[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 15 (Wednesday, February 25, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S952-S955]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IRAQ POLICY
Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, the world witnessed a diplomatic success
in United Nation's Secretary General Kofi Annan's trip to Baghdad last
weekend. We saw a successful conclusion to an episode that has been and
probably will continue to be a very long drama of confrontation with
Iraq. This success is not due solely to Mr. Annan's considerable powers
of persuasion. Mr. Annan's mission was backed by force--by the real,
credible potential for violent punishment from U.S. forces if a
diplomatic solution was not achieved. He said this about his successful
negotiations: ``You can do a lot with diplomacy, but of course you can
do a lot more with diplomacy backed up by firmness and force.'' It
takes nothing away from Mr. Annan's success to note he shares star
billing as a peacemaker with the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines
of the United States.
The smile of diplomacy combined with the force of the gun has
produced an offer from Baghdad to allow U.N. weapons inspectors into
sites previously denied to them by the Iraqi government. For the moment
there is hope that air strikes to reduce Iraq's capacity to use weapons
of mass destruction will not be needed. Gratefully, for now, we will
not again be witnesses to the necessary violence of combat. The images
of war, which increasingly shape and limit our national tolerance for
war, will thankfully not supplant Seinfeld on our TV screens this week.
And yet our gratitude for peace is not entirely satisfying. A sour
taste remains in our mouths. We wonder again if Saddam Hussein has got
the better of us. The question nags: Did we win a diplomatic battle but
not the war? These feelings and this question flow from our national
discussion of Iraq policy over the past several weeks, especially the
growing realization that America should not deal with the Iraq problem
episodically, but rather with finality, even if greater effort is
required.
This problem was eloquently stated last Wednesday at Ohio State
University by a veteran. He said:
I spent twenty years in the military; my oldest son spent
twenty-five; my youngest son died in Vietnam; six months
later, his first cousin died in Vietnam. We stood in the gap.
If push comes to shove and Saddam will not back down, will
not allow or keep his word, are we ready and willing to send
the troops in? You see, I have no problem with asking any one
of these guys in the Armed Forces to stand in the gap for me
now, that we stood in the gap back then. . . . I think all of
Congress wants to know. Are we willing to send troops in and
finish the job, or are we going to do it [half-hearted] like
we've done before?
Mr. President, this veteran speaks for me. He gave the nation a
clarion call to finish the job. It falls to us to determine what
finishing the job means. We must do so with the understanding that
wherever and however we stand in the gap, our stand and our actions
will be globally public. All of us who are given power by the
Constitution to declare war and raise armies must take note of how much
is won or lost over the airwaves.
We will not restrict the flow of images in the next war as we have in
the past. The recently released CIA report on the Bay of Pigs thirty-
six years after the report was written, represents the old way of
making: war in secret. The new way is portable video cameras and
satellite communications opening the battlefield to full view. And
victory may hinge more on the impressions of the battle conveyed
through the media than on the effect of the combatants themselves. Even
if the struggle is only diplomatic, it is no less public and global,
and the impression made on the public who witness the struggle through
the media is at least as important as the diplomatic outcome.
Television images are powerful and effect all who watch. Two and one-
half billion people watched Princess Diana's funeral. Perhaps as many
watched the war of words between the U.S. and Iraq. I am concerned that
to date, we may be losing this battle of the airwaves. A ruthless
dictator who has starved and brutalized and robbed his people for over
twenty years actually appears in some media to be more interested in
the welfare of his people than do we. To win, we must have an objective
that is clear, will justify war's violence if war comes, and will
enable us to rally world opinion. We need a mission that puts us in the
gap not just to reduce a threat but to liberate a people and make a
whole region secure and prosperous. We need a cause which will unite
moral leaders like Nelson Mandela, and Vaclav Havel with other
political and military leaders. We need an objective which will
permanently remove the threat the Iraqi dictatorship poses to the
United States, to our allies, to our interests, to its neighbors, and
to its own people.
The containment of Iraq--although it has been a success--cannot be
such a cause. Containment reduced the Iraqi military threat and
introduced UNSCOM inspections, which are our principal means of
limiting Saddam's production of weapons of mass destruction. But the
ultimate failure of containment is signaled by the word ``reduce'' as a
policy goal. With biological weapons, reduction or limitation are not
sufficient. We need to be sure such weapons are eliminated from
Saddam's arsenal. To ``reduce'' is not enough.
Let me say a word about the fear that has been aroused over the
potential of biological weapons, both Iraqi weapons and possibly such
weapons in the hands of terrorists in this country. Fear is a natural
reaction, but fear is also the great debilitator. Fear keeps us from
taking necessary action. We must manage our fears, we must keep fear
from paralyzing us, and we must realistically measure the threat posed
by these weapons. If we are to truly stand in the gap with regard to
Iraq, we must do something hard: we must have a broader perspective
than just altering our fear of biological weapons. We must transcend
that fear and convert it into a hope for freedom. A democratic Iraq is
certainly in our interest, an Iraq free of weapons of mass destruction
is certainly in our interest, but it is above all for the sake of the
Iraqis that we must replace Saddam.
A review of what Saddam has done to his people underscores the need
to remove him. After over 20 years of Saddam, it is hard to recall that
Iraq was once the heart of the Fertile Crescent, a country blessed with
oil resources, rich agricultural potential, and a vibrant middle class.
Through a disastrous war with Iran and then the invasion of Kuwait,
Saddam mortgaged and then caused the destruction of much of Iraq's oil
capacity. Through static economic policies, he marginalized a middle
class which has since been almost wiped out by the effect of sanctions,
which is to say, by the effect of Saddam's behavior. Per capita income
in Iraq has dropped from $2,900 in 1989 to $60 today, in currency
terms. The dinar, which was worth three dollars in 1989, is now at the
rate of 1,500 to one dollar. Iraqis have seen their salaries drop to
five dollars a month, and their pensions evaporate. We are also
familiar with the starvation and the permanent health crisis he imposes
on his people while he builds palaces and other grandiose monuments to
himself.
Saddam's policies have killed hundreds of thousands of Iranians and
Iraqis and thousands of Kuwaiti citizens, many of whom are still
unaccounted for. His reign of terror continues to kill, including
between 500 and 1,200 prisoners murdered in his prisons last December.
His weapons of mass destruction, with which we are too familiar, were
tested on living human beings, according to British press reports. In
sum, if there is a dictator in the world who needs to be removed, it is
Saddam Hussein.
[[Page S953]]
Force, either our own or that of dissident Iraqis, will be required
to remove this regime. But in my view, Desert Storm is not the model. A
much better example of the marriage of military force with diplomacy, a
success story in the making, is the U.S. deployment to Bosnia. An
initial agreement was reached at Dayton as a result of the use of U.S.
military force. Then our troops led an allied force into the country
and provided, and continue to provide, the overarching security and
stability beneath which a traumatized people regain the confidence to
govern themselves democratically and live civilly with each other. The
lesson of Bosnia is that force persuaded diplomacy, which has in turn
given the people of Bosnia a chance for a lasting peace. Iraq, with its
devastated middle class and ethnic divisions, may need the same kind of
long-term application of potential force, once Saddam's regime has
passed.
It took hope, at the worst moments of the Yugoslav war, when Sarajevo
was a deadly obstacle course for its citizens, to dream of a peaceful
Bosnia, and it took courage to make the commitments which are now
slowly bringing that dream into reality. In the same way, we must get
past our pessimism about Iraq and the Middle East, summon our hope, and
dream the successful outcome of our policy: a democratic Iraq. Imagine
its characteristics: a democratic Iraq would be at peace with its
neighbors. It would have no weapons of mass destruction. A democratic
Iraq would enjoy the benefits of its agricultural and oil wealth and
would share them equitably across their society. A democratic Iraq
would be a tolerant society, in sharp contrast to some of its
neighbors. It would not oppress its minorities. Its Kurdish population,
secure and free in northern Iraq, would not be a base for an insurgency
against Turkey. A democratic Iraq would be a powerful example to the
rising oil states of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan, a proof
to them that a government can use oil revenue for something other than
hiring police and buying weapons.
There is a dissonant sound to the words ``Iraq'' and ``democracy''
side by side, but this dream, aided by a sound American strategy, can
become real. I know of no genetic coding that predisposes the Iraqis,
or any people, to dictatorship. In November, I laid out a road map
which included the following steps and I repeat them today.
First, we must convince our core European and Asian allies that
democracy, not just the temporary compliance of a dictator, is the
right long-term goal for Iraq. We must use the facts about Saddam's
brutality to convince our allies to support a transition to democracy
in Iraq, and to convince them the security and economic opportunity
that would flow out of a new, democratic Iraq is worth more than the
money owed our allies by Saddam's regime. In other words, we must
convince our allies to forgive the debts of a post-Saddam Iraq. Beyond
debt forgiveness, we should clearly state the loan and foreign
assistance preferences which a democratic Iraq would receive from U.S.
and multinational lending agencies.
Second, we should fill Iraqi airwaves, by means of Voice of America
and commercial means, with the horrific truth about Saddam's regime.
The Iraqi people must learn that we know what Saddam has done to them,
and that weapons of mass destruction are not our sole concern. Two
recent news stories exemplify the kind of information we should be
putting in every Iraqi home. The first, from the Los Angeles Times for
February 9, describes the murder of up to 1,200 prisoners in Iraq's
main prison. The second, from the January 18 Sunday Times of London,
relates in detail how Saddam's government tested biological weapons on
human beings. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent both these these
articles be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. KERREY. Third, we should openly and consistently state our goal
of a free, democratic Iraq, even if we have to state it repeatedly for
years. To accept less and say less is simply unworthy of our heritage.
Mr. President, there are additional steps which are essential if we
are to achieve our goal:
We should announce our intention to see Saddam Hussein indicted and
tried for war crimes and genocide.
As some commentators have suggested, the United States should form an
umbrella organization of pro-democracy Iraqi exile groups and support
them with money and military supplies.
When the exile group seizes significant Iraqi territory, the United
States should recognize it as Iraq's government and make frozen Iraqi
government funds available to it.
The UN has already decided to expand the amount of oil Iraq can sell
in exchange for food and medicine. We should work with the UN to
facilitate greater amounts of life's necessities getting into the hands
of the Iraq people. Over the long term, we should consider the
usefulness of sanctions in overthrowing Saddam. The debilitating effect
of sanctions on ordinary Iraqis may actually help keep Saddam in power.
Our policies should serve the strategy of removing this dictator from
office and creating the democratic Iraq and peaceful Middle East which
is our goal.
Mr. President, I am laying out what could be a long road for the
United States. But when you compare today's situation with tomorrow's
possibilities, it is a road worth taking. It is a road worthy of our
heritage as liberators and as a free people. Mr. Annan carefully
selected these familiar words to describe the U.N.'s success this week:
``We the peoples of the world can do anything if united.'' We have
dreamed the possibility. Now it is time for us to make it real.
I yield the floor.
Exhibit 1
[From the Los Angeles Times, Feb. 9, 1998]
Freed Inmate Tells of Mass Executions at Iraqi Prison
(By John Daniszewski)
Amman, Jordan--Ammar Shehab Dein shudders at the memory of
the ``meals'' served up at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison
outside Baghdad.
A ``meal'' is what guards there called the Iraqi prison's
periodic mass executions. ``We have a meal tomorrow,'' they
would taunt the terrified inmates.
During the last 20 days in December, said Shehab Dein,
there were at least three ``meals'' in his section alone.
Each time, an officer would stand in front of the two-story
cellblock and read off the names of those who were to die.
The doomed men would then have their hands tied behind
their backs and be led away--crying, shouting, ``Allahu
Akbar'' (God is great) and, in some cases, cursing the name
of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
Later, other inmates would be ordered into the execution
chamber to clean up.
As it was described to Shehab Dein, the chamber was
``primitive,'' ropes suspended over 12 wells. Bound prisoners
would be put into a noose and then pushed to their deaths, he
said. Doctors were present mainly to determine if the
prisoners were dead.
