Wolfowitz Highlights Saddam Hussein's Terrorist Links~ 02 June 2003
(Deputy Secretary of Defense May 31 interview, Singapore) (3630)
usinfo.state.gov
Part 1 of 3
The United States went to war with the regime of former Iraqi dictator
Saddam Hussein because of the regime's weapons of mass destruction,
its ties with terrorists, and the way it mistreated the Iraqi people,
according to Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.
In a May 31 interview with Cable News Network in Singapore, Wolfowitz
said America's perception of the Iraq regime changed after the
September 11 terrorists' attacks on the United States, and focused on
the possibility that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction could end up
in the hands of terrorists.
"Before September 11 terrorism was viewed as something ugly, but you
lived with it," Wolfowitz said.
Saddam Hussein, too, "was viewed as something ugly," Wolfowitz said,
but also as "something that was for the Iraqi people to take care of."
After September 11, 2001, "terrorism looked different," to the United
States and the American people, Wolfowitz said.
"Saddam Hussein, who played with terrorists, and had weapons of mass
destruction, looked much more threatening to United States than just
to his own people," he continued.
Turning to the terrorist threat in the Southeast Asia region,
Wolfowitz said the terrorists' bombing in Bali in 2002 that killed
nearly 200 people "brought home just how bad it is" in the region.
"The fact is it doesn't take more than a few hundred people of that
kind, in a country of 200 million to create a serious problem,"
Wolfowitz said.
"But I'm very impressed by the professionalism with which the
Indonesian police has gone after the Bali bombers," he continued.
"We are not going to eliminate terrorists overnight or with one magic
bullet but I do believe that (in) the last year (there) has been much
more a series of defeats for them with minor tactical successes here
and there," Wolfowitz said.
Following is the transcript of the May 31 Wolfowitz interview with
Cable News Network in Singapore:
(begin transcript)
NEWS TRANSCRIPT
from the United States Department of Defense
DoD News Briefing
Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz
Saturday, May 31, 2003
Q: There is a report in Vanity Fair today that just quoted you as
saying that the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was just a
bureaucratic reason. Can you respond to that?
Wolfowitz: No, it's a misquote. In fact, the full quote you can see on
our website where the whole interview is there. What I was trying to
explain there is a complicated situation. We had, in fact, three
concerns about Iraq, from the beginning, and it's repeated in Colin
Powell's statement in the UN. One was weapons of mass destruction,
about which I've never seen as unanimous a view in the intelligence
community on almost any issue. Second was the Iraqi connection with
terrorism, about which there is a range of views, although everyone
agrees that there is a connection there. And the third was Iraq's
mistreatment of its people, which has unfortunately never been in any
doubt. But in many ways, it's the first two reasons that were crucial,
and as I said in that interview, there is really a fourth reason,
which is that connection between weapons of mass destruction and
terrorism. That's the axis the President originally was talking about
in his State of Union message, is that connection between terrorism
and weapons of mass destruction. It's complicated, it's not a simple
issue, but when people say our rationale keeps changing, it's not that
keeps changing. We've had all three of those reasons from the
beginning but people who often choose to focus exclusively on the
weapons of mass destruction piece of it.
Q: Even this article seems to highlight the distrust that's around
that. The perception seems to be that weapons of mass destruction was
an excuse to move in. How did you respond
Wolfowitz: I can tell you quite emphatically it was not an excuse.
What really changed in our whole perception of this issue was
September 11. Before September 11 terrorism was viewed as something
ugly, but you lived with it. Saddam Hussein was viewed as something
ugly, something that was for the Iraqi people to take care of. After
September 11, terrorism looked different. Saddam Hussein, who played
with terrorists, and had weapons of mass destruction, looked much more
threatening to United States than just to his own people. And so it
changed the calculation entirely. I mean, without that perception of
threat, I don't believe the President would have considered it
something that American lives should be risked for, as terrible as the
regime is -- I mean there is no question the regime was a horrible
thing.
Q: The fact that there hasn't been a substantial cache of weapons of
mass destruction -- is that an embarrassment?
Wolfowitz: No. Is it an embarrassment to people on the other side that
we've discovered these biological production vans, which the defector
told us about? Look, this dictator had twelve years to develop
innumerable ways to hide his program, and we've said from the
beginning, the only way you get to the bottom of it is when people
start to talk to you. That's why we gave the UN inspectors
unprecedented powers to interview people. I think it is evidence in
itself that Saddam never allowed a single one of the scientists to go
outside the country for interview. In fact he never allowed a single
one of them to be interviewed in the country without monitors present
or at least tape recorders present. So he was a man with something to
hide, and we'll have to find it.
Q: What kind of repercussions do you think this will have now, in the
Arab world and in Southeast Asia?
Wolfowitz: I heard from one Arab foreign minister that it's a shame
that we weren't able to do this for ourselves, but it had to be done
and thank heavens you did it. This is an Arab official. I think in the
Arab world it was actually not a surprise that thousands of mass
graves turned up. I think the Arab people understand that this man was
responsible for killing more Muslims than I think any other single
individual and there is an opportunity now to build a much better Arab
society and to demonstrate to the rest of the world that Arabs are
capable of democracy. I believe they are.
Q: And yet at the same time as the Senior Minister said last night,
there also seems to be a growing concern and in some nations a fear
that the US will go it alone. Senior Minister Lee kind of chided the
US a little bit last night.
Wolfowitz: I found it surprising frankly. Why don't you chide
President Chirac for going it alone? There were 15 NATO nations on our
side and France had Belgium and Luxemburg and Germany with it, in what
seemed frankly like a rather cynical disregard of facts and disregard
of the suffering of the Iraqi people. In all of this discussion about
multilateral, unilateral, we had 46 countries with us. But more
importantly, and I would say we had 95% of the 20 million Iraqi people
with us and their voices ought to count for something.
Q: So you don't see it as a unilateral action at all, do you?
Wolfowitz: No, I don't. In fact we had more international legal
sanction I think for what we did than for the action in Kosovo that
NATO did a few years ago, and no one disputed that.
Q: How do you respond to things like the Senior Minister and what
other diplomats have said?
Wolfowitz: First of all, to say that we had a coalition of 46
countries, that we weren't acting unilaterally, that the time came
that some action had to be taken. Frankly, it was I think France's
action that has weakened the United Nations. We've seen in times past
in history when the failure to come together to act is terribly
damaging to the international community. And I think we were acting
not just in behalf of our own interest, although our own interests
were definitely involved, but I think we had very major regard
(inaudible) quite significantly. We had all the support that we needed
in the region. None of the terrible things that people said were going
to happen -- there weren't terrible mass casualties in Iraq, there
wasn't a food crisis or refugee crisis. We, I think, did a lot to take
care of the concerns that people had. |
