April Glaspie - Saddam Hussein
Conversation 1990
Excerpts From Iraqi Document on Meeting with U.S. Envoy
The New York Times International
Sunday, September 23, 1990
Special to The New York Times
12-19-3
WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 -- On July 25, President Saddam Hussein of Iraq summoned
the United States Ambassador to Baghdad, April Glaspie, to his office in the last
high-level contact between the two Governments before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on
Aug. 2. Here are excerpts from a document described by Iraqi Government officials as a
transcript of the meeting, which also included the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Tariq Aziz.
A copy was provided to The New York Times by ABC News, which translated from the
Arabic. The State Department has declined to comment on its accuracy.
SADDAM HUSSEIN: I have summoned you today to hold comprehensive political
discussions with you. This is a message to President Bush. You know that we did not
have relations with the U.S. until 1984 and you know the circumstances and reasons
which caused them to be severed. The decision to establish relations with the U.S.
were taken in 1980 during the two months prior to the war between us and Iran.
When the war started, and to avoid misinterpretation, we postponed the
establishment of relations hoping that the war would end soon.
But because the war lasted for a long time, and to emphasize the fact that we
are a non-aligned country, it was important to re-establish relations with the U.S.
And we choose to do this in 1984.
It is natural to say that the U.S. is not like Britain, for example, with the
latter's historic relations with Middle Eastern countries, including Iraq. In
addition, there were no relations between Iraq and the U.S. between 1967 and 1984. One
can conclude it would be difficult for the U.S. to have a full understanding of many
matters in Iraq. When relations were re-established we hoped for a better
understanding and for better cooperation because we too do not understand the
background of many American decisions. We dealt with each other during the war and we
had dealings on various levels. The most important of those levels were with the
foreign ministers.
U.S.-Iraq Rifts
We had hoped for a better common understanding and a better chance of
cooperation to benefit both our peoples and the rest of the Arab nations.
But these better relations have suffered from various rifts. The worst of
these was in 1986, only two years after establishing relations, with what was known as
Irangate, which happened during the year that Iran occupied the Fao peninsula.
It was natural then to say that old relations and complexity of interests
could absorb many mistakes. But when interests are limited and relations are not that
old, then there isn't a deep understanding and mistakes could have a negative effect.
Sometimes the effect of an error can be larger than the error itself.
Despite all of that, we accepted the apology, via his envoy, of the American
President regarding Irangate, and we wiped the slate clean. And we shouldn't unearth
the past except when new events remind us that old mistakes were not just a matter of
coincidence.
Our suspicions increased after we liberated the Fao peninsula. The media began
to involve itself in our politics. And our suspicions began to surface anew, because
we began to question whether the U.S. felt uneasy with the outcome of the war when we
liberated our land.
It was clear to us that certain parties in the United States -- and I don't
say the President himself -- but certain parties who had links with the intelligence
community and with the State Department -- and I don't say the Secretary of State
himself -- I say that these parties did not like the fact that we liberated our land.
Some parties began to prepare studies entitles: "Who will succeed Saddam Hussein?"
They began to contact gulf states to make them fear Iraq, to persuade them not to give
Iraq economic aid. And we have evidence of these activities.
Iraqi Policy on Oil
Iraq came out of the war burdened with $40 billion debts, excluding the aid
given by Arab states, some of whom consider that too to be a debt although they knew
-- and you knew too -- that without Iraq they would not have had these sums and the
future of the region would have been entirely different.
We began to face the policy of the drop in the price of oil. Then we saw the
United States, which always talks of democracy but which has no time for the other
point of view. Then the media campaign against Saddam Hussein was started by the
official American media. The United States thought that the situation in Iraq was like
Poland, Romania or Czechoslovakia. We were disturbed by this campaign but we were not
disturbed too much because we had hoped that, in a few months, those who are decision
makers in America would have a chance to find the facts and see whether this media
campaign had had any effect on the lives of Iraqis. We had hoped that soon the
American authorities would make the correct decision regarding their relations with
Iraq. Those with good relations can sometimes afford to disagree.
