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 .
IRAQ NEWS, TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1999
I. SAHHAF REJECTS UK, DUTCH DRAFT, IRAQ RADIO, JUN 20
II. CLINTON, CHIRAC, JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE, JUN 17
III. BRUCE REIDEL, US POLICY ON IRAQ, JUN 18
IV. FORWARD, INC EFFORTS TO TOPPLE SADDAM, JUN 4
The hearing of the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian
Affairs, Senate Foreign Relations, "US Policy Toward Iraq: Mobilizing
the Opposition," has been rescheduled for Wed, Jun 23, 10:00 AM, SD-562.
The administration witness will be Beth Jones, Principle Deputy Asst to
the Asst Sec State for NEA, and not Martin Indyk, Asst Sec State for
NEA, as originally scheduled.
In advance of June 26, United Nations International Day in Support of
Survivors of Torture, Mohammed H. Al-Sadr has constructed a webpage in
remembrance of Iraqis killed as a result of torture at the hands of
Saddam's regime. Al-Sadr asks that people remember torture victims and
survivors of torture from Iraq and worldwide on June 26. The site is at
http://members.tripod.co.uk/trilby
"Iraq News" is preparing an issue on how America's Iraq/Middle East
experts dealt with Iraq over the years. It will include the extent to
which they warned of the problem of Saddam's retained unconventional
capabilities in the period after Hussein Kamil's Aug 95 defection and
before Nov 97, when the Iraq crises began and events put the issue on
the agenda. The only item "Iraq News" has been able to find so far is
Michael Eisenstadt's "Still not Bomb-Proof," in the Feb 26 96 Wash Post.
"Iraq News" would be grateful for information about other citations.
This issue deals with UNSC efforts to develop a new resolution that
would provide for the return to Iraq of a modified UNSCOM, as well as US
policy on Iraq.
The Wash Times, Jun 18, reported, "Iraq has gone nearly a year without
vigorous weapons inspections, and many American and UN officials fear
Saddam has used the time productively. 'We are receiving no data,
zero,' said Charles Duelfer, the American who serves as deputy chairman
of UNSCOM. 'What they're up to? We don't know.' UNSCOM inspectors were
withdrawn from Iraq on the eve of American and British bombing in
mid-December. But the weapons inspectors largely had been idled since
August, when Baghdad stopped cooperating with efforts to inspect sites
that hadn't already been searched and certified. An elaborate network
of remote cameras and sensors installed to monitor banned activities
presumably has been dismantled, Mr. Duelfer said yesterday. UNSCOM's
staff has withered away as well. Once, the commission had 200 people in
New York, Bahrain and Baghdad. Today, there are about 40, and most of
them are administrative [ED: an informed sources gave "Iraq News" a
somewhat higher figure]. Unless Mr. Annan appoints an interim chairman
in the next two weeks, Mr. Duelfer is likely to become the acting
chairman. This does not sit well with Iraq or Security Council members
who believe UNSCOM already is dominated by Americans."
Last week, it was reported that the UK/Dutch draft resolution, which
in May, had been modified to allow foreign investment in Iraq, had been
further modified to provide for the lifting of sanctions. But that is
not quite so.
The draft resolution is complex. According to a copy of the
draft resolution obtained by "Iraq News"--with the caveat that it is
somewhat dated and may have been somewhat modified--the draft calls for
the establishment of UNCIM (UN Commission on Inspection and Monitoring),
as a "subsidiary body of the Council"--i.e. not under the UNSG. UNCIM
is to "undertake the responsibilities mandated to [UNSCOM]" under UNSCRs
687 and 715.
The draft states, "UNCIM, within 90 days of the resumption of its
work in Iraq, will prepare a list of key remaining tasks to be
undertaken by Iraq in compliance with its disarmament obligations under
paragraphs 8, 9, and 10 of resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent relevant
resolutions."
