Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Interview With Garth Whitty, Former U.N. Weapons Inspector

Aired October 03, 2003 - 07:17   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.


SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: The man who is in charge of the U.S. search for weapons in Iraq briefed members of Congress yesterday on what his team has found and has not found.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID KAY, CIA CHIEF WEAPONS INSPECTOR: We have not found at this point actual weapons. It does not mean we've concluded there are no actual weapons. It means at this point in time -- and it's a huge country with a lot to do -- that we have not yet found weapons.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'BRIEN: David Kay says evidence of Iraqi intent to develop weapons is plentiful, though.

And joining us this morning is former weapons inspector, Garth Whitty. He is in London for us this morning.

Good morning. Nice to see you.

GARTH WHITTY, FORMER WEAPONS INSPECTOR: Good morning.

O'BRIEN: When we were talking to you, I think it was back in June, you said that you thought certainly there would be some residue that was found from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. Have you been surprised that that has not yet been found?

WHITTY: I have been surprised, because there have been specific weapons inspection teams looking for weapons. And on top of that, of course, we've got about 150,000 coalition troops there, and while it's not their primary goal, that no one has come across anything in terms of the other searches that they're carrying out seems quite extraordinary.

O'BRIEN: So, then, in your mind, does this mean that there are no weapons of mass destruction? Or do you think that David Kay's team should be looking elsewhere where they're not looking now?

WHITTY: I think that the team is going to have to review everything that they've done. They're going to have to look at the intelligence again, and also probably revisit the sites. But I have no doubt that there is still some residue from the original program. And, of course, it's very important that that's found, because the last thing that anyone would wish would be for those weapons to fall into someone's hands, and perhaps be used for illegitimate purposes. O'BRIEN: At the same time, the Iraqi scientists who were originally involved in the program have said that there is nothing there, and they don't seem to be coming forward with any information of any value. What's your assessment of the reason for that?

WHITTY: Well, I'm sure that they are telling it as they see it. It defies logic that you could have had a major program, as Iraq certainly had in the '80s and early '90s, and have gotten rid of absolutely everything. Somewhere, there will have been something that's overlooked. And I think it's very important to make sure that nothing falls into anyone's hands that might have an unpleasant purpose for it.

O'BRIEN: "TIME" magazine sort of suggests that Saddam Hussein, to some degree, was out of the loop himself on exactly what weapons existed and what did not. Do you think there is some validity potentially in that?

WHITTY: I think that's probably absolutely right. I mean, one of the problems with a regime like his would be that he wouldn't be told the truth necessarily anyway. People would tell him the things that they thought that he wanted to hear and on pain of death of getting it wrong. And so, I doubt that he had very much knowledge at all of what was or wasn't the case.

O'BRIEN: The U.N. weapons inspectors were previously very well- ensconced in the area, know the area well. Do you think the whole entire process should be turned over to them, as opposed to coming out of the Pentagon?

WHITTY: I think there would be all sorts of merits in it being a U.N. task again. For over a decade or the best part of a decade, it was a U.N. task. There's a lot of expertise there. And, of course, that would involve other countries, and other countries with different approaches might help to achieve a great deal success than what has been thus far.

O'BRIEN: Six-hundred million dollars is the price tag of this $87 billion already, according to a "New York Times" report. Do you think that would be money well spent? Other people say way too much money.

WHITTY: It's a huge amount of money, there's no doubt about that. And the reality is, can we afford to go away and perhaps leave behind chemical weapons that may potentially fall into the hands of terrorists or some other group that would use them against us or against a sector of the Iraqi society?

O'BRIEN: Garth Whitty is a former weapons inspector. Thanks for joining us this morning. Appreciate it.

WHITTY: Thank you.

O'BRIEN: Joining us from London.

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





Inspector>


Aired October 3, 2003 - 07:17   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: The man who is in charge of the U.S. search for weapons in Iraq briefed members of Congress yesterday on what his team has found and has not found.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID KAY, CIA CHIEF WEAPONS INSPECTOR: We have not found at this point actual weapons. It does not mean we've concluded there are no actual weapons. It means at this point in time -- and it's a huge country with a lot to do -- that we have not yet found weapons.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'BRIEN: David Kay says evidence of Iraqi intent to develop weapons is plentiful, though.

And joining us this morning is former weapons inspector, Garth Whitty. He is in London for us this morning.

Good morning. Nice to see you.

GARTH WHITTY, FORMER WEAPONS INSPECTOR: Good morning.

O'BRIEN: When we were talking to you, I think it was back in June, you said that you thought certainly there would be some residue that was found from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. Have you been surprised that that has not yet been found?

WHITTY: I have been surprised, because there have been specific weapons inspection teams looking for weapons. And on top of that, of course, we've got about 150,000 coalition troops there, and while it's not their primary goal, that no one has come across anything in terms of the other searches that they're carrying out seems quite extraordinary.

O'BRIEN: So, then, in your mind, does this mean that there are no weapons of mass destruction? Or do you think that David Kay's team should be looking elsewhere where they're not looking now?

WHITTY: I think that the team is going to have to review everything that they've done. They're going to have to look at the intelligence again, and also probably revisit the sites. But I have no doubt that there is still some residue from the original program. And, of course, it's very important that that's found, because the last thing that anyone would wish would be for those weapons to fall into someone's hands, and perhaps be used for illegitimate purposes. O'BRIEN: At the same time, the Iraqi scientists who were originally involved in the program have said that there is nothing there, and they don't seem to be coming forward with any information of any value. What's your assessment of the reason for that?

WHITTY: Well, I'm sure that they are telling it as they see it. It defies logic that you could have had a major program, as Iraq certainly had in the '80s and early '90s, and have gotten rid of absolutely everything. Somewhere, there will have been something that's overlooked. And I think it's very important to make sure that nothing falls into anyone's hands that might have an unpleasant purpose for it.

O'BRIEN: "TIME" magazine sort of suggests that Saddam Hussein, to some degree, was out of the loop himself on exactly what weapons existed and what did not. Do you think there is some validity potentially in that?

WHITTY: I think that's probably absolutely right. I mean, one of the problems with a regime like his would be that he wouldn't be told the truth necessarily anyway. People would tell him the things that they thought that he wanted to hear and on pain of death of getting it wrong. And so, I doubt that he had very much knowledge at all of what was or wasn't the case.

O'BRIEN: The U.N. weapons inspectors were previously very well- ensconced in the area, know the area well. Do you think the whole entire process should be turned over to them, as opposed to coming out of the Pentagon?

WHITTY: I think there would be all sorts of merits in it being a U.N. task again. For over a decade or the best part of a decade, it was a U.N. task. There's a lot of expertise there. And, of course, that would involve other countries, and other countries with different approaches might help to achieve a great deal success than what has been thus far.

O'BRIEN: Six-hundred million dollars is the price tag of this $87 billion already, according to a "New York Times" report. Do you think that would be money well spent? Other people say way too much money.

WHITTY: It's a huge amount of money, there's no doubt about that. And the reality is, can we afford to go away and perhaps leave behind chemical weapons that may potentially fall into the hands of terrorists or some other group that would use them against us or against a sector of the Iraqi society?

O'BRIEN: Garth Whitty is a former weapons inspector. Thanks for joining us this morning. Appreciate it.

WHITTY: Thank you.

O'BRIEN: Joining us from London.

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





Inspector>