Syrian Ambassador: Reactor? That's No Reactor

Western news media, at least, have taken to calling Syria's whatsit that Israel bombed last year a "reactor." I think they're right.

Once more, I have to point out that "Another War-on-Terror Blog" isn't political. But, politicians make decisions that affect war and peace. For that reason, politics has to be discussed. Particularly in an election year.

Although my favorite of the Syrian stories about what Israeli warplanes bombed on September 6, 2007, is that it was an agricultural facility, I must admit that evidence favored it being a nuclear reactor, nearly identical to one in North Korea.

I miss the radioactive kimchi scenario, though ("Radioactive Kimchi, or Nuclear Bomb Material?" (September 23, 2007).

Syria Says: Is Not!

The Syrian ambassador to the United Kingdom was much more eloquent than that, of course. Sami al-Khiyami Said that Syria and North Korea were being very nice: "This has nothing to do with North Korea and Syria. They [the Americans] just want to exert more pressure on North Korea. This is why they are coming up with this story," he told Reuters.

Member of Congress Says It's a Plot!

New York's own Representative Gary Ackerman, who had his own hearing about U.S. policy toward Syria, says that the White House didn't give everybody the same amount of information. He called that "bizarre behavior." "This is the selective control of information that led us to war in Iraq," Ackerman said.

He could be right, but I thought that some of what the CIA told a Congressional committee today was very, very secret: Not the sort of thing you want everyone to know.

Ackerman's not alone, though Michigan's Representative Pete Hoekstra, a leading member of the House Intelligence Committee, said: " 'I think many people believe that we were used today by the administration because — not because they felt they had to inform Congress because it was their legal obligation to do that, but because they had other agendas in mind,' he said.

With due respect to the representative from Michigan, that sounds an awful lot like 'it's some kinda plot.'

And, other members of Congress talked, too: Maine's Senator Susan Collins brought up a sensible point, that revealing this much information could compromise American intelligence sources.

As to that, it will help if members of Congress keep their collective yap shut.

Which, thankfully, they are: so far.

But tomorrow's another day.

Israeli Raid on Syrian Reactor in Today's News

• "US video to link North Korea to Syrian nuclear reactor: reports"
  AFP (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "WASHINGTON (AFP) — The US government on Thursday will show lawmakers a video linking North Korea to a Syrian nuclear reactor the Israelis bombed in September, leading US newspapers said Thursday.
  "The New York Times and The Washington Post, citing unnamed senior officials said the video showed North Koreans inside the secret Syrian facility code-named Al Kibar."
• "Syria 'had covert nuclear scheme' "
  BBC (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "The United States has accused North Korea of helping Syria build a nuclear reactor that 'was not intended for peaceful purposes'.
  "The site, said to be like one in North Korea, was bombed by Israel in 2007."
• "Syria denies building nuclear reactor with N.Korea"
  International Herald Tribune (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "LONDON: Syria on Thursday dismissed U.S. accusations that North Korea was helping it build a nuclear reactor that could produce plutonium.
  "Syria's ambassador to Britain, Sami al-Khiyami, told Reuters that the accusation, which President George W. Bush's administration was expected to lay out to lawmakers on Thursday, was to put pressure on North Korea in talks about Pyongyang's nuclear programme.
  " 'This has nothing to do with North Korea and Syria. They just want to exert more pressure on North Korea. This is why they are coming up with this story,' Khiyami said."
• "Official: Syrian Nuclear Reactor Was Weeks From Functioning"
  FOXNews (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "WASHINGTON — A Syrian nuclear reactor built with help from North Korea was weeks away from functioning, a top U.S. official said Thursday after lawmakers were briefed on the site destroyed last year by Israeli jets.
  "The official, who wanted anonymity, told The Associated Press that the facility was mostly completed but still needed significant testing before it could be declared operational."

Return of the Radioactive Kimchi!! North Korean Nuclear Reactor in Syria Back in the News

September 6, 2007: Israeli jets bombed empty sand, an agricultural station, or a warehouse in Syria, according to various Syrian reports. The Israeli government was very, very quiet about what happened.

The Syrian government was probably responsible for the cleanup crew that went out and removed debris from the attack, so now it does seem to be just empty sand.

That was then, this is now.

It looks like Congressional intelligence committees will get confidential briefings tomorrow, about information regarding the Syrian nuclear reactor. Or empty sand. Or warehouse. Or agricultural station.

If members of Congress maintain their tradition for keeping secrets, particularly in an election year, I'd say that the first leak will come less than two hours after the first briefing ends. It will be interesting to see what various members of Congress say that they heard.

