Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Sunday Morning

Interview With Scott Ritter

Aired September 08, 2002 - 07:01   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Even as some of the U.S. beat the war drums, former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter says action against Iraq would be a mistake. Ritter is in Baghdad to meet with Iraqi officials. He says despite U.S. claims, there is no evidence that Iraq has any weapons of mass destruction.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT RITTER, FMR. U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: My country seems to be on the verge of making a historical mistake, one that will forever change the political dynamic, which has governed the world since the end of the second World War, namely the foundation of international law that set forth a United Nations charter, which calls for the peaceful resolution of problems between nations. My government has set forth on a policy of unilateral intervention that runs contrary to the letter and intent of the United Nations charted. The truth of the matter is that Iraq is not a sponsor of the kind of terror perpetuated against the United States on September 11 and in fact is active in suppressing the sort of fundamentalist extremism that characterizes those who attacked the United States on that horrible day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'BRIEN: That was Scott Ritter not too long ago from Baghdad. Joining us for more on all of this, Scott Ritter live from Baghdad. Mr. Ritter, good to have you with us.

RITTER: Well, thanks, good to be here.

O'BRIEN: All right, let's talk for just a moment about the evidence. You seem very certain that there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein is engaged in an effort to build weapons of mass destruction. How can you be so certain?

RITTER: Well, what I'm very certain of is that the Bush administration has not provided any evidence to substantiate its allegations that Saddam Hussein's regime is currently pursuing weapons of mass destruction programs or is in actual possession of weapons of mass destruction. Based upon my experience as a weapon inspector fro 1991 to 1998, while we had serious concerns about unaccounted aspects of Iraq's weapons programs, we did ascertain a 95 percent level of disarmament that included all of the production equipment and means of production used by Iraq to produce these weapons.

So if Iraq has weapons today, like President Bush says, clearly they would have had to reconstitute this capability since December 1998, and this is something that the Bush administration needs to make a better case for, especially before we talk about going to war.

O'BRIEN: But just to be clear, while you've been there in Iraq, you've had no first-hand looks at any of these suspected sites where mass - weapons of mass destruction might be produced.

RITTER: That's absolutely correct. Look, I'm not here as a weapons inspector. The only people that can make that kind of finding of disarmament are weapons inspectors mandated by the Security Council. Right now these inspectors are not at work here in Iraq, and one of the things that I made absolutely clear to the Iraqi representatives today, and I will continue to do so with any governing officials I have the opportunity to meet with is that Iraq must allow the unconditional return of weapons inspectors and grant them unfettered access to sites designated by the weapons inspectors for inspection. I've also put forward the concept of the honest broker, which is -- go ahead.

O'BRIEN: I'm sorry to interrupt you on this delay. It is a little bit frustrating, but when you say that to them, that it is important to allow these inspections to resume, what's the reaction?

RITTER: I think the Iraqi government understands that if they do not allow unconditional return of inspectors with unfettered access that war is all but inevitable, that there will be nothing that can stay the hand that President Bush and Tony Blair seem prepared to unleash on Iraq and so, that's why I've proposed that a mechanism be put forward that provides, you know, a confidence building measure for the Iraqi government so they can allow these inspectors to return unconditionally and give them unfettered access.

Let's keep in mind that the reason why inspectors are out of Iraq isn't because Iraq kicked them out, but rather they were ordered out by the United States after the United States manipulated the inspection process to create a confrontation that led to Operation Desert Fox and then used intelligence information gathered by inspectors to target Iraqi government sites including the security of Saddam Hussein.

O'BRIEN: But ...

RITTER: So it's going to take a lot to convince Iraqis that they should once again trust inspectors, but frankly, they have no choice.

O'BRIEN: But the situation had become untenable for those inspectors. It's worth reminding our viewers that you're taking that a bit out of context. The inspectors at that juncture weren't really able to do their job properly, were they?

