• Military

• WMD Menu                           

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

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

PT 1/2, Saddam's Mother of Battles Day Speech

Iraq News, MONDAY, JANUARY 18, 1999

The 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.   WILLIAM ARKIN, DESERT FOX TARGET LIST, WASH POST, JAN 17
 Defense analyst, William Arkin, in yesterday's Wash Post, explained 
that the target of Operation Desert Fox was not so much Iraq's 
proscribed weapons, but Saddam and his control over Iraq.  As Arkin 
wrote, "National security insiders, blessed with their unprecedented 
intelligence bonanza from UNSCOM, convinced themselves that bombing 
Saddam Hussein's internal apparatus would drive the Iraqi leader around 
the bend. 'We've penetrated your security, we're inside your brain,' is 
the way one senior administration official described the message that 
the United States was sending Saddam Hussein.  Without the target list, 
such a view seems like sheer bravado.  With the target list, a host of 
new questions arises.  Is the administration's view of Saddam Hussein's 
hold on power in line with reality?"  Indeed!
  And that helps explain why Sec State Madeleine Albright, Jan 5, on the 
Jim Lehrer Newshour spoke of "Saddam's increasing isolation and 
desperation" [see "Iraq News," Jan 6] and Centcom Commander, Gen. 
Anthony Zinni, Jan 8, said that Saddam was displaying "a degree of 
desperation that we hadn't seen before" [see "Iraq News, Jan 10].  It 
seems that, as the administration expected the bombing campaign would 
drive Saddam "around the bend," that is how it interpreted his response 
subsequently.
   But that view--Saddam is desperate, and therefore, evermore is in his 
corner, in his cage & etc--is at odds with the regional perception, 
which is to see Saddam as bent on something quite dangerous and 
therefore, someone who must go. In addition to continuing Saudi and 
Egyptian calls for his overthrow, not to mention Kuwait's open 
apprehensions, Turks are now joining in the public expression of open 
concern.  Writing about Turkey's request for Patriot missiles, Milliyet 
columnist, Hasan Cemal, Jan 16, in "Anxiety over Iraq," wrote, "There 
are various questions related to Saddam Husayn on the agenda of circles 
who are responsible for Turkey's foreign security and foreign policy.  
Can Saddam engage in any madness?  Does he have any strength left to do 
anything like that?  What type of target would Turkey be if he undertook 
such madness?"
 Numerous US papers have condemned the Jan 13 French proposal to lift 
sanctions and replace UNSCOM with milque-toast, including the Los 
Angeles Times [LAT], Jan 14, and the NYT, Jan 15.  And, of course, 
Russia has its own proposal.  As the Wash Post editors, yesterday, in 
"Rewarding Saddam Hussein," observed, "Vice President Gore's tough 
response to all this was to offer to eliminate the ceiling on how much 
oil Iraq is permitted to sell.  The administration also proposed 
allowing Iraq to import more spare parts to get its oil industry up and 
running.  Maybe, those parts can be used to repair the oil refinery 
that, only a few weeks ago, US warplanes were bombing. . . The 
administration proclaims itself satisfied with its Iraq policy, but the 
reasons for such satisfaction are not clear." 
  Robert Zoellick, president and CEO of the Center for Strategic and 
Int'l Studies and an official in the Bush administration, and John 
Hillen, senior fellow in political-military studies at CSIS, wrote in 
the LAT, Jan 17, "For the past six years the United States' approach 
toward Iraq has been haphazard and reactive.  While talking about 
long-term containment, US officials have in fact ceded the initiative to 
Saddam.  With each test of US resolve, the administration's ad hoc and 
incremental response has left Saddam in a slightly stronger position.  
The US has countered by changing goals with every crisis.   This 
flavor-of-the month approach was evident in the last round . . . This 
uncertainty about goals and means is all the more troubling because one 
could easily foresee that the pattern of Saddam's challenges would lead 
to another round.  But each time the administration has been taken by 
surprise, patching together a reaction that did not match the challenge. 
Saddam, on the other hand, has had a focused strategy.  Since 1991, he 
has been working assiduously to split the international coalition 
arrayed against him, get rid of the weapons inspectors and lift the yoke 
of sanctions from his country."
  On Jan 16, Arab News Network Satellite TV broadcast Saddam's "Mother 
of Battles Day" speech, which was also broadcast Jan 17 on Iraqi radio 
and TV.  The speech lacked the open bellicosity of Saddam's Jan 6 Army 
Day speech.  It was, nonetheless, a defiant speech, even at it was 
opaque and largely removed from present events.  It said nothing 
specific, for example, about the no-fly zones or sanctions.  It would 
seem that for some reason, Saddam chose to speak more abstractly.
  In his speech, Saddam recalled the Gulf war's start eight years before 
and "the subsequent blockade that was unparalleled in vileness and 
harm."  He asked, "Why did the forces of evil target Iraq alone and 
concentrate on Iraq all this time, especially in the first and second 
decades of the era of the July 1968 revolution and its great march?"  
