Well I could not have timed reading this book any better than I have. Written by William Rivers Pitt and based on an interview with former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, this short booklet is about as well timed as it could possibly be. The interview that forms the heart of the book was given in the latter part of August this year.
Essentially, the book refutes many of the allegations that are being made by the Bush camp, as they try to win over American and world support for a war with Iraq. The raw facts seem to be these:
1) Saddam Hussein does not have nuclear weapons. If he did, we’d know about it. If he tried to buy the parts to build them, we’d know about. If he tried to develop them himself. we’d know about it. You can’t just build up lots of radioactive material without sensors detecting it.
2) The same really applies to chemical and biological weapons. We would know about it. Also, any chemical or biological weapons that were stockpiled, and kept hidden from investigators until they left in 1998, would be goo by now, since they decompose after 4/5 years.
So when Bush talks about Saddam Hussein’s “Arsenal of terrror” he’s really scaremongering. There may be new buildings going up, but that’s hardly surprising. Just because an engineering plant is “capable” of building parts, it doesn’t mean that they. And as soon as they actually start trying to manufacture nuclear elements, we’ll know about it.
The next problem is what we do if somehow Saddam Hussein is deposed. The majority population is actually Shi’a Muslims aligned to Iraq. And Iraq’s pretty anti-American, and much more extremist. Then there are the Kurds who form 23% of the population but who are really seeking an independent Kurdistan, not government of Iraq. Then there are minority Sunni Muslims who are the ruling class. They are lead by one family, of which Saddam Hussein is a memeber. If he were to be overthrown, the likely leadership would come from the same group of people. This would not be a democracy either.
Finally, why is Osama Bin Laden linked with Saddam Hussein. The two hate one another, since Bin Laden is an Islamic fundamentalist, and Hussein has spent 30 years declaring war on Islamic fundamentalism. The two have nothing in common. So where’s the link?
I cannot reccommend this booklet highly enough.
At least Americans, while supporting military action in the Middle East, want time for weapons inspectors to give it a go. This is imperative. If there has been a re-established weaponry programme, it can be stopped. “Taking out” Saddam is not the right option.