if a Kurdish State,
which included Kirkuk, was established.

During the meeting at Turkish Army Head Quarter, he pointed to Kurdistan
City of Kirkuk on an Iraqi Kurdistan map and said: If a condition, not
acceptable to us, developed in North Iraq, especially in Kirkuk as the
consequences of your coming military operations, that would be very
sensitive to us and I would like to inform you that we shall interfere
directly in the region in case a Kurdish State with Kirkuk established." He
stressed that Turkmans, living in Kirkuk, concern Turkey a lot. He added
that he, himself, was a Turkman descendant.

The Assistant Secretary of USA Defence Minster was on a visit to Turkey to
persuade Turks to give up their support for sources of terror and terrorism
in Iraq and give up their objection to eradicate these sources of terror and
terrorism through a military campaign to liberate Iraq from these sources of
terror and terrorism and eradicating them.

The Turks have made many demands from the USA as a price for their
cooperation with the USA against sources of terror and terrorism in Iraq. It
seems that the Assistant Secretary of USA Defence Minister has not agreed on
all their demands like allowing Turkey to take over Kirkuk. That is why
Turkish Officials now playing a different game, knocking on the door of
Kurds and calling: O.K. If we get Kirkuk you can have your Kurdish State.
Otherwise they directly interfere if this new Kurdish State includes Kirkuk.

These Turkish Officials are really shortsighted. If Iraqi Kurds seeking
separation and accepted the existing crumbs without Kirkuk, most probably
Saddam Hussein would have been the first one in history who recognised an
independent Kurdish State. It is Ironic that these Turkish Officials, the
product of a 600-year-old empire intellect and culture, are so incapable to
recognise requirements of the modern world and how incapable to comprehend
that in 21st century you cannot do any thing you want because you have an
extremely strong armed forces.

These armed forces, Turkish armed forces, built on the back of their
population and caused Turkey to become a source of cheap labour for European
Labour Market and depend on the IMF and USA hand outs for its survival. This
is really a good final product of a 600-year-old Ottoman Empire. A product,
Turkish Republic, which take children to court for demanding to study in
their mothers' tongue or imprisoning an elected Kurdish legislator for
wearing Kurdish costumes and depriving 20 million Kurds, under its control,
from their basic rights.

[.....]

It is vitally important for the free world to keep Turkey at bay, not to
take over Kirkuk. Turkish Ruling class are insecure and paranoiac exactly
like Saddam Hussein. If they take over Kirkuk, they will inflame the region
from Mediterranean to China border in a long-term turmoil threatening the
security of free world. They use Turkman cause as an excuse, which is not
valid because Turkmans have never had it so good within Iraqi Liberated
Kurdistan since the establishment of the state of Iraq.

They claim they want to protect Turkmans from the Kurds but they never came
by words or deeds to protect Turkmans from tyranny and atrocity of Saddam
Hussein against Turkmans. Today, Turkmans enjoy their full democratic rights
in Iraqi liberated Kurdistan. But where they, Turkmans, live under Iraqi
Government, their properties confiscated, their rights violated and
forcefully deported to south Iraq or Liberated Kurdistan. So whom Turkey
bluffs? Certainly only itself.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2149499.stm

*   'AL QAEDA' INFLUENCE GROWS IN IRAQ
by Jim Muir
BBC, 24th July

A pocket of militant Islamic extremists, believed to be linked to Osama Bin
Laden's al-Qaeda movement, is causing havoc in the Kurdish area of northern
Iraq.

The presence of the violently anti-American group, known as the Ansar
al-Islam (Partisans of Islam), is likely to attract increasing attention as
US moves to overthrow Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime gather pace.

A number of Washington's regional adversaries - including both Baghdad and
Iran - appear to have a finger in the Ansar pie.

The Ansar are largely made up of Iraqi Kurds belonging to several radical
Islamic groups which merged late last year.