   He explained, "The enemies of the [Arab] nation and those coveting it 
found out that the leaders of the [Iraqi] revolution and the march of 
rule, construction, and jihad in it are faithful to their call and to 
what they took upon themselves to do or what the people entrusted them 
with.  They became more savage and aggressive when they became aware of 
unalterable facts; namely, that leaders of the march, after relying on 
God, can change the declared principles to practical plans and implement 
them." 
   Saddam then asserted that his 30-year rule had transformed Iraq.  
Referring to the period before 1968, he said, "The percentage of those 
who walked barefoot in the countryside was overwhelming.  Those who had 
shoes were the exception.  The diseases, the deviation from the [Arab] 
role, and the contradiction between the long-possessed past and the 
disabled and backward present undermined their determination.  Baghdad, 
which boasts a history of a glorious nation and assumes a big cultural 
role, was closer to a big neglected village, in terms of shape and 
services than to a city with such historical values in the twentieth 
century. The state's treasury was empty because it was hostage to the 
monopoly and ambitions of oil companies . . .   
  "After the revolution, life became as it is now, despite the 
successive conspiracies of the forces of evil . . . These conspiracies 
aimed at uprooting the new will . . . The concern of those who are 
leading the march has always been to enjoy seeing the people possessing 
what they really possess in terms of development and progress.  Their 
concern also has always been to cut out the hand of any person who 
encroaches on or exploits the people's wealth and funds.  Therefore, 
they deprived western banks of the capability to open accounts for 
responsible people in the state of Iraq, as the case was in old eras, 
especially at the time of the monarchy, and is the case of other 
officials in the in the Arab homeland now.  
  "Thus, the forces of evil realized that the natural resources, 
including oil, are used to strengthen the role and progress of the 
people of Iraq . . . They also realized that there will be no retreat 
from honesty in terms of affiliation with the nation, people, and 
principles. . . Thus, the plots became more serious, and great resources 
were devoted for their sake.  The machinations which were made by some 
Arab rulers, who share the same characteristics in the dark, turned to 
be insufficient.  
  "Thus, the plans became in need of direct roles.  This way, some roles 
and officials were exposed in the chapter of the 30-nation aggression 
within the Mother of Battles.  During the chapter of confrontation on 
Conquest Day [Operation Desert Fox], some roles and officials were 
exposed on a large scale in front of all the Arab masses and the entire 
world.  
  "These roles and officials would not have been exposed this way had it 
not been for the requirements for the battle between right and wrong.  
The steadfastness of your great people in Iraq and your support for 
them, O sons of our glorious [Arab] nation has made it necessary for 
such roles to be played in public.  Thus, in this respect alone, these 
are the reasons-in addition to the other well-known reasons-which made 
the forces of evil, which are hostile to our nation and humanity, target 
Iraq. . . . The steadfastness of Iraq, as God wants it to be, will make 
the nation realize the facts just as they are and set its new criteria 
for the basis of living examples.  . . .
  "Therefore, the evil ones will not stop antagonizing Baghdad, until 
Baghdad betrays itself and its nation, and Baghdad has never been a 
traitor.  The other option is that they will stop when they are defeated 
and lose hope of the possibility of realizing their evil objectives.  
This is what will take place, God willing, and those who wait for 
tomorrow will not wait for long."
   What is that about?  A reader, retired from DoD, sketched out four 
basic scenarios: 1) Iraq uses its unconventional weapons for military 
action in the Gulf, whether to seize territory or oil facilities; 2) 
Iraq carries out a devastating act of unconventional terrorism, perhaps 
against a US target, which the US then blames solely on Osama bin Ladin 
et. al., but which the Middle Eastern members of the anti-Iraq coalition 
recognize was supported by Iraqi intelligence, and then they will think 
long and hard as to whether they want to remain members of the anti-Iraq 
coalition;  3) constant tension, sabotage, and unrest, as Iraqi 
intelligence assists and directs Osama bin Ladin et.al., in generating 
serious political pressures on the Middle Eastern members of the 
anti-Iraq coalition, as suggested by Newsweek, Jan 11 [see "Iraq News," 
Jan 6]; or 4) a continuation of the cat-and-mouse challenges ongoing 
since Oct 97, until the anti-Iraq coalition finally collapses and 
nothing remains of the post-war constraints on Iraq. 
   Also, yesterday, Saddam met with Izzat Ibrahim al -Duri, Taha Yasin 
Ramadan, Tariq Aziz, Ali Hasan al-Majid, Sadun Hammadi, Mohammad 
al-Sahhaf, and Humam Abd al Khaliq.  That meeting, according to Iraq 
Radio, "focused on draft resolutions currently proposed in the Security 
Council regarding the unjust siege imposed on Iraq."  
  On Jan 14, the Iraqi leadership held a meeting that "discussed 