RITTER: No, absolutely false. The inspectors were able to do their task of disarming Iraq without any obstruction by Iraq. Let's keep in mind that from 1994 to 1998, the weapons inspectors carried out ongoing monitoring inspections of the totality of Iraq's industrial infrastructure and never once found any evidence of retain prohibited capability or efforts by Iraq to reconstitute prohibited capability, and in no time did Iraq obstruct this work. The obstruction only came when weapons inspectors sought to gain access to sites that were deemed by Iraq to be sensitive, and many of these sites, including intelligence facilities, security facilities, Saddam Hussein's palaces had nothing whatsoever to do with weapons of mass destruction. So you know, we've got to put this in its proper perspective. Yes there were obstructions, but this obstruction had little, if anything, to do with actual disarmament.

O'BRIEN: Let me ask you this, though, Mr. Ritter, it seems that sometimes we avoid seeing the forest for the trees here. Is there any doubt in your mind, taking aside what you've seen first hand or heard from the Iraqis, is there any doubt in your mind that Saddam Hussein would love to get a hold of nuclear weapons?

RITTER: Well, I think, you know, we have to be careful about, you know, trying to compare what Saddam Hussein and his regime were trying to do in the past with the current situation today. Saddam Hussein is a man who is very interested in the continued survival of Saddam Hussein, and I believe he recognizes that any effort by himself or his government to reacquire any aspect of weapons of mass destruction, let alone nuclear weapons, would be the equivalent of taking a suicide pill.

It would invite the immediate harsh response of the international community and would result in his ultimate demise. So yes, I truly believe that Saddam Hussein today is not seeking to acquire, not only a nuclear weapon, but weapons of mass destruction of any kind.

O'BRIEN: I guess the concern is, though, that we're perhaps in an era where, which invites the necessity of a preemptive strike, and that perhaps the only smoking gun evidence we'll ever see here in the west of nuclear weapons, weapons of mass destruction, might well be a mushroom cloud. The stakes are pretty high, aren't they Mr. Ritter? Isn't it time to act differently perhaps?

RITTER: No, I agree the stakes are very high, and that's why it's imperative that the United States acts in accordance with its obligations under international law. We are a signatory of the United Nations charter and in doing so, we've undertaken to respect international law, especially in regards to you know issues pertaining to war. If the United States shreds international law, rips up the United Nations charter and intervenes against Iraq unilaterally, we will be redefining the entire way the world chooses to deal with situations of this sort.

You know what will then stop India and Pakistan from going to war? What will stop China from intervening in Taiwan? There will be no guarantees. There will be no mechanism. We will be unleashing, you know, chaos. This is a bigger fear than any hypothetical concept of an Iraqi mushroom cloud exploding anywhere in the world.

O'BRIEN: All right ...

RITTER: This is a reality. An Iraqi nuclear weapon, at this point in time is sheer speculation. O'BRIEN: Mr. Ritter, the satellites are about to go out, but I've got to ask you before we get away, I'm sure you've heard the criticism that this -- you are perhaps acting in a disloyal manner toward the United States. How do you respond?

RITTER: Well, I think I made it very clear that I'm acting as a fervent patriot who loves my country. As an American citizen, I have an obligation to speak out when I feel my government is acting in a manner, which is inconsistent with the -- with the principals of our founding fathers. We have a Constitution, which says we will abide by the rule of law. We are signatories of the United Nations charter. Therefore, we are to be, you know, to adhere ourselves to the United Nations charter, and I see my government drifting decisively away from this. So, I feel I have no other choice as an American citizen than to stand up and speak out. It's the most patriotic thing I can do.

O'BRIEN: And with that, the satellite will expire. Scott Ritter, thank you very much for being with us here exclusively on CNN. Scott Ritter, the former U.N. weapons inspector, there in Baghdad as a private citizen on a private trip partially funded by himself, partially funded by sympathetic donors. We appreciate you being with us.

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