16 December 1998
TRANSCRIPT: ALBRIGHT INTERVIEW ON LARRY KING LIVE DECEMBER 16
(Secretary of State says attack on Iraq "not a pin prick") (910) Washington -- Secretary of State Albright says there is "a military reason for having a sustained and substantial attack" on Iraq over a period of three or four days. "People were worried about a pin prick," she said during an interview on CNN's Larry King Live program late December 16. "This is not a pin prick. The effect of this is in order to degrade Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction capability, his ability to develop and deploy the weapons of mass destruction and his ability to threaten his neighbors." Following is the State Department transcript: (begin transcript) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Office of the Spokesman December 16, l998 INTERVIEW OF SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT BY LARRY KING, CNN KING: Secretary Madeleine Albright at the Department of State, thank you very much for joining us. Why three to four days; how did we estimate that? ALBRIGHT: Well, there's a military reason for having a sustained and substantial attack. People were worried about a pin prick. This is not a pin prick. The effect of this is in order to degrade Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction capability, his ability to develop and deploy the weapons of mass destruction and his ability to threaten his neighbors. Larry, the problem here is that Saddam Hussein had many chances to comply with Security Council resolutions. The President gave him one last chance a month ago and he blew it. He had an opportunity to comply and go into a comprehensive review. We feel that the national security issues here are paramount and that the President had to order the strike in order to deal with the threats from Saddam Hussein. KING: Does that mean, Madame Secretary, when we say three to four days, daylight bombing as well? ALBRIGHT: I'm not going to go into the details of the bombing or the targets, Larry. KING: But do we know exactly what we're pinpointing, at risk to civilians is risk to civilians minimal? ALBRIGHT: We are very concerned about collateral damage. What I'm concerned about, now that I hear also what Saddam Hussein has said he has a capability of putting his own people around various targets and then or killing them himself and blaming us. So we are very concerned about collateral damage. The President has made that point; the military have been concerned about it. We are aiming to do the least possible damage to innocent civilians. The civilians suffer because of what Saddam Hussein does. KING: CNN did a poll 62 percent of Americans, just reported by Judy Woodruff, support this; 30 percent thinks that it's a diversion. What would you say to them? ALBRIGHT: Well, I can tell you as the chief diplomat of the United States that we have used every conceivable diplomatic way of not doing this. The timing of this was determined by the report submitted by Chairman Butler, who is an independent person. He's not an American; he's an Australian. He said that UNSCOM the UN inspectors could not work. We had a very limited period in which to do this military strike. I think, Larry, you know that over the weekend Ramadan, which is the Muslim holiest month, begins. It would do great damage to our relationship with the Muslim world to begin bombing then. And if we didn't do this until after Ramadan, that would give Saddam Hussein approximately five weeks to do more damage. So the President decided, for national security reasons, that this was the time to do it. All of us all his national security advisors the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the National Security Advisor, Vice President had all recommended that this was the right time to do it. KING: Is this, therefore, telling Iraq that once Ramadan's started nothing's going to happen? ALBRIGHT: Well, I think that we were concerned that Saddam Hussein thought that he had the cover of Ramadan and that we would not be able to do anything before that. We did manage to do something before Ramadan, and I think he was surprised. The point here is that we are doing this because he is not allowing the United Nations inspectors to do their job. We are concerned, as the President said, about his ability in the long run to threaten his neighbors and, frankly, to threaten all of us with weapons of mass destruction. KING: One other thing do you expect the UN to support you tonight? ALBRIGHT: Well, I think that the UN is engaged in asking questions of Chairman Butler. There was a 15 to nothing vote by the UN earlier for a comprehensive review about six weeks ago. I think there are those who don't agree with what we're doing, but we are the United States; we have leadership responsibilities. There are no solutions out there. If you talk to those who are criticizing us, like the Russians, they have no solution. They tried to get a deal with Saddam Hussein. He wasn't even listening to them. So as I said, we tried diplomatic solutions. We're not picking a fight. But if there is no diplomatic way, then using force in this way, I think, is in US national interest. KING: Thank you, Madame Secretary, for being with us. (end transcript)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
