20 February 2003
Wolfowitz Says U.S. Still Working on Agreement with Turkey
(Defense deputy in BBC interview) (2960)
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said February 19 that, "if it
becomes necessary to use force" to disarm Iraq, "we will achieve our
objective with or without Turkish cooperation. But with Turkish
cooperation it can be much quicker, much less painful for everybody
including innocent civilians in Iraq, including Turkey and the Turkish
economy, including the United States."
During an interview in Washington with BBC television and radio,
Wolfowitz added that there may still be a chance - albeit a small one
- that Saddam Hussein "will either decide to disarm or decide to
leave...if he saw himself surrounded by a powerful coalition" which
included Turkey.
He added, "Turkey has been a strong ally going back to the Korean War,
and the stakes are large for both of us -- I think not only with
respect to handling Iraq, but with the longer-term relationship. So
we're still working hard at it."
Evidence continues to mount that "the Iraqis are obstructing, defying
the will of the United Nations. They have no intention to disarm as
required by Resolution 1441," Wolfowitz said.
Saddam Hussein is "a very dangerous man," he said. The terrorists who
planned to put deadly ricin into the London subway system are tied to
terrorists based in northeastern Iraq, "and some of whose leaders have
been sheltered in sanctuary in Baghdad."
Wolfowitz praised the courage of British Prime Minister Tony Blair,
who "understands that the threat only gets worse if you wait."
"The risks are real. The President of the United States understands
that. I think your Prime Minister understands that. That's what is
leadership. It's the courage of recognizing that those risks need to
be faced in order to avoid some more serious risks," Wolfowitz said.
He acknowledged that "war is an ugly thing," but added, "I do believe
if you look at it from a moral point of view, the number of innocent
people that would be killed if [Saddam Hussein] remains in power is
vastly greater than what it will take to get rid of him."
"If it comes to the use of force... this is not going to be a war for
oil," Wolfowitz said. "If we wanted Iraqi oil we would have dropped
the sanctions years ago. This is not a war for Israel. It is a war to
liberate perhaps the most talented population in the Arab world,
people who I think are ready to build a society and a government that
could become a model for the future for others."
Asked about disagreements between the United States and Europe, and
within the United Nations, Wolfowitz said, "there are going to be
differences of views. I think the great strength of the NATO alliance
is [that] it's an alliance of democracies. The price is that you have
different views, you hear different debates. The positions shift as
things move along."
The anti-war demonstrators will not change U.S. policy, he said, "and
most unfortunately, it's definitely not going to change the position
of Saddam Hussein. I mean the real tragedy is that instead of marching
to change American policy they ought to be marching to change Iraqi
policy. The decision on war and peace rests in the hands of Saddam
Hussein."
Following is a transcript of the interview:
(begin transcript)
United States Department of Defense
News Transcript
Presenter: Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
Wednesday, Feb. 19, 2003
DEPUTY SECRETARY WOLFOWTIZ INTERVIEW WITH BBC TV AND RADIO
BBC: If I could start by asking you, the Turkish government still
hasn't given a green light for a buildup of forces, U.S. forces there.
Can you say how concerned you are about that at the moment?
Wolfowitz: We've done a lot of work with the Turkish government and
we're still working. It's a very important thing to get right and we
are unfortunately running out of time. But Turkey has been a strong
ally going back to the Korean War, and the stakes are large for both
of us -- I think not only with respect to handling Iraq, but with the
longer-term relationship. So we're still working hard at it.
BBC: Are you close to having to abandon that particular flank, if you
like, of a buildup?
Wolfowitz: We're close to some key decision points in terms of our
deployments, yes, but we're still working with the Turks.
BBC: Would it be a major problem for you if you had to make a decision
that you couldn't put forces in there?
Wolfowitz: We've been explaining for months now to the Turks, and I do
believe they understand this, that if it becomes necessary to use
force we will achieve our objective with or without Turkish
cooperation. But with Turkish cooperation it can be much quicker, much
less painful for everybody including innocent civilians in Iraq,
including Turkey and the Turkish economy, including the United States.
So Turkey can do a lot if it becomes necessary to use force to make
the consequences less harmful for everybody including themselves.
I would also say as far as there may be some small chance yet that
Saddam Hussein will either decide to disarm or decide to leave, it
would certainly help if he saw himself surrounded by a powerful
coalition and having that Turkish piece in place would certainly
complete the surrounding of Saddam Hussein.
