≡ Menu

Sharon: Iraqi weapons in Syria

Everyone claims that Iraq has illegal biological and chemical weapons, but the UN inspectors can’t seem to find them. Now Ariel Sharon has an idea of why that might be: He claims Saddam is transferring the weapons to Syria:

Sharon said that Israel has information that “weapons he (Saddam Hussein) wanted to hide, chemical weapons, biological weapons, were indeed transferred to Syria.”

He said that the information has not been fully verified. “We have some information to that effect. We are now working to confirm the information,” he told Israel TV’s Channel 2 in an excerpt of a program broadcast on the nightly news.

At this point, the information seems pretty tenuous. But if it does turn out to be true, it could have some pretty nasty implications, considering Syria is a member of the UN Security Council – and is one of Israel’s sworn enemies.

{ 31 comments… add one }
  • jaws 12.24.02, 9:19 PM

    I’m still puzzled how Syria gets to sit on the security council…
    I guess I shouldn’t spend too much time thinking about it, seeming that at one point, Lybia headed the UN’s council on Human Rights….

  • Me 12.25.02, 4:01 PM

    Syrian Foreign Ministry’s response to the allegation, via CNN (Dec/25):

    “is completely, absolutely not true,”

    “And it aims to divert attention from Israel’s arsenal of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons which other countries support by money and weapons to protect Israel and help it develop.”

    “This accusation against Syria is laughable because Syria has already agreed to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and it has called on all the countries in the region to make the Middle East the region with no weapons of mass destruction. The only side that stands against this call is Israel and Israel with its arsenal of these weapons is not only a threat to Palestinians … but a threat to the whole world’s peace and security,”

    Ha’aretz (Dec/25) version of the same quotes:

    “Sharon’s allegations that Iraq has transported to Syria chemical and biological weapons are baseless and aim to avert attention from the nuclear, chemical and biological arsenal that Israel owns,”

    “The only side that stood and still stands against that call is Israel. Israel with its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction presents a danger not only to the Palestinians, Syria and Lebanon, but to the whole region and to international peace and security,”

  • segacs 12.25.02, 7:29 PM

    Ha’aretz isn’t making that claim . . .it’s reporting Syria’s quotes.

    And why should we take denials on faith?

    Besides, Israel’s weaponry has never been a threat to anyone’s peace or security – Israel has demonstrated over the years that its weapons exist solely for the purpose of defense against aggressors. While Saddam Hussein has shown a willingness to use biological and chemical weapons – even against his own people.

  • Me 12.25.02, 8:19 PM

    Segacs,

    Why should we take Sharon’s accusations on faith?

    “Israel’s weaponry has never been a threat to anyone’s peace or security”

    Tell it to the Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.

    And, not to be a Sadam defender, but the Kurds are as much Hussein’s people as they are Turkey’s people, as the Tibetans are Hu Jintao’s people, the Zapatistas are Vincente Fox’s people, the Chechens are Putin’s people, and the Palestinians are Sharon’s people.

  • segacs 12.25.02, 9:08 PM

    I wasn’t referring to the Kurds, although now that you bring it up, it’s a good example of the threat Saddam poses. I was talking about the evidence that has come to light as of late of Saddam’s plans to use the weapons against Iraqis and then try to pin the blame on the US or Britain.

    And I’m not taking Sharon on faith. I said that at the moment, without seeing evidence, it seems a bit tenuous. But IF it’s true, then it would pose a danger.

  • Me 12.25.02, 9:35 PM

    “I was talking about the evidence that has come to light as of late of Saddam’s plans to use the weapons against Iraqis and then try to pin the blame on the US or Britain.”

    What evidence?

  • segacs 12.25.02, 9:43 PM
  • Me 12.25.02, 9:58 PM

    Note the key phrase in the article-

    “Citing the need to protect intelligence sources, the officials declined to describe that evidence. They spoke on condition of anonymity.”