Shehab Dein, a 27-year-old Jordanian trader who was
imprisoned last year, is not only a rare survivor of the
Iraqi leader's death row. In interviews with The Times, he is
also the first released inmate of Abu Ghraib prison to
publicly corroborate and add detail to accounts that emerged
at the end of 1997 of a series of executions of hundreds or
even thousands of political prisoners and common criminals in
Iraq.
At the time, U.S. State Department spokesman James Foley
called the reports of mass execution ``horrific'' and said
they would constitute ``a gross violation of human rights''
if true.
Shehab Dein's statements were supported by a second
released inmate, a 31-year-old Jordanian businessman who said
he was badly tortured shortly after his 1995 arrest and that
he fears being identified by name.
``The last weeks before Ramadan, we heard [that] about 500
people were killed. . . . We used to hear them [executions]
every day,'' the businessman said.
Both men were interviewed in Amman days after their Jan. 21
release in a surprise amnesty, announced by Hussein, for all
Jordanian prisoners. (Hussein declared a further amnesty
Thursday for all nationals of other Arab countries,
apparently in a goodwill gesture hours after he met with the
secretary-general of the Arab League.)
According to Iraqi opposition sources in Jordan, Britain
and the United States, Hussein's regime executed 800 to 1,200
inmates at the Abu Ghraib and the Radwaniyah prisons, both
near Baghdad, in a cleaning out that began Nov. 20 and lasted
into December.
After the State Department raised the issue Jan. 1, the
Iraqi Information Ministry angrily denied the accusations,
calling them another example of the ``hostile propaganda'' of
Iraq's opponents.
With the world focused on Iraq's standoff with the United
States and the United Nations over access to disputed sites
by arms inspectors, the allegations have elicited relatively
little attention.
But the experiences of the two Jordanians, who went to Iraq
voluntarily for business and say they once were sympathetic
to Hussein, nevertheless are a reminder of the unpredictable
brutality inside Iraq.
[[Page S954]]
``If I had a choice between dying and going back to Iraq, I
would prefer to die,'' said the businessman, who declined to
discuss details of his torture except to say: ``Execution was
something I wanted.''
Since mid-December, opposition groups have been circulating
accounts of the executions, which they said were ordered Nov.
19 by Hussein's powerful younger son, Qusai, and underscore
his preeminent role in the spheres of ``security and
repression,'' in the words of one opposition newsletter.
The Iraqi National Congress, a U.S.-backed anti-Hussein
group, has compiled lists identifying 160 of the victims.
It said one brother of an executed Iraqi Kurd had to comb
through 12 cold-storage rooms containing 30 bodies apiece
before he was able to find his sibling and claim the remains.
The opposition Iraqi Communist Party, meanwhile, said that
109 of its followers apparently were killed in one day.
Decreed at a time when Iraq appeared to have driven a wedge
between the United States and other U.N. Security Council
members, the executions may have been ordered to celebrate
this diplomatic ``triumph on the part of Saddam Hussein,''
speculated the Iraqi Broadcast Corp., the oppositions' radio
station in northern Iraq.
Neither Shehab Dein nor the businessman actually saw any
hangings, but both stated without hesitation that hundreds of
their fellow inmates died.
Shehab Dein's younger brother, Jihad, and that when he
visited his brother in prison in December, he saw other
families collapse in sobs and wails upon learning that loved
ones had been executed. He was once told that he should leave
the prison because a round of executions was about to take
place, he said.
Shehab Dein, who lived with his family in Iraq for most of
the past six years, was arrested Sept. 9 and sent to Abu
Ghraib on Dec. 10 after being condemned to death for
allegedly buying up cheap construction equipment in Iraq to
be dismantled and smuggled out for sale abroad.
Although Shehab Dein and his five brothers buy and sell
heavy machinery, he denies being a smuggler and blames his
arrest on a false accusation from a business rival who stood
to get a significant chunk of Shehab Dein's assets as a
reward from the Iraqi regime.
As soon as he arrived at Abu Ghraib after three months in a
cell in Baghdad's Public Security Department, Shehab Dein
said, he was told by fellow inmates about the mass executions
that had been taking place.
