Saddam's Jul 17 Natl Day Speech
Iraq News, JULY 20, 1998
By Laurie MylroieThe central focus of Iraq News is the tension between the considerable, proscribed WMD capabilities that Iraq is holding on to and its increasing stridency that it has complied with UNSCR 687 and it is time to lift sanctions. If you wish to receive Iraq News by email, a service which includes full-text of news reports not archived here, send your request to Laurie Mylroie .
I. RAMADAN:IRAQ UNWILLING TO SEE EMBARGO BEYOND EIGHT YEARS, AFP, JUL 19
II. SADDAM'S NAT'L DAY SPEECH, IRAQ TV, JUL 17
On Sun, Jul 19, Vice President, Taha Yasin Ramadan, made a speech to a
Bath party "cultural symposuim," in which he said, "The leadership of
Iraq and its people are not willing to see the embargo maintained beyond
eight years and demand practical measures for it to be lifted." "Iraq
News" should have the full text of those remarks shortly.
On Fri, Jul 17, on the occasion of Saddam's Nat'l day speech, Baghdad
inaugurated "Iraq Space Channel," television broadcasting to the Arab
countries, carried on Egypt's Nilesat satellite. [How did Iraq get the
uplink equipment to send the signal?] Also, Saddam ordered pay raises
for a number of state employees.
In his speech, Saddam reiterated the warning sent to the UNSC
May 1. He said, "The enemies of Iraq will be mistaken if they imagine
that they can deceive the people who are fortified by all factors of
national life and . . . who were scorched by the fire of their enemies.
These people are motivated by factors related to their defense of life.
. . These people sacrificed tens of thousands of dear souls within a
short period of time as a result of shortages in food and medicine and
the use of force. We tell them in the name of that great people of Iraq
that they are under a great illusion. They had better reread ancient
history and this glorious history carefully to learn the lessons that
would help us and them avert the consequences of their evils and
wrongdoing." What is the "great illusion" the enemies of Iraq are
under? And what is "the consequences of their evils and wrongdoing"
that Saddam would like to avert?
Saddam continued, "We reassert that the letter addressed to the
Security Council and the UN Secretary General by the joint meeting of
the Party command and the Revolutionary Command Council on 1 May 1998 is
not only a cry of protest, but it represents willpower and an
alternative strategy, should other means and methods fail to return life
to its normal course and restore justice. The command and the council
will meet at a later date to conduct an in-depth discussion of this
issue and deal with it, along with their great people . . . After that,
only what is right shall prevail"
Although Saddam's words implied dramatic action, he preceded and
followed them by suggesting the opposite, "Faced with the Iraqis'
steadfastness, their insistence on the need to lift the siege and their
readiness to add a new honor to their stock of sacrifices, the siege has
started to erode. This year, and the years to follow, is the time for
the serious erosion of the siege imposed on Iraq."
In the view of "Iraq News," the dramatic scenario is the
operational one, while the second is something else--perhaps, meant to
create wiggle room; perhaps, offered up to those who do not want to hear
what the Iraqis are saying; perhaps, something else. In any case, the
NYT Jul 18, carried a story on Saddam's speech, entitled "Saddam Hints
at Setbacks in Lifting of Sanctions," which began, "In the first public
hint that Iraq's hopes for an early lifting of sanctions have been set
back. . . President Saddam Hussein said in a speech Friday that the
embargo was instead more likely to crumble over time." It described the
speech as "considerably less bellicose than usual." "Iraq News"
strongly disagrees and questions the judgment of the sources for that
story, which presumably included US officials.
"Iraq News" reviewed the May 1 statement, as well as subsequent,
related statements. The May 1 statement was close to a declaration of
war. It began by noting the conditions under which wars occur, "Because
of a maximum feeling of injustice, making war the only means to remove
the injustice . . . or because of a feeling of bestial power,
accompanied by a feeling of the nonexistence of other powers to prevent
it from achieving its objectives through armed force or something
equivalent to it." The statement concluded, "The inability of the Iraqi
people to see a lifting of the sanctions after eight years and despite
their sacrifices through their cooperation with the UNSC and Special
Commission will lead to dire consequences. Despite all of this, our
moral, constitutional, and humanitarian responsibility calls on us to
wait and see how the Security Council will behave after this message of
ours" [see "Iraq News," May 5]. Presumably, that is what the Iraqis
have been doing--waiting.
On May 2, Ramadan, addressing the opening of the Fifth "Arab People's
Forces Conference" in Baghdad, reiterated the May 1 statement and said,
"We have to make our enemy feel that it has to pay a dear price if it
decides to continue the siege," according to INA. Ramadan told the
conference at its closing, "The age of this letter is not years or
months. It has a limited time," according to Reuters, May 4.
