Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Interview With Charles Duelfer
Aired September 24, 2002 - 07:44 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Tony Blair saying it is now proof positive that Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction. All of that coming before an address in the Parliament earlier today. In fact, that debate continues at this hour.
Britain's prime minister, a strong ally of the White House right now, released more than 50 pages of details in a dossier about Iraq's weapons program.
Charles Duelfer knows about this topic. He served as deputy chief of the U.N. Commission on Iraq; now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He is live this morning in D.C.
Good to have you with us, sir, and good morning to you.
CHARLES DUELFER, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Good morning.
HEMMER: A couple of specific items that Tony Blair mentioned at the very top of that address that he laid out: the demand for unrestricted access in Iraq. What is the likelihood between the U.N. and Baghdad that indeed that will be the case at some point very soon?
DUELFER: Well, I think unless the United Nations passes a new resolution, the stack -- the deck will remain stacked against the inspectors. The words, "immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access," sound good in New York, but they are very difficult to implement on the ground.
The problem is there is an imbalance between the way the weapons are viewed from Baghdad and what the force -- the Security Council is going to impose is. The weapons from Baghdad's perspective have saved the regime, and so far, the Security Council hasn't been willing to put the force in place to threaten the regime.
HEMMER: So, what's the scenario then? If indeed that's the case and eventually you're going to get another stone wall, what then?
DUELFER: Well, I think what we are going to see in New York this week is the discussion of a new resolution, and they'll have to put some new, tougher elements in that, which would give the inspectors a bit more force on the ground and increase the threat on the regime itself.
HEMMER: Let's talk about some specifics right now. Mobile laboratories that apparently Tony Blair is spelling out that have the capability of carrying out some sort of biological or chemical attack. Do you know -- does anyone know how many of these facilities might be present in Iraq? And tell us the importance about how elusive they can be in terms of tracking them down.
DUELFER: Well, this is a very interesting element of the British presentation, because it was on the basis of that kind of information that we had from defectors as far back as 1997 that we conducted some of our most controversial inspections. We had been hearing these reports. We had been seeking these types of mobile laboratories. They are very difficult to find.
What we have found is that the Iraqis have had a great deal of experience in learning how to hide things, and now, they've had four years to prepare for a new set of inspections.
HEMMER: The other thing he mentioned is that Saddam Hussein, allegedly, in the words of Tony Blair, has essentially hijacked about $3 billion worth of aid -- worth of aid, I should say. Do we know where that money is going and toward what?
DUELFER: Well, the short answer is no. But you can be sure that a lot of it is going towards these prohibited programs. I mean, they have enormous arrays of front companies and procurement actions that are driven by the Mukhabarat, their intelligence services. These are the types of activities which supported the programs in the past, and you can be sure they are continuing today.
HEMMER: One thing he did say, and I want to quote him now: "I want to take it on good faith", the words of Tony Blair, "take it on good faith from our intelligence sources that indeed what he is saying is true."
How strong can an argument -- how persuasive can an argument like that be?
DUELFER: Well, I think that it's pretty interesting at this point that he laid out some specifics, which we haven't seen before. With respect to the nuclear procurement activities, he got into some very specific transactions, which were noted by their intelligence, and that was quite interesting to me.
The other element which was interesting was the statement about the military plans for the use of biological and chemical weapons. This suggests that they have got information on the military planning and communications and command, and they wouldn't be having these plans if they didn't have the weapons.
So, that, I think, is much more specific than we've seen in the past.
HEMMER: One thing also that this argument could kind of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) a question of semantics. In Washington, we heard John King mention it many times. They talk about regime change at the White House. In London, though, it's about disarmament.
How do these two arguments fit in with one another if, indeed, Great Britain and the U.S. are going to forge together along the same path?
DUELFER: Well, here, I think, is -- you know, to convince Saddam to give up these weapons, the only thing which will convince him is if there's enough force behind it which threatens his regime.
Bear in mind, his experiences that these weapons have saved him on two occasions -- in the first instance in the war with Iran. And then the second instance, they argue, the Iraqis argue -- not done this with them personally -- they believe that it contributed to keeping the United States from going to Baghdad in 1991.
So, it seems to me that the only thing which will convince Saddam to give up these weapons completely is if he feels, in fact, his regime is threatened.
HEMMER: That's interesting, because Tony Blair made the comment, he said, diplomacy without the threat of force is useless, essentially in the words of the British prime minister.
Thank you, Charles. Good to talk to you, sir.
DUELFER: Thank you.
HEMMER: Charles Duelfer down in Washington, D.C.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.
