Scott Ritter on Iraq's "Compliance":
Quote:Sometime in the second week of December, inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) will once again assemble in Iraq to carry out surprise inspections of so-called "sensitive sites." These are locations that Iraq claims are related to its national security, dignity, and sovereignty, but that the inspectors believe house documents and other material related to Iraq's production of weapons of mass destruction. Unfettered access to such sites is critical not only for verifying Iraq's compliance with its Security Council-mandated disarmament obligations but also for the conduct of any meaningful long-term monitoring of Iraqi compliance once such disarmament has been achieved. As such, the coming inspections are not only a critical "test" of Iraqi compliance with its recent decision to resume cooperation with UNSCOM in the face of U.S. air strikes, but also a defining moment for the future of UNSCOM and all multilateral disarmament efforts.
Yet, in a real sense, this exercise is a sham that will almost certainly play right into Saddam Hussein's hands. Since Saddam has blocked the inspectors from conducting any meaningful information-gathering for the past four months, the targets of their "surprise" inspections will most likely be drawn from a list of suspicious sites dating to last summer. Today, surely, those facilities will be empty, their contents having been moved to secret locations elsewhere.
In effect, Saddam will have managed to have his cake and eat it too. He will have prevented the inspectors from gathering any real evidence against him, while at the same time appearing to give them unfettered access to sensitive sites.
As a member of UNSCOM since 1991, and its chief inspector responsible for investigating Iraq's concealment mechanism from July 1995 until my resignation on August 26, 1998,
I know that this is hardly the first time Saddam has pulled such tricks. In fact, they are at the heart of his strategy for preserving his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and, eventually, getting rid of U.N. economic sanctions (which he has largely succeeded in eluding anyway). Through skillful manipulation of the situation on the ground in Iraq, international public opinion, and rifts among the members of the Security Council, Saddam actually aims to cap his comeback by getting UNSCOM to issue a clean bill of health. It is an audacious plan, but it may succeed, thanks in no small part to the mistakes of U.S. policymakers themselves.
If it succeeds, the consequences could be dire. The Baghdad regime-- strengthened by having retained the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction and psychologically fortified by having outlasted the world's sole remaining superpower--will rapidly restore its internal and regional constituencies and reemerge as a force to be reckoned with.
Since his defeat in the Gulf war, Saddam has built up eight years' worth of resentment and frustration that can only be released through renewed efforts at territorial expansion through armed aggression and blackmail, both economic and military.
Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. UNSCOM lacks a full declaration from Iraq concerning its prohibited capabilities, making any absolute pronouncement about the extent of Iraq's retained proscribed arsenal inherently tentative. But, based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.
Meanwhile, Iraq has kept its entire nuclear weapons infrastructure intact through dual-use companies that allow the nuclear-design teams to conduct vital research and practical work on related technologies and materials. Iraq still has components (high explosive lenses, initiators, and neutron generators) for up to four nuclear devices minus the fissile core (highly enriched uranium or plutonium), as well as the means to produce these. Iraq has retained an operational long-range ballistic missile force that includes approximately four mobile launchers and a dozen missiles. And, under the guise of a permitted short-range missile program, Iraq has developed the technology and production means necessary for the rapid reconstitution of long-range ballistic missile production.
Iraq supports its retained prohibited capabilities with an extensive covert procurement network operated by Iraqi intelligence. While images of starving Iraqi children are beamed around the world by American television, Iraqi front companies have spent millions of dollars on forbidden material related to all weapons categories--in direct violation of existing sanctions and often under the cover of the humanitarian "oil for food" program.
Finally, Iraqi security forces have kept critical documentation, including the vital "cookbooks" that contain the step-by-step process to make chemical agent, outline the procedures for producing weapons-grade biological agent, detail the final design of the Iraqi nuclear weapon, and provide the mechanical integration procedures for long-range ballistic missiles.
These capabilities may seem paltry compared with what Iraq had before the Gulf war. But they represent a vital "seed stock" that can and will be used by Saddam Hussein to reconstitute his former arsenal. His strategy for doing so has emerged over the past seven years of struggle with UNSCOM. That struggle began almost as soon as the commission was created to verify a declaration Iraq was supposed to provide to the Security Council 15 days after the end of the Gulf war. A Security Council resolution required Iraq to set forth the totality of its proscribed arsenal, as well as all its components and the means of producing it. But, instead of telling the truth, Iraq gave a radically misleading and incomplete account.