They control a string of villages in the plains and mountains between the
town of Halabja and the mountain ridge which marks Iraq's border with Iran.

But many of the Ansar's Kurdish members are believed to have returned from
Afghanistan, where they had gone for training and to wage jihad (Holy War)
alongside al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Kurdish leaders who run the rest of Iraqi Kurdistan, and who have suffered
heavily at the Ansar's hands, say that at least 20 or 30 Arabs linked to
al-Qaeda have also come from Afghanistan to join the Islamist pocket.

The area has been dubbed "Iraq's Tora Bora" by some locals after the
al-Qaeda stronghold in Afghanistan.

The worst atrocity occurred in the village of Khela Hama, near Halabja,
which was overrun by radical Islamic fighters last year.

They captured and massacred 42 Peshmerga guerrillas from the Patriotic Union
of Kurdistan (PUK), which controls the eastern half of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Some of the victims' hands were tied behind their backs when they died. The
aftermath was filmed by the Ansar themselves, only to have the tape captured
in a PUK counter-attack.

Since then, clashes with the PUK have continued. On 4 July, Ansar militants
attacked PUK positions and killed eight Peshmergas, though the attack was
beaten back.

Exactly who is involved with the Ansar and in what way is not clear.

The PUK leader, Jalal Talabani, says the one certain thing is that they had
ties with al-Qaeda and Afghanistan:

"Many of them were trained there, and there are now about 20 to 30 Arabs who
are trained from Afghanistan and who also came here to Kurdistan, and are
now with them. Even their leaders are from these Arabs."

One of those leaders is Abu Wa'il, a former Iraqi army officer.

A captured Iraqi intelligence officer of 20 years' standing, Abu Iman
al-Baghdadi, who is held by the PUK, said Abu Wa'il is actively manipulating
the Ansar on behalf of Iraqi intelligence.

"I was captured by the Kurds after Iraqi intelligence sent me to check what
was happening with Abu Wa'il, following rumours that he'd been captured and
handed over the CIA," al-Baghdadi said.

He added that Baghdad smuggles arms to the Ansar through the Kurdish area,
and is using the group to make problems for the PUK, one of the opposition
factions ranged against Saddam Hussein.

"The Ansar's basic allegiance is to al-Qaeda, but some of them were trained
in Iraq and went Afghanistan," he said, interviewed in a Kurdish prison.

"When the Americans attacked, they came here through Iran. Iraq is
supporting them and using them to carry out attacks."

But Kurdish sources also believe that Iran is arming and training Ansar
members, despite Tehran's denials. Ansar wounded are also said to have been
treated in Iranian hospitals.

"The Iranian Government always plans to make Islamic security along its
border with Kurdistan. Iran is also using these Islamic groups as a pressure
card on the secular groups in Kurdistan," says Shwar Mohammad, editor of the
Kurdish weekly Hawlati and one of the few people to have interviewed the
Ansar leader Mullah Krekar.

Iran has for some time had a strong relationship with the PUK, but is said
to be displeased with the Kurdish groups' secret discussions with the
Americans about plans to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

As was the case with the Taleban in Afghanistan, there is no love lost
between Tehran and the Iraqi ruler.

But Iran equally has no desire to see Saddam displaced by an American-led
regime change that would put US forces on Iran's western flank.

The Ansar leader, Mullah Krekar - his real name is Najmuddin Faraj - has
citizenship in Norway where he once sought refuge.

He left Iraqi Kurdistan recently, supposedly to raise funds in Norway, but
the authorities there say he has not turned up.

So his current whereabouts are a mystery.

A stern young man with a black beard and black-and-white turban, he gave
Hawlati's Shwan Mohammad a stark vision of the brand of Islam to which he
and his followers subscribe.

"Democracy is based on four principles which are rejected by Islam," he
said. "As far as Islam is concerned, democracy, from beginning to end, is
heresy."

