|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| CRISIS AVERTED? | |
 November 16, 1998 
|
||
 |
|
|
|
JIM LEHRER: President Clinton's decision not to bomb Iraq this weekend. We begin with a Newsmaker interview with the President's National Security Adviser, Samuel Berger. He joins us from the White House law. Mr. Burger, welcome.
JIM LEHRER: First, have there been any developments today following the agreement? Has anything happened in a positive or negative way? SAMUEL BERGER: Well, I believe that Chairman Butler has indicated that he is anxious to get the UNSCOM people back. There may have even been some people who went back into Baghdad today. But certainly over the next few days he will begin to flow his people back, begin to check the monitoring situation, and presumably then go on to complete his inspections. |
|||||||||||||
|
Letter of compliance. |
||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: So roughly 100 inspectors are going back, is that right? SAMUEL BERGER: I think there are about 120, I believe, that were withdrawn, but - in that neighborhood. JIM LEHRER: And what are they going to do within the - as soon as they get there to test whether or not Saddam Hussein in this case is serious about complying?
JIM LEHRER: Does the agreement allow those inspectors free access to everything they want to see unannounced, et cetera? SAMUEL BERGER: The agreement - not the agreement, the statement - the letter that was sent to the Security Council on Saturday evening said that the Iraqis would comply, would cooperate fully with UNSCOM, in accordance with all relevant Security Council resolutions, which means essentially that they have access. There are certain arrangements that have been developed over the years between UNSCOM - with UNSCOM. But they will be able to function within the rules of UNSCOM. |
 |
|||||||||||||
| Return of UNSCOM. | ||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: One of the concerns before, Mr. Berger, as you know, that was expressed by Scott Ritter and others, a former U.N. inspector, American, who resigned was that there was so much advance notice that was forced to be given to the Iraqis, they just kept moving things around. And there was no way to keep that from happening. Is there anything in this new letter, anything in the new understanding from your point of view that could keep that from happening? SAMUEL BERGER: Well, it's certainly one of the important reasons why it's important to get UNSCOM back in and why the President decided when to test the willingness of the Iraqis to allow UNSCOM to come back in and to comply. Without UNSCOM, they can reconstitute their weapons of mass destruction in a matter of months. But certainly the time while they were out, which was a few weeks, is time that things could have been moved. Let me make something clear, though, Jim. The obligation here is not on UNSCOM to find the hidden weapons. The obligation is on Saddam Hussein to disclose everything he has - to account for all discrepancies between what we believe he had before the Gulf War and what he has not accounted for. This is not an exercise of finding the needle in the haystack. This is an obligation of Saddam Hussein in a sense to put the haystack out in the lawn and said, "Here it is." And that, as President Clinton said yesterday, the affirmative obligation is on the Iraqis to comply. JIM LEHRER: But have you or others in the U.S. SAMUEL BERGER: Well, UNSCOM is an independent organization under the U.N. and a very professional one and a very vigorous one and one very dedicated to its mission. They will, I am sure, proceed as expeditiously as they can. Chairman Butler went to Iraq back in the summer and said, here's a road map; if you want to come into compliance, here's what you have to do. And you can do it over a period of months if you are committed to complying. So we're going to test that out. And if there is non-compliance in a serious way, the President's made it very clear, we're prepared to act, we're prepared to act swiftly. JIM LEHRER: What I'm trying to get at, Mr. Berger, not very well, I guess, is -- SAMUEL BERGER: I'm sorry. |
 |
|||||||||||||
| When will it end? | ||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: No. No. I think it's the way I'm asking the question here. I mean, is there some kind of -- is this thing going to be over soon, one way or another? I mean, are we talking a matter of days once those inspectors get on the ground, a matter of weeks, a matter of months, or is there, do you have your own kind of timetable - you and the President - as to whether - SAMUEL BERGER: I don't think - actually, I heard Mr. Ritter this morning on another network say that we should not force Mr. Butler to do this under an artificial deadline - that he needs - if we forced him to do that, in a sense, he'd go off and inspect things and find nothing. But this has to be prepared in a careful professional way, so that he's going places and looking for things and seeking documents that really are important and where he believes there are things that have not been disclosed. So I don't think there's an artificial deadline. I don't know how long this period will take. One of two things will happen. Either there will be compliance, or it will be perfectly clear that there is no intention to comply, and the President's made clear what our response will be under those circumstances. JIM LEHRER: Now, the President also said that he called for a new government in Iraq. What exactly does he have in mind?
