TARIQ AZIZ PRESS CONFERENCE
Doha Qatar al-Jazirah Space Channel Television in Arabic 1625 GMT 18 Dec
[News conference by Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz to
unidentified correspondents in Baghdad--live; 'Aziz speaks in Arabic and
English with superimposed translation into Arabic; passages within
slantlines translated from Arabic translation]
[FBIS Translated Text] [Aziz] /Ladies and gentlemen, good evening. What
we are witnessing now is not a military conflict. It is a criminal
aggression by the United States and Britain against Iraq, the Arab
nation, the Muslims, and against the entire international community. It
is a criminal violation of the UN Charter and it is contempt to the UN
Security Council and the United Nations. Clinton and Blair in their
justification of this criminal aggression used the report of Richard
Butler. I will give you some facts on this subject.
/Recently Butler visited Paris and Moscow. There he said things that
were quite different from his report to Kofi Annan. Butler was supposed
to present his report on 14 December. This was the final date. Dr.
al-Barad'i of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], presented
his report on 14 December. That report was genuine and positive. Butler
postponed his report until late on 15 December. At that time, Clinton
was in Israel and it was clear that his visit was a failure.
Officially, he received Butler's report while he was in Israel and on
his way back to the United States. Today, the New York Times says that
Butler reported the content of his report to Clinton on Saturday, two
days before reporting to Kofi Annan. These incidents show that there was
coordination between the US Government and Butler on the content of the
report and when to present the report.
/It is clear to us and it will be clear to the world that that the
report by Butler was written to justify the aggression. The Zionist
clique surrounding Clinton advised him to start the aggression to change
the subject from the failure of his visit to Israel. There is another
matter, about which I do not want to talk. He wanted to change the
subject from truth to falsification of Butler's report and the use of
this falsification, lies, and exaggeration as a pretext to commit this
criminal act.
/There is another fact. Butler decided to withdraw his inspectors
before presenting his report to the UN secretary general and before
presenting his report to the UN Security Council.
/He is a UN official, and he is the head of an organ, which is called
a subsidiary organ of the Security Council. He did so for the second
time. He did it in November and he did it again in December. This
tells that this man is a cheap pawn in the hands of the United States,
who is used whenever the United States wants to use him. The other
fact, which tells that the United States and Britain were and are
violating the UN Charter, the norms of the work of the United Nations,
defying the Security Council, is that while the Security Council was
meeting to discuss the situation, they started the aggression. The
matter is not Butler's report, therefore, the matter is a deliberate and
premeditated wish to carry out this aggression against Iraq. The matter
also is not that of weapons of mass destruction. They know very well.
The Americans and the British, through their experts, know that all
weapons of mass destruction have been totally eliminated. They know
through a monitoring system, which has been there for four years, that
there has not been any violation by Iraq of its obligations enshrined in
Resolutions 687 and 715. Had the matter been weapons of mass
destruction, Kofi Annan proposed a comprehensive review and preparations
were made that the review might take place in January. They could have
waited until January, witnessed the
review, and heard what the UN Special Commission [UNSCOM] and Iraq might
say, and then make an honest and objective judgment. If the judgment of
the Security Council says that Iraq had violated its obligations, it
could have acted unanimously, not only the United States and Britain
because the UN Security Council Resolutions 687 and 715 were approved
unanimously. The fact that they acted unilaterally against the wish of
the rules of the Security Council shows that the matter is not one of
weapons of mass destruction. The matter is not that of Butler's report.
The real objective of this aggression is to show that the United States
is the sole superpower in this world, to show the arrogance of the
United States, and to show that the United States is ready to impose its
will on the whole world, not only on Iraq according to its greedy
interests, not according to moral values and the international law. In
this, Britain joins the United States. You know that Britain has lost
its previous status as a superpower or one of the major powers, but
being a colonialist and imperialist by nature, it is trying to catch the
elephant as a small rat in order to get their share of the petty results
of such an aggression
/To realize this truth, you should concentrate on the position of
Russia and China. Russia and China did not take the position they took
recently just as a support to Iraq. They realized that there is a
substantive dangerous change in the mood in the United States. The
United States wants to show by this military aggression that it wants to
impose its hegemony on the whole world and, of course they cannot accept
that. It is against their policies of multilateral powers, multilateral
joint work regarding the international business.
/Clinton and Blair lied lately. They lied flagrantly and they lied in
February as you remember. Both of these statesmen appeared on
television late January and in February. Clinton said that one of the
presidential sites is larger than Washington DC. Blair said that one of
them is larger than Paris, and then a UN survey team came to Iraq and it
appeared that the eight presidential sites in four governorates are only
32 square kilometers. These two statesmen lied in February. When they
were preparing an aggression to justify that aggression, they quoted the
same figures. Albright, Cohen, the foreign minister of Britain, and the
defense minister of Britain were telling congress, the House of Commons,
and the international community that there are thousands of tons of
stockpiles and biological weapons, chemical weapons, and means to
produce them in those presidential sites you remember that. Then, the
experts of UNSCOM and the IEAE in the presence of 20 diplomats from all
over the world entered those presidential sites and they found that they
were only guest houses--beautiful guest houses with beautiful gardens
and beautiful lakes; and it was a farce.
/Now, Clinton, Blair, Cohen, Albright, and the British officials are
repeating the same lies, the same fabrications, and the same figures.
They are repeating the same lies in order to justify the crime that
cannot be justified--a crime against Iraq, a crime against the Arabs,
the Muslims and the whole world. It is a sinister crime. Look at some
of the targets that they have targeted during the last period. Take,
for instance yesterday, they targeted the whole Ministry of Defense. It
is not the Ministry of Defense. They know it. They have visited and
inspected that building. It is one of the monuments in Baghdad. It is
an old building that belongs to several decades. There is nothing in it
except some administrative departments, which had been visited by UNSCOM
inspectors several times. They attacked in several missiles to destroy
it. What does that mean? Just to hurt whatever is dear to the Iraqi
people. You remember what one of the generals in the American Air Force
said before the aggression in 1991, what are your targets? He said:
Well, everything that is valuable and dear to the Iraqi people. Now
they are doing the same.
/They attacked the presidential sites. What are these presidential
sites? They are guesthouses. They have been built by the Iraqis. They
are fine buildings. The genius Iraqi architects and artists put their
effort in these buildings. They just want to destroy them. Such
buildings could not be used for any purpose related to their
allegations. They have visited them, and the entire diplomatic corps in
Baghdad knows that. You know we invited the entire diplomatic corps in
Baghdad and journalists before the entry of inspectors to these sites as
arranged by Kofi Annan. The people appreciated the work of art in these
sites.
/As the foreign minister said yesterday, they have attacked the house
of the president's daughter. They attacked presidential sites.
Yesterday, the collateral damage, which was inflicted on the Ministry of
Defense, led to a nearby destruction of hospitals and so on so forth.
They say: We are not attacking civilian targets. They did. They attacked
the radio and television. Radio and television are not weapons of mass
destruction. They are not the means as they allege that could be used by
the Government of Iraq to threaten its neighbors. They attacked the oil
refinery in al-Basrah, they attacked a warehouse belonging to the
Ministry of Trade in Tikrit and so on, so forth. We do not have a full
account of all the civilian targets they attacked until now because of
the circumstances. But, the truth will appear. They were making the
same lies in 1991, that they were targeting the military capability of
Iraq in order to enforce the withdrawal from Kuwait and then it appeared
that they were targeting the whole country; they were targeting the
whole people of Iraq. The same liars, the same criminals are repeating
their lies and crimes. I am ready to take your questions.
[Correspondent] /Mr. 'Aziz, can you tell us what, in your view, will
govern a decision by Washington and London to halt the air strikes?
What significance do you think there would be, not only in Iraq, but in
the wide Arab world, which you referred to in your statement, in a
continuation of the air campaign beyond the beginning of Ramadan, which
is very soon going to fall upon us?
[Aziz] /Well, what Clinton and Blair said about the conception between
their aggression and Ramadan is an insult to the Arabs and to the
Muslims. How do we expect a Zionist like Clinton and a Zionist like
Blair to respect the holy month of the Muslims? We know the backgrounds
of these two statesmen. Clinton is a Zionist. He is surrounded by a
clique of Zionists. Those who advise him to commit this crime are
Albright, Cohen, Sandy Berger, and the other members of the clique.
Everybody in Britain and the Labor Party knows that Blair's background
is a Zionist one. These two liars cannot tell the Arab world, mock the
Arab world, and pretend that they respect the month of Ramadan. The true
Muslims refused that and showed contempt to what Blair and Clinton said.
/The reality is that the resources they could assemble for this
aggression are limited. They are not the same resources that they
assembled in 1991. They cannot fire 200 missiles every day for one whole
month. You know this. Everybody in the world who knows anything about
military actions can judge that the resources are assembled for few
days, maybe one, two, or four days; but they cannot go on with these
resources for a very long period of time. The timing, as you know, was
connected to the failure of Clinton's visit to Israel and with another
matter, which I do not want to discuss. It was only a coincidence that
it happened few days before Ramadan. Do not forget that George Bush was
attacking Iraq during Ramadan in 1991. You were here at that time in
Baghdad. We were facing the US and allied aggression during Ramadan
l99l. So, Ramadan is not on their mind. Aggression and crimes are on
their mind./
[Correspondent] /Do you feel there is an intention during these
campaigns to target President Saddam Husayn himself, and what is your
analysis of the final objectives of the campaign?/
['Aziz] /The first objective, as I said, is to show their arrogance,
their determination to impose their will on the who1e world and not on
Iraq only, but the entire Arab world. That's the main desire and the
main objective of this
criminal act. They also want to weaken Iraq. They said that. This is a
Zionist plan, which was behind the 1991 aggression, and it has been
behind the US policy since then. It has been behind the British policy.
It is a colonial and imperialist policy. Of course, they have been
wishing, dreaming of targeting the Iraqi leadership, particularly Iraqi
President Saddam Husayn, but they cannot weaken Iraq. Iraq is not just
a material. It is an entity that survived thousands of years. It is
the will of the Iraqi people in which they take pride, and not in the
number of weapons or buildings Iraq has. Baghdad was destroyed at the
hands of the Moguls when they invaded it in the 13th century. But Iraq
survived. Iraq will also survive this aggression, and any aggression in
the future, proudly, courageously. We demonstrate to the Arab world and
to the whole world that the right thing will survive and that the
aggressors and the malicious and contemptuous leaders of the imperialist
countries cannot impose their will, neither on Iraq nor on the entire
world. They are imposing their will on some weak leaders in this region
and in the world. They cannot impose their will on the courageous
leaders and peoples, however, who have displayed their courage. Look at
the women, men, and children on Baghdad streets who stood fast in the
face of this aggression. Can you imagine that while Tomahawk missiles
were being thrown on a city, young men and women do not postpone their
wedding festivals? You can imagine how courageous these people are, and
how they defy this aggression, therefore, Iraq will survive, the Iraqi
leadership will survive, and President Saddam Husayn will survive
against their aggression and their evil intentions./
[Correspondent] /After the cessation of hostilities, what do you expect
Iraq to do next? Is your government prepared to work with the UN
inspectors, or this disarmament process, which is supervised by the
United Nations, is now over?/
[Aziz] / This pawn, which was used by the United States, Richard Butler,
has killed his job by paving the way for this aggression. When I was in
Moscow, I said something clear, that Iraq, the Iraqi people, and the
Iraqi Government, cannot tolerate UNSCOM and sanctions at the same time.
Now they had added military aggression and you could imagine what the
situation will be./
[Correspondent of al-Jazirah Space Channel] Mr. 'Aziz, al-Jazirah has
received information to the effect that there are conditions to stop
attacks on Iraq, and that these conditions are related to Israel. The
other question is: what does Iraq have to say about the official Arab
stand during and before these attacks?
['Aziz] Let it be clear that Iraq will not accept any conditions. If
the Americans and the British want to continue their criminal aggression
against Iraq, let them do so. Iraq will not budge an inch on its
national and pan-Arab stand, whether toward its own cause or toward the
Palestine question. Iraq will not make any concessions at all. As for
the Arab stand, there is the popular and the official stands. The
popular stand is clear. I saw rallies and demonstrations in Egypt on
al-Jazirah Television today, as well as rallies and demonstrations in
the occupied territories. I believe that the Arab masses everywhere
express solidarity with Iraq, denounce, condemn, and contempt [sic] the
imperialist and colonialist US-British aggression. On the official
level, there is a number of states that adopted a sound and [words
unclear] and denounced the aggression; however, I would like to say
personally that those who issued statements in which they say that they
regret. Regret what? Is this a car accident or a bus that turned over
and fell in a river so as to express regret over? This is an aggression
against a genuine Arab people. This is an aggression against them and
against the entire Arab nation. This is a disdain to the Arab leaders
who express regret. The others express concern. Concern? Can
aggression be confronted by concern? Concern can be treated by two
tablets of valium, but aggression cannot be treated by valium.
Aggression must be confronted by a firm, principled Arab stand because
they will be exposed to what Iraq is being exposed to [words unclear].
The United States is weakening and interfering in the internal affairs
of its Arab friends. The United States has made poor the states which
invited it to protect them, as they claim, from Iraq's aggression,
although Iraq did not threaten them. What was the price of oil in 1990?
In December 1989 and January 1990, it was $21 per barrel. It is less
than $10 now. These states, from whose territory, airspace, and water
the US and Britain aircraft fly and the US missiles are fired, have now
become poor. This has even reached the point where the richest Arab
state and one of the richest states in the world borrows to cover the
deficit in its budget. So, you can conclude that these sides do not
adopt stands in favor of their people or even in their own favor as
regimes, but they serve the US plan, which targets them just as it
targets Iraq.
With all my respect to all those who expressed solidarity with Iraq
from the Arab officials, I say, however, this is not a gift to the Iraqi
people. Yes, we are brothers, and we are supposed to express solidarity
with one another. Whoever expresses solidarity with Iraq, however,
protects himself from the US aggression. He also protects himself from
the criminal schemes concocted in the internal circles of some Arab
countries which are the friends of the United States. This aggression
must open our eyes to the facts. We should not only deal with the
current situation as though it were a contentious issue between Iraq and
UNSCOM. It is not a matter of particularities between politicians and
diplomats. This is not a difference with the Special Commission;
rather, it is an aggression intended to impose the imperialist US and UK
will on all the Arab Nation as well as Muslims. Some days ago, the
United States hit two Islamic states--Afghanistan and Sudan. At the
same time, they are ready to repeat the aggression against any Islamic
country and emasculate it, as they did in Indonesia and is currently
happening in Malaysia as well as in other countries which are well known
to all.
[Correspondent] /The British Defense Secretary said today that the
president of this country must abide by the will of the international
community. Sanctions will remain in place until there is full
compliance. He could expect more military action. What do you say about
that?
[Aziz] This person, whose name I do not know, should remember that his
ancestors in 1919 and 1920 were the colonial rulers of this country, and
then when there was an empire, the great British Empire, they could not
impose their will on the people of Iraq. So he cannot impose his will
on the people of Iraq in 1998. Tell them that Iraq will not listen to
his threats.
[Correspondent] /Can you comment on the French stand following the
recent statement by President Chirac and Minister Vedrine?
[Aziz] France is a permanent member in the Security Council. The
representative of this permanent member in the Security Council was
sitting in the chamber of the council trying to find a solution to the
problem with members. The Americans and the British started aggression
against Iraq. Is that not an insult a permanent member in the Security
Council? Is violation of the rules of the Security Council of the
United Nation's Charter? Unilateral use unacceptable; and they, the
French officials, unilateral use of force is unacceptable. Now, Chirac
is saying that the president of Iraq bears responsibility; but he is not
participating in this aggression, and it might not have been necessary.
This is not the honest and principled position that should be taken by
a major power. Allow me to say, without any personal intentions against
the president and the foreign minister of France, this is an opportunist
position. Try to accommodate the American and British aggression on the
one hand, and try to tell that [recording ends in progress]
[Description of source: Independent Television station financed by the
Qatari Government]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
