PDA

View Full Version : Tests Said to Tie Deal on Uranium to North Korea




zimv20
Feb 2, 2005, 04:19 AM
link (http://nytimes.com/2005/02/02/politics/02nukes.html?hp&ex=1107406800&en=decef909e93c12b8&ei=5094&partner=homepage)


WASHINGTON, Feb. 1 - Scientific tests have led American intelligence agencies and government scientists to conclude with near certainty that North Korea sold processed uranium to Libya, bolstering earlier indications that the reclusive state exported sensitive fuel for atomic weapons, according to officials with access to the intelligence.

The determination, which has circulated among senior government officials in recent weeks, has touched off a hunt to determine if North Korea has also sold uranium to other countries, including Iran and Syria. So far, there is no evidence that such additional transactions took place.

Nonetheless, the conclusion about Libya, which is contained in a classified briefing that has been described to The New York Times, could alter Washington's debate about the assessment of the North Korean nuclear threat. In the past, some administration officials have argued that there is time to find a diplomatic solution because there was no evidence that the government of Kim Jung Il was spreading its atomic technology abroad.

Nine months ago, international inspectors came up with the first evidence that the North may have provided Libya with nearly two tons of uranium hexaflouride, the material that can be fed into nuclear centrifuges and enriched into bomb fuel. Libya surrendered its huge cask of the highly toxic material to the United States when it dismantled its nuclear program last year.

Now, intelligence officials say, extensive testing conducted at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee over the last several months has concluded that the material did not originate in Pakistan or other suspect countries, and one official said that "with a certainty of 90 percent or better, this stuff's from North Korea."

It is unclear if there are any dissenting views in the government, though some outside experts have accused the administration of overstating intelligence on North Korea. Officials cautioned that the analysis of the uranium had been hampered by the fact that the United States has no sample of known North Korean uranium for comparison with the Libya material. The study was done by eliminating other possible sources of uranium, a result that is less certain than the nuclear equivalent of matching DNA samples.

One recently retired Pentagon official who has long experience dealing with North Korea said the new finding was "huge, because it changes the whole equation with the North."

"It suggests we don't have time to sit around and wait for the outcome of negotiations," he said. "It's a scary conclusion because you don't know who else they may have sold to."

President Bush is expected to mention North Korea in his State of the Union address on Wednesday night. In that speech three years ago, he identified the country as part of an "Axis of Evil," along with Iran and Iraq. Two weeks ago Condoleezza Rice, in her confirmation hearings for secretary of state, included North Korea in a list of six "outposts of tyranny," but a senior administration official said Mr. Bush was not planning to use that phrase in his speech.

(more)



Dont Hurt Me
Feb 10, 2005, 01:38 PM
well they say they have the bomb and are pulling out of the 6 nation talks accusing Bush for their weapons program. Just one problem though and that is they were developing them while Clinton was in office in effect telling us lies while not stopping the program as they agreed. A rogue nation ran by a tyrant who is starving his people just for his tyranny,greed and power. Reminds me of Chavez...another tyrant.

mactastic
Feb 10, 2005, 01:45 PM
Clinton's actions at least postphoned NKs nuclear work. Bush's have hastened it.

If you were running one of those states, would you have siezed upon the opportunity presented by US troops being tied up in Iraq for the foreseeable future to ramp up your nuclear program, reasonably assured that it would be at least 3-5 years before US troops were back out?

I would have jumped on that opportunity in late 2002 when the war drums were beating loudly against Iraq. That's over 2 years ago. And I think it's safe to say we won't be reducing our troop levels in Iraq below 100,000 for at least another year under the rosiest of scenarios.

We've given NK 2 years of unhindered development time, and now you're complaining about Clinton?

Don't panic
Feb 10, 2005, 02:39 PM
A rogue nation ran by a tyrant who is starving his people just for his tyranny,greed and power. Reminds me of Chavez...another tyrant.

how is venezuela in any way similar to NK? other that refusing to kiss GW behind there is no parallel between chavez and KJI.
Chavez was democratically elected, was reinstated by the people after an illegal military coup that the bush administration (alone in the world) had hastily recognized (and supported?) and is certainly not in full control of the military.
I agree that it's not a mature democracy and there are important issues, but the opposition and the military are as responsible as chavez for this, if not more.
the very existence of such a polarized political climate shows that it is not a dictatorship

if you want to look at tyrants, you should look elsewhere:

- Burma
- Chechnya, (Russia)
- Cuba
- Emirates
- Haiti
- Kuwait
- Libya
- Maldive
- North Korea
- Oman
- Pakistan
- Qatar
- Saudi Arabia
- Sudan
- Syria
- Tibet, (China)
- Turkmenistan

there are more, of course, but IMO these are the worst (although i might be missing some 'bad boys' especially in africa, because I am not very familiar with some of the situations)