WMD AND SADDAM HUSSEIN: PROPOSED US ACTION TOWARD IRAQ February 2003 Claire Leavitt

THE PROBLEM  Saddam Hussein, the Ba’athist dictator of Iraq (1979-), appears to be building and stockpiling chemical, biological and nuclear weapons (WMD), making his regime a pronounced threat to Middle Eastern and United States security

THE PROBLEM  Should the United States pursue a policy of regime change in Iraq using US ground forces to depose Saddam or disarm Saddam via diplomatic channels (particularly the UN Security Council and UN weapons inspectors)?

HISTORICAL CONTEXT  During Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), Saddam known to have used chemical and biological weapons against Iranian civilians and the Kurdish minority in Iraq (prohibited under international law)  Saddam also pursued nuclear weapons program (though did not acquire a nuclear bomb at the time)

HISTORICAL CONTEXT  During Persian Gulf War (1990-1991), Saddam known to have chemical and biological weapons at his disposal, but did not use them against the Kuwaitis  2 August 1990: Saddam’s forces invade sovereign nation of Kuwait  6 August 1990: UN Resolution 668 imposes economic sanctions on Iraq  7 August 1990: President George H. W. Bush sends US troops to Saudi Arabian border (Operation Desert Shield)  16 January 1991: US launches Operation Desert Storm after Iraq fails to respond to UN ultimatum to withdraw

HISTORICAL CONTEXT  UNSC post-Gulf War disarmament conditions: 1) Saddam and the Iraqi government must unconditionally remove and destroy all chemical and biological weapons and >150km-range ballistic missiles 2) Iraq must submit, within 15 days of the resolution, a report detailing the locations of all weapons and plans to destroy them 3) Iraq must submit to on-site inspections from the UN Special Commission on Iraq 4) Iraq must abide by its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) and agree not to develop nuclear weapons (submit report to UNSG and IAEA)

HISTORICAL CONTEXT  UN Special Commission weapons inspections timeline:  1995: Iraq attempts to buy growth mediums (for biological weapons) from British company Oxoid; international community fearful that Iraq may have been planning to weaponize smallpox  1998: UN chief weapons inspector Scott Ritter angrily resigns, claiming “Iraq is not disarming;” UN weapons inspectors leave Iraq prior to President Clinton’s 4-day bombing campaign to destroy weapons facilities  2002: Ritter, in quick turnaround, claims 90-95% of Iraqi chemical and biological weapons (and LR ballistic missiles) have been destroyed despite prolonged absence of UN inspectors

CURRENT WEAPONS INSPECTIONS  2002: Saddam invites UN weapons inspector Hans Blix back into Iraq to conduct inspections (UN Resolution 1441 permits new inspections to commence); burden on Iraq to prove WMD were gone  January 2003: Blix and the UN inspections committee claim there is no evidence to suggest Saddam has active WMD programs; however, some 1980s/1990s weapons material has not been accounted for

US INTELLIGENCE  2001, 2002 and 2003: Iraq has attempted to acquire high-grade aluminum tubes (prohibited by the UN); could possibly be used to build gas centrifuges intended to separate and enrich uranium for nuclear weapons  2002: Iraq attempted to acquire yellowcake uranium powder from Niger  2001: Mohammed Atta (9/11 mastermind) may have met with senior Iraqi officials in Prague

POLICY OPTIONS 1) Regime change: US troops could depose Saddam in under three weeks  Pros: Saddam is unpredictable and cannot be trusted—deposing him would ensure Middle Eastern and global safety; disarmament of a likely nuclear or pre-nuclear rogue nation; liberation of Iraqi people  Cons: Regime change in Iraq would commit the US to an indefinite occupation of Iraq and ensure the loss of American and Iraqi lives; Iraqis aren’t happy under Saddam, but what would replace him?

POLICY OPTIONS 1) Diplomatic solution: UN approves new round of economic sanctions (likely); Saddam agrees to strict compliance with UN weapons inspectors’ schedule  Pros: Support of the international community and longstanding Western European allies; commitment to international law; no military engagement and loss of American and Iraqi lives  Cons: In short, another Persian Gulf War

PROPOSED SOLUTION We propose a diplomatic solution to the intelligence that suggests Iraqi non-compliance with UN weapons mandates, backed up by the threat of American force should Saddam defy the UN inspectors  Initiating a policy of regime change is simply too risky and would cost too many lives (combatant and civilian), particularly when the WMD intelligence is not ironclad

DETAILS UNSC would unanimously and immediately approve a resolution authorizing a new round of economic sanctions against Iraq UN Special Commission would resume its inspections of Iraqi weapons sites and require Saddam to abide by a strict schedule with a zero-strikes compliance policy

DETAILS 3) US would issue a formal warning to Saddam to comply with the UN weapons inspectors and prove he has completely disarmed, i.e., he has:  Destroyed all chemical, biological and nuclear weapons facilities  Made no attempts to acquire materials used for building these weapons

DETAILS 4) US intelligence community, aided by European and regional allies, would commit to closely monitoring Saddam’s regime and would be prepared to consider multilateral military action in the event of noncompliance