Iraq News by Laurie Mylroie
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 .
III. N. MARSOUMI, "BEWARE THE PATIENT MAN'S RAGE," BABIL, JAN 20 94
IV. JIM HOAGLAND, SADDAM WON'T JUST FIGHT THE SAME WAR AGAIN, OCT 12 94
V. F. GAFFNEY, UNSCOM REPORT: IS THE U.S. THE LIKELY TARGET?, APR 11 95
VI. N. MARSOUMI, A U.S. DELUSION, AL IRAQ, APR 11 95
VII. WARNING TO U.S. FORCES IN SAUDI ARABIA, IRAQ RADIO, APR 12 95
VIII. FRANK GAFFNEY, IRAQ LIES ABOUT BW PROGRAM, JUL 7 95
IX. IRAQ SLAMS ARAB SUMMIT, REUTER, JUN 24 96
X. L. MYLROIE, THE 1997 GULF CRISIS, MERIA, JAN 98
III. N. MARSOUMI, "BEWARE THE PATIENT MAN'S RAGE"
Baghdad, Babil, in Arabic, 20 Jan 94
[Article by Nuri Najm a1-Marsumi, first under secretary of the Culture
and Information Ministry: "Beware of the Patient Man's Rage"]
The UN Security Council issued a routine statement on 18 January in
which it renewed the unjust blockade for 60 days. As in the previous
statements, the majority of the Security Council could not justify the
continuation of the blockade.
This time, however, the ambassadors of some member states of the
Security Council expressed strong protests. The Chinese ambassador
called strongly for the lifting of the blockade, while the ambassadors
of Spain, Brazil, and Nigeria reiterated this stand. The French
ambassador, as well the British ambassador, noted the positive stands
adopted by Iraq. Despite this, the Security Council issued a statement,
without introducing any amendments, because of the U.S ambassador's
insistence on this. The U.S. ambassador expressed her government's
concern over the security of Iraq's neighbors.
We, in Iraq, realize that the blockade no longer has any
justification, and our friends realize this, as well. Now, the camp of
the enemies has begun to collapse and some of its members have become
aware of the dangerous political game played by the managers of U.S
interests and their agents in the region, who are besieging Iraq at the
expense of their people and at the expense of the interests of other
nations and countries.
We also are aware that the Americans want us to guarantee the
security of the bandits, the rulers of the Kuwait governorate and Saudi
Arabia. They want us to relinquish the rights of our people and nation
in Palestine, imagining that the wisdom and necessity of implementing
the Security Council resolutions--despite their injustice--will make
Iraq accept whatever it is asked for.
The Iraqis will not say more than what leader Saddam Husayn said on
the third anniversary of the aggression: They will not turn wisdom into
a prelude for weakness and despair. The Iraqis will not remain silent at
the continuation of the blockade and the violation of Iraqi airspace.
We wi1l never abandon our people in northern Iraq. If we become
certain--despite our patience and the good offices exerted by our
friends to end the abnormal situation resulting from the blockade and
the violations of Iraqi sovereignty in the north and south--we are
capable of bringing the game back to the beginning. We are the original
people in this region and we are the ones who own everything on our
land. We will not allow the agents, lowly people, or covetors to
encroach on what we own, on our rights, and on our dignity. As the
leader said, the punishment of the criminals will be an eye for an eye
and a tooth for a tooth. The Arabs say, "Beware of the patient man's
rage."
IV. JIM HOAGLAND, SADDAM WON'T JUST FIGHT THE SAME WAR AGAIN
Saddam Won't Just Fight the Same War Over Again
Jim Hoagland
Washington Post, Oct 12, 1994
President Clinton has responded with splendid resolve to Iraq s
military thrusts toward Kuwait. But Clinton and his generals should not
simply prepare to refight the last war. Saddam Hussein won't.
Saddam is not likely to wage the war he has in mind for Clinton only
in the deserts of the Iraqi-Kuwaiti frontier. The Iraqi dictator has
openly warned this president to yield to his demands or face terror
attacks on the United States and its allies.
It is not true that Saddam is completely irrational or unpredictable,
as many in the West assume. He manipulates the politics of brute force
better than most leaders. And as he did in the spring and summer of
1990, before he invaded Kuwait, Saddam is again broadcasting the steps
he intends to take if his threats go unheeded.
