Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I call my colleagues attention to a recent
article by Scott Ritter, former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq, published in
the Los Angeles Times. In this article, Mr. Ritter makes a salient point that
deserves careful and serious consideration in this body: how will it be possible
to achieve the stated administration goal of getting weapons inspectors
back into Iraq when the administration has made it known that it intends to
assassinate the Iraqi leader?
2002 Ron Paul 57:2
If nothing else, Saddam Hussein has proven himself a survivor. Does
anyone believe that he will allow inspectors back into his country knowing
that any one of them might kill him? Is it the intention of the administration to
get inspectors back into Iraq and thus answers to lingering and critical
questions regarding Iraqs military capabilities, or is the intent to invade that
country regardless of the near total absence of information and actually make
it impossible for Suddam Hussein to accept the inspectors?
2002 Ron Paul 57:3
Mr. Ritter, who as former chief UN inspector in Iraq probably knows
that country better than any of us here, made some excellent points in a
recent meeting with Republican members of Congress. According to Mr. Ritter,
no American-installed regime could survive in Iraq. Interestingly, Mr.
Ritter noted that though his rule is no doubt despotic, Saddam Hussein has been
harsher toward Islamic fundamentalism than any other Arab regime. He added that
any U.S. invasion to remove Saddam from power would likely open the door to an
anti-American fundamentalist Islamic regime in Iraq. That can hardly be
viewed in a positive light here in the United States. Is a policy that
replaces a bad regime with a worse regime the wisest course to follow?
2002 Ron Paul 57:4
Much is made of Iraqi National Congress leader Ahmed Chalabi, as a
potential post-invasion leader of Iraq. Mr. Ritter told me that in his many
dealings with Chalabi, he found him to be completely unreliable and untrustworthy. He
added that neither he nor the approximately 100 Iraqi generals that the US is
courting have any credibility inside Iraq, and any attempt to place them in
power would be rejected in the strongest manner by the Iraqi people. Hundreds, if
not thousands, of American military personnel would be required to occupy
Iraq indefinitely if any American-installed regime is to remain in power.
Again, it appears we are creating a larger problem than we are attempting to
solve.
2002 Ron Paul 57:5
Similarly, proponents of a US invasion of Iraq often cite the Kurds
in the northern part of that country as a Northern Alliance-like ally, who
will do much of our fighting on the ground and unseat Saddam. But just last week the
Washington Times reported that neither of the two rival Kurdish groups
in northern Iraq want anything to do with an invasion of Iraq.
2002 Ron Paul 57:6
In the meeting last month, Scott Ritter reminded members of Congress
that a nation cannot go to war based on assumptions and guesses, that a lack
of knowledge is no basis on which to initiate military action. Mr. Ritter
warned those present that remaining quiescent in the face of the
administrations seeming determination to exceed the authority granted to go after those
who attacked us, will actually hurt the president and will hurt Congress.
He concluded by stating that going in to Iraq without
Congressionally-granted authority would be a failure of American democracy. Those pounding
the war drums loudest for an invasion of Iraq should pause for a moment and
ponder what Scott Ritter is saying. Thousands of lives are at stake.
[From the Los Angeles Times, June 19, 2002]
BEHIND "PLOT" ON HUSSEIN, A SECRET AGENDA
(By Scott Ritter)
President Bush has reportedly authorized the CIA to use all of the
means at its disposal- including U.S. military special operations forces and CIA
paramilitary teams- to eliminate Iraqs Saddam Hussein. According to
reports, the CIA is to view any such plan as "preparatory" for a larger
military strike.
2002 Ron Paul 57:8
Congressional leaders from both parties have greeted these reports
with enthusiasm. In their rush to be seen as embracing the presidents
hard-line stance on Iraq, however, almost no one in Congress has questioned why a
supposedly covert operation would be made public, thus undermining the
very mission it was intended to accomplish.
2002 Ron Paul 57:9
It is high time that Congress start questioning the hype and
rhetoric emanating from the White House regarding Baghdad, because the leaked
CIA plan is well timed to undermine the efforts underway in the United Nations to
get weapons inspectors back to work in Iraq. In early July, the U.N.
secretary-general will meet with Iraqs foreign minister for a third
round of talks on the return of the weapons monitors. A major sticking point is
Iraqi concern over the use- or abuse- of such inspections by the U.S. for
intelligence collection.
2002 Ron Paul 57:10
I recall during my time as a chief inspector in Iraq the dozens of
extremely fit missile experts and logistics specialists who frequented my
inspection teams and others. Drawn from U.S. units such as Delta Force
or from CIA paramilitary teams such as the Special Activities Staff (both of
which have an ongoing role in the conflict in Afghanistan), these specialists had
a legitimate part to play in the difficult cat-and-mouse effort to disarm
Iraq. So did the teams of British radio intercept operators I ran in Iraq from
1996 to 1998- which listened in on the conversations of Husseins inner circle-
and the various other intelligence specialists who were part of the inspection
effort.
2002 Ron Paul 57:11
The presence of such personnel on inspection teams was, and is,
viewed by the Iraqi government as an unacceptable risk to its nations security.
2002 Ron Paul 57:12
As early as 1992, the Iraqis viewed the teams I led inside Iraq as a
threat to the safety of their president. They were concerned that my
inspections were nothing more than a front for a larger effort to eliminate their
leader.
2002 Ron Paul 57:13
Those concerns were largely baseless while I was in Iraq. Now that
Bush has specifically authorized American covert-operations forces to remove
Hussein, however, the Iraqis will never trust an inspection regime that has
already shown itself susceptible to infiltration and manipulation by intelligence
services hostile to Iraq, regardless of any assurances the U.N.
secretary-general might give.
2002 Ron Paul 57:14
The leaked CIA covert operations plan effectively kills any chance
of inspectors returning to Iraq, and it closes the door on the last
opportunity for shedding light on the true state of affairs regarding any threat in the
form of Iraq weapons of mass destruction.
2002 Ron Paul 57:15
Absent any return of weapons inspectors, no one seems willing to
challenge the Bush administrations assertions of an Iraqi threat. If Bush has a
factual case against Iraq concerning weapons of mass destruction, he hasnt
made it yet.
2002 Ron Paul 57:16
Can the Bush administration substantiate any of its claims that Iraq
continues to pursue efforts to reacquire its capability to produce
chemical and biological weapons, which was dismantled and destroyed by U.N. weapons
inspectors from 1991 to 1998? The same question applies to nuclear
weapons. What facts show that Iraq continues to pursue nuclear weapons aspirations?
2002 Ron Paul 57:17
Bush spoke ominously of an Iraqi ballistic missile threat to Europe.
What missile threat is the president talking about? These questions are
valid, and if the case for war is to be made, they must be answered with more than
speculative rhetoric.
2002 Ron Paul 57:18
Congress has seemed unwilling to challenge the Bush administrations
pursuit of war against Iraq. The one roadblock to an all- out U.S. assault
would be weapons inspectors reporting on the facts inside Iraq. Yet without any
meaningful discussion and debate by Congress concerning the nature of
the threat posed by Baghdad, war seems all but inevitable.
2002 Ron Paul 57:19
The true target of the supposed CIA plan may not be Hussein but
rather the weapons inspection program itself. The real casualty is the last chance
to avoid bloody conflict.
This chapter appeared in Ron Pauls Congressional website at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr062402.htm