YouSaid · the spoken record

Aldouri

lines on the record: 226
first: 2001-08-20
most recent: 2003-03-27
sittings or episodes: 19
sources: un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“Mr. Aldouri (Iraq) (spoke in Arabic): I thank you, Sir, and the Security Council for granting Iraq the opportunity to participate in this meeting and to address the Security Council within the time allotted to us. I listened very carefully to the presentations by Mr. Blix, Executive Chairman of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), and Mr. ElBaradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as well as to the statements of members of the Security Council. I should like to make a number of observations. Iraq agreed to act on resolution 1441 (2002), based on the fact that it provided a means to reach a solution to the so-called issue of the disarmament of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.”
2003-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4707 (2003) · source
“In return, Iraq offers security and peace and reiterates before the members of the Security Council our commitment to continue our proactive cooperation with the inspection teams in order to make it possible for them to complete their tasks as soon as possible so as to verify that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction, lift the unjust sanctions imposed against us, ensure respect for our national security and guarantee regional security by ridding the whole Middle East of weapons of mass destruction, including Israel's huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 14 of Before adjourning, may I remind Council Security Council resolution 687 (1991). members of the luncheon that my delegation will have”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“He stated that the United States Administration has known since 1988 that Iraq did not use chemical weapons against its own people for one simple reason: it does not have the chemical weapon that was used in the Halabja incident. In conclusion, I want to say that the obvious goal behind the holding of this meeting and the presentation of false allegations by the Secretary of State of the United States was to sell the idea of war and aggression against my country, Iraq, without providing any legal, moral or political justification. This was primarily an attempt to sway United States public opinion - and world public opinion generally - in favour of launching a hostile attack against Iraq.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“He stated that analysts at the CIA have complained that Administration officials have exaggerated reports on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and particularly on Iraq's presumed relationship with Al Qaeda, in order to bolster their case for war. I would like to add that Mr. Jack Straw has ignored intelligence reports from his own Government stating that there is no relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Mr. Powell's assertion that Iraq used chemical weapons against its own people particularly surprised me, given that a CIA official unmasked the truth on 31 January - just a few days ago - in The New York Times.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“As regards the sound recordings, suffice it to say that scientific and technical progress has reached a level that would allow for the fabrication of such allegations and for their presentation in the way that Mr. Powell presented them. Anyone can be recorded, at any time and anywhere in the world. As for the supposed relationship between Iraq and the Al Qaeda organization, I would like to note what President Saddam Hussain has said: "If we had a relationship with Al Qaeda and we believed in that relationship, we would not be ashamed to admit it. We have no relationship with Al Qaeda". I would like now to refer to a recent statement by a United States official as reported in The New York Times three days ago.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Furthermore, UNMOVIC and the IAEA have their own sources that provide satellite imagery, and they also use helicopters for surveillance and inspection activities. We therefore believe that those two agencies are very well informed about what takes place on the ground in Iraq. It is important to remind the Council that weapons of mass destruction programmes are not like an aspirin pill - something that can be easily hidden. Rather, they require huge production facilities for research and development, weaponization and deployment. Such facilities cannot be concealed. Inspectors have criss- crossed all of Iraq and found no evidence of that.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Blix stated that to date UNMOVIC had found no proof of the presence of such mobile units. As regards the U-2 overflights and the controversy that has developed in that connection, Iraq does not object to such flights for the purpose of conducting inspection activities. Rather, the objection is that United States and British warplanes are imposing illegal no-fly zones, contrary to Security Council resolutions. To overcome that obstacle, it would be enough for such warplanes to suspend their flights during U-2 flights. Iraq cannot be held responsible for those flights. The allegation that trucks leave sites prior to the arrival of inspection teams is false. Inspections occur suddenly, without prior notification to the Iraqi side.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Blix confirmed in his statement to The New York Times on 30 January 2003 that the inspections did not support any of the scenarios alleged by Mr. Colin Powell - that Iraqi officials were moving proscribed material within or out of Iraq with the goal of concealing it. He confirmed that he did not find sufficient reason to believe that Iraq was sending scientists out of Iraq to prevent them from being interviewed and that he had no reason to believe that President Bush was correct in saying in his State of the Union address that Iraqi intelligence agents were posing as scientists for the interviews. We would like to reiterate that Iraq encourages its scientists to submit to interviews requested by UNMOVIC and the IAEA. As for the existence of the mobile laboratories alleged by Secretary Powell this morning, just yesterday Mr.