Damascus won't allow further inspections of Al-Kibar, the site that Israel bombed last September and that the US claims was a nuclear facility, Bassel Oudat reports from Damascus The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that it will ask Syria for topsoil and equipment removed form Al-Kibar site, in northeast Syria. The IAEA says that it is still trying to determine the nature of the site, which was bombed by Israel in September 2007, but thinks that it bears "the characteristics of a nuclear reactor". "While it cannot be excluded that the building in question was intended for non-nuclear use, the features of the building... are similar to what may be found in connection with a reactor site," the report says. According to the report, IAEA inspectors found a "significant number" of uranium particles in the site, even though the Syrian authorities hastened to bury the facility completely after the Israeli raid. Still, the IAEA report notes that the IAEA cannot determine the source of the uranium unless Damascus allows international experts to uncover the debris of the building. The IAEA expressed the hope that Syria would allow it to visit the site, inspect the debris, and examine any equipment that has been removed from the venue. IAEA officials have asked Israel to provide information concerning the Syrian allegation that the uranium particles found in the scene come from the depleted uranium (DU) coating of Israeli shells. "Syria has not yet provided the requested documentation" to back up its assertion that the bombed building was a non-nuclear military facility, IAEA officials said. They added that Israel's "unilateral use of force" interfered with the efficacy of the investigation, but despite this, that the Syrian dossier will be treated just like the Iranian dossier should Syria refuse to cooperate. IAEA chief Mohamed El-Baradei said that IAEA intends to discuss with Syrian officials pictures of the Al-Kibar site, which the agency obtained from Israel, France and the US in an attempt to spur Damascus to release more information about the case. Syrian Nuclear Energy Agency chief Ibrahim Othman, speaking to reporters in Geneva, dismissed the IAEA report as "proving nothing" and called for an end to the investigation. Othman said that Syria allowed international investigators one visit in June, and will not allow another. Asked if Syria was rejecting further communication with the IAEA, the Syrian official said, "No, no. If the requested information is related to the accusation, we will provide it." But he said that further on-site inspection was "difficult". Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Muallem commented on the report by saying that it aims to "pressure Syria". He said that any traces of uranium in the site were due to the shells Israel used in the attack. He pointed out that both Israel and the US have a history of using shells coated with DU in Iraq and Afghanistan. Israeli use of DU bombs and its own nuclear weapons programme were not mentioned in the IAEA report. The US suspects that the site contained a nuclear reactor based on a North Korean design. US officials claim that the facility was capable of producing bomb-grade plutonium if allowed to operate. The White House maintains that North Korea helped Syria in secret nuclear activities, something that Damascus denies. With the US calling for investigation in Syria's nuclear activities, the IAEA sent a team of experts to Syria last April to investigate Al-Kibar site. Syria didn't announce the visit at the time and discouraged any reporting on the IAEA investigation. Syrian officials declined to comment on the activities of the inspectors. Well-informed Syrian sources said that Damascus cooperated with the experts, but didn't allow them to move beyond 500 metres from the site. Ri Tau Hai, a North Korean diplomat based in Damascus, denied that there is any nuclear cooperation between his country and Syria. He told Al-Ahram Weekly that, "Syria is a friendly country and we have strong economic and military cooperation with it. There are Korean experts working in more than one field in Syria, including military experts, but there is no cooperation of any kind in the nuclear field... There are no North Korean reactors or nuclear substances in Syria," he said. Saber Fahout, media advisor to the Syrian president, denied that Syria has a military nuclear programme, saying that the current interest in Syrian nuclear activities is designed to "undermine the potential for the peace process." He added that the "US, through its highly accurate satellite monitoring, knows better than anyone that Syria doesn't have nuclear reactors of a military nature." Ghassan Abdel-Aziz, a member of the Syrian ruling National Front Command, told the Weekly that, "Syria has never sought to acquire nuclear weapons... and is utterly committed to international resolutions in this regard." Well-informed Syrian sources say that Damascus has no desire to build a military nuclear programme, adding that Syria lacks the technical, human, and financial capabilities to guarantee the safety of such installations. Syria is still in a state of war with Israel, despite the recent indirect talks they held with Turkish mediation. In the event of any nuclear confrontation between the two countries, the Syrians claim, nuclear weapons would be of no value. Syria also has long-range missiles that can reach any point in Israel. Therefore, nuclear weapons would not be of any use in war, according to the same sources. Syria doesn't have the human resources needed to build a big nuclear programme. Also, the security of nuclear facilities is a very complex matter, involving for example the choice of a seismically stable site and precautions for preventing radioactive leaks. Such precautions would be hard to conceal and would require a very high technical, scientific and industrial level. The IAEA report on Syria's nuclear activities coincided with an offer by the same agency to help Syria build a nuclear power station costing $200 million. The offer, which would require ratification of the IAEA Board of Governors, involves assistance in small nuclear projects related to medical and agricultural use. Several Western countries, including the US and the UK are reluctant to endorse the offer. But other members of the IAEA Board of Governors approved the proposal, saying that such agreements must not be politicised without clear and good reasons. Syrian sources say that claims that traces of uranium have been found in Syria aim to undermine future agreements between Damascus and the IAEA. It is worth noting that the Syrian Nuclear Energy Agency is a small establishment with little more than laboratory-level nuclear reactors. The agency is mainly active in examining medical, agricultural, and industrial substances and assessing their radioactive level.