The Syrian claim that the Jews blew up an agricultural facility isn't as crazy as it sounds. I outlined a non-impossible scenario in an earlier post:

"That agricultural research facility that Syria says the Israeli Air Force didn't bomb may be just that: an ag station.

"As for the North Korean protest: I'm surprised that no one has realized what happened.

"It's obvious, when you think about it: North Korea is upset because North Korean nationals there: expert chefs and agricultural specialists, and a large quantity of radioactive Kimchi.

"After all the trouble China is having with lead-coated toys and lethal pharmaceuticals, North Korea is understandably hesitant to admit that the fermented cabbage they were shipping to Syria was radioactive."

On a more serious note, here's a sampling of recent news coverage, announcing the upcoming briefings:

• "Hands Across the Border - Syria and North Korea"
  Washington Post, White House Watch, by Dan Froomkin, Columnist
  Excerpts:
  "Jay Solomon writes in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required): 'North Korea was helping Syria build a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor before Israel bombed the site last September, the Bush administration is set to tell Congress.
  " 'The new information could increase the position of hard-liners in Congress and the administration who have argued against a deal being negotiated to dismantle North Korea's nuclear-weapons program. The hard-liners say Pyongyang hasn't provided enough assurances it will dismantle its atomic arsenal in return for economic and diplomatic incentives....' "
  
• "Administration to Brief Congress on North Korea's Efforts to Help Syria Build Nuclear Facility"
  FOXNews.com (April 23, 2008)
  Excerpts:
  "Congressional intelligence committees will be told Thursday that North Korea was helping Syria build a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor before Israeli warplanes bombed the site last September.
  "North Korea has long been suspected of helping Syria advance its secret nuclear program, but both countries deny it. Pyongyang says it has never spread its nuclear expertise beyond its borders."
• "N Korea 'helped Syria with nukes' "
  The Australian (April 24, 2008) (I know: I think the International Date Line is involved.)
  Excerpts:
  "Korea was helping Syria build a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor before Israel bombed the site last September, the Bush administration is to tell the US Congress.
  "The new information could increase the position of hardliners in Congress and the administration who have argued against a deal being negotiated to dismantle North Korea's nuclear-weapons program."

Posts from "Another War-on-Terror Blog," September and October of 2007, on the Israeli raid and its aftermath:

• "Back to Syria's Mystery Building"
  (October 29, 2007)
• "Satellite Images of Syrian Reactor / Warehouse"
  (October 25, 2007)
• "Putin, Ahmadinejad, Iran, Syria, Israel: Here We Go Again?"
  (October 18, 2007)
  (in passing>
• " 'The Jews Blew Up Our Reactor (Which Does Not Exist)' "
  (October 17, 2007)
• "In the News: Anxious Republicans, Castro and Chavez are Friends, and, oh, yes: Israel Destroyed Syrian Nuclear Reactor"
  (October 14, 2007)
• "No Radioactive Kimchi: Israel Blew Up a Syrian Reactor"
  (October 13, 2007)
• "Radioactive Kimchi, or Nuclear Bomb Material?"
  (September 23, 2007)
• "Nuclear Materials from North Korea,
  Sand, or Radioactive Kimchi?"
  ( September 18, 2007)
• "Nuclear Stockpile Bombed?"
  (September 16, 2007)

Back to Syria's Mystery Building

Syria, Israel, and America have something in common.

None of these nations is helping the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) ("Employing science in the pursuit of international peace.") figure out what Syria had built on the banks of the Euphrates River.

A commercial satellite took a picture of something in Syria, back in 2003. It's the same facility that, at last report, Syria says was a big, unused, warehouse (see "Satellite Images of Syrian Reactor / Warehouse").

ISIS published a paper online (*.pdf format, 5 pages), "SUSPECT REACTOR CONSTRUCTION SITE IN EASTERN SYRIA: THE SITE OF THE SEPTEMBER 6 ISRAELI RAID?." It's a pretty good collection of available information about the Syrian site, including what kind of reactor it could be, based on similarities to a North Korean reactor building.

One of the bits of information is the size of the Syrian "warehouse," compared to a North Korean reactor building:

	Building	Roof Structure
Syrian "Warehouse"	47 x 47 meters	24 x 32 meters
North Korean Reactor	48 x 50 meters/td>	32 x 24 meters

That coincidence in size is no proof, of course. In fact, the ISIS paper says the images "raise as many questions as they answer."

David Albright, president of ISIS, seems frustrated at the refusal of America, Israel, and Syria, to give him all the information he needs to figure out what Syria built on the banks of the Euphrates.

I can understand Albright's frustration. I can also understand the reticence of these governments.

