Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Interview With Amr Moussa

Aired November 11, 2002 - 07:04   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.


PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: As an emergency session of Iraq's parliament prepares to get under way in just a few hours, the 22- member Arab League is urging Saddam Hussein to fully comply with the demands of the United Nations resolution.
The league secretary-general, Ambassador Moussa, joins us now live from Cairo.

Thank you very much for joining us, sir.

Why did the Arab League in the end support this resolution?

SEC. GEN. AMR MOUSSA, ARAB LEAGUE: Well, as we have indicated in the resolution, we do support the international legitimacy and undivided legitimacy. And it was the Arab community of nations at the Arab League that have succeeded in convincing Iraq to approve or accept back the inspectors, and for an unfettered access and inspection mission. So, we have a stake in this.

However, what we need is a serious mission to be mounted by the inspectors with professionalism and credibility. We want them to report back to the Security Council on their findings in order for the Council and for all of us to act according to those findings, provided that there is a credible report coming from those inspectors.

So, we have no quarrel with the direction of this resolution, but we hope that the things will be done in a proper way and in cooperation with the government of Iraq, if we need the cooperation by both parties. And we have said -- as I have said before, we are all in the same boat when it comes to weapons of mass destruction.

ZAHN: Ambassador Moussa, there is obviously a key difference between providing inspectors unfettered access and ultimate compliance by the Iraqis, and we're going to put up on the screen now the timelines that the U.N. Security Council established for Iraq to comply by.

What happens if Iraq doesn't comply by December 8?

MOUSSA: Well, the -- it is mentioned in the resolution itself that it is for the Security Council to assess the situation, and to decide according to the reports coming from the UNMOVIC -- from the inspection mission.

So, I think the Security Council has matters in its hands, and I don't think that any of us, any of the members of the international community should act unilaterally, but through the Security Council. This is what would secure or ensure a collective reaction and collective action.

ZAHN: Under what circumstances would the Arab League support a military invasion of Iraq?

MOUSSA: I don't think under any circumstances the Arab community of nations would support invasion of an Arab country. There is a Security Council resolution -- there is a Security Council anyway, and the Security Council has to decide in accordance with the charter of the U.N.

There is an aversion by all of us in this part of the world for invasion of countries, especially those matters pertaining to the presence or non-presence of weapons of mass destruction is a matter for experts to assess. And the weapons of mass destruction are not only in Iraq; they are in many other countries, too.

Are we going to use force against all of those countries maintaining or having or accusing of having weapons of mass destruction? This is not the way, for example, to deal with North Korea so far, and we have another case in the Middle East, which is Israel, that has weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons. What are we going to do with this?

And I don't think that a policy of a double-standard or a different attitudes according to countries that have proven to be outside of the scope of international legitimacy. Israel is not a member of the NPT, the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

ZAHN: But, Ambassador Moussa...

MOUSSA: And there, the...

ZAHN: ... there clearly has to be a distinction here. I mean, Iraq is a country that not only has attacked its own people with poisonous gas, but actually attacked a sovereign nation. Are you saying that no matter what these inspectors find, there is absolutely no rationale for any kind of military action down the road?

MOUSSA: What I do say is that if there is any violation or any challenge to the work of inspectors, it is for -- it should be for the Security Council to decide -- to assess the situation and decide. The authority of the Council in maintaining international peace and security should be preserved. That's No. 1.

No. 2, yes, indeed, Iraq is a special case, because of the resolutions adopted by the Security Council on its behalf. Israel is another case, but don't forget that also Israel is defying international legitimacy by not acceding to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, like all other countries in the region and beyond.

ZAHN: Ambassador Moussa, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Thank you very much for your time this morning -- appreciate it very much.

MOUSSA: Thank you.

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 November 11, 2002 - 07:04   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: As an emergency session of Iraq's parliament prepares to get under way in just a few hours, the 22- member Arab League is urging Saddam Hussein to fully comply with the demands of the United Nations resolution.
The league secretary-general, Ambassador Moussa, joins us now live from Cairo.

Thank you very much for joining us, sir.

Why did the Arab League in the end support this resolution?

SEC. GEN. AMR MOUSSA, ARAB LEAGUE: Well, as we have indicated in the resolution, we do support the international legitimacy and undivided legitimacy. And it was the Arab community of nations at the Arab League that have succeeded in convincing Iraq to approve or accept back the inspectors, and for an unfettered access and inspection mission. So, we have a stake in this.

However, what we need is a serious mission to be mounted by the inspectors with professionalism and credibility. We want them to report back to the Security Council on their findings in order for the Council and for all of us to act according to those findings, provided that there is a credible report coming from those inspectors.

So, we have no quarrel with the direction of this resolution, but we hope that the things will be done in a proper way and in cooperation with the government of Iraq, if we need the cooperation by both parties. And we have said -- as I have said before, we are all in the same boat when it comes to weapons of mass destruction.

ZAHN: Ambassador Moussa, there is obviously a key difference between providing inspectors unfettered access and ultimate compliance by the Iraqis, and we're going to put up on the screen now the timelines that the U.N. Security Council established for Iraq to comply by.

What happens if Iraq doesn't comply by December 8?

MOUSSA: Well, the -- it is mentioned in the resolution itself that it is for the Security Council to assess the situation, and to decide according to the reports coming from the UNMOVIC -- from the inspection mission.

So, I think the Security Council has matters in its hands, and I don't think that any of us, any of the members of the international community should act unilaterally, but through the Security Council. This is what would secure or ensure a collective reaction and collective action.

ZAHN: Under what circumstances would the Arab League support a military invasion of Iraq?

MOUSSA: I don't think under any circumstances the Arab community of nations would support invasion of an Arab country. There is a Security Council resolution -- there is a Security Council anyway, and the Security Council has to decide in accordance with the charter of the U.N.

There is an aversion by all of us in this part of the world for invasion of countries, especially those matters pertaining to the presence or non-presence of weapons of mass destruction is a matter for experts to assess. And the weapons of mass destruction are not only in Iraq; they are in many other countries, too.

Are we going to use force against all of those countries maintaining or having or accusing of having weapons of mass destruction? This is not the way, for example, to deal with North Korea so far, and we have another case in the Middle East, which is Israel, that has weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons. What are we going to do with this?

And I don't think that a policy of a double-standard or a different attitudes according to countries that have proven to be outside of the scope of international legitimacy. Israel is not a member of the NPT, the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

ZAHN: But, Ambassador Moussa...

MOUSSA: And there, the...

ZAHN: ... there clearly has to be a distinction here. I mean, Iraq is a country that not only has attacked its own people with poisonous gas, but actually attacked a sovereign nation. Are you saying that no matter what these inspectors find, there is absolutely no rationale for any kind of military action down the road?

MOUSSA: What I do say is that if there is any violation or any challenge to the work of inspectors, it is for -- it should be for the Security Council to decide -- to assess the situation and decide. The authority of the Council in maintaining international peace and security should be preserved. That's No. 1.

No. 2, yes, indeed, Iraq is a special case, because of the resolutions adopted by the Security Council on its behalf. Israel is another case, but don't forget that also Israel is defying international legitimacy by not acceding to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, like all other countries in the region and beyond.

ZAHN: Ambassador Moussa, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Thank you very much for your time this morning -- appreciate it very much.

MOUSSA: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.