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Inspectors discovered that none of the allegations contained in those reports was true. Thus, the truth and accuracy of Iraq's declaration that it was free from weapons of mass destruction have been documented by the two technical agencies entrusted by the Security Council with undertaking that task. It is well known that inspection teams took samples of water, soil, plants, air and factory and production remnants from vast areas, including cities, villages, highways, farms, factories and universities throughout Iraq north, south, east and west. UNMOVIC and IAEA analyses of those samples concluded that there was no indication of proscribed chemical, biological or radiological agents or, indeed, of any other proscribed activities in any part of Iraq. Mr.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Iraq submitted an accurate, comprehensive and updated 12,000-page declaration that included detailed information about previous Iraqi programmes, as well as updated information about Iraqi industries in various fields. The inspectors began their activities intensively in Iraq on 27 November 2002, with more than 250 UNMOVIC and IAEA staff, including more than 100 inspectors. As of 4 February 2003, the inspection teams had conducted 575 inspections throughout Iraq, covering 321 sites. The sites singled out by President Bush on 12 September 2002 and by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in the same month, as well as in the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report of October 2002, were at the top of the list of sites inspected by the inspection teams.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Powell could have spared himself, his team and the Security Council a great deal of effort by presenting those allegations directly to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 10 of Security Council resolution 1441 (2002). He could have left the inspectors to work in peace and quiet, to investigate without media pressure. At any rate, the forthcoming visit of Mr. Blix and Mr. ElBaradei on 8 and 9 February will provide another opportunity to test the validity of those allegations. Ongoing inspections have shown that previous allegations and reports from the United States and Britain were false.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“No new information was provided; mere sound recordings cannot be confirmed as genuine. Council members may have seen me smile when I heard some of those recordings; they contain certain words that I will not attempt to translate here. However, those incorrect allegations, unnamed and unknown sources, schemes and presumptions are all in line with United States policy, which is directed towards one known objective. In the interview that he granted yesterday to former British Minister Tony Benn, President Saddam Hussain reiterated that Iraq is completely free from weapons of mass destruction - a statement repeated by numerous Iraqi officials for more than a decade. Mr.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Mr. Aldouri (Iraq) (spoke in Arabic): My delegation congratulates you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month. We wish you success in your work amid these extraordinarily difficult international circumstances. We should have liked to have been granted sufficient time, commensurate with the gravity of the statement made by the United States Secretary of State in his presentation, and not just a few minutes to rebut a statement that lasted 90 minutes. Nevertheless, Iraq will provide detailed and technical explanatory answers to the allegations made in that statement. I shall be polite and brief. The pronouncements in Mr. Powell's statement on weapons of mass destruction are utterly unrelated to the truth and the reality on the ground.”
2003-02-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4701 (2003) · source
“Of course some say that this is just rhetoric, but I say that I am not an experienced diplomat familiar with all these rhetorical flourishes. I speak as an Iraqi who is sincere in my intention. The United Nations does not need another resolution. That is my view, though I know that it will not change the views of the superpower. But I want to ensure all the peace-loving countries that reject war that the new text is geared towards preventing the inspectors from returning to Iraq. We want them to come and do their work, and we are resolved to implement the resolution in spirit and in letter. I thank you very much, Mr. President, for giving me this right of reply to comment on what has been said by other speakers in this debate.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“On the substance of what was agreed on in Vienna, I affirm that there is no misunderstanding as to what was agreed there, and we will not in any way hinder the work of the weapons inspectors. I believe that we are all civilized persons, as you all said. We have a history that covers several civilizations and millennia. Many who participated in this debate noted that goodwill is present and that we will cooperate with UNMOVIC. So I would like to say that the new resolution being spoken of in the media and in negotiations about its text - the contents of which we do not know - will not be about ensuring that UNMOVIC and the inspectors do their work, but rather will prevent the inspectors from doing their work. We urge the inspectors to come tomorrow or the day after to do their work. We will create no problems.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“Blix had only just been signed and Iraq was already looking for another margin or space as delaying tactics, seeking other interpretations in order to deprive the agreement of any significant meaning or content whatsoever. Iraq approved and signed the agreement in Vienna and is bound by all its provisions. We even issued an official communique inviting the inspectors to return to Iraq and undertook to fully cooperate with them. We are willing to work and resolve any problems that occur. We are confident that the inspectors will face no impediments in carrying out their work. I would like to give assurances that any doubt cast on this agreement is inaccurate. In an exchange of letters it is quite natural that there be some misunderstanding about the actual meaning of words, but that is all there is.