If both Iraq and Iran are indeed involved with the Ansar in one way or
another, that would make strange bedfellows of the two neighbours who fought
a long and bloody war through most of the 1980s and remain on difficult
terms.


http://www.dailystar.com.lb/27_07_02/art30.asp

*  WOLFOWITZ'S VISIT TO TURKEY SPARKS DEBATE ON IRAQ STRIKE, RELATIONS WITH
THE WEST
by Mehmet Binay
The Daily Star (Lebanon), 27th July

ANKARA: US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz's recent visit to
Turkey precipitated a flurry of debate in the country about whether or not
the US will launch an imminent operation against Iraq and whether the
removal of the embattled Iraqi leader will benefit Turkey economically,
militarily and politically.

Professor Bulent Aliriza, an expert on Turkish-US relations at the Center
for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, told The Daily Star
that he believes the US has not yet committed itself to a specific plan of
action against Iraq.

According to Aliriza, Wolfowitz's visit must be seen as an "effort by one of
the leading hawks involved in the ongoing policy implementation debate to
obtain preliminary assurances from Ankara that it would support the United
States in the event of a war to help convince the skeptics in Washington."

"The hard bargaining with the admittedly weak Turkish government will follow
the finalization of the debate in Washington," Aliriza added.

Cengiz Candar, an expert on Turkish-US relations and the wider Middle East,
said that "Wolfowitz's visit was a sign that Washington wanted Turkey to be
a member of the European Union in order to make Ankara a "better role model
for development and modernity in the wider Islamic world."

During his visit, Wolfowitz told a conference on Turkish-US relations that:
"Turkey's aspiration to join the European Union is a development that should
be welcomed by all people who share the values of freedom and democracy that
grew out of the European civilization," adding that "these are not only
Western values, but Muslim, Asian and universal values as well."

"Europe has a strategic stake to help Turkey realize its aspirations to join
the EU, to demonstrate to the 1.2 billion Muslims in the world that there is
a far better path than the one offered by the terrorists," Wolfowitz added.

For over a week Turkish columnists and analysts have been mulling over the
type of financial and political assistance the country may receive  for
supporting American interests in the region.

The Turkish daily Yeni Safak claimed this week that Wolfowitz discussed a
financial package worth $36 billion during his official and private meetings
with Turkish leaders.

According to the daily, $10 billion would be in the form of direct financial
aid in a bid to buoy the Turkish economy, while some $5 billion in long-term
loans would be dispersed and $11 billion given to Turkey to help alleviate
Ankara's military debt to the United States.

Sami Kohen, a leading columnist for the Turkish daily Milliyet, believes
that Wolfowitz brought back to Washington Turkey's concerns regarding
possible damage to its economy should there be a US-led operation to topple
the Iraqi leader.

Kohen praised Wolfowitz's positive remarks about possible additional
economic help to Turkey, and asserted that the US official would lobby for
further economic assistance to Ankara.

Turkey suffered considerable economic losses due to the 1991 Gulf War.
Estimates vary from $30 billion to $60 billion in different sectors of the
economy such as tourism, bilateral trade with Iraq and reduced Turkish
investment in the Middle East.

While a military offensive against Iraq could mean a temporary suspension of
all Turkish trade activity with Baghdad and possible large-scale migration
from northern Iraq, some businessmen have expressed a keen interest in the
possibilities a post-Saddam Iraq might hold.

Nejar Kocer, president of Gaziantep Chamber of Industry, represents a
business community with strong links to the Arab world and which has
successfully entered the Syrian market.

"After Abdullah Ocalan, (jailed leader of the separatist Kurdish movement)
left Syria, relations between Damascus and Ankara improved dramatically," he
said.

"Turkey's annual trade volume with Syria increased from $60 million to $1
billion in only three years," Kocer told The Daily Star.

He asserted that a post-Saddam era would "boost economic activity" in the
Middle East.

