The White House Briefing Room
December 16, 1998
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
6:00 P.M. EST
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release December 16, 1998
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
The Oval Office
6:00 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Earlier today, I ordered America's Armed
Forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by
British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and
biological programs, and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. Their
purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States and, indeed,
the interest of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. Saddam
Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear
arms, poison gas, or biological weapons.
I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation
of my national security team, to use force in Iraq, why we have acted now and
what we aim to accomplish.
Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer
cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors, called UNSCOM. They are
highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee
the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass
destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that
capability. The inspectors undertook this mission, first, seven and a half
years ago, at the end of the Gulf War, when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy
its arsenal as a condition of the cease-fire.
The international community had good reason to set this requirement.
Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles.
With Saddam, there's one big difference: he has used them, not once but
repeatedly -- unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a
decade-long war, not only against soldiers, but against civilians; firing Scud
missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Iran -- not only
against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish
civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt
today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons
again.
The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM, as Iraq has
sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion,
we've had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down. Faced with
Saddam's latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic
pressure on Iraq, backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The U.N.
Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that
he immediately come into compliance. Eight Arab nations -- Egypt, Syria, Saudi
Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Oman -- warned that
Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the U.N.
When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It
was only then, at the last possible moment, that
Iraq backed down. It pledged to the U.N. that it had made -- and I quote -- "a
clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons
inspectors."
I decided then to call off the attack, with our airplanes already in the
air, because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the
right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove
his willingness to cooperate.
I made it very clear at that time what "unconditional cooperation"
meant, based on existing U.N. resolutions and Iraq's own commitments. And along
with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if
Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay,
diplomacy or warning.
Now, over the past three weeks, the U.N. weapons inspectors have carried
out their plan for testing Iraq's cooperation. The testing period ended this
weekend, and last night, UNSCOM's Chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results
to U.N. Secretary General Annan. The conclusions are stark, sobering and
profoundly disturbing.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to
cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors.
Here are some of the particulars:
Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For
example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party, and said it
will deny access to the party's other offices, even though U.N. resolutions make
no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.
Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary
evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM's effort to photograph bombs
related to its chemical weapons program. It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological
weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents, and prevented
Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.
Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the
building, removing not just documents, but even the furniture and the equipment.
Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the
inspectors; indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons related
documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.
So Iraq has abused its final chance. As the UNSCOM report concludes --
and again I quote -- "Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be
made in the fields of disarmament. In light of this experience, and in the
absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must, regrettably, be recorded again
that the Commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the
Security Council with respect to Iraq's prohibited weapons program."
In short, the inspectors are saying that, even if they could stay in
Iraq, their work would be a sham. Saddam's deception has defeated their
effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed
the inspectors.
This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of
the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international
community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons
inspectors. Saddam
has failed to seize the chance.
And so we had to act, and act now. Let me explain why.
First, without a strong inspections system, Iraq would be free to retain
and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs --
in months, not years.
Second, if Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get
away with it, he would conclude that the international community, led by the
United States, has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein
to rebuild his arsenal of destruction. And some day, make no mistake, he will
use it again, as he has in the past.
Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance,
not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S.
power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have
allowed Saddam to shatter the inspections system that controls his weapons of
mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force
that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.
That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security
team, including the Vice President, Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of State, and the National Security
Advisor, I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.
They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of
mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors. At the
same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam: If you act
recklessly, you will pay a heavy price.
We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisors, a swift
response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to
prepare. If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler's
report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse forces and protect his
weapons.
Also, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins this weekend. For us to
initiate military action during Ramadan would be profoundly offensive to the
Muslim world, and therefore, would damage our relations with Arab countries and
the progress we have made in the Middle East. That is something we wanted very
much to avoid without giving Iraq a month's head start to prepare for potential
action against it.
Finally, our allies, including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great
Britain, concurred that now is the time to strike.
I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now
and comply with the relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions. But we have to
be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he
poses. So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons
of mass destruction, and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy
of its people.
First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes
threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass
destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging
allied aircraft over Iraq, or moving against his own Kurdish citizens. The
credible threat to use force and, when necessary, the actual use of force, is
the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail
his aggression and prevent another Gulf War.
Second, so long as Iraq remains out of compliance, we will work with the
international community to maintain and enforce economic sanctions. Sanctions
have caused Saddam more than $120 billion -- resources that would have been used
to rebuild his military. The sanctions system allows Iraq to sell oil for food,
for medicine, for other humanitarian supplies for the Iraqi people. We have no
quarrel with them. But without the sanctions, we would see the oil-for-food
program become oil-for-tanks, resulting in a greater threat to Iraq's neighbors
and less food for its people.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens
the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the
world. The best way to end that threat once and for all is with the new Iraqi
government, a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government
that respects the rights of its people.
Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will
strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and
work with them effectively and prudently.
The decision to use force is never cost-free. Whenever American forces
are placed in harm's way, we risk the loss of life. And while our strikes are
focused on Iraq's military capabilities, there will be unintended Iraqi
casualties. Indeed, in the past, Saddam has intentionally placed Iraqi
civilians in harm's way in a cynical bid to sway international opinion. We must
be prepared for these realities. At the same time, Saddam should have
absolutely no doubt: If he lashes out at his neighbors, we will respond
forcefully.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price
of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a
far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he
will make war on his own people. And mark my words, he will develop weapons of
mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them. Because we are
acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.
Let me close by addressing one other issue. Saddam Hussein and the
other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before
the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to
face him down. But once more, the United States has proven that, although we
are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we
will do so.
In the century we're leaving, America has often made the difference
between chaos and community; fear and hope. Now, in a new century, we'll have a
remarkable opportunity to shape a future more peaceful than the past -- but only
if we stand strong against the enemies of peace. Tonight, the United States is
doing just that.
May God bless and protect the brave men and women who are carrying out
this vital mission, and their families. And may God bless America.
END 6:15 P.M. EST
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