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I am not sure whether I should mention it, but I would like to make one point in connection with it. That is the question of some Kuwaiti property - some, I stress - that is about to be returned to the owners as per Iraqi-Kuwaiti arrangements. I recognize what was said about the Kuwaitis and their wish to get their property back without any problems whatsoever, a matter that I appreciate. Another representative spoke of the matter and tried to politicize the issue. Before concluding, I would like to mention the agreement between Mr. Blix and Mr. ElBaradei on the one hand, and Iraqi authorities on the other. We have heard a lot in the media about this. Both yesterday and today, here at this meeting, some supporters of the American position said that the agreement between Iraq and Mr.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“In other words, ifI want to buy Iraqi oil today, I sign a contract, then the United States and the United Kingdom say that I have to wait for a month before a price can be quoted. Naturally, one does not want to conclude such a contract, because oil prices are so volatile. That was a deliberate policy of these two countries to thwart the memorandum of understanding and make sure that it could not work. In the past, the mechanism worked. Hopefully things will soon improve again, and so will the situation of the fund. Those who are shedding crocodile tears for the Iraqi people have also made statements relating to war and destruction, as has been reported widely in the Western and United States media. There was another point made by several speakers.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“There are many other examples, but I shall not go into them. The representative of the United Kingdom said that he was really distressed about the situation of the Iraqi people. They can well say that they have nothing against our people, only against the Iraqi Government. There were four billion dollars available in the fund that could have been used had it not been for the veto by the United States and the United Kingdom. In respect to contractors, 2,000 contracts were stopped. I heard a colleague mention the lack of money in the fund. There are really four reasons for that, but the central one is that the United States and the United Kingdom imposed a retroactive pricing mechanism for our oil.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“We have said that we are willing to welcome inspectors. But there is also the question of lifting the embargo, which, as I have also said, is a political matter for those two countries. Several speakers have also referred to the memorandum of understanding to say that Iraq had not facilitated its implementation. However, although we had billions or tens of billions of dollars in a trust fund, about 2,000 contracts for medicines and medical supplies were pending due to a hold by the United States. Those contracts also included equipment necessary to provide drinking water and to produce food for the people of Iraq. We have lost untold thousands of people as a result of the lack of drinking water and foodstuffs. In fact, the United States even banned the export of chlorine to Iraq, which is essential to treating drinking water.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I would like to thank some of my colleagues, including members of the Council, and especially the representative of Singapore, who have said that sanctions will be lifted once the inspectors return to Iraq and they report to the Security Council that there are no weapons of mass destruction in my country. The Iraqi people would then get some relief. I fear that they are being too optimistic, however. American and British individuals have made clear statements to the effect that sanctions and the embargo will never be lifted until there has been "regime change" in Iraq. In fact, those statements are documented and are available to the Council and the Secretary-General. Everyone knows about documents containing such statements. This is a domestic political issue pertaining to the interests of the United States and the United Kingdom.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“The representative of Norway has expressed some apprehension about Iraqi weapons reaching his country. I do not know the distance between Iraq and Norway, but I would like to reassure him that our hands are now clean and that there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Everything that has been said about the issue of weapons of mass destruction has been part of a disinformation campaign. We hope that inspectors will return soon so that they themselves can tell the international community that Iraq's hands are now clean and that it has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq has no such materials. I just wanted to reassure anyone who still has any doubts about this as a result of that disinformation campaign.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I have spoken about the number of meetings held and about the amount of time spent on inspections and in Iraqi airspace, so I need not repeat that now. Neither Mr. Ikeus nor Mr. Butler nor the inspection teams were able to point to a single element that could indicate the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - apart, of course, from the information provided by Iraq. Iraq destroyed the weapons it had, opened up its doors and provided copious documentation. Iraq was therefore acting in good faith and with good will. Iraq itself took the decision to reject weapons of mass destruction. I think that the fact that we have welcomed the return of inspectors is further evidence of that rejection. We fully and forever turned our back on weapons of mass destruction and we destroyed them.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“Blix and that he and his team will be welcomed in Iraq. Some speakers have said that Iraq has violated all of the Security Council's resolutions. That assertion is perhaps due to the rather frightening lack of familiarity with UNSCOM. documents. It has also been said that Iraq expelled UNSCOM. and the inspectors in 1998. However, as everyone in fact knows, Mr. Butler was receiving his orders directly from the United States and the United Kingdom, which were constantly urging him to leave Iraq. Those calls were in fact sufficient to get him to leave Iraq. As the representative of the Russian Federation pointed out, Iraq was bombed 24 hours after Mr. Butler's departure. I would invite everyone who is not familiar with those events to look into the dossier on this case and to familiarize themselves with its contents.