01 October 2002
Powell Says U.N. Iraq Resolution Must Detail Costs of Defiance
(Secretary of State interviewed on "Lehrer NewsHour" September 30) (2320) The Bush administration is continuing to push for a tough new United Nations Security Council resolution on Iraq weapons inspections -- one that will detail past Iraqi violations, set a strengthened inspection regime, and spell out severe consequences for noncompliance, Secretary of State Colin Powell says. Interviewed September 30 on The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer, Powell acknowledged that some U.S. allies, notably France, still favor leaving the issue of consequences for a later resolution, to be considered by the Security Council only if the first measure fails to achieve its ends in terms of Iraqi disarmament. But while the secretary said "we are in a negotiation" on that point, he made clear it remains the U.S. position that "we want all three" aspects included in a single resolution. "That's our position, and we are going to argue and fight for that position," he said. Asked by Lehrer whether "the third area, the action area, is not necessarily a deal breaker for the United States," Powell replied, "No, it is. There have to be consequences." Speaking a day before Hans Blix, chief U.N. weapons inspector, announced an agreement with Iraqi officials on the return of an inspection force, Powell indicated that the United States would oppose a resumption of that mission until the Security Council adopts a strong, new resolution. "Those inspectors," Lehrer asked, "aren't going anywhere, from the U.S. point of view, until a new resolution passes the United Nations Security Council?" "That is our position," Powell responded. While Blix "has done a good job of bringing this team together," Powell added, "he is fully aware of the . high likelihood that there will be a new resolution coming forward that will structure his work and his actions." Following is a transcript of the Powell interview: (begin transcript) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Office of the Spokesman Interview on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer Secretary Colin L. Powell Washington, DC September 30, 2002 MR. LEHRER: Mr. Secretary, welcome. SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you, Jim. MR. LEHRER: The chief UN weapons inspector said today he could have inspectors ready to go into Iraq within two weeks. Does that sound possible to you? SECRETARY POWELL: Dr. Blix has done a very good job in pulling together a cadre of inspectors ready to go, and that team would be expanded. As a mechanical thing, he could be ready to go; but I think also he will have to wait and see whether or not the United Nations Security Council comes up with new guidance or additional resolutions that might require him to modify his plan. I'm pleased that he is in that state of readiness, and we'll have to see how things develop over the next couple of weeks with respect to a resolution with new requirements. MR. LEHRER: Where do matters stand on that issue? SECRETARY POWELL: I'm pleased with the way the negotiations have been going. It's pretty much unfolding the way I thought it would. I believe that the United Nations Security Council has to look at the three elements in any resolution or set of resolutions. One, let it be known that Iraq is in material breach of all of its previous commitments under the sixteen or so previous UN resolutions. Secondly, we have to make it clear that in order to deal with the weapons of mass destruction issue, we need a strengthened inspection regime if there are going to be inspections. We saw what happened last time when the Iraqis were able to run the inspectors around, deny them access to certain facilities, make it impossible for them to do their jobs. It is our opinion, the United States opinion, that the inspectors cannot go in under that same set of circumstances, so we need a new resolution. Those are the first two elements: they are in breach, and two, there has to be a tough set of conditions for any new inspection regime. It's the third element where there is quite a bit of debate taking place, and that is whether or not we should put down what the consequences are. What is the international community going to do, what is the Security Council going to do if once again inspectors get in and Iraq frustrates them, and we find ourselves right back to where we were in 1998? Should the UN then take some action? There have to be consequences. The debate we're having with some of our Security Council colleagues is whether those consequences should be indicated or spelled out in this first resolution, or whether there should be a second resolution. As you well know from the press reporting, the French and others believe that there should be a second resolution. This is an issue that is being discussed at a political level. In New York I have instructed our delegation to meet with other representatives of Security Council members and begin to discuss the first two elements -- what should be in that first line with respect to a breach, and what should be the conditions under which the inspectors go back in -- while on a political level we have to talk about the suggestions that some have made about a second resolution. The United States position is that we believe it would be better to put this in one resolution. But since this is a consultation, we want to hear what our friends have to say. MR. LEHRER: So the U.S. is flexible on that? It doesn't have to have all three of them? SECRETARY POWELL: We want all three of them. That's our position, and we are going to argue and fight for that position; but we are in a negotiation. We haven't tabled the resolution. We think it's appropriate at this stage of the discussions to share our ideas, and we are doing that in New York today and have been doing it over the last several days with Under Secretary Grossman's trip to Moscow and to Paris. And the British have sent a representative to Beijing to talk to the fifth member of the Permanent Membership of the Security Council, the Chinese. So we are having discussions. We are not at the point yet of tabling a resolution because we thought it would be useful to have discussions and hear what our friends think. We believe one resolution is the cleanest, best way to go. The reason the Iraqis have started to respond in recent weeks after the President's speech is not because they have suddenly changed their minds or discovered the errors of their ways. They are responding because of the enormous pressure that the President's speech generated. We ought to keep that pressure on and not let them wiggle out of it this time by some weak resolution or series of weak resolutions. This is the time to bring this matter to a conclusion. MR. LEHRER: But if I'm hearing you correctly, Mr. Secretary, you're saying that third area, the action area, is not necessarily a deal breaker for the United States. SECRETARY POWELL: No, it is. There have to be consequences. The debate that's taking place between the United States and some of our friends is whether or not that consequences element is in the first resolution, or you have to bring the new violations, ignoring the new inspection regime, back to the Security Council for Security Council action at that time. MR. LEHRER: So it wouldn't be automatic, in other words? SECRETARY POWELL: It wouldn't be automatic. Automaticity is the word we have been using to describe the difference between the two resolutions. I think everybody agrees that there have to be some consequences for continued violation of these resolutions. Otherwise the UN is going to look absolutely impotent. MR. LEHRER: Now, back to the second part, which is a new regime for inspections themselves. As you know, the Iraqi government has said they will not accept any changes from the prior arrangement. How important is that reaction? What does it mean? SECRETARY POWELL: I'm not interested in the Iraqi reaction. What I'm interested in is the United Nations Security Council coming up with a tough set of procedures, a tough regime if inspectors are going to go back in, if that looks like a way to move forward. What we're looking for is [for] the Iraqis to change their behavior. So far they are continuing to act in the old pattern of slowing down, obfuscating, finding reasons to thwart the will of the international community. This time we need a tough inspection regime which should be in a United Nations resolution, and a United Nations resolution that the Iraqis will be faced with and we're not going to negotiate the conditions or terms of that resolution with the Iraqis. MR. LEHRER: When you use the word "tough," what is it? What is the major change that the United States wants in this new resolution in terms of the inspections that is not in the original one? SECRETARY POWELL: The inspectors can go anyplace, anytime; speak to whomever they have to speak to; have access to the documents that are required to be seen in order to find out what the Iraqis have been doing; to have the Iraqis come forward with complete and full declarations; and to make sure the inspectors can move quickly about Iraq so that in the process of getting to a particular place, we don't give Iraq so much time that they can hide things and move things -- a toughened regime that will make sure, as much as we can make sure, that they are complying with the conditions of these resolutions. Now, we've been talking about weapons of mass destruction. Let's not turn loose of the fact that Iraq is in violation of other resolutions that deal with human rights; that deal with the return of property; accounting for prisoners, to include accounting for an American pilot that was lost in the first day of the Gulf War. There are many other things we have to worry about, but the focus has initially been on weapons of mass destruction. MR. LEHRER: From the United States point of view, Mr. Secretary, those inspectors that Mr. Blix is talking about today in Vienna -- in fact, he is meeting with officials from Iraq -- and, as we said at the beginning he said he could be ready to go in two weeks. Those inspectors aren't going anywhere, from the U.S. point of view, until a new resolution passes the United Nations Security Council? SECRETARY POWELL: That is our position. I think even Dr. Blix has made it clear that today's meeting was a procedural one -- points of entry and things of that nature. He is very much aware of the kinds of things that we are talking about at the United Nations now. I think Dr. Blix has done a good job of bringing this team together; but he is fully aware of the possibility and, I think, high likelihood that there will be a new resolution coming forward that will structure his work and his actions. MR. LEHRER: Mr. Secretary, finally, just in general terms, how should the average American view the state of play right now? Are we headed for some kind of confrontation? Or do you sense some movement and some possibility of agreement at the UN Security Council which could lead to what the U.S. wants in terms of inspectors, and it could lead to what you want to find out on the ground in Iraq, and a confrontation could be avoided? What's your sense of this now? SECRETARY POWELL: My sense right now is that the President fundamentally changed the international environment in which this issue is being discussed by his powerful speech on the 12th of September. The international community is now mobilized to determine whether or not Iraq is willing to come into compliance with its resolutions, and with this new resolution. I think the international community also realizes that if Iraq once again violates the will of the international community, action is going to be necessary. I can't rule out that that action might be of a multilateral as well as a unilateral action. The President has made it clear that he wants the international community to act. That's why he brought it to the United Nations. Everybody was saying, why don't you bring it to the United Nations? That's exactly what the President did, and he made a powerful argument. Having brought it to the United Nations, the United Nations must now act, in our judgment. But if at the end of the day there is not that collective will in the Security Council to act, the President reserves the right and the option to do whatever may be necessary in order to protect the United States and to protect our interests. That is the reason he is also asking Congress to pass a resolution giving him that authority to act. So we have two tracks moving at the moment. I'm working the United Nations track; my other colleagues are working the congressional track. I hope Congress will act quickly on a strong, powerful resolution so it will show that America is united behind this effort. That would help our diplomatic efforts in New York. MR. LEHRER: So you don't sense a momentum going either way at this point? SECRETARY POWELL: Right now, we don't know what's going to happen, Jim. The President did not go to the United Nations to declare war, he went to the United Nations to declare a purpose; and he put that purpose down clearly. Now we will have to see how events unfold; but I can assure you that the President is keeping all of his options not only open, but warm. Let me put it that way. MR. LEHRER: All right. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you, Jim. (end transcript) (Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