There's a war on. There will be secrets. Some things will be kept secret because lives depend on the other side staying ignorant. Some secrets will be kept to avoid embarrassing influential people.

I don't know what sort of secret the information about that square building is. My guess is that Israel and America don't want to tell any more than they have to about exactly what they knew - and know - about the "warehouse." And Syria isn't likely to admit that it's got a nuclear program: not even other Middle Eastern nations would be likely to take kindly to that idea.

As for the American government giving ISIS all the information it wants, the research organization says that "Throughout its history, ISIS has maintained a commitment to the wide dissemination of its major findings." That's a noble principle, but in times of war, "wide dissemination" of information can have unhappy consequences.

Senators, Secrets, and Sides: Loose Lips and Politics

The fuss over a New York Senator's request for details of the Pentagon's Iraq withdrawal plans is still in the news, and probably will be for quite a while. Senator Clinton even offered to have the troop deployment plans handed over in a secret meeting.

So far, the Pentagon hasn't cooperated.

Members of Congress playing politics with national security is nothing new. Unhappily, Members of Congress having trouble at keeping secrets is nothing new, too. Other people's secrets, anyway.

Back in the 80s, a senator from Vermont earned the title "Leaky" Leahy, and was forced to resign from his Intelligence Committee post: just because he released classified information during that little Achille Lauro misunderstanding.

Senator Rockefeller, of West Virginia, kept his family name in the forefront of public affairs when he announced the existence of a secret spy program, back in 2004 ("Lawmaker Says Mystery Spy Project 'Dangerous To National Security'," 12/9/04, AP, Katherine Pfleger Shrader). By implication, he was referring to national security of the USA.

What makes this quarrel interesting is a Pentagon aide who charged that the Senator's questions about Iraq withdrawal planning would help the enemy.

A spokesman for the senator said: "We sent a serious letter to the Secretary of Defense, and unacceptably got a political response back."

For once, I'm in agreement with something coming out of the New York Senator's office.

I do believe that this quarrel over letting a Senator get classified information is political, on both sides, at least in one sense of the word.

The New York Senator, in addition to a Congressional duty to examine information, has a reasonable interest in appearing active and concerned in national and international affairs. As a presidential candidate, she'd be foolish not to do what she can to 'look presidential.'

The Pentagon has a sort of political interest in plans for troop movement. This nation's military leaders, perhaps understandably, not only want to keep as many American soldiers from being killed as possible, but are required to maintain the existing power structure in the United States of America.

"Political" has been defined as being "of or relating to your views about social relationships involving authority or power." In this country, the "social relationships involving authority or power" involve a government which is run along the lines of a constitution which, among other things, guarantees the right to discuss matters involving national policy.

By this definition, the Pentagon's efforts to protect the United States of America and its government institutions is "political."

The Pentagon is clearly on the side of those who would prefer to keep the system we have, where people are allowed to disagree with those in power, and engage in debates without the approval of their leaders.

People involved in organizations like al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Army of Islam sincerely believe that a free and open society like ours is utterly unacceptable, and must be wiped from the face of the earth.

I'm not quite sure where some of our leaders stand, judging from their track records of releasing classified information: information that would most likely hurt the United States and help those who prefer a more orderly and culturally unified society.

Geoff Metcalf's 2005 column, Congressional Intelligence Leaks, takes a rather colorful look at Capitol Hill's leaky minds.

U.S. Senator Helps Propaganda: But Not Ours

Or, With Friends Like These ...

The headline is, under the circumstances, mild: DoD rebukes Sen. Clinton on Iraq questions. The first sentence of the article is carries a rather more appropriate tone. "The Pentagon told Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton that her questions about how the U.S. plans to eventually withdraw from Iraq boosts enemy propaganda."

Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman was responding to New York Senator Clinton's statements in May, that the Pentagon had better hurry up and plan how to get out of Iraq.

"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia," Edelman wrote.

Politicos broadcasting sensitive, even secret, information in wartime isn't new. At least not for the War on Terror.

Back in 2002, another Senator exercised his right to free speech, apparently without exercising his brain. Sen. Shelby the subject of probe on 9/11 intelligence leak (the Alabama Senator was a probable source of a "leak of highly classified intelligence related to al-Qaida communications in June 2002, primarily to CNN." The leak let al Qaeda know that one of their communications channels had been compromised, and that which two of their code words needed to be changed.

I suppose I shouldn't be too hard on members of the Senate. It must be difficult to keep track of what facts can be used to attract attention and get re-elected, and which, if broadcast, could kill American soldiers. Or even American Senators, if al Qaeda or a wannabe decides to take a whack at hitting the capitol again.