I'm Not a Conspiracy Theorist, But... Posted by Adam Blickstein

...some of this seems fairly compelling from the LA Times  (make sure to check out the photos at the link):

SYRIA: More questions about alleged nuclear site

Professor William Beeman at the University of Minnesota passed along a note today from "a colleague with a U.S. security clearance" about the mysterious Syrian site targeted in a Sept. 6 Israeli airstrike.

The note raises more questions about the evidence shown last week by U.S. intelligence officials to lawmakers in the House and Senate.

1. Satellite photos of the alleged reactor building show no air defenses or anti-aircraft batteries such as the ones found around the Natanz nuclear site in central Iran.
2. The satellite images do not show any military checkpoints on roads near the building.
3. Where are the power lines? The photos show neither electricity lines or substations.
4. Here is a link to a photo of the North Korean facility that the Syrian site was based on. Look at all the buildings surrounding it. The Syrian site was just one building.

The author of the note pinpoints irregularities about the photographs. Beeman's source alleges that the CIA "enhanced" some of the images.

Of course it is still somewhat unclear what exactly Israel bombed last year, as elucidated in the Washington Post:

At the same time, a senior U.S. official acknowledged that the U.S. intelligence experts had formally assigned only "low confidence" to the possibility that the site was at the heart of a Syrian nuclear weapons program, because it lacked basic components such as a reprocessing plant. The sole photograph shared with reporters depicting Syrian and North Korean officials together did not appear to be the Al Kibar reactor site...David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector, called the evidence on the reactor "compelling. But the lack of other facilities, such as plutonium separation plant, has to give pause before accusing Syria of having an active nuclear weapons program."

As usual with this Administration and intelligence, if you don't know what to believe, it's best not to believe anything at all.

UPDATE: So, according to President Bush this morning, disclosing dubious intelligence 8 months after the fact, and angering  Democrats and Republicans in Congress as well as the international community while doing so, is all part of a larger policy objective:

"We ... wanted to advance certain policy objectives through the disclosure, one would be to the North Koreans to make it abundantly clear that we may know more about you than you think," Bush told a White House news conference.

Ah, but as most things these days, it all comes back to Iran:

"And then we have an interest in sending a message to Iran and the world for that matter about just how destabilizing nuclear proliferation would be in the Middle East," Bush added.

I'm not sure all this "message sending" is really a viable way to deter nation's in the Middle East from pursuing nuclear capability. Maybe the White House should try using diplomacy instead of publicizing antagonistically questionable intelligence. Or at least give Facebook's new instant messenger application a shot...

Comments

[David Billington]

Although perhaps official statements haven't yet caught up, according to a recent report US counter-proliferation strategy in the Arab Middle East appears to have changed from one of opposition to the spread of nuclear technology to one of opposing its spread only to certain countries. The United States seems to have acquiesced to Egypt's decision last year to revive its nuclear program (one nuclear power plant is now budgeted for construction, three more are planned by 2020) with financial assistance from Arab Gulf states. Morocco is also taking steps to go nuclear.

See Sammy Salama and Heidi Weber, "Arab Nuclear Envy," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 63, No. 5 (September/October 2007), 44-63.

Online at: http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/23n41t24t23476u8/fulltext.pdf
(linked article has graphics, takes a minute or two to load)

[Zathras]

I have to admit there are things about this story I've never quite understood.

There is little to trust or admire about the Syrian government, but there is also little reason to believe that its officials are all idiots. They'd pretty much have to be to embark on a serious nuclear program. Such a program would be far too expensive for such a small, oil-less country, for one thing. The Israelis would be bound to find out about it, for another, and there couldn't have been any doubt as to how they would react once they did. North Korean involvement -- of any kind, on any level -- would be a clear red flag for the Americans.

For a while I had thought that the idea of a Syrian nuclear progam was speculation, perhaps encouraged by the Israelis but originating in the somewhat suggestible Office of the Vice President. I had thought that the facility attacked by the Israelis was more likely engaged in something of concern to Israel but not necessarily to the United States -- a plant to modify SSMs to increase their range or lethality, for example. Press reports and the public statements of the American and Israeli governments seem to stick to the nuclear story, though. The Syrian government's own statements, by contrast, imply that Israel attacked an empty building in the middle of nowhere for no reason. I suppose that could be true. It could also reflect the Syrian government's unwillingness to admit what it was really up to there.

I don't have any conclusions at this point, only doubts that the most widely publicized theories about what the Israelis attacked a few months ago make any sense.

[mdc]

"Such a program would be far too expensive for such a small, oil-less country, for one thing. "

You're forgetting that Pakistan, North Korea, and at one point, India, all swung for the fences in their nuclear programs, operating on only a shoe-string budget. What's needed is determination more so than capital.

"Although perhaps official statements haven't yet caught up, according to a recent report US counter-proliferation strategy in the Arab Middle East appears to have changed from one of opposition to the spread of nuclear technology to one of opposing its spread only to certain countries. The United States seems to have acquiesced to Egypt's decision last year to revive its nuclear program (one nuclear power plant is now budgeted for construction, three more are planned by 2020) with financial assistance from Arab Gulf states. Morocco is also taking steps to go nuclear."

With all due respect to the excellent research in the Salama and Weber article, there is a resounding difference between the emerging programs elsewhere in the ME and the Iranian and apparently the Syrian one.