The draft also "reaffirms [UNSC] resolutions 687 (1991), 707 (1991),
715 (1991), 1051 (1996) and all other relevant resolutions and
statements of its President, which constitute the governing standard of
Iraqi compliance . . . and affirms that the obligations of Iraq referred
to in those resolutions and statements with regard to cooperation with
the Special Commission, unrestricted access and provision of information
will apply in respect of UNCIM and decides in particular that Iraq shall
allow UNCIM inspection teams immediate, unconditional and unrestricted
access to any and all areas, facilities, equipment, records and means of
transportation. . . "
The draft also seeks to regulate oil trade that has so far not been
controlled. It "decides to permit in addition to the outlets for export
specified in paragraph 6 of resolution 986 (1995), the transport by road
to Turkey of not more than 500,000 tons per 180 days of petroleum, and
not more than 1,250,000 per 180 days of petroleum products." And the
money from those exports, would, like the money from all Iraq's
authorized oil exports, go into an escrow account, to be used for
humanitarian purposes, as provided for under UNSCR 986.
The draft also seeks to interject the UN more actively into the
distribution of humanitarian supplies in Iraq. It "requests the
Secretary-General to submit to the Council within 30 days an action plan
to enable the United Nations to ensure, if necessary by taking a greater
role itself, that the sums available under the arrangements set out in
resolution 986 (1995) and related resolutions are expended so as to
maximize the humanitarian benefit to the Iraqi population in all areas
of the country by meeting on a priority basis the humanitarian needs in
the food, nutrition and health sectors, and by the equitable and timely
distribution of humanitarian goods, in particular medicines and health
supplies. . . "
The draft also "encourages Member States and international
organizations to provide supplementary humanitarian assistance to the
Iraqi population, and requests them to provide to the Secretary-General
details of bilateral and multilateral humanitarian assistance. . . "
It also "decides that Hajj pilgrim flights which do not transport
cargo into or out of Iraq are exempt from . . . resolutions 661 (1990)
and 670 (1990), subject to timely notification of each flight. . ."
It also "expresses [the UNSC's] intention . . . to increase
Iraq's petroleum production and export capacity, upon receipt of a
report from the Executive Chairman of UNCIM that Iraq has demonstrated
full cooperation with UNCIM for a period of 120 days from the date on
which the Executive Chairman confirms that the reinforced system of
ongoing monitoring and verification is fully operational . . .
"Upon receipt of reports from the Executive Chairman of UNCIM and the
Director-General of the IAEA that Iraq has demonstrated full cooperation
with UNCIM and the IAEA for an additional period of 120 days, and has
completed the tasks referred to in paragraph 4 above, [the UNSC will]
suspend, for a period of 120 days, renewable by the Council, the
remaining prohibitions against the import of commodities and products
originating in Iraq, subject to termination of the suspension if the
Executive Chairman of UNCIM or the Director-General of the IAEA reports
that Iraq is not cooperating or is in the process of acquiring any of
the weapons referred to in paragraphs 8 to 12 of resolution 687 (1991)."
Thus, it is highly unlikely that Iraq, or its UNSC allies, will accept
the resolution. As AP, Jun 17, reported, Russia's UN ambassador
described the UK-Dutch draft as "a very large step back" from UNSCR 687.
And at a joint press conference with Bill Clinton Jun 17, French
president Jacques Chirac said, "Iraq will refuse the resolution which is
at present being drafted."
Indeed, as Reuters, Jun 17, reported Khalid al-Duri, head of the
National Assembly's Arab and Foreign Relations Committee, rejected the
resolution, saying, "Any draft resolution which does not call for a
complete lifting of the embargo is unacceptable and does not concern
us."
And Foreign Minister Mohammad al-Sahhaf, following a meeting in Cairo
with Arab League head, Ismat Abd-al-Majid, rejected the draft. As Iraq
Radio, Jun 20, reported, "Regarding the British-Netherlands plan on Iraq
..., the foreign minister said Iraq expressed its stand clearly: namely,
that any plan on Iraq presented to the Security Council without
consultations with Iraq does not concern Iraq. He said the
aforementioned plan does not include anything on lifting the blockade,
but a suspension for a set period of time. He added that the suspension
concept conflicts with the nature and text of UN Security Council
Resolution No. 687."
The Iraq Radio report also noted that a meeting of the Egyptian-
Yemeni Higher Joint Committee Jun 19 issued a statement "which called
for lifting the blockade imposed on Iraq." Also, according to Rabat
Radio, Jun 13, a Moroccan-Egyptian Higher Joint Committee issued a
statement in which "the two sides expressed their full support for the
Iraqi people in its sufferings as a result of the sanctions imposed on
it. They stressed the need for rallying efforts to lift the sanctions,
as soon as possible."
And support for US policy on Iraq seems to be slipping in other
ways. Above all, Egypt, Yemen, and the UAE are all calling for
convening a full Arab summit, raising prospect of Iraq's participation
in such a meeting for the first time since the Gulf war.
So what is US policy? In Paris, Jun 17, Clinton affirmed the
importance of weapons inspections, "The United States supports the
efforts of the British and the Dutch and the Security Council because we
believe that without the strongest possible inspection mechanism, Saddam
Hussein will attempt to rebuild weapons of mass destruction stocks."
But speaking the next day, NSC adviser on Near East and South Asian
Affairs, Bruce Reidel, said, "After two years of repeated crises and
broken Iraqi promises, it is clear the inspectors cannot do their job
the way it needs to be done. Inspectors without access, without required
documents, without a cooperating partner, can only do so much. A
Potemkin inspection process is worse than no inspection process.
Inspectors confined to hotels in Baghdad may as well be in Baltimore.
We will not be a party to a phony arms control regime."
Finally, the Forward, Jun 4, reported on INC efforts to mobilize
support for overthrowing Saddam. The Forward described the recent Iraqi
opposition visit to Wash DC, in which "for the first time, members of
the INC met with American military officers at the Pentagon to discuss
their mission. The group also met with a group of lawmakers at a
Capitol chamber usually reserved for Senate meetings with heads of
state. . . 'We're going to need specific things that we can do to help
them,' the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jesse
Helms, a Republican from North Carolina, told the Forward following a
meeting with the delegation. 'I think we made a good start,' Mr. Helms
said. About the Clinton administration's record on helping the
opposition, Mr. Helms said, 'Tell me what they've done. I don't know
what they've done. I don't know what, if anything, they've done.'
"'These are real people and they're getting it together now,' Senator
Brownback, a Republican from Kansas, told the Forward. 'We're going to
do what we can to help them. We're going to push the administration to
get them aid to use inside Iraq.'"
The Forward also reported, "a policy statement released by the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee was being criticized for not
going as far as the Clinton administration has already gone in its stand
against Saddam's regime. The statement says Aipac supports 'a steadfast
policy of containment of Iraq including, as necessary, the use of force
by the United States.' Critics noted that in November, the Clinton
administration moved to a policy of 'containment plus,' which opened the
way for the implementation of the Iraq Liberation Act.. . . 'Jinsa's
[Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs] position critically
differs from Aipac because it wants a change in regime in Iraq to best
suit America's security interests,' Mr. Neumann said. 'Aipac has been
strangely sluggish and overall very tender on dealing with what may be
Israel's greatest existential threat,' Mr. Wurmser said. 'Without the
removal of Saddam, we will deal with an Iraq with nuclear weapons within
months, if not years.' ... Officials from Aipac did not return calls
seeking comment."
Indeed, "Iraq News" believes that the US Jewish organizations which
have neglected the Iraq menace-and it is the majority--have made a
terrible mistake. Single-mindedly focused on the threat from Iran
and/or Muslim extremists, they have let the US allow a mortal threat to
emerge to Israel and other members of the anti-Iraq coalition. That is
ultimately rooted in a far-ranging Israeli error made under the
Rabin/Peres Gov't, which subsequently lingered. "Iraq News" hopes to
take up discussion of what it believes to be something bordering on an
Israeli strategic intelligence failure shortly.
I. SAHHAF REJECTS UK, DUTCH DRAFT, IRAQ RADIO
Baghdad Republic of Iraq Radio Network in Arabic 1600 GMT 20 Jun 99
[FBIS Translated Text] Foreign Minister Muhammad Sa'id al-Sahhaf met
with Arab League Secretary General Dr. 'Ismat 'Abd-al-Majid in Cairo
today.
In a statement to journalists following the meeting, the foreign
minister said he briefed the Arab League secretary general on the latest
in Iraq's relations with the UN Security Council, and exchanged views
with him on a number of issues on which decisions were made within the
framework of the Arab League.
Regarding the British-Netherlands plan on Iraq, currently being
discussed by the UN Security Council, the foreign minister said Iraq
expressed its stand clearly; namely, that any plan on Iraq presented to
the Security Council without consultations with Iraq does not concern
Iraq. He said the aforementioned plan does not include anything on
lifting the blockade, but a suspension for a set period of time. He
added that the suspension concept conflicts with the nature and text of
UN Security Council Resolution No. 687.
Regarding reports on a comprehensive Arab summit, al-Sahhaf said: We
support all Arab good offices to hold a meeting attended by all sides to
focus on points of agreement and common Arab interests. Iraq always
supports all good efforts that have clear objectives, particularly the
issue of holding a comprehensive Arab summit without excluding anyone-a
summit that focuses on specific issues of interest to the Arab nation.
Concerning Iraq's viewpoint about Arab efforts being exerted to lift
the blockade, especially since an Egyptian-Yemeni statement was issued
at the end of the meetings of the Egyptian-Yemeni Higher Joint Committee
meetings yesterday which called for lifting the blockade imposed on
Iraq, the minister said: We salute any fraternal Arab efforts that help
us lift the blockade, especially since Iraq has fulfilled all its
obligations in accordance with the UN Security Council over the past
nine years. Iraq does not only welcome any official Arab support for
this just cause, but also salutes and blesses it.
Dr. Sultan al-Shawi, Iraq's permanent representative to the Arab
League, attended the meeting.
Foreign Minister Muhammad Sa'id al-Sahhaf arrived in Cairo today from
Johannesburg after participating in the ceremony of the swearing-in
ceremony of New South African President Thabo Mbeki.
II. CLINTON, CHIRAC, JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE
http://www.usia.gov/cgibin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/topic/intrel&f=99061704.tpo&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml
III. BRUCE REIDEL, US POLICY ON IRAQ
http://www.usia.gov/cgibin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/topic/intrel&f=99061803.npo&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml
IV. FORWARD, INC EFFORTS TO TOPPLE SADDAM
Forward
June 4, 1999
Leaders of Anti-Saddam Group Pressure Clinton
Iraqi National Congress Turns to Washington-and Tehran-to Aid Drive to
Topple Regime
Forward Staff
WASHINGTON- On the heels of a crucial Tehran meeting and a Washington
lobbying mission, the Iraqi National Congress is moving ahead in its
effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
The INC's officer responsible for relations with America, Ahmad
Chalabi, led a diverse group of Iraqi opposition members to Washington
last week. A week earlier, Mr. Chalabi met with leaders of the Supreme
Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq; the meeting took place in
Tehran, where most of the council's leadership is based. Mr. Chalabi aid
he also recently met with Iranian officials there.
The Washington trip, which included Kurdish representatives and
members of the Iraqi National Accord, represents an important step in
the effort to depose Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi opposition members made
the trip to help convince the Clinton administration to implement the
Iraq Liberation Act, which could provide the rebels with almost $100
million in American funding. For the first time, members of the INC met
with American military officers at the Pentagon to discuss their
mission. The group also met with a group of lawmakers at a Capitol
chamber usually reserved for Senate meetings with heads of state and had
a meeting with Secretary of State Albright.
"We're going to need specific things that we can do to help them,"
the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jesse Helms, a
Republican from North Carolina, told the Forward following a meeting
with the delegation. "I think we made a good start," Mr. Helms said.
About the Clinton administration's record on helping the opposition, Mr.
Helms said: "Tell me what they've done. I don't know what, if anything,
they've done."
"These are real people, and they're getting it together now," Senator
Brownback, a Republican from Kansas, told the Forward. "We're going to
do what we can to help them. We're going to push the administration to
get them aid to use inside Iraq."
Senator Kerrey, a Democrat from Nebraska; Senator Lieberman, a
Democrat from Connecticut, and Minority Leader Daschle, a Democrat from
South Dakota, also attend-ed the meeting. Senator Warner, a Republican
from Virginia, briefly attended. The INC delegation met the previous day
with Senator Biden, a Democrat from Delaware.
Mr. Chalabi announced last week details of his visit to Iran before a
small audience at the American Enterprise Institute. Asked about the
absence from his delegation of members of the Supreme Council for the
Islamic Revolution in Iraq, Mr. Chalabi said, "I was in Tehran last
week. I met with Sciri. I had discussions with them. Sciri [is not]
feuding with anybody in the INC."
Mr. Chalabi also said he met with Iranian officials in Tehran. "The
Iranians say we have our own differences with the United States. [They
view the Iraq Liberation Act] as a qualitative change in the policy of
the U.S. They say, 'Take advantage of it,'" Mr. Chalabi said.
Challenged on the military viability of the INC mission, Mr. Chalabi
said, "There has to be someone who will take this ... Saddam and put him
in the dustbin of history."
The director of the Middle East program at the AEI, David Wurmser,
defended Mr. Chalabi's trip to Iran. "He's driven to do this because the
Americans have forced him to do this by launching their campaign of
discreditiation over the last few years. The U.S. has never seen the
Shia in Iraq as an agent separate from the Iranians; it has discredited
all those non-Iranian oriented Shia organizations," Mr. Wurmser said.
"The trip is a positive move in terms of solidifying the opposition, but
it's sad that has to go through Iran."
A State Department official told the Forward the Clinton
administration was on the verge of issuing its first supplies to the INC
and did not object to the inclusion of the Iranian-based group. "The
Supreme Council is a member of the interim leadership. They're a
designated group under the ILA. They've definitely got a role to play."
The official also said, "We're prepared to use force if Iraq threatens
its leaders or its own people in the north of Iraq."
Meanwhile, in America last week, a policy statement released by the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee was being criticized for not
going as far as the Clinton administration has already gone in its stand
against Saddam's regime. The statement says Aipac supports "a steadfast
policy of containment of Iraq including, as necessary, the use of force
by the United States." Critics noted that in November, the Clinton
administration moved to a policy of "containment plus," which opened the
way for the implementation of the Iraq Liberation Act, which, in turn,
is meant to lead to a new government in Iraq.
"Jinsa's position critically differs from Aipac because it wants a
change in regime in Iraq to best suit America's security interests," Mr.
Neumann said.
"Aipac has been strangely, curiously sluggish and overall very tender
on dealing with what may be Israel's greatest existential threat, Mr.
Wurmser said. "Without the removal of Saddam, we will deal with an Iraq
with nuclear weapon within months, if not years. Aipac simply isn't on
the forefront of the issue." Officials from Aipac did not return calls
seeking comment.
The publisher of the Iran Brief, Kenneth Timmerman, said Mr. Chalabi
was also trying to get the Iranians to back off their course of
supporting terrorist activities. Mr. Timmerman, no fan of the Islamic
republic, said that Mr. Chalabi is "one of the few people who can deal
with the Iranians in a rational way and bring in the Supreme Islamic
Council in a rational way."
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