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“Let them come to Iraq, where they will be welcomed and where they and their teams will be able to go where they wish. That is our position regarding Mr. Blix. We have trust in him. Actually, though, why do we have to reconfirm our trust in Mr. Blix? When has there ever been any question about our confidence in him? Who raised the issue of their being any doubt about him? I do not think anyone has questioned him. In order to be able to explain the evolution of events we therefore have to look back to the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and Mr. Butler, who was entrusted with the task of leading UNSCOM. There had been some rumours here and there about Mr. Butler in the past, but we are now talking about Mr. Blix and the need to have confidence in him. However, let me reassure the Council that Iraq has full trust in Mr.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“Rather, we will work tirelessly to restore the credibility of the United Nations, which has been called into question, not by small countries like my own but by some major Powers. Many speakers, members and non-members of the Council alike, have expressed their trust in Mr. Blix and Mr. ElBaradei. Indeed, the Government of Iraq also has full confidence in those two gentlemen. Our doors are wide open to them and to their inspectors. Let them come as soon as possible; they will be quite welcome in Iraq. Our doors are widen open, as are our palaces, houses, hospitals and schools. Let them come and go where they wish. As I say, our doors are wide open to them. We are not afraid. We are open to Mr. Blix, Mr. ElBaradei and their inspectors. They are welcome to send the inspectors on 19 October, which is just a couple of days away.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I am, however, happy to see that the majority of the members of the United Nations are still anxious to preserve peace, the rights of peoples and the Charter of the United Nations, as well as principles that I myself have advocated, and have in fact taught for 30 years in this very country. Those principles are nevertheless being trampled underfoot on a daily basis in our world. Like others who have spoken in the Security Council today, and indeed like the overwhelming majority of the Members of the United Nations, I believe that it is necessary to preserve the credibility of the United Nations in order to guarantee its future. I can assure the Council that it will certainly not be Iraq that will undermine or weaken the Organization.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I said earlier that the world has been split into two, one part favouring peace and the other part - which is actually a very small minority, but an extremely active minority, made up of virtually two States - favouring war. But I wonder: how can a State go along with the warlike approach of another State? The representative of one State said here that if the Council does not take a decision, then his State will act as it sees fit. The text of his statement has been photocopied and is available to Council members. Its message is clear: if the Council refuses to declare war on Iraq, then that State will do it for the Council. That was one voice in this debate.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“But while we were engaged in this debate, we witnessed a major event that nearly amounted to a declaration of war, aimed at striking Iraq, although a debate was being held here. It was a virtual declaration of war. War legislation was adopted and celebrated with great pomp and ceremony by the President and the leaders of a certain country, and it was against Iraq, a small country thousands of kilometres away from that superpower, which is the primary Power in the world today. It is my hope that that country's President and his colleagues, who celebrated that declaration of war in the form of legislation, have all heard what has been said in this debate by those who favour peace and security.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I fervently desire peace, understanding and conciliation, and I care about the future of this international Organization. It was recently jeopardized by the statement of one major Power that, if the United Nations failed to take into account the interests of that State, it would go its own way. It was not Iraq that made that statement, it was another major Power that feels it has immense power in the world. It was the National Security Adviser who made that statement. It seemed that we had nearly written the Organization's epitaph. We ourselves support those who believe in peace, diplomacy, understanding, the implementation of resolutions adopted by the United Nations and the provisions of the Charter. I should like to thank and pay tribute to all those who have spoken to that effect.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“I should like to begin my statement where the President left off in his statement, when he spoke about the Sumerian, Babylonian and Akkadian civilizations in Iraq - Iraq, the land of water, oil and minds, the Iraq of the Abbassid civilization. Even without oil or water, would we have experienced the situation that we are now experiencing? I shall not dwell on a political analysis of this issue. The Council is fully aware that the only objectives of the approaching war are oil, wealth and hegemony - control over the wealth in the region and the world. I shall not go into detail. I shall say only that the world is now split into two and that the larger part favours peace, negotiations and diplomacy under the Charter of the United Nations, unity in the United Nations and the very future of the Organization. I am definitely in that camp.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“Mr. Aldouri (Iraq) (spoke in Arabic): I should like to thank everyone who has participated in this debate. It has certainly further developed discussion on the issue of Iraq, and I believe that it has been very useful to the Council, to the rest of the United Nations and to the world. This important and serious debate has been held to offset significant efforts that have sought to mislead public opinion. I should like to thank all those who have made statements that have faithfully described reality, because before now reality had been revealed only in part. The time called for the debate was fairly short, and it was quite difficult to acquire all the necessary data from the period since 1999 so that everyone could participate fully in this debate.”
