Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (67313)	1/21/2003 1:14:55 AM
From: Rollcast...	Respond to of 281500

Will North Korea Sell Nuclear Weapons? A Reuters story, abbreviated, with our headline, from Globalsecurity.org orbat.com Reuters January 19, 2003 WASHINGTON - North Korea's arms bazaar soon may boast an enticing new product -- a nuclear bomb that U.S. officials fear could be available to the highest bidder. They say North Korea, through its past arms sales, has shown a willingness to sell just about anything to anyone, and fear that potential customers for a nuclear bomb could include hostile countries or even groups such as al Qaeda. A U.S. defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: "Is it a potential threat? Yes it is. Is it a likely scenario given where North Korea is now? Probably not. If they crank up production, then the situation changes." Experts estimate that cash-starved North Korea sells about $500 million annually in weapons to other nations, mostly Scud missiles and Scud missile parts. Its best customers are Iran and Pakistan, experts said, but it also may have sold missiles to Yemen, Egypt, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam. "Certainly by past experience, we've seen that North Korea has been willing to sell virtually anything that it has produced. It's a country that wants the hard currency. And if they have enough of whatever the (military) system is for their own security, additional ones they'll sell for sure," said Baker Spring, a military analyst at the Heritage Foundation. Some experts note that while North Korea has sold missiles, there is no evidence that it has sold chemical or biological weapons, which it is thought to have in large quantities. "I think, to a large degree, they are an arms bazaar," said Joel Wit, a former State Department official who served as the coordinator for the 1994 U.S.-North Korea Agreed Framework, the pact under which North Korea froze and pledged to dismantle its nuclear weapons program in return for receiving 500,000 tons annually of fuel oil and a project to build two nuclear reactors poorly suited for military purposes. "But it seems even they have drawn a line somewhere, and that has to do with weapons of mass destruction," added Wit, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "What will happen over time is that as they accumulate more and more plutonium, maybe more and more weapons in their stockpile, there may be a temptation to sell some of it to others, whether they are countries or even terrorist groups." North Korea's best-selling items are two versions of the Scud missile: the Scud-B, with a range of about 185 miles, and the Scud-C, with a range of about 340 miles. The Scud is a mobile, ballistic, surface-to-surface missile system originally developed by the Soviets in the mid-1950s. North Korea has sold hundreds of their Scud versions. Experts said three missiles with longer ranges also are being developed by the North Koreans: the No Dong (about 620 miles); the Taepo Dong-1 (930 miles); and the Taepo Dong-2 (up to about 3,700 miles). Scores of the No Dong and Taepo Dong-1 missiles already may have been deployed by North Korea, and perhaps two dozen No Dongs have been sold to Iran and Pakistan, experts said. "The big distinction I would draw is, as far as we know, that has all been to state actors. It has not been to the non-state terrorist groups," said Bruce Bennett, military analyst with the RAND Corp. research group.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (67313)	1/21/2003 10:12:24 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The Axis of Oil Lead Editorial The New York Times January 21, 2003 Like several other posters on this thread, I generally don't read the editorials offered by any of the newspapers I read. But this one is definitely an exception. Very pointed. Perhaps Gail Collins is staying in the Howell Raines' editorial page tradition.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (67313)	1/21/2003 12:37:42 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 281500

France might veto Iraq war Announcement at U.N. a blow to Bush policy Glenn Kessler, Colum Lynch, Washington Post Tuesday, January 21, 2003 www.sfgate.com United Nations -- France suggested Monday that it will wage a major diplomatic fight, including possible use of its veto power, to prevent the U.N. Security Council from passing a resolution authorizing military action against Iraq. France's opposition to a war, emphatically delivered by Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, is a serious blow for the Bush administration, which has begun pouring tens of thousands of troops into the Persian Gulf in preparation for a military conflict this spring. Iraq, meanwhile, said Monday that it will comply with demands for greater cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors, promising to encourage its scientists to speak privately with inspectors, to comb the country for more undeclared chemical munitions and to hand over additional documents to augment the arms declaration it issued last month. The Bush administration had hoped to mark the final phase in its confrontation with Iraq when U.N. weapons inspectors deliver a progress report Monday. But in an unexpected move, France and other countries used a high-level Security Council meeting on terrorism to lay down their markers for the debate that will commence next week on the inspectors' report. Russia and China, which have veto power, and Germany also signaled they are willing to let the inspections continue for months longer. Only Britain appeared to openly support the U.S. position that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has thwarted effective inspections. "If war is the only way to resolve this problem, we are going down a dead end," de Villepin said. "Already we know for a fact that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs are being largely blocked, even frozen. We must do everything possible to strengthen this process." The U.N., he said, should stay "on the path of cooperation. The other choice is to move forward out of impatience over a situation in Iraq to move toward military intervention. We believe that today nothing justifies envisaging military action." Secretary of State Colin Powell, in the face of such comments, departed from his prepared text on terrorism and implored his colleagues to remember that the Security Council resolution passed unanimously two months ago gave Iraq a last chance to meet its obligations. "We must not shrink from our duties and our responsibilities when the material comes before us next week," Powell said, using some variation of the phrase "must not shrink" three more times before the Council. During the weeks of debate on the Iraq resolution, passed in December, French officials had indicated they were open to some sort of military intervention if Iraq did not comply. But now the French appear to have set much higher hurdles for any support. INCREASING OPPOSITION Rising opposition to war, particularly in France, appears to have played some role in the hardening positions in the Security Council. Foreign officials are also aware of polls in the United States suggesting that support for a war drops dramatically if the Bush administration does not have U.N. approval. At the U.N., several foreign ministers said an Iraqi war would spawn more terrorist acts around the globe and, in the words of Germany's Joschka Fischer, have "disastrous consequences for long-term regional stability." Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan said next Monday's report should be regarded as a new beginning rather than an end to inspections. The chief weapons inspectors "have been talking about that there is more work to do in terms of the inspections and they need more time. I think we should respect their opinion and support their work." BAGHDAD MEETING Iraqi officials made their new promises during a lengthy meeting in Baghdad with the U.N.'s two top weapons inspectors, Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, who are scheduled to deliver the much-anticipated report to the Security Council next week. Blix called the new Iraqi promises positive steps. But he refused to say Iraq had met his call for cooperation, saying he plans to defer judgment until inspectors receive more documents and are able to conduct confidential interviews. The inspectors want to be able to interview Iraqi scientists in private.