Ironworks Gaming Forum - Iraq tried last minute dealings to avoid war

Ironworks Gaming Forum (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/index.php)

- General Discussion (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=36)

- - Iraq tried last minute dealings to avoid war (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=76368)

It's a three page article, here is a snippet and link to the first page:

Link

Quote:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 — As American soldiers massed on the Iraqi border in March and diplomats argued about war, an influential adviser to the Pentagon received a secret message from a Lebanese-American businessman: Saddam Hussein wanted to make a deal.

Iraqi officials, including the chief of the Iraqi Intelligence Service, had told the businessman that they wanted Washington to know that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction, and they offered to allow American troops and experts to conduct an independent search. The businessman said in an interview that the Iraqis also offered to hand over a man accused of being involved in the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 who was being held in Baghdad. At one point, he said, the Iraqis pledged to hold elections.

The messages from Baghdad, first relayed in February to an analyst in the office of Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy and planning, were part of an attempt by Iraqi intelligence officers to open last-ditch negotiations with the Bush administration through a clandestine communications channel, according to people involved.

The efforts were portrayed by Iraqi officials as having the approval of President Saddam Hussein, according to interviews and documents.

The overtures, after a decade of evasions and deceptions by Iraq and a number of other attempts to broker last-minute meetings with American officials, were ultimately rebuffed. But the messages raised enough interest that in early March, Richard N. Perle, an influential adviser to top Pentagon officials, met in London with the Lebanese-American businessman, Imad Hage.

According to both men, Mr. Hage laid out the Iraqis' position to Mr. Perle, and he pressed the Iraqi request for a direct meeting with Mr. Perle or another representative of the United States.

"I was dubious that this would work," said Mr. Perle, widely recognized as an intellectual architect of the Bush administration's hawkish policy toward Iraq, "but I agreed to talk to people in Washington."

Mr. Perle said he sought authorization from C.I.A. officials to meet with the Iraqis, but the officials told him they did not want to pursue this channel, and they indicated they had already engaged in separate contacts with Baghdad. Mr. Perle said the response was simple: "The message was, `Tell them that we will see them in Baghdad.' "

A senior United States intelligence official said this was one of several contacts with Iraqis or with people who said they were trying to broker meetings on their behalf. "These signals came via a broad range of foreign intelligence services, other governments, third parties, charlatans and independent actors," said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "Every lead that was at all plausible, and some that weren't, were followed up."

There were a variety of efforts, both public and discreet, to avert a war in Iraq, but Mr. Hage's back channel appears to have been a final attempt by Mr. Hussein's government to communicate directly with United States officials.

In interviews in Beirut, Mr. Hage said the Iraqis appeared intimidated by the American military threat. "The Iraqis were finally taking it seriously," he said, "and they wanted to talk, and they offered things they never would have offered if the build-up hadn't occurred."

Mr. Perle said he found it "puzzling" that the Iraqis would have used such a complicated series of contacts to communicate "a quite astonishing proposal" to the Bush administration.

But former American intelligence officers with extensive experience in the Middle East say many Arab leaders have traditionally placed a high value on secret communications, though such informal arrangements are sometimes considered suspect in Washington.

The activity in this back channel, which was detailed in interviews and in documents obtained by The New York Times, appears to show an increasingly frantic Iraqi regime trying to find room to maneuver as the enemy closes in. It also provides a rare glimpse into a subterranean world of international networking.

[ 11-07-2003, 02:51 AM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

Yeah i saw that, some interesting stuff for sure.

Hopefully stuff like this will be mentioned during Bush's time trying to get re-elected. There are other things I hope also gets brought up. If the Republicans were allowed to stick it to the Clintons, then the Democrats should return the favor. [img]tongue.gif[/img] IMO. :D

Pfft... Iraq had 12 or 13 years years to avoid war. Why go through back channels when they could have approached us through regular channels. They would have definitely looked better in the world stage. Then again, why go to the trouble to hide WMD programs you never had. Something tells me the Saddam regime was a brick shy of a load.

Quote:

why go to the trouble to hide WMD programs you never had.

To keep Iran (or anyone else) from thinking about beating you to a bloody pulp?

[ 11-08-2003, 02:29 AM: Message edited by: Seraph ]

It must be Clinton's fault.

As Sir Taliesin said, Saddam had many opportunities to "come clean" about his WMD programs. He also had several opportunities to avoid the war. And if he really DID want to avoid the war, why not send one of his gov't officials rather than an unknown businessman who may or may not actually represent him. Saddam has a documented history of being belligerent and defiant right up till the last minute, then suddenly giving in. However, even when he "gave in" to pressure from the U.N. or other outside forces, he was only as cooperative as he absolutely had to be and - in fact - did everything he could to frustrate and thwart thier efforts after they arrived.

Remember after Gulf War I, U.N. Inspectors were finally allowed into Iraq, but Saddam flat out refused to allow them access to certain buildings and areas. Then - several days later - he would finally let the inspectors into these areas. It seems obvious that whatever was in these "restricted areas" was something Saddam did not want the U.N. Inspectors to see and he denied them access until he had ample time to remove whatever was there.

Saddam has a history of being defiant in the face of threats until he felt that the threat was actually going to be carried out, then he would capitulate, but still remained as uncooperative and arrogant as possible after that. Then, after a sufficient amount of time passed, he kicked the Inspectors out of Iraq and went right back to the his old habits.

While it is a gross over-simplification, Saddam Hussein's actions and attitudes reminds me a lot of my boys when they are misbehaving. I can tell them to quit misbehaving and I can warn them they will get a whipping or lose privileges if they continue. But sometimes they will keep right on "acting up" until I actually come into the room with the belt in my hand. THEN, they suddenly say "OK OK, we're sorry. We won't do it again." But - as often as not - when I go to put the belt back up, they are right back to the same behavior by the time I get back in the room. As soon as the threat of punishment was removed, they continued to misbehave. When that happens, I go back, get the belt, and carry through with the threatened punishment.

The bottom line is this - sometimes it is just too late to avoid the punishment. After being given chance after chance after chance, there finally comes a time to say "Enough is enough, you don't get any more second chances."

Nothing would have come from this back channel dealing anyway because the ultimate aim was the over throw of the Baath Party in Iraq. And they would never agree to that.

I'm not putting much stock in how much an ousted administration troublemaker and a few Lebanese businessmen with supposed in-roads to Saddam's administration could make. As an 11th-hour effort to stop the war, this was not much. I'd think Saddam would have been on TV making these offers, giving the US no choice but to talk. That would have been smarter.

Wasn't the Lebanese businessman an American who was of Lebanese descent?

Does it make a difference? Wondering...

Mark