[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 34, Number 9 (Monday, March 2, 1998)]
[Pages 307-310]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan's Mission to Iraq 
and an Exchange With Reporters

February 23, 1998

    The President. Good afternoon. Let me say first that I welcome U.N. 
Secretary-General Annan's mission to Baghdad. I thank him and his team 
for their hard work on behalf

[[Page 308]]

of the international community. I also want to commend each and every 
one of our men and women in uniform and our coalition partners for their 
steadfastness. Once again, we have seen that diplomacy must be backed by 
strength and resolve.
    The Government of Iraq has made a written commitment to provide 
immediate, unrestricted, unconditional access for the UNSCOM weapons 
inspectors to all suspect sites in Iraq, as called for by the United 
Nations Security Council resolutions. If fully implemented--and that is 
the big ``if''--this commitment will allow UNSCOM to fulfill its 
mission: first, to find and destroy all of Iraq's chemical, biological, 
and nuclear weapons; second, to find and destroy the missiles to deliver 
those weapons; and third, to institute a system for long-term monitoring 
to make sure Iraq does not build more.
    The Secretary-General has made clear that Iraq's commitment applies 
to all sites anywhere in the country, including eight so-called 
presidential sites, which are among the areas to which the weapons 
inspectors had previously been denied access.
    Senior diplomats appointed by the Secretary-General will accompany 
the UNSCOM experts as they inspect these sites, with repeat visits and 
no deadlines to complete their work. And Iraq has committed that all 
other areas, facilities, equipment, records, and means of transportation 
shall be open to UNSCOM under existing procedures. Again, this includes 
sites that were previously closed.
    There are issues that still need to be clarified to our satisfaction 
and details that need to be spelled out. We will hear from the 
Secretary-General tomorrow on these questions, and we will work with him 
and with UNSCOM to make sure the inspections are rigorous and 
professional. What really matters is Iraq's compliance, not its stated 
commitments; not what Iraq says, but what it does. In the days and weeks 
ahead, UNSCOM must test and verify.
    After two crises in the last 4 months, Iraq's failure to allow 
UNSCOM to do its job would be a serious, serious matter. If Iraq fails 
to comply this time to provide immediate, unrestricted, unconditional 
access to the weapons inspectors, there will be serious consequences.
    I have ordered our military to remain in the Persian Gulf. Our 
soldiers, our ships, our planes will stay there in force until we are 
satisfied that Iran is complying--Iraq is complying with its 
commitments.
    If the inspectors are allowed to inspect where and when they want, 
then they are the most effective tool we have to monitor Iraq's 
compliance with the commitment it made at the end of the Gulf war to 
give up all of its biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons, the 
missiles to deliver them, and the capacity to rebuild its arsenal.
    I hope today's agreement will prove to be the step forward we have 
been looking for. But the proof is in the testing. The United States 
remains resolved and ready to secure, by whatever means necessary, 
Iraq's full compliance with its commitment to destroy its weapons of 
mass destruction.
    Thank you.
    Q. Mr. President, what makes you think that you will be--you won't 
be in this position a year from now, 2 years from now, 3 years from now? 
What in the preliminary details makes you comfortable, or at least 
somewhat comfortable at this stage?
    The President. Well, I've already said I don't know whether we'll be 
in a position of breach by Iraq within a year. All I said is that I 
think it is now clear, based on my conversations with Prime Minister 
Blair, President Chirac, President Yeltsin, and what we in our own team 
believe, no one seriously believes that there can be a breach of this 
agreement by Iraq without serious consequences.
    But I will say, this is the first time--at least since 1991--that 
Iraq has made a commitment to unconditional, open, unfettered access to 
all the sites, not only these presidential sites there's been so much 
talk about but also some other so-called sensitive sites that have been 
off limits.
    So if the inspection system is allowed to go forward--we know from 
the record that the UNSCOM inspectors have compiled in the last 7 years 
that the system works. And if we can find a peaceful means for the 
system to work to secure the safety of the people

[[Page 309]]