    In other words, segacs, there’s no evidence on which to base your claim.

  • Me 12.25.02, 10:08 PM

    “I wasn’t referring to the Kurds, although now that you bring it up, it’s a good example of the threat Saddam poses.”

    It’s also a good example of the threat that the US & Britain pose, since it was they who supplied Iraq with chemical & biological weapons & technology (up until 1991) and it was the US (via Donald Rumsfeld) who gave Hussein the OK to commit his attrocity against the Kurds in 1988.

  • Bill 12.26.02, 12:25 AM

    Not only Sadaam, but Syria is a clear
    threat. The Syrians under the brutal
    dictatorships of Assad the Elder
    and Assad the Younger have occupied
    Lebanon for thirty years. Iran, also,
    by their proxies Hezbollah, has occupied
    Lebanon for 20 years.

    Israel must maintain in weapons of deterence
    because, time and time again, it has been
    shown that the only the arab/muslim world
    understands is force. If I was running Israel
    I wouldn’t give away any more land for a piece
    of paper with the word “Peace” written
    on it because to the Arabs, a piece of paper
    is just a piece of paper.

  • Not Me 12.26.02, 3:28 PM

    The Palestinians are Sharon’s people? No, the Occupied Territories aren’t part of Israel. They’re Occupied Palestine. Learn the difference.

  • Me 12.26.02, 4:51 PM

    Bill,

    How very kind of Israel to be concerned about Syrian occupation of Lebanon.

    “Weapons of deterence,” are they?

    Indeed, they deter peace and security in the region, deter a just solution to the ongoing conflict.

    Just as Mr. Bush is attempting to “deter” a war by starting one.

    Ass-backwards logic.

    As for you using a peace treaty as tiolet paper, well that fits perfectly with the tired anti-Arab shit you’re spewing “time and again.”

    Not Me,

    Just as with the others, the Palestinians are attempting to set up an autonomous state in the face of an authoritarian military power which refuses to let them do so.

  • Bill 12.27.02, 5:56 AM

    The “palestinians” can set up an autonomous
    state whenever they want. In fact, that
    is what the israeli’s have been offering
    them all along – autonomy.

    The only thing the palestinians can’t do
    is set up terrorist bases to murder Jews.
    That is unacceptable to the Israelis.

  • Bill 12.27.02, 6:01 AM

    They deter peace? What are you out of your
    minds. Do you know how many wars the israelis
    have stopped becaused of the deterence capabilities.

    Ask Abdullah ibn Hussein ibn Talal ibn
    Abdullah. The Israeli airforce saved his
    ass when the Syrians invaded his country –
    the former 75% of Mandate Palestine now called
    Jordan.

    The truth is, the Israeli military is the most
    stabilizing force in the reason. Stop
    watching Peter Jennings and listening to
    all the left-wing news outlets and learn something.
    Pick up a book by Michael Oren called 6 Days of War.

    You’ve got it ass backwards. Nuclear weapons in
    in the hands of Israel are Weapons of Deterrance.

  • Bill 12.27.02, 6:03 AM

    Not Me,

    The land that Israel captured from Jordan
    in the 6 Day War is the heartland of the Jewish
    People. At best, you can call them disputed terriroties.

    Get your facts straight.

  • Me 12.27.02, 2:51 PM

    -“The “palestinians” can set up an autonomous state whenever they want.”

    Well gee, Bill, that’s kinda hard to do when the “Israelis” insist on occupying that land and daily killing people there. What would they call such a state, The Israeli Occupied Territories of Palestine?

    -“Nuclear weapons in the hands of Israel are Weapons of Deterrance.”

    Deterence against what? Aggression against Israel? Well then, every other nation in the region can claim legitimacy to developing nuclear weapons programs, as a means of deterring agression against themselves.

    Including North Korea, including Iran, including Syria, including Iraq.