But when planned and deliberate policy forces the price of oil down without
good commercial reasons, then that means another war against Iraq. Because military
war kills people by bleeding them, and economic war kills their humanity by depriving
them of their chance to have a good standard of living. As you know, we gave rivers of
blood in a war that lasted eight years, but we did not lose our humanity. Iraqis have
a right to live proudly. We do not accept that anyone could injure Iraqi pride or the
Iraqi right to have high standards of living.
Kuwait and the U.A.E. were at the front of this policy aimed at lowering
Iraq's position and depriving its people of higher economic standards. And you know
that our relations with the Emirates and Kuwait had been good. On top of all that,
while we were busy at war, the state of Kuwait began to expand at the expense of our
territory.
You may say this is propaganda, but I would direct you to one document, the
Military Patrol Line, which is the borderline endorsed by the Arab League in 1961 for
military patrols not to cross the Iraq-Kuwait border.
But go and look for yourselves. You will see the Kuwaiti border patrols, the
Kuwaiti farms, the Kuwaiti oil installations -- all built as closely as possible to
this line to establish that land as Kuwaiti territory.
Conflicting Interests
Since then, the Kuwaiti Government has been stable while the Iraqi Government
has undergone many changes. Even after 1968 and for 10 years afterwards, we were too
busy with our own problems. First in the north then the 1973 war, and other problems.
Then came the war with Iran which started 10 years ago.
We believe that the United States must understand that people who live in
luxury and economic security can each an understanding with the United States on what
are legitimate joint interests. But the starved and the economically deprived cannot
reach the same understanding.
We do not accept threats from anyone because we do not threaten anyone. But we
say clearly that we hope that the U.S. will not entertain too many illusions and will
seek new friends rather than increase the number of its enemies.
I have read the American statements speaking of friends in the area. Of
course, it is the right of everyone to choose their friends. We can have no
objections. But you know you are not the ones who protected your friends during the
war with Iran. I assure you, had the Iranians overrun the region, the American troops
would not have stopped them, except by the use of nuclear weapons.
I do not belittle you. But I hold this view by looking at the geography and
nature of American society into account. Yours is a society which cannot accept 10,000
dead in one battle.
You know that Iran agreed to the cease-fire not because the United States had
bombed one of the oil platforms after the liberation of the Fao. Is this Iraq's reward
for its role in securing the stability of the region and for protecting it from an
unknown flood?
Protecting the Oil Flow
So, what can it mean when America says it will now protect its friends? It can
only mean prejudice against Iraq. This stance plus maneuvers and statements which have
been made has encouraged the U.A.E. and Kuwait to disregard Iraqi rights.
I say to you clearly that Iraq's rights, which are mentioned in the
memorandum, we will take one by one. That might not happen now or after a month or
after one year, but we will take it all. We are not the kind of people who will
relinquish their rights. There is no historic right, or legitimacy, or need, for the
U.A.E. and Kuwait to deprive us of our rights. If they are needy, we too are needy.
The United States must have a better understanding of the situation and
declare who it wants to have relations with and who its enemies are. But it should not
make enemies simply because others have different points of view regarding the
Arab-Israeli conflict.
We clearly understand America's statement that it wants an easy flow of oil.
We understanding American staying that it seeks friendship with the states in the
region, and to encourage their joint interests. But we cannot understand the attempt
to encourage some parties to hard Iraq's interests.
The United States wants to secure the flow of oil. This understandable and
known. But it must not deploy methods which the United States says it disapproves of
-- flexing muscles and pressure.
If you use pressure, we will deploy pressure and force. We know that you can
harm us although we do not threaten you. But we too can harm you. Everyone can cause
harm according to their ability and their size. We cannot come all the way to you in
the United States, but individual Arabs may reach you.