``Between November and December, they used to take 50
people, 80 people a day,'' he said. ``It was not something
normal.''
From Dec. 10 until Dec. 30, when executions were stopped in
observance of the start of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month,
Shehab Dein said, he saw or heard a total of 56 men dragged
away--27, 15 and 14 at a time.
None ever returned to his section, which housed more than
1,000 people who had been sentenced to death for various
crimes, ranging from corruption to theft to murder.
He said he believes that prisoners from other sections,
including political prisoners and those containing people
sentenced in long prison terms but not death, were being
executed daily. Among those killed, he said, was a friend he
had made earlier at the Public Security Department cells, a
likable would-be counterfeiter whom he knew as ``Eyad the
Palestinian.''
Eyad's name was among those called out one morning, and he
was led out with his hands tied behind his back.
``They allowed him to say goodbye to his friends,'' Shehab
Dein said quietly. ``Eyad came to me right away because I was
the only other Palestinian. He said, `Forgive me if I have
done anything wrong, and give charity in my name if you have
the chance.'
``I cannot describe to you the feeling--someone saying that
to you. What I thought was, how dear he was to me, and I was
helpless to give him any consolation,'' he said.
Shehab Dein said prison conditions were appalling.
He was in a 5-foot-square cell with three other condemned
men. They took turns sleeping. But that was ``paradise''
compared with other cells of the same dimensions packed with
seven or eight prisoners.
He said he was sentenced to die based on a confession he
never made and upon the written testimony of two
``witnesses'' whom he had never met and who were not even
present at his trial.
Iraq executed four Jordanian students Dec. 9 for smuggling,
despite repeated entreaties from Jordan's King Hussein that
they be spared.
Shehab Dein, who had been condemned Dec. 7, said he
believed that he surely would be the next to die. But he got
a reprieve when Saddam Hussein suddenly ordered all
Jordanians in his prison let go, apparently to mollify
Jordanian anger.
``I thought I was dead,'' Shehab Dein murmured, recalling
the moment he learned that he would escape the noose. ``But I
was reborn.''
____
[From the London Sunday Times, Jan. 18, 1998]
Saddam Tested Anthrax on Human Guinea Pigs
(By Marie Colvin and Uzi Mahnaimi)
Evidence has emerged that Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi
dictator, has had prisoners tied to stakes and bombarded with
anthrax in brutal human experiments with his biological and
chemical armoury.
Dozens of prisoners are believed to have died in agony
during a secret programme of military research designed to
produce potent new weapons of mass destruction.
In one incident, Iranian prisoners of war are said to have
been tied up and killed by bacteria from a shell detonated
nearby. Others were exposed to an aerosol of anthrax sprayed
into a chamber while doctors watched behind a glass screen.
Two British-trained scientists have been identified as
leading figures in the programme.
As the first details of Iraq's use of human guinea pigs
came to light, Saddam threatened yesterday to expel United
Nations weapons inspectors unless they complete their work
within six months. The British aircraft carrier Invincible is
sailing for the Gulf to support American forces.
Saddam's biological and chemical warfare programme is at
the heart of his latest confrontation with the UN, which
began when a team of inspectors was prevented from visiting
Abu Gharib jail, near Baghdad, to investigate evidence that
some prisoners were sent to a military facility for
experimentation two years ago.
The Sunday Times has obtained evidence about the programme
from several sources, including UN inspectors, Iraqi
dissidents and Israeli intelligence. The evidence suggests
that tests on human beings began in the 1980s during Iraq's
eight-year war with Iran after initial experiments on sheep
and camels.
According to Israeli military intelligence sources, 10
Iranian prisoners of war were taken to a location near Iraq's
border with Saudi Arabia. They were lashed to posts and left
helpless as an anthrax bomb was exploded by remote control 15
yards away. All died painfully from internal haemorrhaging.
In another experiment, 15 Kurdish prisoners were tied up in a
field while shells containing camel pox, a mild virus, were
dropped from a light aircraft. The results were slower but
the test was judged a success; the prisoners fell ill within
a week.
Iraqi sources say some of the cruellest research has been
conducted at an underground facility near Salman Pak,
southwest of Baghdad. Here, the sources say, experiments with
biological and chemical agents were carried out first on dogs
and cats, then on Iranian prisoners.
