The African Bombs; More Criticism of US Iraq Policy

Iraq News, AUGUST 12, 1998

The central focus of Iraq News is the tension between the considerable, proscribed WMD capabilities that Iraq is holding on to and its increasing stridency that it has complied with UNSCR 687 and it is time to lift sanctions. If you wish to receive Iraq News by email, a service which includes full-text of news reports not archived here, send your request to Laurie Mylroie .


I.   DAILY TELEGRAPH, WAS SADDAM BEHIND THE AFRICAN BOMBS?, AUG 12
II.  JERUSALEM POST EDITORIAL, THE NEED TO PURSUE STATE SPONSORS, AUG 12
III. JINSA, SUPPORT AN INSURGENCY TO OVERTHROW SADDAM,  AUG 10
IV.  NYT EDITORIAL, "DRIFTING TO A NEW IRAQ POLICY," AUG 12

  Ambrose Evan-Pritchard, writing in London's Daily Telegraph, Aug 12,
made the argument for why the most likely suspect in the Kenya/Tanzania
bombings is Iraq.  He made kind mention of work I had done on the
Feb 26 1993 bombing of New York's World Trade Center, which "Iraq News"
will discuss shortly, and which, in some ways, was the origin of the
grievously misguided Clinton approach to terrorism, namely to treat it
as a criminal issue, with the  focus on arresting perpetrators, rather
than a national security issue, with the focus on state sponsorship.
  Indeed, the editors of the Jerusalem Post, Aug 12, took up precisely
that issue with regard to the bombs in Africa.  "Fighting terorism is
not a matter of 'solving cases' with courtroom-level standards of proof,
but acting quickly and decisively against known terrorist and their
bases of support.  As the recent bombings show, the price of not doing
so will be paid not just by the United States, but by defenseless
nations chosen by terrorists to become part of their global
battlefield."

  And criticism of the Clinton administration's Iraq policy grows.  The
Jewish Institute for Nat'l Security Affairs, Aug 10, reviewed recent
congressional measures to get the administration to adopt a policy to
overthrow Saddam by supporting an insurgency.  JINSA suggested, "The
next responsible action for Congress to take is to provide the President
with the military authority needed to take effective action against
Saddam Hussein's illegal regime... Toward this end, legislation is being
considered which would authorise the President to provide military
assistance to the Iraqi National Congress (INC), the unified Iraqi
democratic opposition to Saddam Hussein.  The bill would provide $100
million (or more) in military drawdown authority to the President,
allowing him to use existing Pentagon resources to run, equip, and train
INC resistance fighters... This is the right bill at the right time."
  And the editors of the NYT, Aug 12, joined in the criticism of the
administration's Iraq policy, "These first days of August have brought a
disquieting retreat by the Clinton Administration on Iraq.  Without
saying as much, the White House seems on the verge of altering seven
years of American policy by letting Saddam Hussein slip free of the
international effort to prevent him from developing a new arsenal of
biologcal and chemical weapons.  That would be a grave mistake."