UNSCOM's original mandate, a seemingly simple exercise in conventional arms control verification, evolved into an endless game of cat and mouse.
https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?r=sub&uri=%2Farchive%2F1298%2F122198%2Fritter122198.html
And Scott demonstrates his well known care and concern for the welfare of children:
Quote:(TIME Magazine asks Ritter) You've spoke about having seen the children's prisons in Iraq. Can you describe what you saw there?
The prison in question is at the General Security Services headquarters, which was inspected by my team in Jan. 1998. It appeared to be a prison for children ?- toddlers up to pre-adolescents ?- whose only crime was to be the offspring of those who have spoken out politically against the regime of Saddam Hussein. It was a horrific scene.
Actually I'm not going to describe what I saw there because what I saw was so horrible that it can be used by those who would want to promote war with Iraq, and right now I'm waging peace.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,351165,00.html
Thanks timber. You are preaching to the choir about that stuff. I though Ritter might have something new to say.
Yes, Timber.
How could you so callously flout the truth, when it is so unpopular among agend-bound Bush detractors?
Hmmm.
Once again, I don't know anyone who denies that the removal of Hussein from power was a positive accomplishment. The closing of the peds prisons is also positive. But, I would daresay the thriving drugs,prostitution,rape and murder economy in Iraq is not a positive accomplishment.
People bleed during life-saving surgery.
Anti-biotics make some nauseated.
Childbirth hurts.
You have to destroy the road before repaving it.
Chemotherapy makes you almost wish you were dead....
Please don't force me to share more analogies!
Iraq will be a short-term mess, and a long-term success. (I say.) :wink:
Tell me please ..... just who is the freakin monster?
Sanctions Against Iraq
A Violation of International Law
1) Since 6 August 1990, Iraq has been subjected to the most comprehensive regime of sanctions ever imposed by the Security Council. Following the Gulf War, the Security Council adopted resolution 687 in which a number of obligations were imposed upon Iraq as a requirement for the establishment of a formal end to the military operations. Iraq accepted those obligations, which included the recognition of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Kuwait and the borders demarcated by the U.N, and disarmament.
2) The Council also decided to review the sanctions regime every sixty days in the light of Iraq's implementation in order to ?''reduce ?'' or ?''lift'' the sanctions. The distinction between reducing and lifting of sanctions does not make sense unless the Council intended to ease the sanctions, both in scope and content, proportionally with the degree of implementation achieved until such times as they are lifted completely with the full implementation of the obligations imposed.
3) Despite the harsh nature of the obligations imposed by the Security Council, some of which were in fact unprecedented and transgressed the acceptable norms of international law, Iraq lived up to its commitments. For over nine years, Iraq has dedicated its efforts towards implementing those obligations with the result of fulfilling all substantive requirements set out by the Council.
4) However, until now, the Security Council has not taken any step to reduce or lift the comprehensive embargo imposed upon Iraq, despite the dire consequences resulting therefrom to the entire country and its population.
5) The Security Council continues until now to maintain a punitive approach against Iraq ignoring thereby the record of implementation. It is well-known that this approach is led by the United States of America and the United Kingdom in furtherance of their declared policy to change the political regime of Iraq. These two permanent members continue to interfere in the internal affairs of Iraq, thereby threatening the territorial integrity of the country. They imposed, without authorization from the Security Council, no fly-zones over Iraq (in the north since 1991, and in the south since 1992 which was extended in 1996) in the enforcement of which continuous acts of aggression have been committed. In December 1998, they launched a deliberate act of aggression against the whole country. All these acts are being perpetrated against Iraq while these two members continue to obstruct any move in the Council aimed at rendering justice to Iraq.
6) In maintaining this policy, these two permanent allege that Iraq has not fulfilled the substantive obligations under the Council's resolutions and that it continues to be a threat to its neighbours. . In this connection, the central argument is based on the opinion of UNSCOM that the weapons obligations have not been fully completed. This position is totally discredited by a number of facts particularly those pertaining to the revelations of former UNSCOM employees which proved beyond doubt that that body acted as a tool of American policy, and that Iraq has in fact fulfilled the substantive requirements of the Council's resolutions on this point.
7) It is well-known that the sanctions under the Charter are envisaged as a means for the maintenance and restoration of the comprehensive embargo has become an end in itself for these two permanent members, regardless of the Charter and international law and their responsibilities thereunder.