  • jaws 12.29.02, 4:10 AM

    Me–Israel only has it’s nuclear option as a last resort, were the country to either be at the last thread of survival, or if it’s attacted by a nuke first. Israel has also developed its program in secret, and once it was recvealed to exist, it has been a powerful deterrent.

    A difference between Israel and Iraq/Iran/Syria is that the latter 3 states are run by psychotic dictatotrs who’d use the bomb against Irael or anything else they don’t like. They’re loose cannons, literally…and that’s the threat.

    Bill–have you had a chance to read Oren’s book? Is it good? (I haven’t gotten my hands on a copy yet).

  • Bill 12.30.02, 2:03 PM

    Jaws — I just started reading Oren’s book.
    It is excellent. He devotes the first four
    chapters to discuss what issues and actions
    led up to the war. He really shows how corrupt
    and venal the Arab leaders were; how they
    basically used the “palestine” issue to strengthen
    their power within their own countries and among
    other arab countries.

    For instance, he talks about how Assad, as the head of
    the Syrian airforce, tried to provoke war
    with israel at the same time he plots to kill
    Jadid, at that time the Syrian stongman.
    He talks about how the Egyptians were bogged down
    in the war in Yemen and were actually fighting
    Saudis there.

    Also, because the soviet archives have opened up
    he delves into a lot of new material. He also had
    interviewed many of the Arab and Israeli who were
    leaders at the time leading up to and during the war.

  • Me 12.31.02, 2:02 AM

    Jaws,

    -“A difference between Israel and Iraq/Iran/Syria is that the latter 3 states are run by psychotic dictatotrs who’d use the bomb against Irael or anything else they don’t like. They’re loose cannons, literally…and that’s the threat.”

    1)Iran’s president Khatami was democratically elected into power; he is not a dictator.

    2)Israel’s current PM Sharon’s entire military/political career has been stained with blood. The attrocities in 1953, the attrocities in 1982, the start of the second intifadah, the attrocities in Jenin, and the ongoing brutality committed daily in the Palestinian territories are the defining markers with which his leadership has become associated. He has been accused by prominent human rights organisations of ‘war crimes’ and ‘crimes against humanity.’

    I can’t think of many other political leaders today, given this record, who would be more deserving of the description “psychotic.”

    3)Israel has certainly “shown a willingness” to use its WMD (missiles and bombs) — not as a last resort but as government policy — against a largely defenseless Palestinian population as part of its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. This puts the Israeli leadership in the “loose cannon” category.

    4)If, as you claim, Israel’s nuclear program’s primary function is as a deterrent, why hasn’t Israel made a public declaration to the international community that it does, in fact, possess such a program?
    How does a secret program act as a deterrent?

    Laid side by side, Israeli international crimes far outweigh Iraqi ones.

    So why is it that Israel can be trusted with WMD while other countries can’t?

  • jaws 12.31.02, 4:30 PM

    Me–

    I don’t have much time right now, so I can’t anwser all of your arguments right now….but let me start

    1) While Khatami was democratically elected, teh country is still ruled/controlled by the Ayatollahs and the clerics.

    2) Sharon has not been tarnished by the Reprisal raids by Unit 101 in 1953. Rather, in public Israeli opinion, he’s viewed in a heroic light. Second, he wasn’t responsible for Sabra-Shatilla; rather that was the Philangelists (sp?) and the Kahan commission only found him indirectly responsible as DM for not acting sooner.

    There was NO massacre/attrocities in Jenin. even the UN admitted that. 50 people were killed; 47 terrorists, and 3 civilians (accidental). It’s also sort of hard to fight when the terrorists decide to hide and fire from inside houses with their wives, children. The terrorists are teh ones who should be faulted if anyone. And yes, Ambulences were allowed into the city.

  • Me 12.31.02, 11:01 PM

    Jaws,

    2)”Rather, in public Israeli opinion, he’s viewed in a heroic light.”

