Duplicitous and complex – global policy in Iraq
Former UNSCOM inspector Scott Ritter details situation in Iraq
By Matt VandeBunte
World News Editor

Last November, the United States and Great Britain launched Operation Desert Fox as punishment for Iraqi non-compliance with the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) weapons inspection team. The operation, which consisted of bombing raids on Iraqi targets, sought to force Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi government into allowing UNSCOM unrestricted access to any suspected sites of weapons manufacture or storage. The former head of UNSCOM, Scott Ritter, spoke on Tuesday afternoon about the effects of Operation Desert Fox, how it destroyed UNSCOM and how it has created a quagmire in Iraq. He also gave details about the destruction that has been caused by economic sanctions decreed by U.N. Security Council resolutions, the presence (or lack thereof) of weapons of mass destruction, including biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons, and the faults he perceives in U.S. policy. Ritter, who publicly resigned his post as head of the inspection team last summer citing a crooked U.S. policy, suggested the continuation of such “duplicitous” policy in Operation Desert Fox. “Operation Desert Fox changed everything,” said Ritter. Prior to the attack, he said he had favored military intervention to force Iraqi compliance.

 


courtesy January Series

Scott Ritter, former head of UNSCOM, spoke Tuesday about Operation Desert Fox and Iraq today.

However, the results of the half-baked operation included the removal of UNSCOM and the maintenance of economic sanctions for an indefinite duration of time. “[The operation] was pure lunacy,” lamented Ritter as he intimated that U.S. policy aimed to eliminate UNSCOM and continue sanctions. Ritter seemed adamant about the harmful effects of economic sanctions on the Iraqi people. “If my children were denied the medicine they needed,” said Ritter, “I know that I’d be angry.” He also complained about the U.S. Government’s refusal to “constructively engage” Iraq. Such an engagement would bring an end to economic sanctions, normalizing economic relations. While Ritter believes that “engaging” Iraq would not necessarily lead to the demise of Saddam Hussein, he feels that it would improve the lot in life for most Iraqis. “If you can make hell a better place,” Ritter said, “why not?”

Ritter employed a similar argument to justify the intervention of the United States and the United Nations in Iraqi affairs. He suggested that the history of Iraq, particularly under Hussein, has shown the government to be aggressive with its use of weapons of mass destruction. He said the United States has an interest to ensure and advance the democracy that survived the Cold War. However, Ritter could not offer anything prescriptive concerning the economic sanctions, the potential buildup of illegal weapons, or the despotic reign of Saddam Hussein. Many factors influence the situation in Iraq and he offered benefits and disadvantages to both military and diplomatic solutions. Ritter suggested that it would take a very creative mind, perhaps that of Richard Holbrooke, who has been involved with negotiations in the former Yugoslavia, to find solutions to the muddled picture.

Ritter, 37, who majored in Russian History at Franklin & Marshall College, entered the U.S. Marine Corps after receiving his undergraduate degree. He specialized in intelligence before being assigned to the U.N. inspection team. Currently, Ritter is unemployed, spending his time writing articles for various publications (and also a book to be published soon) and making speeches across the country at venues such as Calvin. Ritter has also recently appeared on network television as an expert commentator on Unites States/Iraq military conflicts in the Gulf region. In the future, Ritter hopes to land a teaching job where he can “broaden his perspectives” on international affairs. Ultimately, the former UNSCOM head desires to have a role in the U.S. Government in national security or foreign policy.