|
||||||||||||||
| Revolt? | ||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: So you want the people of Iraq to revolt against Saddam Hussein? SAMUEL BERGER: We want over time for the government of Saddam Hussein to - for there to be a different government. I don't think we want to create any artificial or dangerous situations. I think we need to be, as I said, prudent in what we do - not create unreasonable expectations. But I think to the extent there are - there are voices and forces in Iraq that seek change, we will work for that change. JIM LEHRER: Are you concerned, Mr. Berger, that - and a potential Iraqi revolutionary, an anti-Saddam Hussein Iraqi citizen hearing the President's words, might go out and foment something, and then Saddam Hussein's forces crush him or her and their efforts, and then he looks at Port Washington and says, okay, I did what you said, now what are you going to do, are you going to help me out -- what are we going to do if that happens? SAMUEL BERGER: I think we'll have to take any situation on its own merits. I think that's why the President has said that we'll act in a prudent manner, we'll act in a manner that we believe is most effective, and that this will be a long-term enterprise. |
||||||||||||||
| A final solution. | ||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: But you're talking money, right? You're talking about that kind of support to anti-Saddam Hussein forces? SAMUEL BERGER: Well, there are a number of JIM LEHRER: Finally, to come back to where we began, Mr. Berger, this whole thing, should this be seen as some kind of final resolution of our problems with Iraq, or just another chapter in the confrontation? SAMUEL BERGER: Well, I think that what we have now is Saddam Hussein more isolated than he has been at any time since the Gulf War. No support, not the Russians, not the French, not the Chinese, not the Secretary-General of the U.N. - the whole world now is watching. Will he comply, or will he not? If he complies, fine. If not, I believe the international community will support whatever action is necessary. JIM LEHRER: Mr. Berger, thank you very much. SAMUEL BERGER: Thank you, Jim. |
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
   
|
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
SAMUEL
BERGER: Good evening, Jim. 
SAMUEL
BERGER: Well, I think this is essentially a professional judgment that
Chairman Butler and his team will make. They are extraordinarily committed
to their mission, which is to obtain full compliance with the resolutions
of the Security Council to detect and destroy weapons of mass destruction.
How they will proceed to do that really is, I think, a judgment they
will best make. I know they will proceed expeditiously, but they obviously
have to do it in a way that is professionally sound. 
Government
on behalf of President Clinton sat down with the people or in some ways
- Mr. Butler and others at the U.N. -- worked out some kind of either
timetable or checklist, or whatever, so the President will know, okay,
this thing has worked; they have passed the test, or whatever, or is
it just a case you're going to wait until Butler says, okay, they're
okay, or they're not okay? 
SAMUEL
BERGER: Well, I think, Jim, anybody who has watched the suffering of
the Iraqi people over the last 10 years -- this is a government that
has gassed its own people. This is a government that has fought a ghastly
war with Iran in which tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people
were killed, subjected its people to the punishing tack of the Gulf
War, anybody who has watched that - meantime in the last seven years
refused the U.N.'s offer to let him sell oil to buy food to feed his own
people - has to reach the conclusion that we need to help the Iraqi
people have a government that will represent and be reflective of their
interests, rather than repress their interests. What that means is that
we will work in a prudent, effective way with opposition voices, opposition
groups, to strengthen their ability, strengthen their capacity to bring
about change. This is not a short-term proposition. This is not a quick
fix, but this is something over the long-term which we are committed
to doing.