PDA

View Full Version : Iraq Said to Have Tried to Reach Last-Minute Deal to Avert War


zimv20
Nov 5, 2003, 10:35 PM
link (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/06/politics/06INTE.html?hp)


As American soldiers massed on the Iraqi border in March and diplomats argued about war, an influential adviser to the Pentagon received a secret message from a Lebanese-American businessman: Saddam Hussein wanted to make a deal.

Iraqi officials, including the chief of the Iraqi Intelligence Service, had told the businessman that they wanted Washington to know that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction, and they offered to allow American troops and experts to conduct a search. The businessman said in an interview that the Iraqis also offered to hand over a man accused of being involved in the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 who was being held in Baghdad. At one point, he said, the Iraqis pledged to hold elections.

The messages from Baghdad, first relayed in February to an analyst in the office of Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy and planning, were part of an attempt by Iraqi intelligence officers to open last-ditch negotiations with the Bush administration through a clandestine communications channel, according to people involved.

The efforts were portrayed by Iraqi officials as having the approval of President Saddam Hussein, according to interviews and documents.

The overtures, after a decade of evasions and deceptions by Iraq, were ultimately rebuffed. But the messages raised enough interest that in early March, Richard N. Perle, an influential adviser to top Pentagon officials, met in London with the Lebanese-American businessman, Imad Hage.

According to both men, Mr. Hage laid out the Iraqis' position to Mr. Perle, and he pressed the Iraqi request for a direct meeting with Mr. Perle or another representative of the United States.

"I was dubious that this would work," said Mr. Perle, widely recognized as an intellectual architect of the Bush administration's hawkish policy toward Iraq, "but I agreed to talk to people in Washington."

Mr. Perle said he sought authorization from C.I.A. officials to meet with the Iraqis, but the officials told him they did not want to pursue this channel, and they indicated they had already engaged in separate contacts with Baghdad. Mr. Perle said, "The message was, `Tell them that we will see them in Baghdad.' "

(more)


it's pretty clear that the administration's mind was already made up. probably years before.

at the moment, this is the nytimes.com top story. it doesn't even appear on cnn.com's front page.

SPG
Nov 5, 2003, 10:49 PM
Not surprising if you've read the PNAC mandate. Anything that could have prevented the war needed to be ignored, like evidence that there were no WMD, no links to Al Quaeda, no iminent threat, no international support...

g5man
Nov 6, 2003, 12:14 AM
If Saddam really wanted to avoid war he needed to abide by the UN resolutions. He did not need to go via some back channel to express his change of heart and cooperate.

Tonight PBS had an excellent documentry on the special forces. They followed a unit in Iraq and they showed how they discovered very sophisticated bomb making materials in a Baath security house. They showed diagrams of airport medal detectors along with explosive detecting machines. No link to Al Queda but items only used by terrorists.

In regards to this story the Pentagon allready dismissed it along with the state department.

SPG
Nov 6, 2003, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by g5man
If Saddam really wanted to avoid war he needed to abide by the UN resolutions.

By doing what? Oh, I dunno, maybe getting rid of any WMD's? Anybody find any? Well I guess that didn't work out so well for Saddam after all.

BTW, Anybody find Saddam?

Taft
Nov 6, 2003, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by g5man
If Saddam really wanted to avoid war he needed to abide by the UN resolutions. He did not need to go via some back channel to express his change of heart and cooperate.

As the article noted...

But former American intelligence officers with extensive experience in the Middle East say many Arab leaders have traditionally placed a high value on secret communications, though such informal arrangements are sometimes considered suspect in Washington.

As is prevelant in their society, a high value is assigned to pride and honor. Negotiating and making concessions in public would probably be seen as humiliating to a leader with this mindset.


As to the article...

I don't know what to think about this. The channels being used by the Iraqis certainly seem less than mainstream. In fact, they could even be a last ditch ploy by Saddam's regime.

At the same time, you would like to think that the administration would do everything in their power to avoid a war, if possible. If Saddam was really making the offers detailed in this article, and those offers were sincere, the Bush administration should have listened.

If it can be established that the Iraqis made credible offers of concession and the administration ignored them in their fervor to go to war, I think that borders on criminal. Think of the lives that could have been saved.

For me, the jury is still out on this item. I'm sure we'll be hearing more about this in the days to come. Should be interesting...

Taft