On Sept. 27, Saddam promised in a speech to his followers that he
would not stand by and allow Iraqis to "die of hunger" because of UN
sanctions. The speech was immediately analyzed by Baghdad newspapers
under his direct control. They asked if the United States really failed
to understand "the meaning of every Iraqi becoming a missile that can
cross to countries and cities?" Saddam s scribes went on to warn the
world community in these terms in the following days:
"When peoples reach the verge of collective death they will be able
to spread death to all." And "The patience of the Arabs and Muslims is
about to reach its end and people have now started to prepare for hot
confrontations in more than one country and continent."
Empty Iraqi rhetoric intended to influence the UN debate on lifting
sanctions? Or real threats that Saddam will try to execute? America s
only answer can be to hope for the former and prepare for the latter--
especially as sketchy evidence suggests that the Iraqis may have already
put in motion terrorist networks in America.
But that evidence and the threats coming out of Baghdad had not
engaged the Clinton administration, preoccupied at home, in Haiti and
elsewhere, before last weekend. My guess is that Saddam has moved his
Republican Guard units through the desert to focus Clinton's attention
on the dangers Iraq still poses and on the deal that would avoid them.
Do not be surprised, or deceived, if Saddam now indicates that he
will lower the tensions he has created and recognize Kuwait's frontier,
the major remaining hurdle he has to clear to get sanctions lifted.
In Saddam's mind recognizing Kuwait would be a meaningless commitment
that he could reverse when the circumstances change. He has over the
years signed and torn up treaties fixing Iraq s border with Iran in the
Shatt al Arab estuary as his needs dictate. For Saddam, Iraq's
frontiers are etched in blood shed in battle, not in ink scrawled on
treaties.
That is why he will be a threat to his neighbors as long as he and
his Baath party survive in power. Bush and his generals, Colin Powell
and Norman Schwarzkopf, continued to underestimate Saddam when they made
the political decision to let him recover key republican Guard divisions
from the Kuwait theater and stay in power at the end of Operation Desert
Storm.
The Clinton administration was also taking for granted Saddam's
greatly weakened state until this new wake-up call. At the Justice
Department, there has been no aggressive pursuit of the many loose ends
created by Iraqi penetration and manipulation of US banks in the Bush
years. More surprisingly, Justice has dragged its feet in pursuing
Abdul Rahman Yassin, an American citizen of Iraqi origin who fled to
Baghdad after being questioned about his role in the bombing of New York
s World Trade Center blast have been pursued more diligently and writer
on Iraq, than by the US government. Mylroie has concluded that the New
York attack may have been part of a broad revenge campaign by Saddam
that included the plot to assassinate President Bush in Kuwait in April
1993.
That is why Mylroie picked up on the recent rush of threatening
statements in the Baghdad media much more quickly than did government
counterterrorist agencies, which have not assigned a high priority to
countering Saddam's operatives here. The Iraqis were unable to mount
terror operations during Desert Storm, the government agencies recall.
Why would they try now?
There can be no excuse of misreading Saddam again. The
counterterrorist agencies need to make Iraq their top urgent priority.
Iraq's coercive diplomacy cannot be rewarded with a deal on sanctions.
Clinton, who ordered a one-shot retaliatory raid on Baghdad for the Bush
plot needs to emphasize consistently to all government departments, not
just the Pentagon, that Saddam's survival is a continuing threat to
American interests at home and abroad.
V. FRANK GAFFNEY, UNSCOM REPORT: IS THE U.S. THE LIKELY TARGET?
http://www.security-policy.org/papers/1995/95-D23.html
VI. N. MARSOUMI, A U.S. DELUSION, AL IRAQ, APR 11 95
Al-Iraq, April 11, 1995
"A U.S. Misunderstanding Which Must Be Removed"
Nuri Najm al-Marsumi, First Undersecretary of the Ministry of Culture &
Information
[FBIS Translated Text] By following the US administration's stands
toward Iraq throughout the recent period one can see that this
administration, and the Republican one preceding it, have been
experiencing a delusion regarding their understanding of what has
happened and is happening in Iraq. This delusion is the result of a
misunderstanding that several factors have helped to create. It has
grown in size and the US administration has dealt with it as one of the
established factors of the conflict and the crisis with its historical
leadership. The US administration has based many of its calculations on
this delusion, and has begun justifying and emphasizing it and prompting
other nations to follow its example on this basis.
The delusion says Iraqis, as a people, are satisfied with their
government's measures in accepting the UN Security Council resolutions
that were issued before and after the 30-state military aggression and
that they form an element of pressure on the state in this direction.
The impact of this delusion on US calculations has been enhanced by the
Iraqi Government's desire to avoid any military confrontation to prevent
further destruction and damage to the Iraqi people and their interests,
especially since US arrogance aims at destroying everything which is
lively and beautiful in this dear homeland, using the most sophisticated
an savage means of destruction, without giving the people's armed forces
the chance of a confrontation, as happens in conventional wars.
As long as the United States entertains this delusion and builds all
its calculations on it, the policy of harming Iraq will continue.
Therefore, it has become essential to straighten out the situation one
more time and remove the misunderstanding in certain US politicians, and
their followers among rulers in our Arab homeland. In this context,
publishing the facts on a wide basis and calling on the state to tackle
them is essential at this stage of the conflict.
Some of the facts are already known; others may not have received
their fare share of publicity, leading to the growth of this
misunderstanding. The main facts are:
First: Although Iraq has officially recognized Kuwait as a state,
there is a broad popular current which does not approve of this and is
bitter about severing part of its precious land and turning it into a
spoil for the foreigner, a den for a licentious group like the al-Sabah,
and a source of plotting against the interests of the homeland and the
people.
Second: The government's performance and method of dealing with the UN
Security Council and Special Commission are unacceptable to considerable
number of Iraqis, who may be right. One opinion which deserves respect
says Iraq's unilateral implementation of resolution 687 and the
subsequent destruction of the long-range missiles and chemical weapons
and abandonment of the programs to develop these weapons may have been
somewhat premature, since it has deprived Iraq of an effective means of
pressure in the conflict and this is what has encouraged the Americans
and their agents in the region to go on inflicting harm on the people
and the homeland by continuing the blockade, plotting against Iraq's
leadership and revolutionary regime, and attempting to mutilate its
territorial integrity and encroaching on its sovereignty as has happened
recently with the Turkish invasion of the northern part of the homeland.
However, this does not deny the fact that there are also those who
support the government's dealing with the Security Council and the
Special Commission and who may be the majority. But this majority has
been in constant conflict due to the lack of precise conclusions
regarding the Security Council's reactions to what Iraq has offered.
Third: The main cause of this misunderstanding might have been what
took place during the chapter of treachery and treason. The US
administration did not want to believe the truth about what actually
happened. It only believed the scenarios of the Iranians and their
agents. It did not believe that what took place was due to the state of
confusion resulting from the infiltration of gangs from Iran. These
gangs carried out acts of sabotage, exploiting the lack of
communications between the governorates, the disruption of power
stations and the main radio and television transmission stations that
were destroyed during the aggression, and the state of confusion and
panic resulting from this phenomenon. All this was exploited by
infiltrators, mercenaries, and criminals who found in what took place an
opportunity to plunder people's property and food and vandalize the
citizens' resources and educational, health, and service institutions.
What took place in the first three weeks of March 1991 was a
premeditated plot timed to coincide with the cease-fire in the first
chapter of aggression. This is the truth about what happened, and the
experiences of the abortive attempts at recent years are proof of its
veracity and accuracy.
Fourth: Iraq's abandonment of parts of its weapons--the long-range
missiles and chemical weapons--under resolution 687 and its acceptance
of the other Security Council resolutions does not mean it has lost
everything. The Iraqi people consist of 18 million people, most of whom
have attained legal age. They are trained in the use of arms and fought
heroic battles in the glorious Saddam's al-Qadisiyah and the immortal
Mother of Battles. Should it be necessary, the people can become a huge
potent force in defense of their interests, children, women, old people,
and future generations. These are the very people, and no one else, who
can forge the road to their cherish future.
Fifth: Iraq has vast natural wealth. It is one of the richest
countries in the world compared to its population and the area of its
land. After the aggression, the Iraqis have begun pursuing completely
new policies of construction, production, and investment. Continuation
with these policies in order to achieve the national program of ensuring
self-sufficiency in food will eventually enable Iraq to leave the
Security Council and its resolutions and commissions behind it.
Sixth: The people's relationship with their historic leadership,
represented by leader Saddam Husayn, is unique in the relations between
peoples and historic leaders. Saddam Husayn is no longer like any other
ruler. He is today the symbol of freedom, independence, heroism,
courage, justice, development, and construction. All the wagers to
cause a split between the symbol and the people have failed, and will
inevitably fail.
These and many other facts should be sufficient to restore sense to
the heads of American politicians, stop the fanaticism that
characterizes their stands, and end the ignominious misunderstanding
that has led to this long chain of errors and oppressive resolutions
against the Iraqis people. The members of the Security Council are
called upon to comprehend these facts, put an end to the exposed U.S.
game in the Security Council before the world, and deal positively with
what Iraq has offered. Otherwise, Iraq itself will have the right to
put an end to the game, exactly as it has acted conscientiously and out
of its free will when abiding by the Security Council's resolutions and
the Special Commission's measures.
VII. WARNING TO U.S. FORCES IN SAUDI ARABIA
Baghdad Republic of Iraq Radio Network in Arabic 0300 GMT 12 Apr 95
[FBIS Translated Text] A Saudi organization calling itself the Arabian
Peninsula Change Movement-the Jihad Wing [harakat al-taghyir al-islami,
al-jinah al-jihadi, fi al-jazirah al-arabiyah] has threatened to carry
out military operations against the foreign forces stationed in the
Arabian Peninsula, particularly the US and British forces, and the
influential members of the Al Saud family.
In a statement published yesterday in the London-based Al-Quds Al
Arabi, the organization says it is giving the foreign forces in the
Arabian Peninsula an ultimatum, they have until Wednesday 28 April [ED:
should be June] 1995. After that date, the statement says, the
organization will carry out legitimate operations against these forces.
The statement adds: The Royal Guard forces, the Military Police, and
other similar units that protect the al Saud regime will also be a
target. The statement denounces the Al Saud regime, stressing that it
is an infidel regime that opposes Islam, Muslims, preachers, and
reformers and opened the doors of the Arabian Peninsula to colonialist
forces.
VIII. FRANK GAFFNEY, IRAQ LIES ABOUT BW PROGRAM
http://www.security-policy.org/papers/1995/95-D44.html
IX. IRAQ SLAMS ARAB SUMMIT
Iraq slams Arab summit's final statement
By Hassan Hafidh
Baghdad, June 24 (Reuter)
Iraqi newspapers on Monday harshly attacked the final statement of
the weekend Arab summit in Cairo, saying that it was anti-Iraq and
dictated by the United States, Israel and their Arab allies.
"Cairo summit has adopted a statement which is worse than the hostile
hands against Iraqi people by Israel, the US, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia,"
the government newspaper al-Jumhouriya said in a front page editorial
written by its editor Salah al-Mukhtar.
"Instead of calling for lifting the trade sanctions on Iraqi people
causing the death of more than one million Iraqis since its inception
five years ago, Cairo summit urges Iraq not to follow aggressive
policies which provoke its Arab neighbours," Mukhtar said.
Iraq is under crippling United Nations trade sanctions imposed after
Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait in 1990. The curbs include a ban on oil
exports and imports of commodities apart from humanitarian needs.
Fourteen heads of state and representatives of seven other Arab
states took part in the Cairo meeting--the first such summit since the
1990-91 Gulf crisis divided the Arab world.
Iraq, which precipitated the crisis with its August 1990 invasion of
Kuwait, was not invited.
In the summit's final statement, the Arab leaders affirmed their
commitment to "preserve the unity of Iraq," and also demanded that Iraq
"commit itself not to adopt any aggressive policies designed to provoke
its Arab neighbours and to finish implementing all the relevant Security
Council resolutions . . .
"All this is the right way to bring an end to the sanctions imposed
on Iraq and create the right atmosphere for it to regain its role in the
Arab regional system," the statement said.
The summit was called in response to the election in Israel of
hardline Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has questioned trading
land for peace, the basis of previous negotiations between Israel, the
Palestinians and Arab states.
The paper said Iraq should not remain idle about what it called
provocations of some Arab leaders against Iraq.
"The US President Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State have
officially and publicly . . . ordered some Arab leaders to insert a
hostile paragraph against the Iraqi people (in the final statement of
the summit)," he said.
Mukhtar said leaders of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia "paid millions of
dollars to implement Clinton's orders."
Al-Thawra, organ of the ruling Baath party, also strongly criticised
the final statement of the summit.
"The statement was written with Arabic letters but with an [sic]
American sentences and phrases paid for by the Saudi and Kuwaiti dirty
money," Thawra said.
X. L. MYLROIE, THE 1997 GULF CRISIS
http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/jour4a1.html
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
