Investigation


Hichem Karoui
war plan investigation military fbi
Investigation (July 31) It is not a choice between peace and war, though; but well between war and war. Hichem Karoui home page : Hard times for the Iraqis.
Normal
Hichem Karoui
2
6
2002-08-01T10:15:00Z
2002-08-02T07:12:00Z
2002-08-02T07:12:00Z
2
593
2940
HP
61
20
3530
9.4402



1
1
21
9.35 pt
2











 

 

Investigation

 

By:
Hichem Karoui (in Paris)

 

 TIME \@ "dd MMMM yyyy" 02 August 2002

 

Hard times for the Iraqis.

            It
seems that the US has to choose between something bad, and something worse. It
is not a choice between peace and war, though; but well between war and war.
The Bush administration sounds hesitating between these two options:

Either
attack the Iraqis with full military involvement, or let them die slowly under
an everlasting siege. A third option, such as “lift the embargo” and “normalise
the situation” is definitely excluded, at least in the view of the current
administration.

            On
his recent visit to Washington, King Abdullah of Jordan made a joke of the
rumour about using his country as a launching pad. He seemed worried about war. Abdullah
said "all of a sudden this thing is moving to the horizon much closer than
we believed."

"In
all the years I have seen in the international community, everybody is saying
this is a bad idea," he added.

 But the Washington Post  reports that “ Much of the senior uniformed military, with the notable exception of
some top Air Force and Marine generals, opposes going to war anytime soon, a
stance that is provoking frustration among civilian officials in the Pentagon
and in the White House”. (July 31)

Has that “opposition “ on the one side and
“frustration” on the other something to do with the storm raised by the recent
revelation of the military plan about the intended invasion?

               One thing at least is sure: the internal debate going on inside the Bush administration unveils some recalcitrance – not to say dissension- among military and civilian officials. Thus, the report published by the New York Times last month about the invasion plan, did not much good to the government. Secretary of Defence, D. Rumsfeld while denying that he blames the newspaper for reporting said that the Air Force Office of Special Investigations has begun working to identify the source of the classified leak to the New York Times concerning potential Iraqi war plans. It is believed that an officer opposing the intended war against Iraq has leaked this secret plan to the press.               The fact that the Defence Secretary seeks the FBI help in this case is significant of its gravity. "I hope that they [the FBI] will decide that this is something that they do want to participate in," Secretary Rumsfeld said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on July 25.  "And if they don't,

why, I'll probably encourage
them."

            It
is not the custom that the FBI interferes in such cases though. But since it is
the Defense Secretary himself who requested its help, that may also put the
investigation on a double level, which is enough significant of a probable
complicity between military and civilian officials.

            According
to Sen. Carl Levin The FBI is investigating a leak
which apparently came from somewhere in the intelligence committees, either the
House or the Senate.

But two
categories of questions are to be raised here. The first is connected directly
to the investigation, and the second is wide-ranging:

 1) To which extent may the FBI go in
such an investigation? And to which extent the military establishment may
cooperate with the civilian Bureau?

 2) Is this investigation a confirmation
that the Pentagon has prepared an invasion plan and that the Senate and the
House’s intelligence committees were briefed about it? If this is the case,
then what about the repeated denials by high officials – included Mr. Bush
himself- that such a plan ever exists?

 

Hichem Karoui home page :

 http://www.hichemkaroui.com/