War and Friendship
You can come to Iraq with aircraft and missiles but do not push us to the
point where we cease to care. And when we feel that you want to injure our pride and
take away the Iraqis' chance of a high standard of living, then we will cease to care
and death will be the choice for us. Then we would not care if you fired 100missiles
for each missile we fired. Because without pride life would have no value.
It is not reasonable to ask our people to bleed rivers of blood for eight
years then to tell them, "Now you have to accept aggression from Kuwait, the U.A.E.,
or from the U.S. or from Israel."
We do not put all these countries in the same boat. First, we are hurt and
upset that such disagreement is taking place between us and Kuwait and the U.A.E. The
solution must be found within an Arab framework and through direct bilateral
relations. We do not place America among the enemies. We pace it where we want our
friends to be and we try to be friends. But repeated American statements last year
make it apparent that America did not regard us as friends. Well the Americans are
free.
When we seek friendship we want pride, liberty and our right to choose.
We want to deal according to our status as we deal with the others according
to their statuses.
We consider the others' interests while we look after our own. And we expect
the others to consider our interests while they are dealing with their own. What does
it mean when the Zionist war minister is summoned to the United States now? What do
they mean, these fiery statements coming out of Israel during the past few days and
the talk of war being expected now more than at any other time?
* * *
I do not believe that anyone would lose by making friends with Iraq. In my
opinion, the American President has not made mistakes regarding the Arabs, although
his decision to freeze dialogue with the P.L.O. was wrong. But it appears that this
decision was made to appease the Zionist lobby or as a piece of strategy to cool the
Zionist anger, before trying again. I hope that our latter conclusion is the correct
one. But we will carry on saying it was the wrong decision.
You are appeasing the usurper in so many ways -- economically, politically and
militarily as well as in the media. When will the time come when, for every three
appeasements to the usurper, you praise the Arabs just once?
APRIL GLASPIE: I thank you, Mr. President, and it is a great pleasure for a
diplomat to meet and talk directly with the President. I clearly understand your
message. We studied history at school That taught us to say freedom or death. I think
you know well that we as a people have our experience with the colonialists.
Mr. President, you mentioned many things during this meeting which I cannot
comment on on behalf of my Government. But with your permission, I will comment on two
points. You spoke of friendship and I believe it was clear from the letters sent by
our President to you on the occasion of your National Day that he emphasizes --
HUSSEIN: He was kind and his expressions met with our regard and respect.
Directive on Relations
GLASPIE: As you know, he directed the United States Administration to reject
the suggestion of implementing trade sanctions.
HUSSEIN: There is nothing left for us to buy from America. Only wheat. Because
every time we want to buy something, they say it is forbidden. I am afraid that one
day you will say, "You are going to make gunpowder out of wheat."
GLASPIE: I have a direct instruction from the President to seek better
relations with Iraq.
HUSSEIN: But how? We too have this desire. But matters are running contrary to
this desire.
GLASPIE: This is less likely to happen the more we talk. For example, you
mentioned the issue of the article published by the American Information Agency and
that was sad. And a formal apology was presented.
HUSSEIN: Your stance is generous. We are Arabs. It is enough for us that
someone says, "I am sorry. I made a mistake." Then we carry on. But the media campaign
continued. And it is full of stories. If the stories were true, no one would get
upset. But we understand from its continuation that there is a determination.
GLASPIE: I saw the Diane Sawyer program on ABC. And what happened in that
program was cheap and unjust. And this is a real picture of what happens in the
American media -- even to American politicians themselves. These are the methods the
Western media employs. I am pleased that you add your voice to the diplomats who stand
up to the media. Because your appearance in the media, even for five minutes, would
help us to make the American people understand Iraq. This would increase mutual
understanding. If they American President had control of the media, his job would be
much easier.