On May 7, INA reported, "Al Thawrah [party newspaper] says that
whoever thinks that he can imprison Iraq in the embargo tunnel for an
indefinite period under different, futile excuses must remember that
there is more than one way to get out of this tunnel. The paper says:
Iraq's open letter to the president and members of the Security Council
is clear. Unless justice is done by lifting the economic embargo at the
minimum, there will be some other action. This action is a private
matter, which only Iraq knows and will decide when and how to take."
On May 17, following a UNSC decision to review Iraq's nuclear program
in Jul(rather than Oct), the cabinet issued a statement that briefly
mentioned the May 1 warning, "The Council of Ministers took cognizance
of the statement issued by the president of the UN Security Council on
14 May 1998 on the plan to move the activity of the International Atomic
Energy Agency in Iraq to the stage of permanent monitoring in July. The
Council of Ministers has found that this statement does not meet the
minimum level of Iraq's rights following the immense sacrifices it has
made. Iraq is still WAITING in accordance with the concepts included in
the open letter it addressed to the UNSC on 1 May 1998" [see "Iraq
News," May 20].
On May 23, Radio Monte Carlo interviewed Ramadan, asking what Iraq's
response would be if the UNSC did not meet its demands. He replied, "The
UNSC must fulfill its obligations as Iraq has fulfilled all UN demands.
. . We have not set a time limit, but the time must not be long. We
will WAIT for a reasonable period of time and then act accordingly."
In an interview published by the Tunisian paper, al Shuruq, reported
Jun 3, by INA, "Taha Yasin Ramadan said: The letter by the Iraqi
leadership and the RCC to the president and the members of the Security
Council is not open ended in terms of time, and we are not talking about
years here. We are talking about months, at the most, a few months."
On Jun 17, Reuters reported that Iraq's UN Ambassador, Nizar Hamdoon
said, "There are two things that can happen . . . Either the sanctions
will be lifted as soon as possible or, by October or November, if the
sanctions are not lifted, there will be a crisis. This will be the last
crisis."
On Jun 23, the day the Wash Post reported that UNSCOM had detected
traces of VX in a SCUD warhead, the RCC and Party leadership issued a
statement reiterating the May 1 warning, "Regarding the question of the
blockade and the US position on it, the conferees noted the alternative
strategy stated in the open letter issued by the meeting of the command
and the council on 1 May 1998-the letter addressed to the president and
members of the Security Council. When other means fail due to the
evilness and aggressiveness of others, then this strategy, adopted by
the leadership would be the unavoidable alternative. This strategy is
supported by the sons of our great people and the sons of our glorious
Arab nation to get rid of the unjust blockade. It has been decided to
continue meetings later to assess the final situation and make a final
decision."
On Jun 26, Al Thawrah's chief editor, Sami Mahdi, wrote, "Iraq will
not allow a crucial issue, such as the embargo, to remain captive to the
evil willpower of the US administration and an ugly puppet called
Richard Butler. If Iraq has decided to presently continue with its
contacts 'so as to know the final situation and make the final
decision,' its other option-or rather alternative option-will remain
open. It will make its final decision at the appropriate time."
On Jun 29, the Saudi-owned, Al Sharq Al Awsat published an interview
with Deputy Prime Minister, Tariq Aziz, in which he said, "When we
addressed the Security Council earlier this year, we said that we would
WAIT for the Council's action to rectify the non-neutral role of UNSCOM
. . . That did not mean that we would wait for an open period of time.
No, I say now that we are not going to wait for an open period of time,
and the exploitation of the blockade issue is not going to have good
results. It is a serious matter . . . very serious."
For two and a half months, the Iraqi leadership has said that the
situation is intolerable and it has another option, which it prefers not
to use. What is that other option? "Iraq News" can think of nothing
other than the use of the proscribed weapons Iraq will not turn over to
UNSCOM, whether for military action in the Gulf, or for some other
purpose, even if the first step might be something else, like the
expulsion of UNSCOM.
In his speech, Saddam also explained Iraq's strategy over the past
year, "By the end of 1997 and the beginning of 1998, the Iraqis waged
battles and took positions. These placed those who have no interest in
the blockade face to face with those who had evil intentions and
ambitions. The two parties were separated by clear distinctive lines.."
The rest of Saddam's speech constituted an indictment of the Arab
leaders for their willingness to deal with Israel and their failure to
develop a strategy to destroy it.
Saddam reviewed the Palestinian question, going back to the 1945
establishment of the Arab League, of which Iraq was one of seven
founding members, as opposed to the "22 countries and entities which is
the case now, resulting from the political and constitutional division
of the nation." [Kuwait, which became independent in 1961, could be
among the "entities" Saddam had in mind].
