Uranium Controversy Raises Nigerís Profile by Sean OíDriscoll Never in the past 50 years has Niger been in the news so frequently. As The Washington Diplomat spoke to the countryís ambassador, Joseph Diatta, the controversy over forged documents purporting to show uranium sales from Niger to Iraq had just begun to die down. There was no mention of the issue in The Washington Post on the morning of the interview, a source of some relief for the ambassador. Itís easy to see why the Nigerien government is growing tired of the uranium questions, given that the whole affair was based largely on very poorly faked documents. During the controversy, Britainís Guardian newspaper tested how long it would take to establish the veracity of the documents. It took 15 seconds on an Internet search engine to show that the Nigerien foreign minister mentioned in the documents had not been in power since 1989. In that space of time, a journalist could also have discovered that the military council mentioned in one of the pages had not been in operation for more than a decade. Diatta smiled broadly when asked why he thought the United States and Britain clung so long to the documents and insisted that Iraq had sought uran ium in Niger. You have to find the conclusions yourself, he said. ìYou have the conclusion, Iím sure.î Remarkably relaxed, Diatta said he is happy that his countryís position has been vindicated by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog. He accepts the charge that at the time of the supposed uranium sales, the Iraqi ambassador to the Vatican may have been in his country, but he added that his governmentís diplomatic links were still open to Iraq in early 2000 and as such, it would have been difficult to say no to such a visit. ìThey had a right to ask for things, and we had a right to say yes or no,î Diatta said, stressing, however, that no discussion had taken place on the subject of uranium sales. And of course, there is the million-dollar question: Who could have been behind the Iraqi uranium sales documents, one of the most amateurish yet massively successful forgeries of modern times? ìGood question,î replied the ambassador ìI could ask you the same question. It is really impossible for us to know. We are awaiting the investigation of the Senate, which has asked the FBI to make an investigation. We want to know the outcome of this investigation.î The International Atomic Energy Agency has already described an attempted copy of the Niger presidential signature as a ìblatant forgery,î and some people are wondering if the documents were the work of someone within Niger trying to embarrass the newly established and largely successful democratic government. The ambassadorís response to this question is lightning quick. ìNo, no. I donít think so,î Diatta said. ìOur prime minister said to a journalist from the British Telegraph that it was impossible that the forgery was made in our embassy in Rome,î he added, referring to the Embassy of Niger in Rome, which has been mentioned as a suspect because the first page of the forged documents appears to be a genuine letter from the embassy advising Nigerís government of a visit to the country by the Iraqi ambassador to the Vatican. ìAnd anyway,î continued the ambassador, ìit is really ridiculous if it was someone from Niger to have put a military institution more than 15 years old into the article.î That institution, the Supreme Military Council, has long been disbanded but was mentioned in one of the letters supposedly written in 2000. The political storm generated by the uranium controversy has had at least one unexpected side effect: It has raised the profile of Niger, a hot desert nation in Western Africa with a population of about 11 million. ìI would sometimes talk to people on the street and say I was from Niger and they would say ëOh, Nigeria, yesíÖ. At least now they knowóNiger produces uranium, Nigeria produces petroleum,î Diatta said, referring to Nigerís neighbor to the south. Even the correct pronunciation of his country is finally being sorted out. Since the controversy began, Diatta said his office has fielded ìmany, manyî calls from journalists, political pundits and others trying to figure out the countryís pronunciation, with many learning for the first time that the correct way to say Niger is nee-ger, not nigh-ger. Diattaís second posting to Washington has certainly been an eventful one. He is recognized as a highly accomplished diplomat, having served as Nigerís ambassador to Ethiopia, the United States and later China before returning to Washington in 1997. His wife, Haoua, gave an account of their diplomatic experiences in her memoir, ìShadow of Africa,î in which she recounted her horror upon learning that the president of Niger had been assassinated in April 1999 while his daughter was staying at the Diattasí home in Washington. Diattaís return to the United States came at a time when the Nigerien government was trying to recover from two coups in less than a decade. The ambassador pointed out, however, that his country has now been stabilized with the establishment of a solid democracy in late 1999, a claim supported by international observers. Yet the media continue with their eagerness to unveil the truth about the uranium documents, mostly to shed light on why the British and U.S. governments were so willing to accept a shockingly bad forgery as fact. A British Telegraph journalist in Niger recently reported that the former U.S. assistant secretary of state for African affairs, Herman Cohen, had told Nigerís president to stay quiet on the uranium issue. Diatta is quick to address the potentially damaging media report, pointing out that Cohen is also a lobbyist for the Nigerien government and frequently travels to Niger to brief the government on his work in Washington. ìI know Ambassador Cohen very well,î Diatta said. ìAmbassador Cohen went as a private person, not as an official of the U.S. government. It is normal for him to go to Niger and speak about his job with my government.î The former U.S. ambassador to Gabon, Joseph Wilson, is another key player who helped debunk the claim that Niger sold uranium to Iraq. In 2002, he was sent by the U.S. government to check out the uranium allegations, and he reported back that it was highly unlikely that any such transaction had taken placeóa fact apparently not absorbed by the White House until after the presidentís State of the Union address. ìI know [Wilson] very well also,î said Diatta. ìAnd you know, something very strangeówhen he went to Niger in February 2002, I was myself in Niger and we had a meeting in my house and we spoke about this matter. So, it was not a secret mission. Everyone spoke about this secret CIA mission. I donít understand why there is so much noise about this visit to Niger. ìAmbassador Wilson was requested by the CIA to go to Niger, yes, but he accomplished this for his government without any problem. He told everyone that he was sent by the U.S. government on the uranium issue, without any secrecy,î Diatta said. Above all, Diatta is keen to explain that Niger is ìnot just uranium.î ìNiger is also this beautiful desert we have, it is the beautiful views we have along the River Niger, it is ancient cities with a beautiful mosque built in the 16th century. We invite you to come there and see for yourselves. We want Americans to know that the recent controversy has not affected the good relations between our two countries.î Diatta said that when the media rushed toward the uranium controversy, they overlooked one important point: Niger was one of only two African nations to send troops to help with the liberation of Kuwait during the first Gulf War. ìI think people have forgotten this, but our participation was appreciated by the U.S. government at the time,î Diatta said. ìThis should not be forgotten. We were allies of the U.S. and we remain so now. That is what is most important.î Sean OíDriscoll is a contributing writer for The Washington Diplomat.