|
CounterPunch
January
28, 2003
Weapons of Mass
Distraction
OK:
But Where They?
by BRIAN CLOUGHLEY
If Iraq is lying (and it is difficult to imagine
Mr Saddam Hussein telling the truth about the time of day) then
let it be proved. Saying over and over again that Mr Hussein
tells lies and therefore must have NBC weapons is not good enough
Let us be realistic about repeated US
assertions that Iraq has nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC)
weapons. (President George Bush calls them "Weapons of Mass
Destruction", which is a dreary propaganda phrase.) If America
has evidence of these weapons it could produce it without compromising
intelligence sources. Mr Bush and his staff keep announcing that
Iraq possesses these things, yet refuse to give us proof.
Take Condoleeza Rice whose piece "Why
we know Iraq is lying" appeared in the papers last week.
She wrote that "Richard Butler, the former chief UN arms
inspector, estimates that if a larger type of warhead that Iraq
has made and used in the past were filled with VX (an even deadlier
nerve agent) and launched at a major city, it could kill up to
one million people." It is a classic ploy of the propagandist
to link a respected figure with undeniable facts to produce an
unverifiable but convincing shock-horror headline-grabber. We
all know what could happen "if" a warhead "were"
filled with VX and landed in a city. But nobody has shown us
that there are operational warheads (as distinct from the dozen
rusty 122mm carriers found two weeks ago), or that there is any
VX to put in them, or any launchers to deliver them to "a
city". These claims are made without evidence and used deliberately
to mislead the American people.
Make no mistake: if it is determined
by the UN that Iraq has one single nuclear weapon, or an operational
long-range rocket, or a store of biological agents, or a stock
of chemicals assessed by inspectors as being specifically for
use as weapons, there will then be no doubt that Iraq will have
violated Security Council Resolution 1441 and will have to take
the consequences as decided by the Council. Under Chapter Seven
of the UN Charter the Council can "take such action by air,
sea or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore
international peace and security". There is, of course,
one major proviso that has been ignored and will continue to
be ignored by the United States, and that is Article 46, which
states that "Plans for the application of armed force shall
be made by the Security Council with the assistance of the Military
Staff committee". Fat chance of that happening. Nevertheless,
if Iraq is proved to have any of these ghastly weapons (of which
America has the largest stocks in the world), then it must pay
the price.
But Ms Rice says, "Many questions
remain" about Iraq's alleged NBC programmes, and "it
is Iraq's obligation to provide answers". The question posed
to Iraq was "Do you possess NBC weapons?" Iraq's answer
is "No". If Iraq is lying (and it is difficult to imagine
Mr Saddam Hussein telling the truth about the time of day) then
let it be proved. Saying over and over again that Mr Hussein
tells lies and therefore must have NBC weapons is not good enough.
Ari Fleischer, the spokesman for Mr Bush, said on January 9,
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there."
OK: where are they? If it is known "for a fact" that
there are weapons, then it must be known where they are. You
can't identify something you can't see, unless you're getting
decidedly metaphysical about worldly affairs. Just show us one
nuclear device "" not even a bomb, just a thingy that
is nuclear. Just show us one picture taken yesterday of a missile
with an NBC warhead. Let us see evidence that there is a missile
launcher ready to shoot off a missile that could "kill up
to one million people". All right: we'll settle for a missile
that could kill a thousand people. Produce evidence that Iraq
has one vial of VX agent. Then we will say you were right, and
watch you reduce Iraq to rubble.
The United States of America, whose taxpayers
pay forty BILLION dollars a year for information gathering and
intelligence processing, is verging on the omniscient. OK, so
it can't find Osama bin Laden, which, it is said, is the Number
One National Priority (although one wonders about this, given
the obsession of Mr Bush with Mr Saddam Hussein whom he damns
in every speech, while he never refers to Mr bin Laden), but
US agencies (and their colleagues in Israel, the UK and Australia)
can listen to every telephone and radio conversation in the world.