in the region, the neighbors of Iraq and others that might be menaced in 
the future by its weapons of mass destruction, that is what we have been 
seeking.
    Q. Mr. President, if Iraq does not keep its word this time, do we go 
through this exercise of weeks and weeks and weeks again?
    The President. I believe if it does not keep its word this time, 
everyone would understand that then the United States and hopefully all 
of our allies would have the unilateral right to respond at a time, 
place, and manner of our own choosing. And I think that's enough for me 
to say about that at this time.
    Q. Mr. President, you said before that he's lied, and he's cheated. 
Do you think that you can trust him this time? What's your expectation? 
I know that you say you're going to take a wait and see attitude.
    The President. First of all, that is true. But I've also said before 
that when the UNSCOM inspectors have been allowed to do their job, even 
when there's been some cat-and-mouse games over there, they have 
succeeded beyond anyone's expectations. You just have to look at the 
volume of stuff they've uncovered and destroyed to know that. Therefore, 
this should not be a question of trust. First, we need clarity. We need 
to clarify some of the remaining questions about the agreement to our 
satisfaction. Clarity is important. And in fairness, all parties, even 
Saddam Hussein--all the parties are entitled to that--clarity. Then we 
need to test the agreement and verify that the commitments which are 
made in writing are kept in fact. So trust should not have to be an 
issue here. If you have clarity, then you can verify.
    So over the next 2 days we have a very--all Americans should have a 
positive reaction to the fact that we finally have a commitment to open 
all these sites and to let the inspectors finish their job. We need 
clarity; we need verification; and I intend to keep our forces at high 
levels of preparation in the Gulf in the near-term to see what happens 
in terms of honoring these obligations.
    Yes.
    Q. Mr. President, Senator Lott says you lack a long-term strategy 
for handling Iraq. How do you respond to that, sir?
    The President. Well, since 1991, our strategy has been to keep the 
sanctions on, keep Iraq from rebuilding its military might and 
threatening its neighbors, but to pursue this inspection system to end 
what is the biggest threat both to its neighbors and to others by 
indirection, which is the chemical, the biological, and the nuclear 
weapons program. That has been our strategy all along. Whether that 
should continue to be our strategy depends in no small measure, I 
believe, on whether this agreement is honored.
    Q. Sir, is there any wiggle room----
    Q. Has Saddam capitulated, sir?
    The President. I'll answer both questions.
    Q. Has Saddam Hussein capitulated?
    The President. Well, I think he has admitted that he has to honor 
commitments he made back in '91. You know, I think that our tough 
response was essential to getting him to admit that. The Secretary-
General has conducted a hard mission. I am satisfied that he has done 
the best he can. And I am satisfied that we would not have this 
commitment to open all these spots had not the United States and our 
allies--and there were lots of them, don't forget--been prepared to go 
further and to take whatever actions were necessary.
    But the main thing we need to do now is to focus on clarifying the 
details of the agreement to our satisfaction, then going ahead and 
testing it and verifying the commitment. I think that is the most useful 
thing. What we want here is to secure the safety of the people who would 
be exposed to chemical and biological weapons and to whatever nuclear 
capacity that he might still have.
    You know, the United States--I think I should point this out, it's 
not been part of my statement, but the United States--and Ambassador 
Richardson was there carrying the ball for us--we strongly supported 
expanding the program under Resolution 986 in the Security Council to 
let Iraq sell even more oil to go for food, to lift the Iraqi children 
above the minimum caloric requirement for all growing children in the 
world, to build 5,000 more schools, to put a lot more medicine into that 
country, to rebuild the water and sewer systems and the agriculture 
system. We care a lot about the people of

[[Page 310]]

Iraq, and we want them to have a decent life. But we all--we must still 
be vigilant and steadfast about this regime.
    This is--and I say again, one of you asked me this question--this is 
not about trusting. First, we need to be clear on what it means, and he 
needs to be clear on what it means. And then we need to see whether it 
is enforced. And if it is, fine. If it's not, then the alternative will 
be a clear course of action to everyone in the world.
    Q. Is there any wiggle room in this agreement? Because even before 
you spoke, some of your critics predicted that you would buy an 
agreement that was not airtight simply as a way out.
    The President. Well, I think it's obvious that I haven't looked for 
a way out here. What I have looked for is a way forward. The United 
States, because of our position in the world, is called upon to bring 
its power to bear when it's important to do so. But we also should have 
the self-confidence and the conscience to show forbearance as well as 
strength, and to do what is right.
    The objective is unassailable, and he has agreed to the objective, 
which is full and free and unfettered access. I have told you--not my 
critics, I have told you--that there are details in this agreement that 
still have to be flushed out, and there are provisions in it which 
require greater clarity, and we have to have those things resolved to 
our satisfaction in order to go forward.
    But my instinct is, talking to the Secretary-General and talking to 
our partners, that we can resolve those things to our satisfaction. I'm 
hoping that we can, but I am not prejudging it. Ambassador Richardson 
has got his work cut out for him tomorrow, and the rest of our team will 
be working closely with him. We'll see what we're doing.
    Q. Can you give us examples of those things where maybe you need 
clarification that could provide a problem?
    The President. Well, we'll do that at the proper time. The 
Secretary-General has asked to have the opportunity--and I think he's 
entitled to it--to present the memorandum of understanding to the 
Security Council before the rest of us comment on the details. And I 
think that he is entitled to that. He's worked very hard; he's had very 
little sleep in the last several days. And I'm going to honor his 
request to that.
    Thank you.

Note: The President spoke at 3:42 p.m. in the Oval Office at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; 
Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom; President Jacques 
Chirac of France; and President Boris Yeltsin of Russia. The President 
also referred to the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM).