|
WEST
NILE VIRUS: IS CASTRO'S BIOTERRORISM THREAT
BEING IGNORED?
By
Ernesto F. Betancourt
When
the West Nile virus first emerged in the U.S
as the cause of the encephalitis outbreak in
NY, it was considered an epidemiological
mystery. The discovery made by an alert
veterinarian in the Bronx Zoo, Ms Tracey
McNamara, baffled the CDC because that virus
had never been present in the Western
Hemisphere. There was an initial search for
explanations and one writer, Robert Preston,
published a story in the October 18-25 issue
of The New Yorker, that this was being
investigated under the hypothesis that it
could be the work of Saddam Hussein. In that
story (105) Saddam is quoted as referring to
"his final weapon, developed in
laboratories outside Iraq...Free of UN
inspection, the laboratories will develop
strain SV1417 of the West Nile virus."
Needless
to say th! at in the complacent environment
that prevailed at the time, the possibility
to select birds to "host" the
introduction of viruses, such as the West
Nile, in the US was perceived as insane as,
say, flying passenger planes as missiles
into the World Trade Center. The whole idea
was utterly rejected by an anonymous CIA
spokesman who, in a story in The Washington
Post of October 12, 1999, stated
categorically that "to imply that there
is an investigation gives more credibility
to that hypothesis than it deserves."
End of the story.
In
the light of the awesome terrorist aggresion
we suffered on 9/11, shouldn't we, at least,
undertake some investigation of this
hypothesis? Particularly, since the colossal
breach in our security resulting from the
arrest of Ana Belen Montes, the top
intelligence analyst on Cuba at the
Pentagon, as a Castro spy. Is it possible
that previous categoric rejections of such
hypotheses were tainted by opinions uttered
or inf! luenced by this Castro agent? True,
we have to learn to live normal lives under
the most absurd threats, but we must also
stop rejecting these threats as hypotheses
because they do not fit preconceived notions
of what may or may not happen, or our
ideological inclinations. This tragedy shows
that anything is possible and, therefore,
all hypotheses should be validated or
rejected.
That
is why the above hypothesis should be open
for investigation. This suggestion is based
on the fact that this was not so farfetched.
And that there is enough circunstancial
evidence to justify its being investigated.
Here is why.
If
Saddam was using another country as a
surrogate in his efforts to develop
biological weapons, the most logical one was
Cuba. There are several reasons: i) Cuba has
been developing biological weapons since the
1980s and has thousands of scientists and
technicians working in its bioengineering
and genetic industry, whic! h is attached to
Castro's office; ii) Castro is an ally of
Saddam Husseim and shares with him a
pathological hatred of the US; iii) Cuba is
not subject to UN inspection; iv) it is an
Stalinist society where there is no freedom
of the press and an overwhelming repressive
apparatus allows the regime to work in
utmost secrecy; and, v) it is very close to
the US mainland, allowing the use of
migratory birds as "hosts" for
viruses.
Additionally,
in a book, Natumaleza Cubana, published the
previous year--and it must be emphasized
that the book came out in 1998--the author
Carlos Wotzkow, narrates how he was fired
from his work as an ornithologist at the
Institute of Zoology in the early 1980s. The
reason, among others, his objecting to a
Castro order creating the Biological Front,
an effort to develop viruses that could be
carried by "host" birds or other
means into the US. This work was assigned to
the Institute of Zoology, and its
institutional derivative! s, in
collaboration with the Pedro Kouri Tropical
Medicine Institute. The question that comes
to mind is why would Castro do that?
This
was answered in the book Biohazard by Ken
Alibek, a former deputy head of the Soviet
Biological Warfare program, who defected
about six or seven years ago and is now
working as a consultant for the CIA and the
Pentagon. In his book, Alibek reports that
Castro's decision to seek Soviet assistance
to develop a biological warfare capability
was linked to his blaming the US for
outbreaks in Cuba. He also reports that such
capability was developed.