They can examine every fax and email, assess Airbus production
facilities and similar anti-American activities (the French found
out about this economic spying but can't do anything about it),
analyse the defences of friend and foe alike, and are in general
an Olympic-class nosy parker.
The US has had Iraq under the closest
possible surveillance for 12 years. There are satellites galore,
silently imaging the entire country by photography and electronic
means at all times of day and night. There are devices that "see"
through roofs and into the ground. There are satellites scooping
up every conversation by radio, telephone and computer. Additionally,
US and British aircraft operate daily over two thirds of Iraq
in their illegally-imposed "no-fly zones". Intelligence
gathering aircraft fly in these zones and along the Iraq border.
They complement the satellites in gathering vast quantities of
information about Iraqi defences (and civilian commercial enterprises,
in preparation for the US takeover of the country) and practice
guiding strike aircraft to a multitude of targets, not only in
the "no-fly" areas but also in the third of Iraq that
they permit to be under central government control. Iraq is quite
a large country (six tenths the size of Texas) but there is not
an inch that has not been closely examined. (The US proposal
to send U-2 reconnaissance aircraft to "help" the UN
was an absurd afterthought, and intended solely to confuse matters
in order that Washington could claim non-cooperation by Baghdad.)
It is fatuous for the Bush administration
to say that information cannot be provided to the UN, or evidence
to the world, about Iraq's alleged NBC arsenal because "we
don't want to betray our sources", as if these were Mr Saddam
Hussein's valet, PA or ADC. (Sorry, guys.) Show us the pictures
of the nuclear weapons plants, and the rockets and the canisters
of chemical weapons. Or provide transcripts of intercepted communications
indicating existence of these things. The methods themselves
aren't secret. It is quite possible Iraq has some very nasty
weapons. OK: where are they? And if you produce evidence now,
why did you take so long?
Brian Cloughley
is a former military officer who writes on international affairs.
His website is www.briancloughley.com
Yesterday's
Features
Walt Whitman
Respondez!
Respondez!
Jennifer Berkshire
Porto
Alegre Diary 3: Lula, Savior or Sell Out?
Chris Floyd
Street
Legal
Linda Heard
Are You a Friend of Freedom?
Agustín Velloso
Santisteban
Spain
and the War on Iraq
Rich Procter
We Can Stop This War
A National Rifle Association of Peace
Saul Landau
A Guide to Bush's Political Bipolar Disorder
Ralph Nader
Protecting Public Education from Corporate Tax Giveaways
Robert Fisk
The Human Cost of War
Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make
a Tax--Deductible Donation Today Online!
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- CounterPunch Special:
The Persecution of Gershon Legman by Susan Davis: Smut, the Post Office, Commies
and the FBI;
- Reeling Democrats: Is Pelosi the Answer?
- Gandhi v. Hitler: the Secret Race for the Nobel
Prize;
- Sullying Mario Savio's
Memory;
- Lynching Then and Now;
- Earn While You Learn: Chris Whittle and Child Labor;
The Case of the Pompous
Professor;
- The Class Struggle in
Boston: All that
Effort, But What Did They Get?
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
January 25
/ 26, 2003
Ron Jacobs
Iraq
War as Football Game
Bill and Kathy
Christison
Too Many Smoking Guns: Israel, American Jews and the War on Iraq
Chris Clarke
Collateral Damage: Draft Resistance and the Peace Mvt.
Bruce Jackson
Killing an Oak Tree: a Gratuitous Death
Jennifer Berkshire
Porto Allegre Diary II: Building the Party, Lula Style
Forrest Hylton
Left Turns in South America
Edward Said
When Will Arabs Resist?
William A.
Cook
Israeli
Democracy: Fact or Fiction?
Anthony Gancarski
America Never Was America to Me
Subcomandante
Marcos
Zaps to Basques: Lighten Up!
Ellen Cantarow
Music Lives in Palestine
Marta Russell
Extinguishing Frida Kahlo
Adam Engel
Man in the Black Suit: a novelini
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|