"A new Iraqi government could work without UN embargoes and sanctions. Iraq,
with its educated population and large natural resources, could turn into a
huge, lucrative market for Turkey and other Middle Eastern countries," Kocer
said.

"This would also help Turkish companies that already know the Iraqi market
well."

[.....]


IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2002/jul/20/072004304.html

*  U.N. HUMANITARIAN COORDINATOR IN IRAQ
Las Vegas Sun (from AP), 20th July

BAGHDAD, Iraq- The new head of the U.N. humanitarian program in Iraq took up
his post, admitting on arrival in Baghdad he was facing a difficult task.

Ramiro Armando de Oliveira Lopes da Silva of Portugal will serve as the
humanitarian coordinator for the oil-for-food program, set up in 1996 to
provide relief from the sanctions imposed on Iraq in 1990 following Iraq's
invasion of Kuwait. The program allows Iraq to sell oil to buy food,
medicine and other humanitarian goods under U.N. supervision.

"There is a heavy agenda ahead of me," Lopes da Silva, 53, told reporters
late Friday. "The role of the U.N. in Iraq is rather a complex role,
particularly in the oil-for-food program. It is an enormous program," he
said, without elaborating.

The former special envoy of the World Food Program to Afghanistan, Lopes da
Silva replaces Tun Myat of Myanmar, who was recently appointed U.N. security
coordinator. Lopes da Silva is based in Baghdad.

To lift the U.N. sanctions, international weapons inspectors must certify
Iraq has eliminated its weapons of mass destruction. Baghdad claims it has
done so, but has not let inspectors into Iraq since 1998, saying sanctions
must be lifted first.

The United States has accused Iraq of stockpiling and producing chemical and
biological weapons, warning President Saddam Hussein of unspecified
consequences of his actions.


http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/news.asp?ArticleID=58288

*  U.S. DENIES IT RECEIVED IRAQI VISA REQUEST
Gulf News (from Reuters), 21st July

The United States dismissed on Friday an Iraqi complaint that an Iraqi
delegation could not get visas to attend a UN meeting in New York, saying
that Iraq did not ask for the visas in the first place.

The Iraqi Foreign Ministry said on Thursday it had protested to the United
Nations that its delegation members were denied visas to take part in a
preparatory panel for the International Criminal Court.

But U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said, "the U.S.
delegation to the United Nations received no requests for visas from the
Iraqi delegation to the UN regarding Iraqi officials' attendance at meetings
on the International Criminal Court in New York from July 1 to 12."

A U.S. official said when countries do not have diplomatic relations with
the United States, official delegations to the United Nations obtain U.S.
visas through the U.S. mission in New York.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/world/1505860

*  ANNAN REJECTS NEW TALKS WITH IRAQ WITHOUT PROGRESS
Houston Chronicle (from Reuters), 23rd July

UNITED NATIONS - Secretary-General Kofi Annan told U.N. Security Council
members and a television interviewer today he did not intend to hold further
talks with Iraq until Baghdad showed some willingness to allow U.N. arms
inspectors back into the country.

Some council diplomats at the monthly luncheon with the secretary-general
reported that Annan, however, stressed that the channel for a dialogue
should not be closed following the third round of unsuccessful talks with
Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri in Vienna on July 5-6.

The United States believes that three rounds of talks with no progress were
sufficient but other envoys hoped the discussions would continue, if for no
other reason than to ward off any possible U.S. attack.

The inspectors left Iraq in December 1998, the eve of a U.S.-British bombing
campaign to punish Baghdad for not cooperating with the arms experts.
Accounting for Iraq's dangerous weapons is key to suspending U.N. sanctions,
imposed when Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990.

Later Tuesday, Annan told CNN's Lou Dobbs "Moneyline" he deliberately did
not set a date for another session after the Vienna talks until the Iraqis
gave a "reason to meet again."