[Zathras]

Neither Pakistan nor India are Syria; both are large countries with access to substantial resources out of which a nuclear program could be financed. Syria isn't -- even leaving aside the recent added strain imposed on it by a large influx of refugees fleeing the violence in Iraq. Nor is Syria North Korea, able to divert resources into a nuclear program even if it meant letting part of its population starve.

[Dan Kervick]

The Syrian government's own statements, by contrast, imply that Israel attacked an empty building in the middle of nowhere for no reason. I suppose that could be true. It could also reflect the Syrian government's unwillingness to admit what it was really up to there.

Like Zathras, I have also been a bit mystified about the Israeli attack was really about. But I have intrigued by idea that it was a warning shot of some kind, aimed at both Syria and Iran, and designed to show off some kind of weapons or tactical capabilities. Apparently the Israelis had to first insert a commando team to light up the target, and their planes spent several hours traversing Syrian airspace, and so far as we know met no resistance from Syrian air defenses. They might have used sophisticated anti-radar attack systems. The target was quite deep inside Syria, and not far from Iraq, which might send the message to the Iranians that the Israelis could fly into Iran via Syria and Iraq, and them Iranians would have little advance notice.

[Simmons]

All the information the "note" passed along was already known, by the way. I'm very interested in this incident; the mystery is enticing.

"Where are the power lines? The photos show neither electricity lines or substations."
One of the most convincing reasons the program wasn't for peaceful purposes.

[Don Bacon]

Perhaps the belligerent announcements were made at this time to scuttle a Syria-Israel peace agreement being negotiated by Turkey. The US administration, as we have seen, is totally against peace in the Middle East.

According to the Gulf Times, Turkish leaders have been fervently pursuing a proposal to make lasting peace between Israel and Syria by following the path of “quiet diplomacy”. The proposal includes a deal wherein Israel will return to Syria the Golan Heights occupied in the Six-Day War of 1967. In return, Damascus and Tel Aviv will sign a peace treaty and end a state of war that has existed since 1973.

[Michael P.]

If it was a building that was even remotely non-military, Syria would have invited in the world press and scored some propoganda points instead of bulldozing it almost immediately.

[mdc]

Zathras: I want to see your point, but can't quite. Nearly any country can finance construction of a reactor, make use of domestic resources, or acquire crucial ones externally. If North Korea can do it, so can Syria. And I don't quite see how you can claim that Syria somehow wasn't "diverting resources" in this endeavor.

More broadly, you seem to be dismissing the "official story" that this was a reactor. Correct? At any rate, assume it was. I don't know that we quite have a line into the Assad regime's mindset - and can therefore hardly decide for it what is logical, from its perspective.

[thatmichaelguy]

Bush said "we have an interest in sending a message to Iran and the world for that matter" so I wonder who he's going to send to deliver such a message and to whom? Help me out here ...

[David Billington]

"With all due respect to the excellent research in the Salama and Weber article, there is a resounding difference between the emerging programs elsewhere in the ME and the Iranian and apparently the Syrian one."

Can't military nuclear programs begin as civilian programs?

[Cal]

I'm Not a Conspiracy Theorist, But...

After almost 8 years of this administration, I don't see why we have to pussyfoot around the possibility that the Bush administration has lied about national security. Just a few months ago they were caught altering a video tape to make it sound as if the the Iranians were threatening our naval vessels.

But the bigger point is what David raised above. Is the death of the NPT bipartisan?

We know that Bush's unilateral enforcement of nonproliferation is largely a failure. Why do the Democrats want to continue it?

[mdc]

@David:

Of course they can. My point was more to the openness that has so far surrounded the other programs in the ME as opposed to the initial concealment of Iran's. Moreover, take the UAE's proposed program, for example. They have offered to sign an Additional Protocol with the IAEA and import fuel from abroad as opposed to pursuing indigenous enrichment. That's about as far from Tehran's current approach as you can get.

Regardless, programs that remain civilian are not violating anything, and a country can't legally restrict another's acquisition of civil nuclear programs.

[Don Bacon]

thatmichaelguy: Bush said "we have an interest in sending a message to Iran and the world for that matter" so I wonder who he's going to send to deliver such a message and to whom? Help me out here

We are currently observing the highest level of naval presence in the Middle East region since late 2003. The US Navy is currently operating two Carrier Strike Groups in the Middle East plus two US Expeditionary Strike Groups, and a British Carrier Strike Group is also in the region. So there is the coincidence of increased US naval presence due to strike force overlap with a large European naval presence -- a massive increase in naval power which may not be reduced soon.

[cheap kamas]

They supply dofus kamas.
They also supply cheapest kamas for the customer.
I usually buydofus gold from them. If you want to
buy dofus kamas, please contact them.

[Anarchy online gold]

When you have Anarchy credits, you will become strong. With Anarchy Online credits, you can upgrade and admire by others. You can use Anarchy gold to start the journey of the world. So, do not hesitate, let us move to buy AO credits

[cheap wow gold]

I am so glad to receive some wow gold and the World of Warcraft Gold is the gift as my birthday. Some of the warcraft gold is very attractive for me that I will buy wow gold to enter into the game because the gold is the key to the net game.

[dd]

I hope i can get FFXI Gil in low price,
Yesterday i bought FFXI gold for my friend.

[maple mesos]

Do want to know the magic of online games, and here you can get more maple mesos. Do you want to have a try? Come on and mesos can make you happy.

[cheap coach handbags]

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

[sohbet odaları]

sonra bedava chat
burasıda var bedava sohbet