 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Push on Iraq starts today
Compiled from Times wires WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration today will launch a concerted effort to prepare the nation and the world for war with Iraq, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld hinted Tuesday that Bush holds a trump card: new evidence that Iraq is close to developing a nuclear weapon. Under pressure at home and abroad to justify a war against Iraq, President Bush will meet with congressional leaders from both parties at the White House this morning to discuss Iraq. Later today he will send Rumsfeld to a closed-door briefing on the subject for all 100 senators in a secure room inside the Capitol. And next week Bush is expected to use a Sept. 12 speech at the United Nations to begin spelling out his grievances against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "I think you'll see that the president will pull all of these threads together," Secretary of State Colin Powell told reporters traveling with him to an international conference on development and the environment in Johannesburg, South Africa. "With respect to what the American position will be, the president will articulate it. He will articulate it fully in the very near future." Powell acknowledged that there was a fierce debate within the administration over Iraq, but said officials were working hard to reach a consensus. "It is a very serious issue and we are discussing it in a very serious way," he said, adding, "I think there are lots of differences -- some are real, some are perceived, some are overhyped." In another sign that the administration is ratcheting up its machinery to lay the groundwork for war, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said he would present a position paper "within the next few weeks" spelling out the need for action against Hussein. The British leader called Iraq "a unique threat to the security of the region and to the rest of the world." Blair said broad international support was important in any move against Iraq, but warned that there may still be action without it. "Of course it is better to do this with the broadest possible basis of international support. But it does have to be done and we have to make sure that there are not people who are simply going to turn a blind eye to this," he said. Blair argued that European criticism of Bush's confrontational attitude with Iraq was "just straightforward anti-Americanism." At a Pentagon news conference, Rumsfeld hinted that Bush has new information that Iraq is close to developing a nuclear weapon, but the defense secretary declined to elaborate. "Oh, I think I'll leave that for the coming days and weeks," Rumsfeld said. "We know some other things, but those are the kinds of things that would come out if and when the president decides that he thinks it's appropriate." Rumsfeld noted that U.N. weapons inspections after the 1991 Gulf War determined that Iraq had been far closer to producing a nuclear bomb than U.S. intelligence officials had believed at the time. "To the extent that they have kept their nuclear scientists together and working on these efforts, one has to assume they have not been playing tiddlywinks, that they have been focusing on nuclear weapons," he said. Administration officials continue to insist that Bush has not decided how to deal with Iraq, but those assurances were drowned out last week by Vice President Dick Cheney's forceful case for military action. In two separate appearances, Cheney said the United States should act quickly to avoid the danger that Hussein will unleash weapons of mass destruction against the United States or its allies. Cheney's assertion that Iraq is close to acquiring a nuclear weapon -- and Rumsfeld's suggestion that Bush can back it up with evidence -- contrasts sharply with the CIA's most recent public assessments of Baghdad's nuclear weapons development efforts. In a report submitted to Congress in January, the CIA concluded that Iraq's nuclear weapons program "probably" consisted of "low-level theoretical" research and development. In February, CIA director George Tenet told a Senate committee that the spy agency's greatest near-term concern was the "possibility" that Iraq could obtain enriched uranium or plutonium with which to make a nuclear weapon. According to Knight Ridder, citing a knowledgeable U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity, U.S. intelligence has picked up no evidence that Iraq has succeeded in acquiring such materials. According to the Los Angeles Times, the Bush administration is exploring tough proposals for "extremely aggressive" inspections that would force Baghdad to cede its deadliest weapons quickly or face immediate punitive action. The newspaper, citing U.S. officials, said the proposals center on "coercive inspections," which would speed the search for weapons and potentially even back up the inspectors with thousands of U.S. or multinational troops deployed in or around Iraq. One idea under consideration suggests that if inspectors are turned away from a site suspected of producing or hiding weapons of mass destruction, foreign troops could shoot their way in, according to the Los Angeles Times. Another idea for the "comply-or-else" effort suggests inspectors go quickly to the most sensitive Iraqi sites suspected of links to nuclear, biological or chemical weapons or ballistic missiles. If Baghdad refuses access, the inspectors would report immediately to the United Nations, with the implicit understanding that a single refusal could provoke a full military assault to oust the regime. The flurry of activity to begin building the case for military action came in response to growing criticism from Congress and from U.S. allies that the Bush administration appears ready to charge off to war precipitously. On Capitol Hill, lawmakers returned from their August break with nagging doubts about Bush's handling of the Iraq issue. Senate Republican leader Trent Lott on Tuesday joined a long list of lawmakers who have urged Bush to seek congressional support for any military action. Lott, a Mississippi Republican who backs Bush's stance on Iraq, said the White House has failed to present a convincing case for war. "I do think that we're going to have to get a more coherent message together and make sure the American people understand the threat and what we may have to do," Lott told reporters. Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, another senior Republican who sits on both the Armed Services and Intelligence committees, announced his opposition to immediate military action. At the same time, he agreed with administration officials that Hussein is intent on improving his ability to deliver weapons of mass destruction. "Does that mean you send 250,000 troops in the immediate future, I don't think so. We're strained and stressed in regards to the terrorist war," Roberts said. "We have to explain it to the American people." Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., just back from Europe, said she detected growing opposition to the United States among America's allies. "The driver of a lot of this animus," she said, "is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. To leave this unresolved and to attack an Arab country is going to be viewed as an attack on the Arab world." She said the anti-American sentiment was so strong that she felt it personally. "As an American, I have always been proud," Feinstein said. "I have a (U.S. flag) pin. I was embarrassed to wear it." Virtually every European ally other than Britain has expressed opposition to an unprovoked U.S. attack, a position echoed by key Middle East nations such as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. -- Information from Knight Ridder, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, New York Times and Associated Press was used in this report.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
From the Times wire desk
From the AP |