Aired September 24, 2002 - 07:44 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Tony Blair saying it is now proof positive that Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction. All of that coming before an address in the Parliament earlier today. In fact, that debate continues at this hour.
Britain's prime minister, a strong ally of the White House right now, released more than 50 pages of details in a dossier about Iraq's weapons program.
Charles Duelfer knows about this topic. He served as deputy chief of the U.N. Commission on Iraq; now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He is live this morning in D.C.
Good to have you with us, sir, and good morning to you.
CHARLES DUELFER, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Good morning.
HEMMER: A couple of specific items that Tony Blair mentioned at the very top of that address that he laid out: the demand for unrestricted access in Iraq. What is the likelihood between the U.N. and Baghdad that indeed that will be the case at some point very soon?
DUELFER: Well, I think unless the United Nations passes a new resolution, the stack -- the deck will remain stacked against the inspectors. The words, "immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access," sound good in New York, but they are very difficult to implement on the ground.
The problem is there is an imbalance between the way the weapons are viewed from Baghdad and what the force -- the Security Council is going to impose is. The weapons from Baghdad's perspective have saved the regime, and so far, the Security Council hasn't been willing to put the force in place to threaten the regime.
HEMMER: So, what's the scenario then? If indeed that's the case and eventually you're going to get another stone wall, what then?
DUELFER: Well, I think what we are going to see in New York this week is the discussion of a new resolution, and they'll have to put some new, tougher elements in that, which would give the inspectors a bit more force on the ground and increase the threat on the regime itself.
HEMMER: Let's talk about some specifics right now. Mobile laboratories that apparently Tony Blair is spelling out that have the capability of carrying out some sort of biological or chemical attack. Do you know -- does anyone know how many of these facilities might be present in Iraq? And tell us the importance about how elusive they can be in terms of tracking them down.
DUELFER: Well, this is a very interesting element of the British presentation, because it was on the basis of that kind of information that we had from defectors as far back as 1997 that we conducted some of our most controversial inspections. We had been hearing these reports. We had been seeking these types of mobile laboratories. They are very difficult to find.
What we have found is that the Iraqis have had a great deal of experience in learning how to hide things, and now, they've had four years to prepare for a new set of inspections.
HEMMER: The other thing he mentioned is that Saddam Hussein, allegedly, in the words of Tony Blair, has essentially hijacked about $3 billion worth of aid -- worth of aid, I should say. Do we know where that money is going and toward what?
DUELFER: Well, the short answer is no. But you can be sure that a lot of it is going towards these prohibited programs. I mean, they have enormous arrays of front companies and procurement actions that are driven by the Mukhabarat, their intelligence services. These are the types of activities which supported the programs in the past, and you can be sure they are continuing today.
HEMMER: One thing he did say, and I want to quote him now: "I want to take it on good faith", the words of Tony Blair, "take it on good faith from our intelligence sources that indeed what he is saying is true."
How strong can an argument -- how persuasive can an argument like that be?
DUELFER: Well, I think that it's pretty interesting at this point that he laid out some specifics, which we haven't seen before. With respect to the nuclear procurement activities, he got into some very specific transactions, which were noted by their intelligence, and that was quite interesting to me.
The other element which was interesting was the statement about the military plans for the use of biological and chemical weapons. This suggests that they have got information on the military planning and communications and command, and they wouldn't be having these plans if they didn't have the weapons.
So, that, I think, is much more specific than we've seen in the past.
HEMMER: One thing also that this argument could kind of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) a question of semantics. In Washington, we heard John King mention it many times. They talk about regime change at the White House. In London, though, it's about disarmament.
How do these two arguments fit in with one another if, indeed, Great Britain and the U.S. are going to forge together along the same path?
DUELFER: Well, here, I think, is -- you know, to convince Saddam to give up these weapons, the only thing which will convince him is if there's enough force behind it which threatens his regime.
Bear in mind, his experiences that these weapons have saved him on two occasions -- in the first instance in the war with Iran. And then the second instance, they argue, the Iraqis argue -- not done this with them personally -- they believe that it contributed to keeping the United States from going to Baghdad in 1991.
So, it seems to me that the only thing which will convince Saddam to give up these weapons completely is if he feels, in fact, his regime is threatened.
HEMMER: That's interesting, because Tony Blair made the comment, he said, diplomacy without the threat of force is useless, essentially in the words of the British prime minister.
Thank you, Charles. Good to talk to you, sir.
DUELFER: Thank you.
HEMMER: Charles Duelfer down in Washington, D.C.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.