    Perhaps, but according to international public opinion, Sharon’s leadership is synonymous with brutal repression of the Palestinian population, extra-judicial assasinations, collective punishment, and killings of unarmed civilians.

    3)From Human Rights Watch:

    Human Rights Watch’s research demonstrates that, during their incursion into the Jenin refugee camp, Israeli forces committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, some amounting prima facie to war crimes.

    Human Rights Watch has confirmed that at least fifty-two Palestinians were killed as a result of IDF operations in Jenin.

    At least twenty-two of those confirmed dead were civilians, including children, physically disabled, and elderly people. At least twenty-seven of those confirmed dead were suspected to have been armed Palestinians belonging to movements such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and the al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigades.

    During “Operation Defensive Shield,” the IDF blocked the passage of emergency medical vehicles and personnel to Jenin refugee camp for eleven days, from April 4 to April 15.

    There is a strong prima facie evidence that, in the cases noted below, IDF personnel committed grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, or war crimes.

  • jaws 01.01.03, 8:59 AM

    Many thought Sharon would be done with politics following the findings of the Kahan commission in ’82 and his subsequent resignation as DM. As such, his rise through the Likud and to the office of the PM was a suprise to many.

    As for Jenin:
    HRW and AI were incorrect in their reporting; as were many western media outlets. In fact, the first hand accounts of what happen don’t corroborate HRW and AI’s false claims. Amd infact, AI and HRW have since tried to cover their rears as a result.

    Some links:
    http://www.freeman.org/m_online/dec02/sangan.htm

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2167266.stm

    http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/May-02/060502.html (collection of articles)

    http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/terrorism/massacre.htm
    http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0lm00

    As for an earlier post, you claim that Israel has shown its willingness to use WMD….where’d you come up with this from? Israel has never engaged in nuclear, biological or chemical warefare; especially not with the palestinians.

    As for Israel and its nuclear program, I haven’t done all the reading on the subject; but it’s basically a known fact now that Israel is a nuclear nation. It’s been known by the US at least since the 60s I think. It’s a question still being discussed, as to why Israel’s gov’t maintain’s a degree of “opacity” regarding her nuclear program.

  • Bill 01.01.03, 10:10 AM
  • Me 01.01.03, 5:13 PM

    Sharon:

    -the Kahan commission held him “personally responsible” but sidestepped charging him with war crimes because he was only watching from above while his thuggish friends the Phalangists did the actual dirty work.

    -the Kahan commission interviewed no Palestinian survivors during its inquiry and ended with an unexplained statement that several hundred people may also have “disappeared” outside of and at about the same time as the Sabra and Chatila massacres (600 bodies were found inside the camps; 1800 civilians were reported as “missing”).

    -when the case for war crimes indictment went to the Belgian appeals court in 2001, the prosecution found new evidence that in the two weeks following the massacres, the Israeli army had continued to hand over Palestinian refugees to the Phalangists (for summary execution).

    -former Lebanese Phalangist militia leader and government minister Elie Hobeika was killed in a car bomb in Beirut (Jan. 23, 2002) two days after he agreed to give evidence against Sharon in the war crimes indictment case at the Belgian court. He would’ve been the key witness.

  • Me 01.01.03, 6:22 PM

    Jenin:

    -even before the Israeli military completed its conquest of the Jenin refugee camp on Apr. 11, Ha’aretz reported that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had established a public relations committee specifically devoted to defending the IDF’s conduct in the camp — damage control.

    -on Apr. 10, according to Ha’aretz, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres characterised the military’s action in Jenin as a “massacre,” while unnamed military officers stated, “when the world sees the pictures of what we have done there, it will do us immense damage.”

    -during the operation in Jenin and for about a week afterward, Israel systematically enforce a strict exclusion zone which kept out journalists, human rights monitors, and humanitarian aid workers.

