Posted on 10/28/2004 11:40:32 AM PDT by crushelits
VIENNA, Austria - The U.N. nuclear agency said Thursday it warned the United States about the vulnerability of explosives stored at Iraq (news - web sites)'s Al-Qaqaa military installation after another facility — Iraq's main nuclear complex — was looted in April 2003.
Melissa Fleming, a spokeswoman for the International Atomic Energy Agency, told The Associated Press that U.S. officials were cautioned directly about what was stored at Al-Qaqaa, the main high explosives facility in Iraq.
Some 377 tons of high explosives — HMX and RDX and PETN — are now missing from the facility, and questions have arisen about what the United States knew about Al-Qaqaa and what it did to secure the site.
Iraqi officials say the materials were taken amid looting sometime after the fall of Baghdad to U.S. forces on April 9, 2003, though the Pentagon (news - web sites) is suggesting the ordnance could have been moved by Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s regime before the United States invaded on March 20, 2003.
Fleming did not say which officials were notified or exactly when, but she said the IAEA — which had put storage bunkers at the site under seal just before the war — alerted the United States after the Tuwaitha nuclear complex was looted.
"After we heard reports of looting at the Tuwaitha site in April 2003, the agency's chief Iraq inspectors alerted American officials that we were concerned about the security of the high explosives stored at Al-Qaqaa," she told the AP.
"It is also important to note that this was the main high explosives storage facility in Iraq, and it was well-known through IAEA reports to the Security Council," Fleming said.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei informed the United Nations (news - web sites) in February 2003, and again in April of that year, that he was concerned about HMX explosives, which were stored at Al-Qaqaa.
The explosives' disappearance has become a flashpoint in the final week of the U.S. presidential campaign, with Democratic nominee John Kerry (news - web sites) accusing the Bush administration of ignoring the threat.
IAEA inspectors last confirmed that the agency's seals on the explosives were in place and intact in early to mid-March 2003, days before the invasion began March 20.
The IAEA sought Thursday to clarify reports that the amount of missing explosives may have been far less than what the Iraqis said in an Oct. 10 report to the nuclear agency.
ABC News, citing IAEA inspection documents, reported Wednesday night that the Iraqis had declared 141 tons of RDX explosives at Al-Qaqaa in July 2002, but that the site held only three tons when it was checked in January 2003.
The network said that could suggest that 138 tons were removed from the facility long before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.
But Fleming said most of the RDX — about 125 tons — was kept at Al-Mahaweel, a storage site under Al-Qaqaa's jurisdiction located outside the main Al-Qaqaa site. She also said about 10 tons already had been reported by Iraq as having been used for non-prohibited purposes between July 2002 and January 2003.
"IAEA inspectors visited Al-Mahaweel on Jan. 15, 2003, and verified the RDX inventory by weighing sampling," Fleming said. She said the RDX at Al-Mahaweel was not under seal but was subject to IAEA monitoring.
"IAEA inspectors were in the process of verifying this statement ... and would have proceeded later had they stayed in Iraq," Fleming said. The nuclear agency's inspectors pulled out of Iraq just before the U.S.-led invasion and have not been allowed to return for general inspections despite ElBaradei's requests that they be allowed to finish their work.
The agency became involved at Al-Qaqaa because of the presence of 214 tons of HMX, which — like RDX — is a key component in plastic explosives but also can be used as an ignitor on a nuclear weapon. Fleming said it was the HMX that was the agency's main focus.
ABC said the inspection report noted that the seals at Al-Qaqaa may have been useless because the storage bunkers had ventilation slats on the sides that could have been removed to give looters access to the explosives.
But Fleming said the inspectors had also checked the ventilation slats to ensure they had not been tampered with, and that they concluded "the confinement was sufficient" as long as the site was regularly checked. They could no longer do that once they pulled out just before the invasion.
IAEA inspectors last saw the explosives in January 2003 when they took an inventory and placed fresh seals on the bunkers. Inspectors visited the site again in March 2003, but didn't view the explosives because the seals were not broken, she said.
Agency inspectors who have returned twice to Iraq since the war focused only on Tuwaitha, a sprawling nuclear complex 12 miles south of Baghdad.
In June 2003, inspectors investigated reports of widespread looting of storage rooms at Tuwaitha, and they returned in August 2003 to take inventory of several tons of natural uranium that had been stored there. They have not been allowed back to Al-Qaqaa.
Does anyone have a picture of one of these IAEA seals?
They sound like big doors.
A picture of them will blow this thing wide open.
Proof that they were not easily missed.
This story is filled with IAEA backtracking from what they originally leaked to the NYT.
This whole thing reeks of UN lies.
Yawn! ;)
They don't give up even when they're lying, do they?
What the IAEA won't tell you is that Deulfer (sp?) warned them they should be destroying the ammunitions, not just putting stickers on them.
They ignored our warning and now it's come back to bite them.
In 1995.
Once again, Yahoo never fails to jump on the other side of the issue.
Next time you see an article this in-depth in favor of anything the Bush administration does, track me down.
I'd love to see it.
And the IAEA was told by the Security Council to remove the explosives in 1996 but they didn't because Saddam want to keep them for peacefull uses ie: construction projects so they took it upon themselves to let him keep them.
Plus, even if IAEA DID warn the US, that doesn't mean that the explosives were still there. By the time the warning was issued, the explosives could have been gone already...
They showed them on Fox. I was thinking large cable locks. But seriously, it wouldn't have taken anything to break them. Looked like they were only there to determine if entry was made, not to prevent entry.
The IAEA ignored our warnings, in 1995 (thanks Howlin) and now they are trying to blame US for a problem THEY created.
Does anyone else get the picture of slapping a happy face sticker on a box of deadly ammo and thinking that was going to keep Saddam on the straight and narrow so hilarious it's hard to breath?
UN makes millions off the Iraqi misery. UN allows Saddam to grow stronger. Bush warns UN. UN votes to do something about Saddam. UN refuses to do anything about Saddam. Bush does something about Saddam. UN criticizes Bush about doing something. Coalition finds some weapons, finds some missing, but also realized UN colluded with Saddam. The UN says it warned Bush that the things Bush warned UN about (but don't exist in the UN papers and Democrat mind) were taken while Bush is getting the UN to commit to solving the problems Bush warned the UN. Now UN criticizes Bush for not heeding the warning that came after the other warnings Bush gave to them.
Makes total sense.
As I recall, there were several European countries that stalled our action in the UN debacle. That gave Saddam warning and time to move the explosives.
A futile, infintile CYA attempt?
The IAEA can warn us all they want. They ignored our strong recommendations to get rid of/destroy the ammunition.
Somehow the appeasers in the UN thought a cute little sticker would suffice instead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.