An interview with US Marine, spy, and "disarmament inspector" Scott Ritter:
--- Forwarded Message from Peace and Justice Works <pjw@agora.rdrop.com> ---
>Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 11:12:55 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Irrationality in Iraq: interview w/Scott Ritter (Boston Phoeniz 5/4)
Ritter seems to have adopted a lot of progressive language, even if he is
still a hardcore marine underneath.
I still don't fully trust him, and his final premise is that Iraq will
"have to privatize," but this is an interesting piece.
---dan
------------------------
The Boston Phoenix
May 4 - 11, 2000
Human rights
Irrationality and Iraq
by Laura A. Siegel
Scott Ritter led the United Nations weapons-inspection team in Iraq
until he quit in August 1998, claiming that the United States was
using the team to spy on Saddam Hussein. His experiences in Iraq
have left Ritter convinced that UN sanctions against Iraq should be
lifted. As the Phoenix went to press, Ritter was scheduled to
testify before Congress on this topic May 3. He spoke with the
Phoenix last week.
Q: If sanctions continue, is war inevitable?
A: Absolutely. Innocent people are going to continue to suffer for
two or three years, but eventually there will be a moral and
economic imperative for the rest of the world to begin doing
business with Iraq. Trade will be uncontrolled. Iraq feels
threatened [by Iran, Syria, Israel, and Saudi Arabia]. Iraq is not
going to sit there in the face of an Iranian threat.
Q: Should sanctions be lifted without further disarmament?
A: Disarmament has already occurred. I don't believe the intent [of
the UN resolution] was to get the world tied up in a hunt for nuts
and bolts and pieces of paper. Iraq has no long-range ballistic
missiles, no warheads that could go on these missiles, no means of
producing chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. That doesn't
mean they can't reconstitute them -- which is why it is very
important to get a viable weapons-inspection program back in Iraq.
Q: You wrote, "When it comes to Iraq, a politics of irrationality
reigns supreme." Why?
A: It began in the 1980s -- we were supporting Iraq blindly against
the Iranian threat. Once Iraq invaded Kuwait, it threw the Bush
administration for a loop. How to respond? Demonize Saddam Hussein.
Hussein was suddenly called the Middle Eastern equivalent of Adolf
Hitler. But [when Iraq left Kuwait] Saddam Hussein was still there
-- it was like we'd lost. The US became focused on how to get rid
of Saddam.
Q: So should we give up on getting rid of him?
A: Getting rid of Hussein is illegal as hell. People talk about
"rogue states" -- what defines them as "rogue states"? Total
disregard for international law.
We have shredded the fabric of Iraqi society. The only good news is
that Iraq is ready to rebuild. You want to get rid of Saddam
Hussein? Lift the economic sanctions. The expectations of regrowth
are so high that Hussein . . . will have to privatize. You're
basically talking about turning power over to the people, [which
will create] a viable middle class, [which will lead to] democracy.
Q: Why hasn't the press covered this more?
A: If these were Serbian white kids or Jewish white kids dying,
Americans would be repulsed. We're a society that seems to feel the
price of life is cheaper in Iraq than in Europe or America.
It's not newsworthy unless you can get the candidates and the
president to talk about Iraq. That's the last thing anyone wants to
talk about, because you can't defend what we're doing.
Copyright © 2000 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group. All rights
reserved.
http://www.bostonphoenix.com/archive/features/00/05/04/tji/HUMAN_RIGHTS.html
-
-
G L O B E
- - - - - - - - - - - -
s a m i z d a t . n e t
european counter network
bureaucratie : samizdat@samizdat.net
messages sur la liste : globe_l@ecn.org
archives web : http://www.ecn.org/lists/globe_l
envois restreints aux abonnes
http://www.samizdat.net/infos
![[<--]](/icons/prev.gif){kind=icon}
![[-->]](/icons/next.gif){kind=icon}