8) The military operations of the coalition forces in 1991, the major part of which were conducted by the United States forces, brought, according to the report of the investigation team sent to Iraq in March 1991 under the leadership of Mr. Martti Ahtisaari, the then UN USG for Administration and Management, a form of devastation which has wrought near-apocalyptic results on the infrastructure of what had been until January 1991 a rather highly urbanized and mechanized society. Moreover, the prolongation of the embargo intensified the said results. Aside from the failure of the Security Council to fulfil its substantive and procedural duties under the Charter and international humanitarian law, ten well-established facts from the countless reports of the Specialized Agencies, Non-Governmental organizations, and the Security General of the United Nations demonstrate that the humanitarian situation in Iraq is, in a word, a ?''catastrophe''.
9) After the Gulf War and under the effect of sanctions, it is estimated that Iraq's GDP may have fallen by nearly two-thirds in 1991, owing to an 85% decline in oil production and the devastation of the industrial and services sectors of the economy. Agricultural growth has since been erratic and manufacturing output has all but vanished. The material mortality rate increased from 50/100,000 live births in 1989 to 117/100,000 in 1997. The under-five child mortality rate increased from 30.2/1000 live births to 97.2/100 during the same period. The infant mortality rate rose from 64/1,00 births in 1990 to 129/1,000 in 1995. Low birth weight babies (less than 2.5 kg) rose from 4% in 1990 to around a quarter registered births in 1997m due mainly to maternal malnutrition. As many as 70% of Iraqi women are suffering from anemia. The dietary energy supply had fallen from 3.120 to 1.093 kilo calories per capita/per day by 1994-95. The prevalence of malnutrition in Iraqi children under five almost doubled from 1991 to 1996 (from 12% to 23%). Malnutrition problems stem from the massive deterioration in basic infrastructure, in particular in the water supply and waste disposal systems. Access to portable water is currently 50 % of the 1990 level in urban areas and only 33% of rural areas. In Central and Southern governorates 83% of school buildings needed rehabilitation, with 8,613 out of 10,334 schools having suffered serious damage. Some schools with a planned capacity of 700 pupils actually have 4500 enrolled in them. Substantive progress in reducing adult and female illiteracy has ceased and regressed to mid-1980 levels. The accelerating decline of power sector has had acute consequences for the humanitarian situation. The total remaining installed capacity today is about 7,500 mw, but inadequate maintenance and poor operating conditions have reduced the power actually generated to about half that figure at 3,500 mw. Aging equipment and the continuing effects of war damage have caused deterioration at nearly every level. The cumulative effects of sustained deprivation on the psycho-social cohesion of the Iraqi population are worth mentioning. There has been an increase in juvenile delinquency, anxiety about the future and lack of motivation, a rising sense of isolation bred by absence of contact with the outside world, the development of a parallel economy replete with profiteering and criminality, cultural and scientific impoverishment, and disruption of family life. The cumulative effect of the embargo and economic decline on the social fabric of Iraq is particularly evident.
10) as of this date, one and a half million Iraqis, mostly children, the frail and the elderly, have died as a direct result of the sanctions. Approximately five thousand children are dying every month. The devastating long-term effects of the radiation resulting from the depleted uranium weapons used by the American and British forces in Iraq are beginning to take their toll on the population, the genetically-deformed new born and the environment. The erosion of the vast numbers of DU shells, the burnt-out tanks and other armoured vehicles has now seeped into the sub-soil and the water table. The radiation has entered the food chain and the latest effects of their contamination will continue for generations and will be impossible to eradicate. All this constitutes a clear act of genocide, which is being perpetrated in the name of the United Nations.
11) The approach adopted against Iraq demonstrates the failure to follow the political and diplomatic means for the solution of international problems recognized by the Charter and international law. Instead a policy of aggression, destruction and revenge seem to have been employed by the forces controlling the mainstream of international relations at present in pursuit of unilateral interests rather than the collective interests of the international community. This approach, which is evidently espoused by the United States and the United Kingdom, is no longer a " hidden agenda'' as it had been declared publicly on numerous occasions by American and British officials at the highest level. This policy kept the region in a state of tension and instability at the expense of restoring peace and security, in order to maintain a firm control over its oil resources. The rules and standards of international law and the Charter have been manipulated and often violated. They have also been completely ignored when they proved to be a troubling constraint.
12) The sanctions inflicted upon the people of Iraq for nine years now, though harsh and unprecedented in their damaging injustice, have failed to undermine the resolute steadfastness of the people of Iraq in their determination to realize justice under international law and the U.N Charter.
