The Libya ‘Scandal,’ Part IV.

The New York Times has a very interesting article on the North-Korea Libya story today. Again, we almost delve into the question of how much evidence of guilt we demand in relation to deliberatively secretive regimes that create unbearable risks, and whether secretive regimes should be entitled to the benefits of doubts they cultivate. David Sanger misses the latter point entirely and indulges in plenty of gratuitous editorializing about Iraq. Put that aside, however, and he’s done a fine job of laying out the evidence of the North Korean transfer for the reader to evaluate:

The Bush administration, joined by United Nations inspectors, now say the uranium most likely came from North Korea and helps to build a case that the North has exported dangerous nuclear material to Libya, and perhaps beyond. The officials drew on scientific tests, secret documents and interviews with key players in the black market, which taken together are potentially highly incriminating. But the evidence is also circumstantial.

In interviews this week, administration officials and foreign diplomats disclosed that Libyan officials had also surrendered financial ledgers to the United States that provide a guide to the front companies involved in the nuclear network set up by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani scientist. One large payment, American officials contend, was directed to North Korea, presumably for the uranium hexafluoride that arrived in Tripoli in 2001. But American and foreign officials who have seen the financial documents or been briefed on them say they do not prove a direct payment from Libya to the North Korean government.

The charge of “unilateralism” takes a kidney punch, too:

A European diplomat familiar with the I.A.E.A.’s investigation of the uranium shipment said a growing number of clues suggested that the source of the uranium was indeed North Korea. “There is a North Korean connection here,” he said. “But what it is exactly is a mystery.”

Sanger seems almost too embarassed to touch Dafna Lizner and Glenn Kessler for the reckless little screed they published in last week’s Washington Post fiasco, which I fisked here (the single malt distillation of stuff you’ve already read on this blog). Sanger goes to great pains to avoid telling us that his colleagues are full of it:

Last week, for the first time in public, the White House declared that the uranium came from North Korea. “The fact that nuclear material found its way out of North Korea to any destination is a source of serious concern for the United States,” said Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, in a letter to The Washington Post. The letter denied that American officials visiting Asia had focused on the North Korean connection to draw attention from the fact that Mr. Khan’s network in Pakistan – an American ally – had acted as a middleman.

Well, that’s certainly putting it mildly. The WaPo claimed that the administration “concealed” and “covered up” Pakistan’s role–in essence, that it lied to its allies. Sanger blew his responsibility to correct the record here. Hey, sometimes, I have to do nasty cross-examinations of perfectly nice people who for reasons that are very important to them, lie. Did it again today, in fact. I didn’t enjoy it, but when your business is the dissemination of truth, you do your duty. Professional courtesy shouldn’t intrude upon one’s obligation to the truth.

All that being said, the article is still a must-read, and Sanger’s reporting is still praiseworthy.

(Links to Part I, Part II, and Part III, and a highly recommended post at No Illusions.)