U.S. Will Undermine Inspections in Iraq in Order to Wage War, Says Ritter
by Chris Strohm 10:04pm Tue Nov 12 '02 (Modified on 11:39am Fri Nov 15 '02)
The U.S. government has no intention of allowing new weapons inspections to succeed in Iraq, and instead wants to wage war in the Middle East in order to advance American economic and military supremacy, says Scott Ritter, a former Marine and UN weapons inspector who has gained international fame for opposing U.S. policy toward Iraq.
The U.S. government has no intention of allowing new weapons inspections to succeed in Iraq, and instead wants to wage war in the Middle East in order to advance American economic and military supremacy, says Scott Ritter, a former Marine and UN weapons inspector who has gained international fame for opposing U.S. policy toward Iraq.
In a bold speech before a standing room only crowd on Veteran’s Day at the University of Maryland, Ritter said the new United Nation’s resolution on Iraq is doomed to failure because the U.S. government will undermine new weapons inspections, just like it did in the mid 1990s.
The UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution Nov. 8 that requires Saddam Hussein’s government to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq. On Nov. 12, Iraq’s parliament unanimously rejected the resolution. Hussein can override the parliament, and has three days to make a final decision on whether inspectors will be allowed back into Iraq.
Regardless, Ritter said the U.S. government – and the administration of President Bush specifically -- wants war.
“The United States has no intention of allowing the inspectors to do their job in Iraq,” Ritter said in his first public appearance since the resolution was passed. “The United States has every intention of going to war.”
Ritter added that he has met privately with members of Congress who also oppose the Bush administration’s entrenched stance on Iraq, but they are afraid to go public for fear of losing office or being attacked as unpatriotic.
“We’ve trapped ourselves,” Ritter said. “It’s a ludicrous, horrific situation where you have your elected representative recognizing that there is a policy failure that results not only in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, but the potential deaths of thousands of Americans, and yet they don’t have the courage to do anything about it because they’re afraid they’re not going to get reelected.”
For his part, the U.S. government put Ritter under investigation for being a spy when he started to denounce U.S. policy toward Iraq. He said he receives constant intimidation and pressure from the U.S. government to be silent, and that his family has also been intimidated.
During his speech, Ritter said there is no credible evidence that Iraq has reestablished its weapons of mass destruction program, and the Bush administration’s motive for war is to push American ideology and supremacy in the Middle East. Ritter cited the new U.S. National Security Strategy, which Bush unveiled Sept. 20, as evidence.
That document, which is 33 pages and went largely unreported by the media, marks a historic shift in U.S. foreign policy, stating that the U.S. government reserves the right to attack other countries preemptively and unilaterally. The new strategy abandons the country's 50-year reliance on deterrence and arms control agreements, and operates on the premise that pre-emptive attack is justified to deal with countries that seek to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
Ritter called the document a “stunning piece of literature.”
“It speaks of the United States using its overwhelming military and economic superiority to impose a unilateral American solution on problems that have been defined unilaterally by the United States,” he said. “It says that we will not accept any nation developing economic or military parody with the United States; that we insist that the United States alone maintain it’s superiority over the globe.
“We speak of rejecting international law and multilateral solutions,” he continued. “We speak of the United States defining the world as we see the world, in terms of failed nations, failed regions, [and] failed non-nation entities. And once we identify something as a failure, we empower ourselves to preemptively strike. It’s American unilateralism. There’s another term for it. It’s called imperialism.”
Ritter says a successful weapons inspection program in Iraq is contradictory to what the U.S. government wants. He said the United States would undermine any weapons inspection program by enforcing strict deadlines that cannot practically be met. For example, the new resolution says Iraq must declare what weapons of mass destruction it has–if any–on Dec. 8.
Ritter pointed out that the Bush administration already believes Iraq has weapons. Therefore, if Iraq does not declare any weapons the U.S. government will say Hussein is in violation of the new resolution, and subsequently start bombing. However, if Iraq declares it has weapons, then the Bush administration has an excuse to start war. Ritter called the strict Dec. 8 deadline a “poison pill” for the new resolution.
He also said weapons inspectors would need at least six months to do an accurate assessment of Iraq’s weapons program, while the Bush administration is demanding immediate reports.
Ritter was chief of a UN weapons inspections team in Iraq up until 1998, when he resigned saying the U.S. government was undermining the program. He said the U.S. government, then under President Clinton, used the weapons inspection teams to spy on Iraq in order to get information that was then used in bombing campaigns. He cited one example in which weapons inspectors were ordered to search a site that they had no authority to search. When the Iraqi government refused to comply, the U.S. government ordered the inspection teams out of Iraq and then started bombing the next day – using information that was obtained from spying.
Ritter emphasized that he supports the weapons inspections process, and that Hussein is a brutal dictator. He said he believes the solution in Iraq is to allow the weapons inspectors to do their jobs; peacefully disarm Iraq if necessary; and then provide economic assistance to rebuild the country. War, on the other hand, will be long and bloody, resulting in the death of innocent Iraqis and Americans, and would ultimately breed more terrorism, he said.
Throughout his speech, Ritter challenged the audience to take action, saying the U.S. people have a responsibility to be accountable for what is done in their name. Ritter was asked after his speech what specifically people could do to stop the drive to war. He said he doesn’t have any sure solutions, but people need to continue to take action in the best way they know how, including street demonstrations and putting pressure on government officials.
However, he said the tools of U.S. democracy have been “stripped away” from the public because Congress voted to give Bush the power to go to war.