    -telephone interviews with camp residents, cross-examination of refugees exiled to the city of Jenin and the surrounding villages of Rummani and Kufr Dan, the testimony of Israeli soldiers involved in the conquest of the camp, and an array of circumstantial evidence had by Apr. 15 led virtually every independent observer to conclude that an impartial examination of the facts would demonstrate that Israel had systematically violated the laws of war and international humanitarian law in Jenin.

    -Phil Reeves of the London Independent (Apr. 16) – who along with Justin Huggler of the same paper provided the most detailed reporting of the camp’s fate – wrote of “a monstrous war crime that Israel has tried to cover up for a fortnight finally exposed The sweet and ghastly reek of rotting human bodies is everywhere, evidence that it is a human tomb.”

    -when UN Middle East envoy Terje Roed-Larsen was finally permitted to visit the camp on Apr. 19, he described “what I saw, what I heard, what I smelt” as “horrifying beyond belief”

    -forensic pathologist Derrick Pounder, who spent several days in the aftermath of the Jenin refugee camp as part of an Amnesty International mission, concluded that it is “simply not true” that most of those killed were armed fighters. “In Jenin,” he stated, “there have certainly been mass killings – both combatants and civilians.”

    -as the UN Security Council was to debate a resolution to establish a formal commission of inquiry into Israeli conduct in Jenin, the US, which had initially threatened to veto this initiative, sponsored a separate resolution to establish a “fact-finding committee,” whose conclusions would not by definition have legal validity or consequences.

    -shortly after pledging “full cooperation” with the UN fact-finding committee, on Apr. 23 – several days before it was scheduled to arrive – Israel decided to “suspend cooperation” with it, thus effectively preventing it from visiting Jenin. Ha’aretz on Apr. 24: “Israel has said the mandate for the mission, at present, is directed at war crimes accusations. Israel is now demanding that testimonies and information gathered by the probe would not be used for any other procedure and would not grant the Palestinians a basis for legal charges to be brought against Israeli military officials.”

    -as for the resulting UN report on Jenin, it is not an investigation into the events at the camp — none of the authors visited Jenin, since the UN Security Council-mandated investigation was blocked by Israel, which refused all cooperation. The report itself states:

    “The report was written without a visit to Jenin or the other Palestinian cities in question and it therefore relies completely on available resources and information, including submissions from five United Nations Member States and Observer Missions, documents in the public domain and papers submitted by non-governmental organizations.”

    -both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, which unlike the UN team, actually sent investigators to Jenin, reported that these actions by Israel may constitute “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” among other serious breaches of the Geneva Conventions.

    -nevertheless, the UN report does repeat the findings of several international aid and human rights agencies that Israel used excessive and disproportionate force in civilian areas, blocked medical treatment for wounded civilians for days, and prevented access to the camp to humanitarian aid and journalists.

    -the main headlines around the world after the release of the UN report were ‘There was no massacre’ — in fact the report never states this; rather it avoids the use of the word “massacre” altogether. It does state that the overall number of Palestinians killed was 52, around half of whom may have been civilians, while Israel lost 23 soldiers — the same numbers that AI and HRW reported.

    -and since the UN report seems to exonerate the IDF of a “massacre,” the Israeli government, while having done everything possible to block, discredit and undermine an investigation into Jenin, eventually cited the same report as vindication.

    -in conclusion, the UN report

  • jaws 01.02.03, 3:58 AM

    As for Sharon, as I said before, many thought after ’82 he’d had a “coup-de-grace” from the political arena; so it’s surpising that he was able to re-ascend the rungs of the latter.

    As for Jenin: First off, I’ve met people who fought there and many of the stories that were leaked to the media aren’t true. One such soldier was actually responsible for tallying the traffic in/out of the surrounding area; which included ambulances.

    As for the reports from Larsen–he later took back his quote. The UN team was “un-invited” after its composition was changed, as Israel believed that some members of this committee had an anti-Israel slant.

    As for teh UK jouurnalists; let’s just say there’s a reason they won the “Award” from Honest Reporting (honestreporting.com) for 2002.