Mr. President, not only do I want to say that President Bush wanted better and
deeper relations with Iraq, but he also wants an Iraqi contribution to peace and
prosperity in the Middle East. President Bush is an intelligent man. He is not going
to declare an economic war against Iraq.
You are right. It is true what you say that we do not want higher prices for
oil. But I would ask you to examine the possibility of not charging too high a price
for oil.
HUSSEIN: We do not want too high prices for oil. And I remind you that in 1974
I gave Tariq Aziz the idea for an article he wrote which criticized the policy of
keeping oil prices high. It was the first Arab article which expressed this view.
Shifting Price of Oil
TARIQ AZIZ: Our policy in OPEC opposes sudden jumps in oil prices.
HUSSEIN: Twenty-five dollars a barrel is not a high price.
GLASPIE: We have many Americans who would like to see the price go above $25
because they come from oil-producing states.
HUSSEIN: The price at one stage had dropped to $12 a barrel and a reduction in
the modest Iraqi budget of $6 billion to $7 billion is a disaster.
GLASPIE: I think I understand this. I have lived here for years. I admire your
extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. I know you need funds. We understand
that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country.
But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with
Kuwait.
I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during the late 60's. The instruction
we had during this period was that we should express no opinion on this issue and that
the issue is not associated with America. James Baker has directed our official
spokesmen to emphasize this instruction. We hope you can solve this problem using any
suitable methods via Klibi or via President Mubarak. All that we hope is that these
issues are solved quickly. With regard to all of this, can I ask you to see how the
issue appears to us?
My assessment after 25 years' service in this area is that your objective must
have strong backing from your Arab brothers. I now speak of oil But you, Mr.
President, have fought through a horrific and painful war. Frankly, we can see only
that you have deployed massive troops in the south. Normally that would not be any of
our business. But when this happens in the context of what you said on your national
day, then when we read the details in the two letters of the Foreign Minister, then
when we see the Iraqi point of view that the measures taken by the U.A.E. and Kuwait
is, in the final analysis, parallel to military aggression against Iraq, then it would
be reasonable for me to be concerned. And for this reason, I received an instruction
to ask you, in the spirit of friendship -- not in the spirit of confrontation --
regarding your intentions.
I simply describe the position of my Government. And I do not mean that the
situation is a simple situation. But our concern is a simple one.
HUSSEIN: We do not ask people not to be concerned when peace is at issue. This
is a noble human feeling which we all feel. It is natural for you as a superpower to
be concerned. But what we ask is not to express your concern in a way that would make
an aggressor believe that he is getting support for his aggression.
We want to find a just solution which will give us our rights but not deprive
others of their rights. But at the same time, we want the others to know that our
patience is running out regarding their action, which is harming even the milk our
children drink, and the pensions of the widow who lost her husband during the war, and
the pensions of the orphans who lost their parents.
As a country, we have the right to prosper. We lost so many opportunities, and
the others should value the Iraqi role in their protection. Even this Iraqi [the
President points to their interpreter] feels bitter like all other Iraqis. We are not
aggressors but we do not accept aggression either. We sent them envoys and handwritten
letters. We tried everything. We asked the Servant of the Two Shrines -- King Fahd --
to hold a four-member summit, but he suggested a meeting between the Oil Ministers. We
agreed. And as you know, the meeting took place in Jidda. They reached an agreement
which did not express what we wanted, but we agreed.
Only two days after the meeting, the Kuwaiti Oil Minister made a statement
that contradicted the agreement. We also discussed the issue during the Baghdad
summit. I told the Arab Kings and Presidents that some brothers are fighting an
economic war against us. And that not all wars use weapons and we regard this kind of
war as a military action against us. Because if the capability of our army is lowered
then, if Iran renewed the war, it could achieve goals which it could not achieve
before. And if we lowered the standard of our defenses, then this could encourage
Israel to attack us. I said that before the Arab Kings and Presidents. Only I did not
mention Kuwait and U.A.E. by name, because they were my guests.
