Jeffrey LewisPanel of Exports Report on DPRK

I missed that the Daniel Halper at the Weekly Standard has a copy of the May 2011 Panel of Experts Report on North Korea.  How come I didn’t get the document like last year?!


  1. blowback (History)

    The United States, United Kingdom, Japan and South Korea. An “independent” panel of experts? Ha! Maybe the Chinese don’t want it published because it is pure un-diluted propaganda BS.

    From your website:

    No official allegations have been presented to the Committee since the adoption of resolution 1718 (2006) concerning the provision of proscribed nuclear-related or ballistic missile-related items, technology or know-how to or from the DPRK. Nevertheless, the Panel of Experts has reviewed several government assessments, IAEA reports, research papers and media reports indicating continuing DPRK involvement in nuclear and ballistic missile related activities in certain countries including Iran, Syria and Myanmar.

    Don’t you think that if there was even a single provable allegation, it would have been presented?

    BTW, please tell me the “media reports” weren’t from the New York Daily Post, The News of the World or the National Enquirer. Actually, scrub the News of the World, they are better than most so-called “intelligence agencies” at gathering information!

    I seem to recall that the latest “panel of experts” report on Iran claimed that Iran was continuing to ship arms to Syria even though it stated they had no evidence of this.

    • PW (History)

      The latest report from the Iran panel (posted on 17 May at under: ‘and as a public service is putting it online here’ ) has a bit more evidence for Iran’s violations of the UN ban on arms exports from Iran, including some evidence of arms exports to Syria.
      For the rest it appears a bit lame and telling us much new.

  2. Anon (History)

    btw, Sanger and Broad are beating drums about a U deuteride trigger Iran may have worked on — BEFORE 2003.

    EVERYONE knows they had a nuclear weapons programme: why can’t Sanger and Broad understand that even the DNI has said there is no evidence that they have one now.

    It would be good if Sanger and Broad would report on what is NOW happening in Iran instead of getting us into another war.

    • FSB (History)

      Luckily, the website is now pay-only so Broad and Sanger’s unnecessarily inflammatory piece about Iran’s well known nuclear program ca. 2003 will hopefully not get wide readership. One hopes.

      I agree — people need to read DNI’s statements:

      and ignore Broad and Sanger.