By Ted Weaver   

1/18/2003

An inspectors job Can be made easy or it can create a challenge. In the case of South Africa and some others, they were a willing participant and essentially rolling out a red carpet leading to the full and cooperative disclosure, whereas Saddam right from day one, (12 years ago) has played "survivor and deceive the inspectors game" with the full strategic intent to deceive for a purpose to retain power and retain and develop his arsenal of chemical and bio weapons of mass destruction. And whether it was intended or not in the initial strategy, is having a wedge-driving like effect between the security council members for military action to disarm him.

Now, what I think I’m hearing is that the inspectors are not expected to find anything because Saddam is so good at the game of deception that it is not within the scope of an inspector to locate the WMD stockpiles. That sounds more like an excuse than a plausible job description. The last time I defined what an inspector does, is the inspectors would examine for accuracy what has been willingly provided or disclosed, as well as what has not been willingly provided or disclosed. That would and should include in the search for the not disclosed stockpiles of WMD’s., as is the case with Saddam’s game.

As I go back in memory (research), I can’t help but think of how some of this all came about, and I hate to say it but, it was the U.S. who helped to facilitate and provide technical assistance and material support for chemical and germ warfare to Saddam in the early to mid 1980’s to help ensure the survival of Saddam and Iraq during the war with Iran in a foreign policy decision that was not so well thought through and has come back to haunt us in the form of a Frankenstein.

The potential for working outside the U.N. raises this legitimate high probability event and question. Do we clean up one mess using another with the potential for negative consequences in the present or the future? Would working outside the parameters of the U.N., in which the President so wisely chose to go to in the beginning, cause unforeseen negative consequences in a highly probable event that if where upon Saddam is easily closed in on militarily in a (non) U.N. supported coalition action, and he unleashes the WMD’s on his people causing a potential hundreds of thousands of deaths to civilians plus some of our own military people.? He has done it before! How about his scorched earth policy on his way out of Kuwait. Would it cause more hatred toward Americans? Could the U.S. ever go again to the U.N. and receive the same kind of support and backing President Bush received should the need ever arise again - and it will. That’s all just for starters. The stakes are just too high and we have to think about the future. This war on terror is big and dangerous, its worldwide in scope and with many players. This is not the time to pull the trigger. Strategy is key.

In my opinion, I’m really getting sick and tired of Saddam playing this hide and cheat game and winning. I think its high time that this inspection system become more aggressive in nature no matter how much of complainers the Iraqi’s become - which would be a good sign. A recent inspection raised a few voices from Iraq when the Iraqi Physicist Hassan had his home searched and was escorted to a hotel. What did the inspectors find? The inspectors found nuclear enrichment processing research papers. The papers are an important find proving these research scientist do have information that they have not yet provided as required. It touched a few nerves and why? Because it was a hit! Every time they complain, almost assuredly it signals a hit. Not a foul as they would cry.