Before this, I had sent them envoys reminding them that our war had included
their defense. Therefore the aid they gave us should not be regarded as a debt. We did
not more than the United States would have done against someone who attacked its
interests.
I talked about the same thing with a number of other Arab states. I explained
the situation t brother King Fahd a few times, by sending envoys and on the telephone.
I talked with brother King Hussein and with Sheik Zaid after the conclusion of the
summit. I walked with the Sheik to the plane when he was leaving Mosul. He told me,
"Just wait until I get home." But after he had reached his destination, the statements
that came from there were very bad -- not from him, but from his Minister of Oil.
And after the Jidda agreement, we received some intelligence that they were
talking of sticking to the agreement for two months only. Then they would change their
policy. Now tell us, if the American President found himself in this situation, what
would he do? I said it was very difficult for me to talk about these issues in public.
But we must tell the Iraqi people who face economic difficulties who was responsible
for that.
Talks with Mubarak
GLASPIE: I spent four beautiful years in Egypt.
HUSSEIN: The Egyptian people are kind and good and ancient. The oil people are
supposed to help the Egyptian people, but they are mean beyond belief. It is painful
to admit it, but some of them are disliked by Arabs because of their greed.
GLASPIE: Mr. President, it would be helpful if you could give us an assessment
of the effort made by your Arab brothers and whether they have achieved anything.
HUSSEIN: On this subject, we agreed with President Mubarak that the Prime
Minister of Kuwait would meet with the deputy chairman of the Revolution Command
Council in Saudi Arabia, because the Saudis initiated contact with us, aided by
President Mubarak's efforts. He just telephoned me a short while ago to say the
Kuwaitis have agreed to that suggestion.
GLASPIE: Congratulations.
HUSSEIN: A protocol meeting will be held in Saudi Arabia. Then the meeting
will be transferred to Baghdad for deeper discussion directly between Kuwait and Iraq.
We hope we will reach some result. We hope that the long-term view and the real
interests will overcome Kuwaiti greed.
GLASPIE: May I ask you when you expect Sheik Saad to come to Baghdad?
HUSSEIN: I suppose it would be on Saturday or Monday at the latest. I told
brother Mubarak that the agreement should be in Baghdad Saturday or Sunday. You know
that brother Mubarak's visits have always been a good omen.
Jeff: Have you seen this? It'sdynamite. Charlotte
GLASPIE: This is good news. Congratulations.
HUSSEIN: Brother President Mubarak told me they were scared. They said troops
were only 20 kilometers north of the Arab League line. I said to him that regardless
of what is there, whether they are police, border guards or army, and regardless of
how many are there, and what they are doing, assure the Kuwaitis and give them our
word that we are not going to do anything until we meet with them. When we meet and
when we see that there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find
a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death, even though
wisdom is above everything else. There you have good news.
AZIZ: This is a journalistic exclusive.
GLASPIE: I am planning to go to the United States next Monday. I hope I will
meet with President Bush in Washington next week. I thought to postpone my trip
because of the difficulties we are facing. But now I will fly on Monday.
The Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy"
Groupe de communication Mulindwas
"avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie"
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
**********Keep Hope Alive!!!*************
Win upto =N=150,000.00 ... Essay Competition 'HOPE PROJECT" ...see the ===>>>
http://www.iseehope.org
Nigeria arise to rebuild Hope
++++++++++++++
Nigerians for Nigeria, rebuilding a Country where No man is oppressed.
- ---
Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**********Keep Hope Alive!!!*************
****Internet Solution****
A one stop solution for your web site. It is fully Nigerian, with Hausa, Yorub and
Ibo Alphabets and so many resources easy to use and a 24/7 support access. Why go
further when a Nigerian, try this one you wont go elsewhere. I ve my signsture to
it... PJ Adamz Abuja Nigeria.
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/abujaNig/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--------------------------------------------
This service is hosted on the Infocom network
http://www.infocom.co.ug