BBC: In terms of the surrounding of Saddam Hussein as you say, on the
broader diplomatic front there's been something of a really sense of
disarray really on the diplomatic front. The United Nations, between
the United States and some countries in Europe. Do you think that has
also harmed the prospect of a peaceful solution to this problem?
Wolfowitz: Can I tease you a little? It's always these authoritarian
regimes who describe democracy as a process of disarray.
I mean debate is disorderly, and getting opinions out on the table
unless everybody's marching 100 percent behind Saddam as they did in
that absurd referendum in Baghdad, there are going to be differences
of views. I think the great strength of the NATO alliance is it's an
alliance of democracies. The price is that you have different views,
you hear different debates.
The positions shift as things move along. And I think honestly that
the evidence just keeps piling up, number one, that the Iraqis are
obstructing, defying the will of the United Nations. They have no
intention to disarm as required by Resolution 1441. And this is a very
dangerous man. The danger grows every month, every year that we wait.
The attack that was broken up in London recently with terrorists
planning to put ricin, one of the most deadly poisons known to man,
into the London subway system is tied directly to that group of
terrorists that are based in northeastern Iraq, and some of whose
leaders have been sheltered in sanctuary in Baghdad.
It's a huge mistake to wait for this threat to just keep growing and I
think your Prime Minister, he's a real profile in courage. He
understands that the threat only gets worse if you wait, number one.
And that to me is very important. I think he understands. It's
unfortunate many of those demonstrators don't seem to understand that
it's the people of Iraq who have suffered worst under this tyrant.
BBC: You mentioned the demonstrators there, and Blair to some extent
is an embattled Prime Minister. They, the demonstrators, obviously
don't see the threat as you see it and obviously don't see it as an
issue that is worth going to war over. What more do you think you can
say to them as somebody who's studied this?
Wolfowitz: I guess first of all I would say I understand the feeling
of demonstrators. We're right across the river, of course, from the
Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial. I remember in 1964 being
in a crowd of several hundred thousand people demonstrating for civil
rights and listening to Martin Luther King give that incredible speech
about "I have a dream," and I know the powerful feelings that a little
bit of self-righteousness even can overcome people marching for a good
cause.
But my strongest message to them would be to stop and realize that
people in Baghdad are not free to march and express their opinions.
People in Baghdad are terrorized into silence. If you express
opposition to that regime you not only subject yourself to the most
horrible tortures and openly death, even worse, you subject your
family to those kinds of punishments.
If the Iraqi people were free to demonstrate they would be on the
streets in the millions now saying, "Why didn't you come sooner? Don't
make us wait any longer." I don't think there's any question where the
feelings of the Iraqi people are.
If it comes to the use of force, I guess this is my other message,
this is not going to be a war for oil. If we wanted Iraqi oil we would
have dropped the sanctions years ago. This is not a war for Israel. It
is a war to liberate perhaps the most talented population in the Arab
world, people who I think are ready to build a society and a
government that could become a model for the future for others.
BBC: What some people in the demonstrations I would guess are
concerned about is if it does come to a conflict as you say, is the
issue that the risk of the conflict. I think it's been reported
recently that [Defense] Secretary Rumsfeld has in his drawer a list of
risks which include the possibility that Saddam Hussein could actually
use his suspected weapons of mass destruction, that the war itself
would be protracted and enormously destabilizing. What's your response
to that?
Wolfowitz: First of all the risk is there, but the risk grows the
longer we wait. If that means let's just keep waiting until he has
more and more weapons and more and more connections to terrorists. The
Zarqawi network which was involved in the operation in London has
multiplied by many other networks and tentacles. It seems to me it's a
formula for just having a bigger conflagration later.
It's dangerous to make too many historical analogies, but we have seen
examples in the past where threats that could have been dealt with
when they were small were postponed until they were large. It would
have been much easier to deal with Iraq five years ago or even ten
years ago. It would be easier to do it now though than to wait another
five years or another ten years.
The risks are real. The President of the United States understands
that. I think your Prime Minister understands that. That's what is
leadership. It's the courage of recognizing that those risks need to
be faced in order to avoid some more serious risks.
There's one other aspect which I think certainly moves the
demonstrators, and that's that war is an ugly thing. There's no
question about it. People get killed. Innocent people get killed. And
for that matter, I know we have this distinction between combatants
and innocents, but the American soldiers who are going to get killed
if there's a conflict don't deserve to die either. They're prepared to
do so because they're defending their country and they're defending
the world. And I do believe if you look at it from a moral point of
view, the number of innocent people that would be killed if this man
remains in power is vastly greater than what it will take to get rid
of him.