It is in this spirit of moral determination and the rule of law that Iraq addresses itself to the collective wisdom and understanding of the Organization of African Unity, as well as the fraternal support of the Governments and peoples of its member States. In this regard, Iraq demands nothing more than the application of the resolutions of the Council legally and fairly, which requires the objective assessment of the record of implementation by Iraq. Iraq is firmly convinced that once this is done, the sanctions have no way of being continued to be imposed on the Iraqi people.
When GWBush declared the major fighting over, we immediately secured the oil fields and forgot everything else. I wonder why?
TOo bad Ritter didn't mention 9/11 as the strategic opening to the Central-Asian wars. He was on a roll.
Anyone supporting Bush better explain to me how they justify such a treasonous act: the mass murder of innocent compatriots that was allowed to happen/planned, on that dark sunny morning.
Some folks are convinced the reason they can't find a lot of other folks who accept the answers they like is that there exists a vast conspiracy structured to keep the masses unaware of the conclusions some wish to draw. Particularly of note is the logarithmic inverse relationship between the probability of a thing and their passion for it.
That certainly includes you, timber.
Appreciate all the medical analogies, Sophia -- but in this case the doctor may have used false information in the diagnosis and performed an unnecessary operation.
Timber summarized it nicely for me. Ritter has said this before. Nothing new.
Ge - unquestioning compliance?
Timber,
I find your obtuse analogies increasingly difficult to follow. Scott Ritter spoke very clearly and with a passion. That guy obviously means what he said and knows what he is talking about. This is not some conspiracy theory nut, but a former chief UNMOVIC weapons inspector. He deserves to be listened to, not be a target for character assassination.
steve, I did not imply Ritter was a conspiracist; the remark addressed another post, from another member, and had nothing to do with Ritter. As for character assassination, one is not libeled by the disclosure of one's own documented words. Ritter's character stands to examination on its own merit.
Timber
I wasn't suggesting you in particular were undermining Ritter's reputation. but I have heard stories about Ritter's private life which smell of character assassination.
Ritter has clearly made powerful enemies in the US, I wonder if that is why he felt it easier to speak so passionately to the BBC?
There is cause to suspect Ritter's motive and objectivity. Reams of paper and miles of videotape have been devoted to the questions, but here are a few excerpts from a Washington Post/CNN article which summarizes much of the controversy and contradiction surrounding him.
Which Ritter is real?
Quote:When Ritter resigned in 1998, calling the inspection program a sham, he testified in Congress:
"Iraq is not disarmed. Iraq still poses a real and meaningful threat to its neighbors."
Quote:Amid the rising tattoo of Bush administration war drums, Ritter took off for Baghdad, singing a different tune. "The truth of the matter is that Iraq has not been shown to possess weapons of mass destruction," he said in an address to the Iraqi National Assembly -- the first by an American and widely seen as a propaganda coup for Hussein. "Iraq today is not a threat to its neighbors."
Quote:"I don't deviate -- I don't backtrack from anything I've ever said or done," former UNSCOM inspector Scott Ritter says.
Quote:His September trip was assisted, in part, by a wealthy Iraqi American businessman who opposes U.N. economic sanctions on Iraq and who also invested $400,000 in a documentary Ritter researched there two years ago. In the film, which has not been commercially released, Ritter condemns the sanctions, calling American policy toward Iraq immoral.
Quote:The Ritter affair swirls with its own mysteries. Primarily, his old friends wonder: What happened?
"I like Scott and I honestly think he's a man of great integrity, but I don't know what's going on in his mind," says Tim Trevan, ex-spokesman for the U.N. special commission to disarm Iraq (UNSCOM). "I do believe his credibility is shot . . . and I think that's very sad."
A former nuclear inspector, David Kay, said recently in Congress: "He's gone completely the other way. I cannot explain it on the basis of known facts."
Richard Butler, Ritter's old boss at UNSCOM, said on CNN: "I don't know why, I'm not a psychoanalyst."
"He has completely marginalized himself and turned himself into a pathetic, strange figure," says Francis Brooke, Washington adviser to the anti-Hussein Iraqi National Congress.
Jim Trevan, David Kay, Richard Butler, and Francis Brooke, among others, fail to see a rationale in Ritter's behavior.
Perhaps the answers lie somewhere near here:
Quote:"The thing he wants most is attention," says Danielle Pletka, a former staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who ran the 1998 hearing at which Ritter also testified that Iraq remained "an ugly threat." "He is cynically manipulating information in order to call attention to himself."
Others say Ritter seeks the spotlight for a simple reason: He needs money. He relies on speaking engagements for income; he has to promote his film and books.