"You will note that in Vienna I did not set another date, a date for another
meeting saying that they should go back home and think about it and come
back to me with a message that gives me reason to meet again," Annan said.

"And so we will see what happens. But as you know, we did not come to a
successful agreement in Vienna, and of course, if they do not come back with
indications that I'm looking or, then of course, we are not going to meet,"
he said.

Annan said he and Sabri agreed that the foreign minister would consult his
government and "come back to me with an indication that they are prepared to
allow the inspectors, and then we can resume discussions.

"If they were to say 'no', if we were to come to no agreement, then of
course the situation, which has existed since December 1998, when the
inspectors left will continue to prevail," Annan said.

With Washington threatening to attack Iraq, some council members had been
promoting further talks in hopes the return of the inspectors, out of the
country for more than three years, would delay any attempt to topple
President Saddam Hussein.

One key reason the Bush administration has given for a "regime change" is
its suspicion that Iraq has restarted its weapons of mass destruction
programs.

The United States has been skeptical of the talks between Annan and Sabri
since they began in March but could not oppose the urging of other council
members to resume discussions. "And now it's three strikes and you're out,"
said one U.N. official after the third round of talks.

Annan's position was clear in Vienna when he deliberately avoided setting a
date for a new round of high-level meetings and said there might be
"technical talks" in the future, a phrase that obviously excluded him.

Iraq has been seeking assurances from Annan since May that the United States
would not carry out its threats to topple Saddam. But Annan has repeatedly
said he is not in a position to reply to such questions.

Sabri and others have openly questioned why they should allow in U.N.
weapons teams, which would probably include Americans, when Washington was
planning to attack no matter what Baghdad did. They also raised the
possibility of U.S. "spies" fingering targets for an attack.

Shortly after the talks, Sabri told Abu Dhabi's satellite channel that the
United States was undermining the discussions. He said that Hans Blix, the
chief weapons inspector, was "stringent in the talks and refused to discuss
technical issues" although Baghdad had brought its top arms experts.

Blix, the executive chairman of the U.N. Inspection, Monitoring,
Verification and Inspection Commission, known as UNMOVIC, met for several
hours with Iraqi officials and said he wanted to discuss "practical
arrangements" for how the inspectors would operate.

But the Iraqi team insisted on going over outstanding weapons issues in
1998, which Blix said he could not discuss in detail until inspectors were
on the ground and try to determine if anything had happened since then.


http://hoovnews.hoovers.com/fp.asp?layout=displaynews&doc_id=NR20020727670.2
_c3bc00080e7f24bd

*  IRAQI HEALTH MINISTER, WHO REGIONAL OFFICIAL DISCUSS COOPERATION
Hoover's (Financial Times), 27th July
Source: INA news agency web site, Baghdad, in Arabic 27 Jul 02/BBC
Monitoring

Baghdad, 27 July: Official talks between the Iraqi Health Ministry and the
World Health Organization [WHO] opened today to discuss ways to develop
cooperation and implement joint programmes.

The Iraqi side was headed by Health Minister Umid Midhat Mubarak, while the
WHO delegation was headed by Dr Husayn Abd-al-Razzaq al-Jaza'iri, director
of the WHO regional office.

The minister reviewed the negative effects of the continuation of the unfair
sanctions and savage aggression staged by the US administration of evil and
its lackey, Britain, against the Iraqi mujahidin people. He said the
sanctions and aggression had caused the death of 1,600,000 Iraqi citizens as
a result of the acute shortage of food and medicine, and also as a result of
the obstacles placed by the US and UK representatives in Committee 661. He
said the US and UK representatives obstruct the supply of medicines from
various companies within the context of the Memorandum of Understanding
under feeble, unfounded pretexts.

He praised the special relations with WHO and its sympathy with Iraq's
problems. He stressed the need to expand relations in the fields of training
and in the field of supplying cancer medicine and laboratory and other
material to treat the chronic cases that resulted from the 30-state
aggression and the use of prohibited weapons.