    Finally, the original claims made by the PLO, AI and HRW were that 300+ were killed….a far cry from 50…most of whom were terrorists.

  • Bill 01.03.03, 9:51 AM

    13 alleged members of outlawed Islamic group arrested in Egypt

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1041482444751

    isn’t this the same group that arafat belonged to?

  • Me 01.03.03, 8:28 PM

    As for Larsen ‘taking back’ his quote, do you actually believe that at some point he suddenly realized that what he had seen was not in fact “horrifying beyond belief”?

    It’s called diplomatic pressure.

    As for honestreporting.com, it is hardly an objective source: “Help Israel win the media war” it trumpets.

    No surprise then that it took exception to negative reports by UK journalists on IDF actions in Jenin.

    According to Robert Fisk of The Independent, the organisation itself is far from ‘honest’; it “carries a series of misleading and, in some cases, untruthful statements about my own articles.”

    For more details of Fisk’s greviences with this organisation, see:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=74998

  • jaws 01.05.03, 7:38 AM

    Bill–Arafat was expelled from Egypt for being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood…

    Me–I roll my eyes at the mention of Fisk’s name. He’s regarded by many (even outside of the pro-Israel circles) as being an unreliable reporter. Calling the NYT, LA Times and WaPO pro-Israel newspapers is a big stretch.

    He’s labled by FAIR, and Camera:
    Fisk has an axe to grind against Israel…such as his prior claims:
    Fisk attributed the August 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa to “Washington’s blind support for Israel.” He even blamed the 1994 bombing of Israel’s London embassy on a mysterious “Israeli agent,” exonerating the Palestinians who were tried and convicted by British courts.

  • Me 01.05.03, 6:17 PM

    Very nice, but that doesn’t counter the fact that honestreporting twisted and falsified Fisk’s words to make a case against him, nor the fact that honestreporting has its own axe to grind against anything anti-Israeli…including honest reporting.

    It also does nothing to counter the many independant claims (including, as mentioned, Israeli claims) that atrocities were committed by the IDF in Jenin.

    Even the watered-down UN report which you cite states that Israel used excessive and disproportionate force in civilian areas, blocked medical treatment for wounded civilians for days, and prevented access to the camp to humanitarian aid and journalists, as well as that the overall number of Palestinians killed was 52, around half of whom were civilians.

    You ought to see a doctor about that eye-rolling thing.

  • jaws 01.06.03, 3:33 AM

    Me–

    Well, I do have to visit the eye doctor soon, so I’ll be sure to ask him about the “eye-rolling thing”.

    First, off, HonestReporting didn’t twist Fisk’s words. In fact, numerous media outlets condemn Fisk.

    His “Reporting” is beyond biased…and many times absurd. From his hypothesis about the motiviation of the Afghanis who mugged him; to his attempts to excuse the palestinians that publically celebrated the 9/11/01 attacks. He even blames America for the attacks (Which again, is absurd).

    As for the UN report, it proves that the claim of a “massacre” was indeed a lie.

    For a first hand account of what happened, see; http://gipsy20010.tripod.com/saliencevoices/id34.html

    and from oan op-ed in the St. Petersburg (FL) times:
    Alternatively, the report accused Palestinian terrorist groups of using civilian areas in violation of international law, apparently referring to the use of the Jenin camp to hide combatants, munitions laboratories and weapons. The report also noted Israel’s claims that ambulance and medical services were slowed because they had been used in the past to transport terrorists. And it confirmed the Israeli assertion that buildings had been booby-trapped by Palestinian militants. This is the reason, said Israelis, the process of conducting house-to-house searches caused such damage.

    The Israelis may not have conducted the most humane military operation in Jenin, but they didn’t engage in a massacre.

    http://www.sptimes.com/2002/08/07/Opinion/Arabs_need_the_truth_.shtml

Leave a Comment