To
further document this explanation, the
reader is referred to Granma Internacional,
where the front page of the Spanish version
carries a permanent window to report on
"La Guerra Biologica de los Estados
Unidos contra Cuba." The current insert
is a six part report on a roundtable
broadcast on December 8, 2000 with the
Minister of Science, Technology and
environment, Dr. Rosa! Elena Simeon, and
several of her collaborators. Previously, it
included the pertinnt section of the
sentence in Cuba's trial of the US for
aggression, which had been twice presented
to the UN General Assembly.
In
a further confirmation of this motivation,
there is a report of a personal conversation
between a defecting officer and Raul Castro,
during which Castro's brother and Minister
of the Armed Forces, stated early in the
eighties that "we are aware the US is
waging biological warfare against us and
what the Americans do not know is that Cuba
is going to pay them back the same
way." For security reasons, the name
and occasion of this conversation cannot be
revealed.
It
so happens that Dr. Rosa Elena Simeon is the
person responsible for the Frente Biologico
that is developing the capability to wage
biological warfare directly under Castro's
oversight. She attended the UN General
Assembly in 1999, the year of the
encephalitis outbreak, a st! range
diplomatic assignment for an official
responsible for science, technology and the
environment. More so, since upon her return
with the delegation to Cuba they were
welcomed in person by Castro in an unusual
event at Havana University during which
Castro made reference "to their
historic and victorious battle in the heart
of the Empire." Could this battle have
been the encephalitis outbreak? Was this a
battle won by the Biological Front? Strange
wording, indeed.
To
add more concrete evidence to the Cuban
efforts in developing the capability to wage
such a campaign against the US, one can
refer to the testimony of Dr. Luis Roberto
Hernandez, an entomologist trained in Great
Britain, who defected in London in 1995 and
resides now in Puerto Rico. In a recent
article in Encuentro en la Red, Dr.
Hernandez debunks the regime's accusations
of biological warfare by the US against
Cuba. And, in an earlier interview to El
Nuevo Herald, on! October 18, 1999, Dr.
Hernandez asserted that he worked in the
Biological Front and that "those were
laboratories to identify and produce viruses
to be used in birds as "hosts" for
their dissemination." These
laboratories were kept under "strict
secrecy."
A
significant leak on the Cuba/Iraq link took
place precisely at the time of the
encephalitis outbreak. According to a
Reuters dispatch, (6/24/99), Dr. Rafael
Limonta, who had been director of the Center
for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnoly had
been cleared of corruption in his dealings
with Iraq and was going to return to his
activities as a researcher. This seems to
indicate that there are some financial
relations between the two countries
involving biotechnology. Since the Center is
a huge research operation with more than
1200 scientists and technicians in its
staff, it is logical to assume that any
research undertaken on behalf of Saddam is
done there. Saddam has close personal links
w! ith Castro. In fact, liaison between the
two countries is handled through Dr. Rodrigo
Alvares Cambria, an orthopedic surgeon with
close links to Castro, who performed surgery
on Saddam's son when he hurt his back in an
accident. And the potential complementarity of interests is indicated by
the fact that Cuba has no financial
resources to invest in what has been a
non-productive industry, while Saddam has
access to substantial oil revenues but
severe limitations to undertake research.
According to an article by Jocelyn Kaiser in
Science, dated November 28, 1998, Cuba had
invested one billion dollars in its
Biotechnology industry. Cuba is a bankrut
country that does not have the financial
resources or credit mobilization capability
to finance such an investment. And, the
2,000 report by ECLAC on the Cuban economy
did not have any statistics of the output of
this industry or its exports. Isn't it
reasonab! le to assume that this is due to
the fact that these investments are not
undertaken for economic reasons but for
military purposes?
This
does not mean that we must reach any
conclusions or, much less, take any punitive
actions. Nobody is advocating that. But,
borrowing from police argot, these facts
provide enough circunstantial evidence to
indicate motive, means and opportunity. At
least, in view of the surprising nature of
the WTC and Pentagon attacks and the
possibility that our previous judgments on
the West Nile virus may have been tainted by
a key intelligence analyst working for
Castro, they warrant an investigation. That
is all. Of course, the problem this poses,
if the results reveal the hypothesis is
valid, are very serious. But failing to find
out and take preventive action could end in
much worse results.
End
Ernesto
F. Betancourt 9/27/01
Top
^
|