[Peace-discuss] the Yemeni Scud missles and Bush's search for a pretext for war

[patton paul]

The strange affair of the Yemeni Scud missiles

By Peter Symonds
14 December 2002

WSWS.ORG

In the midst of Washingtons efforts to ratchet up its weapons of mass
destruction rhetoric and establish a pretext for war against Iraq, a
peculiar episode took place this week in the Arabian Sea.

On Monday, two Spanish warships, which form part of a US-led
anti-terrorist naval task force, intercepted in international waters a
North Korean freighter, the So San, heading towards the Middle East.
According to Spanish and US officials, the ship, which was about 1,000km
from the Horn of Africa, was unflagged, its identification markings had
been painted over and it failed to stop when challenged.

The Spanish frigate Navarra fired three bursts of warning shots at the
vessel. Snipers shot out cables crisscrossing the deck, enabling a
helicopter to hover and land a boarding party of armed marines who seized
the ship. A search uncovered 15 medium-range Scud missiles packed under
bags of cement, along with conventional high explosive warheads and drums
of fuel.

Spanish authorities immediately called in US military experts from the USS
Nassau, conveniently located nearby, to deal with the explosives and the
ship was handed over to the US navy. The eventsthe Spanish snipers, the
landing party and the cargo packed under bags of cementwere all captured
on film for timely media release. The story leaked out in Washington
within hours.

The initial press coverage was cautious but nevertheless pointed in a
definite direction. According to the unnamed US officials, the ship did
not appear to be heading towards Iraq, but the ultimate destination of the
missiles was unknown. Some people would like to rule out Iraq, others do
not want to rule out Iraq. Yemen has Scuds. We dont really know right now
where this was going, one told the New York Times.

Here, it appeared, was the potential casus belli for a war against Iraq
that the Bush administration has been so desperate to establish. As the
New York Times commented: If Iraq had been the buyer, not only would
confiscating the shipment have been legal under United Nations
resolutions, but Iraq would also have been in material breach of those
resolutions. The missiles would have given the United States grounds for
war.

But the whole affair rapidly went awry when the Yemeni government claimed
the Scud missiles and issued a formal protest to Washington on Wednesday
demanding the ships release. The purchase had been legal, it insisted, and
the missiles were destined for the Yemeni army for defensive purposes.
Following a flurry of phone calls involving US Vice President Richard
Cheney and Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, Washington reluctantly
decided to comply.

Clearly the White House was not pleased. As a senior official told the New
York Times, Bush was a very, very unhappy man after deciding to let the
freighter continue on its way. But the alternative was to alienate a
Middle East regime, which has collaborated closely with the US military in
hunting down Al Qaeda suspects and whose support, even if only tacit,
would be needed in any US invasion of Iraq. In return, Yemen gave
Washington face-saving guarantees to make no further purchases and to
ensure that the Scuds remained in the hands of its army.

It was left to White House spokesmen Ari Fleischer to put the best
possible spin on the incident. He stumbled his way through a story fraught
with contradictions. Even though US intelligence had tracked the ship, he
said, the Bush administration had not known its destination and was
concerned that it may have been heading for a nation that was a terrorista
potential terrorist nation. Asked if that meant Iraq, he declared: We had
concern about where its ultimate destination might have been.

When pressed as to why military rather than diplomatic means were used to
ascertain the nature of the shipment, Fleischer insisted: Until yesterday,
we didnt know what nation to talk to in terms of who was going to receive
these. It may not have been Yemen. It turned out to be Yemen... Once we
learned it was Yemen, we immediately talked to Yemen.

Fleischers remarks include two bald-faced lies. Firstly, the US knew where
the shipment was headed well in advance, and secondly, the Bush
administration had contacted the Yemeni government prior to the
interception of the So San.

On December 2a full week before the ship was interceptedthe rightwing
Washington Times published a story entitled N. Korea ships fuel, missiles
to Yemen. Citing US intelligence officials, the article explained that the
ship had been under surveillance since it left the port of Nampo in North
Korea, that its destination was Yemen and its cargo included missile
components and fuel.

An article in the Wall Street Journal this week explained that the US has
been virtually certain since late November that the Yemenis were the
buyers, after US intelligence discovered that Yemen had transferred a
payment in the millions of dollars to North Korea. After the publication
of the Washington Times article, US defence officials, fearful of blowing
the interdiction, sounded out the Yemeni government, which indicated that
it would deny any involvement.

The US then concluded it would be able to seize the missiles at sea
without Yemeni protest, allowing it to stop the shipment and avoid a
public fight with a key ally in the war on terrorism, the Wall Street
Journal stated. The problem for the White House was that the Yemeni
government reneged on the arrangement, publicly acknowledged the purchase
and demanded the release of their goods.

If Yemen had done what was expected, Washington would have been able to
point the finger at anyone they chose, and was already beginning to do so.
As the Wall Street Journal noted: Some administration hawks were hinting
as late as Wednesday that Iraq might be the eventual purchaserand
administration spokesmen did little to correct that impression.

When the provocation backfired, the White House went into damage control.
An apology was issued to Spain where military officials were privately
venting their anger to the media. To justify the boarding of the So San,
the rather threadbare explanation was offered that the ship was unflagged
and therefore stateless.

The international media stepped in to help salvage the Bush administration
from an embarrassing debacle. Stories, photographs and footage that seemed
destined for sensational, front-page treatment moved quickly to the inside
pages and down the news bulletins. References to possible Iraqi
involvement were replaced by calls for tougher controls on missile sales
and pro forma denunciations of North Korea. Now the matter has been all
but dropped.

The willingness of the US administration to undertake what amounts to an
act of piracy is a sharp warning of the desperate methods it is prepared
to employ in obtaining a casus belli for war against Iraq. The So San
incident is certainly not the only plot being hatched in Washington, nor
will it be the last.

CLICK BELOW FOR ADDITIONAL ARTICLES
Written by Peter Symonds--Posted 12/14/2002
Click Here For More...


12/15/2002 6:16:32 PM EST


Seeds of Fire
Click here to view Book details [Buy Now]


Unfinished Business
Click here to view Book details [Buy Now]

Shop at Amazon.com





  NOTE TO THE READER: Headline Articles are contributed to GoOff.com by
independent third-parties. Since individual author's sources cannot be
verified, GoOff.com assumes no responsibility for the reliability of any
information presented as fact. Moreover, any opinions expressed are solely
the author's opinions and should not be construed to represent the views
of GoOff.com, nor its owners, partners, or affiliates.