developments related to the US-UK aggression on Iraq and the various 
activities, some of which are suspicious and encouraged by the United 
States, Britain, and their agents in the region," according to INA [see 
"Iraq News," Jan 15].
  Although it sounds like one subject was discussed in the first meeting 
and another subject was discussed in the second meeting, the two 
meetings produced virtually the same, identical statement.  Could that 
be a way in which the Iraqi leadership means to underscore the 
seriousness of its demands? 
  As Iraq Radio, Jan 17, reported, following the meeting of the Iraqi 
leadership that day, "An official spokesman made the following statement 
regarding the draft resolutions: For any solution to be practical and 
fair and save the region and beyond from crises and the recurrent 
hostile acts that the evil commit, it should be based on the basic 
elements that were issued by the meeting chaired by President Saddam 
Husayn and a number of officials.  These elements are:"  
  What followed was exactly what the Iraqi leadership said after its Jan 
14 meeting, word for word, including the demand for an immediate lifting 
of sanctions and an end to the no-fly zones.  In addition, the Jan 17 
statement said, regarding the various proposals for revamping 
sanctions/UNSCOM, "The conferees underlined Iraq's past announcements 
that Iraq rejects and opposes any plans proposed by people with 
tendentious objectives, and that Iraq will continue to expose those 
plans and those who advocate them, who are involved in the conspiracy 
and aggression against Iraq.  As for the other plans, we will continue 
to discuss them with those who proposed them, and who do not have bad 
intentions, in order to correct the concepts and courses on which we 
have different views.  The conferees also underlined Iraq's 
determination to protect its airspace against the aggression of the 
United States and Britain, which continue to violate our national 
airspace.  These two countries must bear the full responsibility for all 
the damage caused by their constant attacks against our air defense 
positions and against the lives and property of the Iraqis, in addition 
to the responsibility they must bear for their aggression that has been 
continuing since the dawn of 17 January 1991."
  Also, major demonstrations were held in Iraq, Jan 16, denouncing the 
US on the eighth anniversary of the Gulf War, while smaller 
demonstrations were held Jan 17.  As AP, Jan 16, reported, "About 6,000 
people took to the streets in the capital's downtown in demonstrations 
organized by the ruling Baath Party, shouting 'Down with America.'  A 
group of protesters tried to burn a US flag, but officials from the 
Baath Party snatched the flag from them and ripped it to pieces."  Iraq 
TV, Jan 17, apparently describing the Jan 16 demonstrations, said 
"Baghdad and the rest of the country's provinces were the scene of 
marches and official and popular ceremonies expressing the people's high 
admiration of their leader and their preparedness to sacrifice in 
defense of their land and the achievements of the great July revolution. 
The Iraqis were joined by their Arab brothers residing in Iraq in 
celebrating the occasion.  Hundreds of Sudanese nationals in Iraq 
demonstrated in the early hours of this morning. . . . The demonstrators 
burned US, British, and Israeli flags and shouted slogans denouncing the 
crimes committed against the people of Iraq."
  On Jan 17, as AP reported, "Shouting 'Down, down America' and 'Long 
live Saddam,' 2,000 Iraqis marched to the UN Development Program 
headquarters . . . Some burned flags of the United States, Britain and 
Israel.  Several carried posters of President Clinton wearing a T-shirt 
with Monica Lewinsky's picture on it. . ."
I. WILLIAM ARKIN, DESERT FOX TARGET LIST
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-01/17/127l-011799-idx.html
  Also, the following from the article, was not included in the internet 
version:
  Of the 100 targets on the list for Operation Desert Fox in Iraq, 87 
were hit. A breakdown of the seven categories and their key areas is as 
follows:
COMMAND AND CONTROL: 18 of 20 targets hit
Abu Rajash, Jabul Makhul, Radwaniyah, Republican (Baghdad), Sijood 
palaces
Ba'ath party headquarters
Iraq Intelligence Service headquarters
Ministry of Defense
Ministry of Industry
Presidential Secretariat Building
State radio and television
WMD INDUSTRY AND PRODUCTION: 12 of 12 targets hit
Biological Research Center (Baghdad University)
Ibn al Haytham missile R&D center
Karama electronics plant
Al Kindi missile R&D facility (Mosul)
Shahiyat liquid engine R&D, T&E facility
Zaafaraniyah fabrication facility (Nidda)
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMD) SECURITY:
18 of 18 targets hit
Directorate of General Security headquarters
Special Security Organization (SS0) headquarters
Special Republican Guards (SRG) headquarters
SSO Communications/Computer Center
SSO/SRG barracks (Abu Ghraib, Radwinyah, Baghdad, Tikrit)
REPUBLICAN GUARDS: 9 of 9 targets hit
ECONOMIC: 1 of 1 targets hit
Basra refinery distribution manifold
AIRFIELDS: 5 of 6 targets hit
AIR DEFENSES: 24 of 34 targets hit
Sources: U.S. Central Command, Department of Defense Detail of 
collateral damage at the Natural History Museum in Baghdad, which was 
hit in an attack on the adjacent State Radio and Television 
Establishment.