Health Minister Dr Umid Midhat Mubarak then reviewed the health projects
implemented by his ministry and the 10-year plan ordered by President Saddam
Husayn. He also reviewed the national campaigns and activities implemented
by his ministry to vaccinate children against polio and measles and the
special campaigns for the early diagnosis of breast and uterine cancer.

Dr Husayn Abd-al-Razzaq al-Jaza'iri said he is happy to visit Iraq. He said
his visit aims to study health conditions in Iraq, the Health Ministry's
health programmes and the way that WHO can support the health projects
implemented by the ministry. The visit, he added, also aims to review the
joint programmes and the role that the regional office can play in the field
of health education and WHO's cooperation with Iraq to support its health,
preventive and environmental programmes, as well as training.

He praised the Health Ministry's achievements and efforts to implement the
national campaigns and fight polio and measles. He stressed that the
self-finance experiment in the Iraqi health institutions has achieved great
success in the health field.


WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020726-23093280.htm

*  IRAQ SEEKS STEEL FOR NUKES
by Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES, 26th July

Iraq's government is trying to buy special equipment used in producing fuel
for nuclear weapons, The Washington Times has learned.

Procurement agents from Iraq's covert nuclear-arms program were detected as
they tried to purchase stainless-steel tubing, uniquely used in gas
centrifuges and a key component in making the material for nuclear bombs,
from an unknown supplier, said administration officials familiar with
intelligence reports.

U.S. intelligence agencies believe the tubing is an essential component of
Iraq's plans to enrich radioactive uranium to the point where it could be
used to fashion a nuclear bomb.

Efforts by Iraq to build nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and
missiles are a key reason that the Bush administration has called for the
overthrow of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

The covert nuclear-acquisition effort was detected in mid-June, and reports
about the activities were then circulated to senior Bush administration
policy officials.

"This is only one sign that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons
program," one official said.

Officials say other evidence exists that Iraq is rebuilding its nuclear
program, which was to have been dismantled under U.N. sanctions imposed
after the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

Earlier this year, Turkish military intelligence informed the Pentagon that
Iraq was believed to have at least one nuclear device. Officials said the
report could not be confirmed.

A senior Bush administration official said intelligence reports of the
efforts by Iraq to purchase stainless-steel tubing were a troubling sign.

"We know they are trying to obtain this material but so far have not been
successful," the official said.

[.....]

According to the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, Iraq in the past
has sought to create enriched uranium through the use of high-speed
centrifuges, which spin uranium hexafluoride gas. The spinning separates out
uranium isotope gas that is highly enriched and can fuel a crude nuclear
bomb.

Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control,
said in an interview that stainless-steel tubing would be essential to
building such gas centrifuges because the radioactive gas is extremely
corrosive.

The Iraqi nuclear-arms program had planned to build a 100-centrifuge
"cascade" plant, Al Furat, that would be capable of producing 55 pounds of
highly enriched uranium per year, enough for about 11Ž2 nuclear bombs per
year, according to a Wisconsin Project report on Iraq's nuclear program.

Mr. Milhollin said that while "not much" is known about Iraq's continuing
efforts to build nuclear arms, "we do know that if they were to reconstitute
their nuclear program they would need stainless-steel piping."

According to a Wisconsin Project database on Iraq's nuclear program, several
German companies attempted to sell special steel and tubing to Iraq for
centrifuges in 1990. In 1989, Iraq also obtained Swiss-made equipment used
to power centrifuges.

Khidhir Hamza, a former Iraqi nuclear-weapons official who defected in 1994,
said Iraq's nuclear program is based on enriching uranium. He said Iraq had
about 400 locations in the country where uranium-enrichment work could be
carried out in secret.

Mr. Hamza also has said Iraq purchased 130 classified reports from Germany
during the 1980s that show how to manufacture centrifuges for uranium
enrichment.






_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk