26 March 2003
Powell Calls Saddam Hussein Cause of Current Iraqi Conflict
(Tells Congress that coalition forces will have to bring security and stability to Iraq) (2390) Secretary of State Colin Powell testified before a Congressional subcommittee March 26 that the conflict now unfolding in Iraq was brought to the world by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and his 12-year record of disobeying U.N. resolutions. "This battle is not about conquering the Iraqi people, it is about putting down a dictatorial regime that for all these years had been developing and using weapons of mass destruction against its own people, against its neighbors," Powell said in a statement before the U.S. House Appropriations subcommittee that is responsible for the State Department's annual budget. Once the Saddam Hussein regime is gone, he said, "we can get the weapons of mass destruction totally ripped out of the infrastructure, the military and civilian infrastructure of Iraq," and get a new government started. "Initially, our military forces will have to bring security and stability to Iraq," he said, "but as soon as possible, and working with the United Nations and getting international support from the United Nations and other agencies, help bring up an interim authority in Iraq which can then grow into a full government, a government responsive and representative of its people, to use the wealth of Iraq." Powell's prepared testimony largely dealt with budgetary matters. The State Department has requested $28.5 billion for fiscal year 2004. Following are excerpts from his remarks, as delivered: (begin excerpt) Let me go first to public diplomacy. Mr. Chairman, you couldn't be more correct in saying that we have got to do all we can to change the tone in the world with respect to what we are doing. We need to talk to the Arab media, to the Arab public. Just two hours ago, Mr. Chairman, I sat down and I did a "round robin" -- a series of television interviews. The first one was to Al-Jazeera, the second one was to Abu Dhabi Television, the third one was to an Indian channel, and the fourth one was back to Egypt, to an Egyptian television channel, taking our message to the people of the world, but especially the people in the Arab world, that this is a conflict that we did not ask for, we did not seek, we did not want, we did everything to avoid. This was a conflict that was brought to the world community by Saddam Hussein and his 12-year record of disobedience of one U.N. resolution after another; and we are going to Iraq not as conquerors. This battle is not about conquering the Iraqi people, it is about putting down a dictatorial regime that for all these years had been developing and using weapons of mass destruction against its own people, against its neighbors. It's about using the wealth of Iraq, its oil, to benefit its people, to provide wherewithal for the people in the south who have been so deprived by Saddam Hussein over the years. It's about freeing people from a dictator who has massacred them, who has kept them under the worst kind of subjugation, who has tortured them, who has been guilty of the worst sorts of crimes, who has invaded his neighbors. And once this regime is now gone, we can get the weapons of mass destruction totally ripped out of the infrastructure, the military and civilian infrastructure of Iraq, and we can put in place a government that will be responsive to its people, that will represent its people, and we can use the wealth of Iraq, channeled through their new government, with their new government having responsibility for the use of that wealth. We will help get this government up and started. Initially, our military forces will have to bring security and stability to Iraq, but as soon as possible, and working with the United Nations and getting international support from the United Nations and other agencies, help bring up an interim authority in Iraq which can then grow into a full government, a government responsive and representative of its people, to use the wealth of Iraq. We've got to get that message out. We've got to do a better job of it. As this war continues to its conclusion, and it will be concluded successfully -- I have no doubt about the ability of coalition forces to prosecute this conflict to a successful conclusion -- you will see more and more pictures of the type we saw this morning, not only battles, but slowly but surely humanitarian aid coming into the country, water being restored in places like Basra, rations being delivered to people in need. And when the people realize that those young men and women in their camouflage uniforms are not there to destroy, but to build, I think you will see attitude change quickly. And as people around the Arab world, people around the world, recognize the nature of this regime that is being eliminated and what coalition forces and the international community is coming in to do, I think attitudes will begin to change. And from this success, when people see that this Administration, President Bush personally, is committed to doing something to move the Middle East peace process along with the delivery of a roadmap to the new Palestinian prime minister when he has been confirmed, and to the Israeli Government, so the two sides can now engage in a more sustained way with sustained American involvement and the involvement of the other members of the so-called Quartet to get this processing moving along, to end violence, to put in place responsible governance on the Palestinian side with a new prime minister and to also put obligations on the Israeli side to open up the area, the territories again, so people can get back and forth to work, so that new security organizations under responsible leadership can start to do their job, to do something about the settlements activity that is underway that must be brought to an end in order for there to be a solution. The President is as committed to this, as committed today as he was when he gave his speech last June, to a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and in security with Israel, and that is our commitment. A point was made about we are not doing this with the support of allies and we are not doing with this U.N. authority. We very much are doing it with U.N. authority. All last fall, we fought for and obtained a U.N. resolution that followed from the President's speech of 12 September where he challenged the U.N. We didn't go off unilaterally and say we're just going to invade Iraq. We brought the problem to the United Nations where it belonged. It's the United Nations' will that is being thwarted by the actions of Saddam Hussein. The President took it to the U.N. After seven weeks of tough negotiations, we got U.N. Resolution 1441. It was a diplomatic success on the part of the United States and the part of every member of the Security Council that participated in that debate and got a 15-0 unanimous vote. And there was no question about what we were voting for. We were voting for a resolution that said Saddam Hussein is in violation of his obligations. He's guilty. Not let's find out if he's guilty. He's guilty, the resolution said It then said there is a way for him to end this problem by changing what he has been doing, changing the nature of his regime, cooperating fully, complying fully, immediately, unconditionally, fully right now, not nine months from now when inspectors are prowling around, not two years from now and then we report back to the U.N. -- but now, immediately, unconditionally, fully and actively cooperating with the inspectors. The inspectors went in for the purpose of helping him comply, not for the purpose of searching the countryside to find out that which was hidden, but to verify that which he would bring out into the open. And so we said, let the inspectors go in and see if he's willing to obey from this time. And almost from the get-go, we knew that he wasn't going to do it. He reluctantly accepted the resolution a week later, as he was required to do. Thirty days later, he filed a totally false declaration that not one member of the Council -- not even his associates and friends in the Council -- would come forward and say, this is an accurate declaration. The inspectors should be congratulated for being such dedicated international servants. And they did get some cooperation from the Iraqis on process, and some things were turned over. But they constantly found themselves not getting answers to their questions, not getting gaps filled that were in the declaration. They constantly found themselves being deterred and deceived. And the United States and its partners in this finally said, enough. We have now come to New York every week for about four weeks and heard the reports of the inspectors. And what is clear is that, even though there has been some progress with respect to process, there has been no fundamental change, no strategic change on the part of Saddam Hussein. He is not in compliance of this resolution, therefore the serious consequences anticipated and built into this resolution are now ready to be applied against Saddam Hussein. At that point, a debate broke out, because some members of the Council said, no, let the inspectors keep going; we don't want to see this noncompliance, and we'll veto anything that comes before us. The United States did not feel it needed another resolution. But, in order to go that extra step and also to help some of our closest friends, the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy, Spain and others, as well as to show the American people that we had gone the extra step, we tried to get a second resolution. Not one we needed; we tried anyway. We fought hard for it. But we weren't able to achieve success, because there was a hanging veto threat. So no matter how many members were ready to vote for it, it was going to be vetoed. And it put people, members of the Council, especially members of the elected 10, in a difficult situation. So we elected not to take it for a vote, because we had more than enough authority. That was a disappointment to many people. But remember, if that resolution had been passed, it said it was Saddam Hussein's last chance also and he would have missed that last chance and a conflict was coming anyway. Without that resolution, nonetheless, as badly as they needed it, Prime Minister Blair went before his Parliament without the resolution that he needed and felt it would be very helpful to have, and he made a powerful case so that his Parliament nevertheless voted and voted with a clear understanding that the legal authority was there for the forces of the United Kingdom to participate. Same thing in other nations that are part of this coalition. The point was made that we don't have some of our traditional allies and friends with us. Well, we have a lot of our traditional allies and friends with us, not all of them but a lot of them. We've got the United Kingdom, got Australia, we've got Italy, we've got Spain. We've got some new allies and friends who want to be a part of this. Many of them are small countries; they can't make a major military contribution. But they made a political contribution of enormous importance when they stood up and said, we are standing with what is right; we are standing with what the U.N. required, we are standing with the United States and its other coalition partners, even though we can't send one soldier, in the face of public opinion that doesn't want war -- and no public opinion tends to want war. I've been through this many times. It's only when people understand that you're going to achieve success and that there was a good reason that you entered into this conflict and you've made the case -- unfortunately, occasionally, by the force of arms -- then you'll get the support you need. But in the absence of that support, these little countries with strong political leaders, who knew what right was, even being threatened by other nations on the European continent for -- you know, you don't want to do this, you don't want to stand with them, you'll have to pay a price later -- they nevertheless stood with us. And now it's a willing coalition of 47 nations who are willing to stand up and say, we're part of this, and a number of other nations who are cooperating and are willing but, for one reason and another can't say it out loud yet, but they will in due course. I think we should be proud that so many nations are standing firm with us. ... We will continue to take our public case to the world. I think, as more and more people see what we're doing, as we take our case through leaflets and through radio broadcasts and new ways of communicating with the world and especially the Arab world, as these efforts gin up as a result of your strong support of our public diplomacy effort, I think we can get on top of this. There is a lot of anti-Americanism out there, but it's fueled to a large extent by the Iraq situation and the Middle East peace process. When we fix Iraq and when we show progress with the Middle East peace program, and people can see that this is a nation that is not against any religion, especially not the religion of Islam, people will see that it is America that is fueled by values. We want to help people achieve a better life. We want to help people find a way to participate in this 21st century economic globalized world that we have, and I think we can turn public opinion around in due course. (end excerpt) (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 |
|
|
|
