|
Opinion Focus: Weapons Inspections
With Amb. Dennis Ross
Director, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2002; 1:30 p.m. ET
Friday’s unanimous vote by the U.N. Security Council requiring Saddam Hussein to submit to weapons inspections seems to suggest victory for President Bush in his campaign to disarm Iraq. But will Hussein comply with the resolution’s provisions by the Dec. 8 deadline? And if inspection teams are allowed in, will he cooperate or attempt to outmaneuver them as he has done in the past? Ambassador Dennis Ross maintains in his Tuesday opinion piece, Deadline for Hussein, that “the hard part begins now... [T]he only possibility of achieving [disarmament] without war will depend on Hussein’s understanding that anything less than full disclosure is, in fact, the trigger for war.”
Ambassador Dennis B. Ross is director and Ziegler distinguished fellow of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He was director for policy planning in the State Department under President George H.W. Bush and special Middle East coordinator under President Clinton. Ross played a leading role in shaping U.S. involvement in the Middle East peace process, including the 1995 Interim Agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians and the 1997 Hebron Accord. He was online on Tuesday, Nov. 12..
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
washingtonpost.com:
Thank you for joining us today.
New York, N.Y.:
Amb. Ross: Two questions, if I may. What significance, if any, do you ascribe to the Iraq Parliament's rejection today of last Friday's U.N. Resolution on inspections?
Second, France had long objected to the inclusion of textual language such as "serious consequences" and "material breach" in the U.N. Resolution. So how do you explain their willingness to accept this language - did this ultimately reflect resignation to a resolute US position as negotiating time was running out, or the result of some behind-the-scenes dealmaking?
Thank you.
washingtonpost.com:
U.N. Resolution
Dennis Ross: Today's vote by the parliament is probably part of a charade. Saddam wants to show that he is moderate in comparison to his public. By all rights, he should not have to accept the resolution but reluctantly he will go along and as a result we should be grateful. He is counting on others in the coalition to breathe a sigh of relief and be ready to cut him more slack--especially in implementation of the resolution.
As for the French, they wanted to be sure there was not an automatic trigger in the resolution that would justify an immediate resort to force. Once they had the assurance that we would return to the Security Council for discussion of any violation, they were prepared to accept the language on material breach.
Cincinnati, Ohio:
If all of the UN conditions are met and the sanctions are removed, what provisions are in place to prevent Iraq from rearming/
Dennis Ross: The current provisions would require ongoing monitoring to ensure that the WMD are not reconstituted.
Chevy Chase, Md.:
Abassador Ross,
Prior to the return of inspectors, on what basis do you believe it will be possible for the U.S. to claim that Iraq's initial Dec. 8 declaration is incomplete? Furthermore, if it must base such a determination on as yet unrevealed or classified information regarding the extent of the Iraqi weapons program, should that material be released immmediately to the Security Council in order to convince the other Member States to declare Iraq in further "material breach"?
Thank you for your time,
Dennis Ross: We may need to provide the classified material to the Security Council at the time that we return to show that Saddam has not revealed all the information he is required to reveal by the resolution. Bear in mind, that starting in April 1991 he was supposed to disclose all the information about his WMD programs and weapons--and was given only 15 days to do so. He has never done so; this is either his last chance or it isn't. We may have to take a page from Kennedy Administration when Ambassador Stevenson revealed pictures to the Security Council of the missiles the Soviets denied they had put into Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Harrisburg, Penn..:
What is the opinion of Saddam Hussein among Arab countries? Are some nations in fear that he may attempt to spread his influence throughout the Arab world? Is there much fear of American intervention spreading beyond Iraq? How much support does Saddam Hussein have outside Iraq?
Dennis Ross: Saddam has very little support outside of Iraq. He is known throughout the Arab world for what he is: a very brutal dictator. But there is also a tendency in the Arab world to oppose outside powers imposing on Arab leaders. A history of colonialism and outside domination fosters a deeply held attitude in this regard. However, should a US-led coalition succeed quickly in removing Saddam, and as is likely the Iraqi people rejoice over their liberation, we will hear little criticism from the Arab world. Should, however, it take time to remove him and should there be many casualties among Iraq civilians, then it would be a very different story.
Jerusalem, Israel:
What effect will war on Iraq have on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Specifically, is regime change in Iraq likely to instigate
movement to a Madrid II? And how might it differ from the first Madrid conference and the Oslo Accords?
Dennis Ross: Saddam's removal would represent a seismic change in the Middle East. But like any earthquake the land resettles, and if the seismic change is to mean anything, action would be required quickly to try to promote longer term change in the region--including on the peace process. In the immediate aftermath of Saddam's demise, there is likely to be increased calm for several reasons. First, Saddam will not be paying $25000 to the families of the suicide bombers. Second, Iran and Syria are likely to believe that this is not the time to provoke the United States, and will press Hamas and Islamic Jihad to stop the suicide bombers for the time-being. Iranian and Syrian pressure on the external Hamas and Islamic Jihad--operating out of Damascus-has driven continuing suicidal bombing attacks in Israel. But the calm is not likely to last for very long absent a credible political process. The question is how best to put one together. In all liklihood, it will take an effort by the Bush Administration, and if it takes a page from the first Bush Administration, it might try something like a Madrid conference. Then the purpose was to break the taboo on direct talks. Now, it would have to be to get Arabs to reach out to Israelis, and to support the reformers among the Palestinians by backing a prime minister. It would have to require the Palestinians to assume a responsibility for ensuring their territory would not be a safe haven for those who attack Israel--not in words but in deeds. And it would require the Israelis to create an environment in which Palestinian reformers would have a chance to succeed and would see that a credible political pathway for achieving Palestinian aspirations is possible.
Orlando, Fla.:
If, on Dec. 8, the U.S. determines that Saddam has not revealed all aspects of his WMD programs, and returns to the Security Council with this position, what do you anticipate to be the reactions of the other permanent members? Will they support the use of force to ensure disarmament at that point, or is there likely to be further hedging and stalling?
Do you have any feeling for the consequences if the US and Britain decide to act largely on their own?
Thank you for your time today.
Dennis Ross: It will depend on how wide the gap is between what he has revealed, and what we know or have reason to believe that he has. The more he reveals, the more there will be a temptation on the part of the other members of the security council to say this is progress, let's keep it up. The problem, of course, will be that if he knows that he can get away with less than total disclosure, he will believe that the inspection regime will also allow him to continue to play a more subtle kind of hide and seek. That's why I think that disclosure on Dec. 8 will confront everyone with a real moment of truth.
washingtonpost.com:
That's all the time we have for today. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion and a special thanks to Ambassador Dennis Ross for participating.
Stay tuned to Live Online:
Did you know that you can follow more than one Live Online discussion at
the same time? Just open another browser window and toggle back and
forth between discussions! And, if you miss one, catch up with the Live
Online transcripts.
Keep up with the latest in news, sports, politics and entertainment with
washingtonpost.com
e-mail newsletters.
Personalize your Post with mywashingtonpost.com.
Get customized news, traffic, weather and more.
| |
© Copyright 2002 The Washington Post Company | 