“We’re not a democracy anymore when it comes to war with Iraq, ladies and gentlemen. We better wake up to this fact,” he said. “We are a dictatorship of one: George W. Bush. We might as well call him King George, because that’s what he is.”
by Chris Strohm 10:04pm Tue Nov 12 '02 (Modified on 11:39am Fri Nov 15 '02)
The U.S. government has no intention of allowing new weapons inspections to succeed in Iraq, and instead wants to wage war in the Middle East in order to advance American economic and military supremacy, says Scott Ritter, a former Marine and UN weapons inspector who has gained international fame for opposing U.S. policy toward Iraq.
The U.S. government has no intention of allowing new weapons inspections to succeed in Iraq, and instead wants to wage war in the Middle East in order to advance American economic and military supremacy, says Scott Ritter, a former Marine and UN weapons inspector who has gained international fame for opposing U.S. policy toward Iraq.
In a bold speech before a standing room only crowd on Veteran’s Day at the University of Maryland, Ritter said the new United Nation’s resolution on Iraq is doomed to failure because the U.S. government will undermine new weapons inspections, just like it did in the mid 1990s.
The UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution Nov. 8 that requires Saddam Hussein’s government to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq. On Nov. 12, Iraq’s parliament unanimously rejected the resolution. Hussein can override the parliament, and has three days to make a final decision on whether inspectors will be allowed back into Iraq.
Regardless, Ritter said the U.S. government – and the administration of President Bush specifically -- wants war.
“The United States has no intention of allowing the inspectors to do their job in Iraq,” Ritter said in his first public appearance since the resolution was passed. “The United States has every intention of going to war.”
Ritter added that he has met privately with members of Congress who also oppose the Bush administration’s entrenched stance on Iraq, but they are afraid to go public for fear of losing office or being attacked as unpatriotic.
“We’ve trapped ourselves,” Ritter said. “It’s a ludicrous, horrific situation where you have your elected representative recognizing that there is a policy failure that results not only in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, but the potential deaths of thousands of Americans, and yet they don’t have the courage to do anything about it because they’re afraid they’re not going to get reelected.”
For his part, the U.S. government put Ritter under investigation for being a spy when he started to denounce U.S. policy toward Iraq. He said he receives constant intimidation and pressure from the U.S. government to be silent, and that his family has also been intimidated.
During his speech, Ritter said there is no credible evidence that Iraq has reestablished its weapons of mass destruction program, and the Bush administration’s motive for war is to push American ideology and supremacy in the Middle East. Ritter cited the new U.S. National Security Strategy, which Bush unveiled Sept. 20, as evidence.
That document, which is 33 pages and went largely unreported by the media, marks a historic shift in U.S. foreign policy, stating that the U.S. government reserves the right to attack other countries preemptively and unilaterally. The new strategy abandons the country's 50-year reliance on deterrence and arms control agreements, and operates on the premise that pre-emptive attack is justified to deal with countries that seek to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
Ritter called the document a “stunning piece of literature.”
“It speaks of the United States using its overwhelming military and economic superiority to impose a unilateral American solution on problems that have been defined unilaterally by the United States,” he said. “It says that we will not accept any nation developing economic or military parody with the United States; that we insist that the United States alone maintain it’s superiority over the globe.
“We speak of rejecting international law and multilateral solutions,” he continued. “We speak of the United States defining the world as we see the world, in terms of failed nations, failed regions, [and] failed non-nation entities. And once we identify something as a failure, we empower ourselves to preemptively strike. It’s American unilateralism. There’s another term for it. It’s called imperialism.”
Ritter says a successful weapons inspection program in Iraq is contradictory to what the U.S. government wants. He said the United States would undermine any weapons inspection program by enforcing strict deadlines that cannot practically be met. For example, the new resolution says Iraq must declare what weapons of mass destruction it has–if any–on Dec. 8.
Ritter pointed out that the Bush administration already believes Iraq has weapons. Therefore, if Iraq does not declare any weapons the U.S. government will say Hussein is in violation of the new resolution, and subsequently start bombing. However, if Iraq declares it has weapons, then the Bush administration has an excuse to start war. Ritter called the strict Dec. 8 deadline a “poison pill” for the new resolution.
He also said weapons inspectors would need at least six months to do an accurate assessment of Iraq’s weapons program, while the Bush administration is demanding immediate reports.
Ritter was chief of a UN weapons inspections team in Iraq up until 1998, when he resigned saying the U.S. government was undermining the program. He said the U.S. government, then under President Clinton, used the weapons inspection teams to spy on Iraq in order to get information that was then used in bombing campaigns. He cited one example in which weapons inspectors were ordered to search a site that they had no authority to search. When the Iraqi government refused to comply, the U.S. government ordered the inspection teams out of Iraq and then started bombing the next day – using information that was obtained from spying.
Ritter emphasized that he supports the weapons inspections process, and that Hussein is a brutal dictator. He said he believes the solution in Iraq is to allow the weapons inspectors to do their jobs; peacefully disarm Iraq if necessary; and then provide economic assistance to rebuild the country. War, on the other hand, will be long and bloody, resulting in the death of innocent Iraqis and Americans, and would ultimately breed more terrorism, he said.
Throughout his speech, Ritter challenged the audience to take action, saying the U.S. people have a responsibility to be accountable for what is done in their name. Ritter was asked after his speech what specifically people could do to stop the drive to war. He said he doesn’t have any sure solutions, but people need to continue to take action in the best way they know how, including street demonstrations and putting pressure on government officials.
However, he said the tools of U.S. democracy have been “stripped away” from the public because Congress voted to give Bush the power to go to war.
“We’re not a democracy anymore when it comes to war with Iraq, ladies and gentlemen. We better wake up to this fact,” he said. “We are a dictatorship of one: George W. Bush. We might as well call him King George, because that’s what he is.”