The prisoners were secured to a bed in a purpose-built
chamber, into which lethal agents, including anthrax, were
sprayed from a high-velocity device mounted in the ceiling.
Medical researchers viewed the results through fortified
glass.
Details of the experiments were known only to Saddam and an
inner circle of senior government officials and Iraqi
scientists educated in the West.
Madeleine Albright, the American secretary of state, said
Saddam was ``tightening the noose around himself''. She
added, ``By not letting this inspection team go forward, in
almost a strange way it's almost as if he has come close to
saying, `Okay, you caught me'.''
iraq tested anthrax on pow's
They started with domestic cats and dogs. But the
scientists at Salman Pak, a military complex 50 miles
southwest of Baghdad, were under pressure from President
Saddam Hussein to prove the potency of the technology that
would underpin their new weapons of mass destruction. It was
inevitable that their experiments would eventually be
conducted on human beings.
From behind a reinforced glass screen they watched as, one
by one, Iranian prisoners of war were strapped to the bed in
a chamber at the underground facility.
The terror of their victims as a high-velocity device
mounted on the ceiling dispensed a lethal spray can only be
imagined. Sometimes it contained anthrax bacteria, which
penetrate the skin and lungs. The prisoners died in agony
from internal hemorrhaging.
At other times the aerosol was of toxins suitable for use
in chemical weapons. The results were no less devastating.
The facility, which is understood to have been built by
German engineers in the 1980s, has been at the centre of
Iraq's experiments on ``human guinea pigs'' for more than 10
years, according to Israeli military sources.
The first details of the atrocities carried out there and
in experiments in the open air emerged this weekend as Saddam
threatened to expel United Nations weapons inspectors unless
they complete their work within six months.
Dozens of prisoners have died during the research. In one
test, 10 Iranian prisoners were taken to an open-air site
near Iraq's border with Saudi Arabia. There they were tied to
posts and left helpless while shells loaded with anthrax were
detonated by remote control 15 yards away. The prisoners'
heads were shielded to protect them from shrapnel so that the
effectiveness of the bacteria could be observed. All died
from the disease.
In another experiment, 15 Kurdish prisoners were tied up in
a field while shells containing a pox virus were dropped from
a light aircraft. The virus was camel pox, normally a
relatively mild disease. Iraqi scientists, however, are
believed to have developed a more virulent strain by genetic
manipulation. All the prisoners fell ill within a week.
The programme is the focus of Iraq's latest confrontation
with the UN, which began when inspectors were prevented from
visiting Abu Gharib jail, near Baghdad, to investigate
evidence that prisoners had been sent away for
experimentation two years ago.
[[Page S955]]
Two of the leading researchers in Iraq's biological
programme studied in Britain. Rihab al-Taha, educated at the
University of East Anglia, is the head of Iraq's military
research and development institute. Another scientist, who
received a doctorate in molecular biology from the University
of Edinburgh, is said by Israeli sources to have specialized
in anthrax although her precise role, if any, in human
experiments is unknown.
The evidence compiled by the Israelis could not be
independently corroborated. But it appeared consistent with
information about Iraq's chemical and biological programmes
in documents recovered by UN inspectors after the 1995
defection of Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law, who had been
in charge of Iraq's military procurement programme.
Apparently afraid of what Kamel would reveal after he fled
to Jordan, Iraqi officials led the inspectors to a cache of
papers they said they had discovered in a shed on his chicken
farm in the hope that he would be blamed for the programme.
Inspectors raised eyebrows at the fact that the boxes were
shiny new while their surroundings were filthy. Kamel was
killed on his return to Iraq in 1996.
Among the ``chicken farm'' documents on biological warfare
was a photograph of a human arm with lesions. The inspectors
also found video footage of dogs that had died after being
exposed to unidentified agents.
Iraqi opposition sources said last week they had received
reports of prisoners disappearing from their cells, only to
return with mysterious illnesses that proved fatal.
The prisoners, they said, were usually released out of fear
of contamination and died afterwards at home.
____________________