BBC: Do I take from all you say there that you don't think the
demonstrations, the differences with European allies, is going to
change the position of this Administration as far as the proceeding on
the course of its choosing?
Wolfowitz: No, and most unfortunately, it's definitely not going to
change the position of Saddam Hussein. I mean the real tragedy is that
instead of marching to change American policy they ought to be
marching to change Iraqi policy.
The decision on war and peace rests in the hands of Saddam Hussein. It
would be -- I was about to say, simple. It would be simple for a
normal human being to say enough is enough. I'm going to give up my
chemical weapons, I'm going to give up my biological weapons, I'm
going to give up my nuclear weapons program. The world would know it
if he did it. We knew it when South Africa did it, we knew it when
Ukraine did it, we knew it when Kazakhstan did it. We know that Iraq
is not doing it now and it would be nice if instead of seeing a
million or several million demonstrators letting him sit in Baghdad
saying he's winning, if he saw a few million people on the streets
saying your time is up, you'd better change, that would be the one
hope of either getting him disarmed or getting him to leave
peacefully.
BBC: If we have a conflict what is it going to be about? Is it going
to be about disarmament or will it be about removing Saddam Hussein?
Wolfowitz: It's a fair question, people ask it. Clearly the purpose of
the UN resolution is to disarm him. If he disarms peacefully, that
would be his -- Well, the purpose of that resolution would be
achieved.
If we have to disarm him by force, there's only one way to do it and
that is to remove him and remove his regime. If we're going to do that
and we're going to run the risks, and the risk of American and British
and other lives to do it, we're certainly not going to do it just to
have another regime just like his replace him. I mean it has to be, I
think, for something better. I believe the Iraqi people are hungry for
something better and fully capable of producing something better,
which is to say a broadly representative government which I hope will
qualify for the description democracy.
BBC: That is the other main area of concern recently, is what happens
post Saddam Hussein? Is there enough work being put in early enough to
ensure there will be a stable future for Iraq? You or the
Administration has been criticized in Congress for doing too little
too late, thinking too little too late. How do you respond to that?
Wolfowitz: First of all, I'm used to being criticized. I mean it's the
role of Congress to keep the pressure on.
But we're doing a lot. I would point out, we're going to be dealing
with a situation that is intrinsically unpredictable, so we're setting
up an organization that will allow us to respond to the different
range of circumstances that we will find on the ground. But we are
doing a lot of planning in that, both with respect to humanitarian
relief, which will be the most immediate need; and with respect to
reconstruction, although we're also even in a military campaign trying
to avoid damage to infrastructure that would not be of military
importance but would be important to the reconstruction of Iraq.
Finally, in thinking about how to put together a working civil
society. There we're certainly going to have to feel our way.
But I had a very powerful experience last week when five
Iraqi-Americans all from Michigan, from the Detroit area in Michigan
came to see us. With one exception they'd all been in the United
States ten years or longer. They were thoroughly Americanized. They
were I think interestingly, somewhat representative, although there
was no Kurd in the group, but there were three Shia, one Suni, one
Caldian Christian. The two messages that came through most powerfully,
every single one of them had a heart-rending story about what had
happened to them or to their families. Three of them actually broke
down and just stopped talking for a minute or two in telling these
stories, they were so horrible.
But the other thing was the hopefulness, the sense from all of them
that this is not a country that has been driven by Shias killing Sunis
or Sunis killing Shias. It really has been unfortunately equal
opportunity oppression by this horrible regime that people want to get
rid of. And I think there's a great sense of optimism that the Iraqi
people are capable of the same kind of democratic transition that
we've seen in eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet communists.
BBC: But there are frictions there or potential frictions there. I
think you used the word "feel your way through" to some extent. Or the
phrase, "feel your way through." I think that's what people are
worried about. They're looking for a blueprint, if you like, of
assurance.
Wolfowitz: I think blueprint, it's interesting, and I'm not trying to
get into a debate about this doctrine of nation-building, but it is
interesting that people can use this phrase build a nation as though
foreigners can come in from outside and build a nation.
Nations grow. They're built from the inside. What I think we'll see is
we can create the conditions by removing this horrible oppression
where the Iraqi people can build something for themselves and we'll
have to provide some of the supporting scaffolding while they do it,
but it's got to have indigenous roots to be successful.
BBC: Secretary Wolfowitz, thank you very much.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
