• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

16 November 1998

TRANSCRIPT: COHEN SAYS IRAQ LEADER "HAS BEEN COMPLETELY ISOLATED"

(Saddam Hussein must give UNSCOM access without conditions) (1630)
Washington -- Defense Secretary Cohen says Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein
"has been completely isolated not only by all of the Gulf States" but
by all the members of the United Nations Security Council.
The combination of a lack of support for the Iraqi leader's policies
and a strong U.S. military that was, for all practical purposes, "on
its way" to Baghdad, had the effect of focusing Saddam Hussein's mind,
the secretary said, leading him to accede and to grant UN Special
Commission (UNSCOM) inspectors unfettered access to suspected Iraqi
weapons sites.
Speaking to reporters following the swearing-in ceremony of Richard
Danzig as Secretary of the Navy in Washington November 16, Cohen said
the United States is keeping a military presence in the region, and
that the Iraqi leader must comply fully with UN resolutions in order
to avert air strikes.
Cohen told journalists: "When we talk about total compliance and
unfettered access, it means precisely that. It means that Saddam will
have to produce documentation....He will have to allow unfettered
access without condition consistent with the memorandum of
understanding and the resolution, but no more hiding and seeking and
no more playing games."
"This is the last go-around as far as Saddam is concerned," Cohen
added. "Now he has committed his government through Tariq Aziz that he
will fully comply. We'll see whether the deeds are going to match his
words."
Following is the transcript of Cohen's media availability:
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, are you going to maintain the buildup in the
Gulf? Or are you going to send some of those planes back?
ANSWER: I'm talking now with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and
we're meeting on a regular basis to see how much of the force that is
on its way should be returned to the United States. We will keep the
forces that are already deployed there for the time being. (For) Those
forces that have not yet arrived we will in all probability decide to
cycle them back so they can be ready to go on a moment's notice if we
choose to do so.
Q: Does that include the F-117s?
A: That would include those forces which have yet to arrive will in
all probability be recycled back within the next several days.
Q: Mr. Secretary, has Saddam Hussein won another round with the U.S.?
And is there any way to permanently solve this Saddam Hussein problem?
A: He hasn't won another round. What has happened is that the
international community is more united than ever. He has been
completely isolated not only by all of the Gulf States, but everyone
on the Security Council. So he took a look around and saw there was no
one supporting him. He also saw there was a very strong military, an
incredible threat on its way for all practical purposes. So I think
that focused his mind wonderfully, as I might indicate that it's not
nearly as important as to whether the world or we believe Saddam
Hussein's word. It is very important that the world believe our word.
Our word was that if he agreed to comply and allow the inspectors to
come back in then he would avert a military strike. So the President
under these circumstances made the right call, and he received his
advice from all of his advisers. He had to make a decision, and we
support his decision.
Q: What is the trigger that could set off additional airstrikes? What
is going to be your criteria?
A: President Clinton made it very clear yesterday that there were key
points that we insist upon. Namely, when we talk about total
compliance and unfettered access, it means precisely that. It means
that Saddam will have to produce documentation; he will have to
produce that which he has refused to produce to date. He will have to
allow unfettered access without condition consistent with the
memorandum of understanding and the resolution, but no more hiding and
seeking and no more playing games.
I think we will see very quickly, over the next few weeks or perhaps
even longer, but nonetheless within a short period of time, as to
whether he is going to fully comply.
I think everyone understands that this is the last go-around as far as
Saddam is concerned. He has had every opportunity to fully comply. Now
he has committed his government through Tariq Aziz that he will fully
comply. We'll see whether the deeds are going to match his words.
Q: Did you miss an opportunity that may not come again in order to
launch a strike at a time when world opinion was behind the United
States?
A: We had an opportunity to see the combination of diplomacy backed up
by a strong military capability. That's what allowed us to succeed
diplomatically.
Again, President Clinton made it very clear during his speech at the
Arlington Cemetery during Veterans Day; I made a number of statements
during the course of the week; Saddam simply had to say yes in order
to avert a military response. He said yes. Now we'll put him to the
test as to whether that's unqualified or whether we'll go back to the
playing of games.
Q: Did you recommend to go ahead with the strike?
A: I won't get into any recommendations. We always have very good
exchanges and the President gets advice from all sources. I am
obligated to provide military options for the President's discussion.
He will take into account diplomatic initiatives as well. Everyone I
think is satisfied that this is the right result.
Q: But Mr. Secretary, Saddam Hussein is still there, he's still in
power, still apparently has the ability to produce weapons of mass
destruction. How do you solve this problem once and for all?
A: We have indicated that the best way to determine whether or not
he's producing chemical or biological or indeed even nuclear weaponry
is to have the UNSCOM inspectors on the ground being allowed to do
what they are charged with doing and have a responsibility to do.
That's the best guarantee that we have for keeping him measuring up to
his obligations. They will be back on the ground; we will see whether
their access has been fettered or not. In the event that it is, I
think it's very clear what their response is going to be.
Q: Is this his last, last chance?
A: I think you could say that, yes.
Q: How close did it come?
A: Very close.
Q: How close is very close?
A: I won't discuss in terms of hours or minutes, but it was as close
as it could possibly come.
Q: Was the United States prepared this time to endure more collateral
damage because of the timing of the attack and because of the kind of
targets that you felt you had to select this time?
A: We have always been concerned in any of our military planning
operations that we minimize the damage and harm to innocent civilians.
That was true in this case as well. We also are obviously concerned
about the welfare and the safety of our forces, very concerned about
it. All of that goes into the planning, the targets, the target
selection, as well as the timing of any type of military attack. So we
try to reduce casualties to innocent civilians, but our paramount
concern is also with the welfare of our own forces.
Q: Do you believe the two carriers will be swapped out? One in the
Gulf?
A: I would hope that we would have the normal rotation. It was part of
the plan to have a normal rotation. We would continue that.
Q: What about the Army troops out of Fort Bliss or Fort Stewart? Will
you tell them to stand down?
A: It would be my recommendation. We'll have to discuss it with the
President, obviously, but it would be my recommendation that we allow
those that were scheduled to be deployed to stand down for the moment.
They will be at the ready and can be called back on a moment's notice.
If we find that Saddam is breaching this agreement then I think that
no one, anyone, anywhere could fault the United States and our allies
for considering action at that time.
Q: Isn't it a possibility that this time he has been sufficiently
warned and the U.S. could strike without warning if he doesn't live up
to these latest commitments?
A: I think he has had more than sufficient warning. I don't believe
that any additional warning is required.
Q: Mr. Secretary, yesterday U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said
that he could not guarantee that Iraq would not do this again. What is
the U.S. doing to guarantee that he doesn't do it again?
A: I think Kofi Annan said it right. There is no guarantee that Saddam
will finally agree to do that which he has been obligated to do ever
since the end of the Gulf War. I think it's also clear from Secretary
General Annan's statement that everyone has gone the last mile with
Saddam Hussein, (and) that the Gulf states passed a resolution which
is very important, this past week. They said he should fully comply
with his obligation and a failure to do so means that he will bear the
full burden of those consequences on his shoulders. That was a very
strong message coming from all of the Gulf states. It came through the
Security Council as well. I think the message is very clear now, and
unambiguous.
(end transcript)