Saddam recalled the 1967 Khartoum summit, known for the "Three
NoXs"--no recognition; no negotiations; and no peace. He explained,
"Although some people cast doubts about that conference at the time, the
rejection of the defeat and the insistence by Abd al Nasir's Egypt to
liberate territory provided the political and psychological base for the
military position in 1973."
Saddam then described the 1978 Baghdad summit, held after the Sept 78
Camp David summit among Carter, Begin, and Sadat, and before the Mar 79
signing of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. That was the period of
the Iranian revolution and Saddam took advantage of it to orchestrate
the Arab opposition to Egypt's peace with Israel. With the Shah gone,
or about to be, an Iraqi-Syrian combination was able to pressure and
intimidate the Saudis to generate an Arab "consensus" to ostracize Egypt
and block other Arab leaders from following Sadat into an agreement with
Israel. As Saddam explained, "Several resolutions were adopted. . .
These resolutions constituted the practical base for the steadfastness
of others and prevented their collapse, as was expected by the Zionists
and the masters of imperialism following al-Sadat's position."
Saddam also described the May, 1990 Baghdad summit. With hindsight,
after Aug 2, it became clear that the summit was part of a strategy to
raise tensions with Israel, and excite Arab populations, in advance of
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Yet, as Saddam said, "Those resolutions and
the nature of the known roles and stands at that summit adversely
affected the plans of the black conspiracy which preceded August 1990
against Baghdad and its men, stand, policy and ability. Thus, was the
treacherous 30-state aggression." So, it is all one big conspiracy
against Iraq--by the imperialists, the Zionists, and their agents.
Saddam then described the 1996 Cairo summit, Jun 22-23, the only Arab
summit held since the Gulf war. Iraq was the only Arab state not
invited to the summit, which took a very tough line on Iraq, holding
Baghdad responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people and calling on
it to implement the UNSC resolutions. As Saddam explained, "One of its
most important decisions was to facilitate the mission of the United
States and its supporters in maintaining the blockade against Iraq under
the banner of stressing the need for Iraq to implement the so-called UN
Security Council resolutions. That was as though the concerned Arabs
turned to play the role of a UN office on behalf of the United States."
Indeed, immediately following that summit, the Iraqi press lashed out
at the US, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. On Jun 24, Al Jumhuriya (Gov't
paper), Al Thawra (party paper) and al Qadissiya (military paper) all
carried strong editorials condemning the summit. As INA reported, Al
Jumhuriya's chief editor, Salah Mukhtar, wrote in a front page editorial
"that the Cairo statement adopted the worst things in the Zionist,
American, and Saudi stands toward the Iraqi people. In its editorial
Al-Jumhuriyah says that what came in the statement on Iraq constitutes
in itself a candid, official acknowledgement that those who imposed and
accepted the statement are official and effective parties to the policy
of annihilating millions of Iraqis and exposing those who are still
alive to unlimited suffering." That line was repeated in the Iraqi
press the next day. And that night, the biggest bomb ever to explode in
the Arabian peninsula, exploded at the base that housed the US pilots
that flew over Southern Iraq, enforcing the no-fly zone. How that bomb
ever came to be understood as Iran is extraordinary and historians will
have a lot of fun with it. They will find a US blunder, grounded in a
failure to understand that the Gulf war was not over for Saddam,
reinforced by a strategic intelligence failure in Israel, generated by
the "peace process," as it was pursued by the Rabin Gov't [see "Iraq
News," Mar 20].
Saddam went on to discuss recent efforts among the Arabs to hold
another summit, implying that little good would come of it, unless Iraq
were present, because other Arabs are willing to compromise with Israel.
As Saddam explained, "Some Arab officials, publicly and frankly,
distorted the truth of the conflict between the Arabs and the usurper,
aggressor Zionist entity . . . They turned this conflict into a
disagreement over policies and nothing more. They dwarfed the areas of
disagreement to portray them as if they were differences between some
Arab rulers and Netanyahu over minor tactical, transitional issues, and
not over major, strategic and crucial issues that concern the entire
nation. . . .
But, Saddam said, "There is no way out of a dilemma caused by a
greedy imperialist foreigner [the US] or an occupying foreigner [Israel]
by building on low ground, because it will then be washed away by the
flood and be left in ruins. The enemy cannot be made to understand the
truth and respond to what is right and just by submission, but rather by
the Arabs taking an honorable and proud stand, in which case the
foreigner may retreat without the shedding of blood . . .
"The Iraqis echo the words of their great poet, Kamal al-Hadithi:
Small birds will not be spared disgrace if they flee chasing falcons.
Life will progress and those who are mortal are bound to die. Though
our resources may be scarce and disperse, we do things our way, then we
forge ahead to drink the purest of waters. . . ."
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