2002-10-17 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625Resumption3 (2002) · source
“Finally, we are confident that, now that Iraq has expressed its readiness before the Security Council unconditionally to receive the inspectors, the States Members of the United Nations will defend its decisions, just as all peoples have done in rejecting the American war of aggression.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“The goal of that aggression is the colonization of our country and the imposition of American domination over our oil, as a first step towards the imposition of American colonialism in the region as a whole and the control of its oil and towards allowing Israel to continue its genocidal war against the Palestinian people and its aggression against the Arab countries. The United States of America does not want the inspectors to return, because if they do there will be proof that the Americans have consistently lied and made false allegations. At that point the Security Council would have to lift the unjust embargo against Iraq, ensure respect for its national and regional security concerns, and implement of the other requirements set out in Council resolutions; and that is exactly what the United States of America does not want.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“Iraq has pledged to cooperate with the inspectors in every possible way so as to facilitate their task of ascertaining that there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There is therefore absolutely no need for the adoption a new Security Council resolution. The attempts being made by the United States of America to hamper and delay the return of the inspectors and to make the Security Council adopt a new resolution laying down conditions that are impossible to respect are but a pretext for aggression against Iraq.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“The key principles underpinning all of these include resorting first to peaceful means in the settlement of conflicts; refraining from the use of force, or the threat thereof, and from violating the territorial integrity or political independence of any State; respecting equal sovereignty among States Members of the United Nations; and following a policy of non-intervention in matters that fall under the jurisdiction of a given State. This hegemonistic attitude will claim many victims if we do not bridle it. Today we must urgently reject Washington's attempts to hinder the return of the inspectors. It is doing so even though Iraq has taken all the necessary practical measures and arrangements and paved the way for the return of the inspectors and made the necessary preparations for them to carry out their work easily.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“At every inspection operation the Americans were trying to change the rules of the game." We call on the international community loudly to voice their objections to the aggressive designs of the United States of America against Iraq, in order to prevent it from using the Security Council as a tool to carry out its policy of aggression. Not to speak out in the face of these attempts would have serious repercussions on international peace and security, for this would be the beginning of the end of the collective security system as set out in the Charter of the United Nations and of all other instruments, agreements and conventions governing international relations.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“Allow me to mention, as an example, a statement of the former Director-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Mr. Jose Bustani, published in Le Monde Diplomatique in July of this year, where he stated "From the very beginning we were faced with difficulty when the Americans refused to allow the members of the organization to carry out their inspections. Very often the inspectors could not enter the laboratories so we remained unable to ascertain that they were actually producing chemical material for peaceful purposes only. It was very difficult for us to examine the samples, for it was not possible to carry out such an inspection, except in the American laboratories. In the final analysis, we had no guarantee as to the validity of the results.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“The United States of America has been providing Israel with state-of-the-art weapons to kill the heroic Palestinian people and destroy their property. This aggressive American hysteria has nothing to do with ending the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the world, for the United States of America possesses the largest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and has a longer history of using these weapons against people, starting with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then Viet Nam and most recently by using depleted uranium against Iraq and Yugoslavia. The United States is the country that revoked the Anti- ballistic Missile Treaty. It unilaterally hampered the implementation of paragraph 14 of Security Council resolution 687 (1991) which calls for making the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“These conditions are, at the least, an insult to the international community, the United Nations and international law and constitute a return to the law of the jungle. The war hysteria that seems to have hit the current American Government is fed by hatred and by a desire to settle old accounts and impose its hegemony on the world politically, militarily, and economically. The United States is not interested in the implementation of the Security Council resolutions, for the United States of America is the main ally of Israel, which has refused to implement more than twenty- eight Security Council resolutions and scores of General Assembly resolutions that have called on Israel to withdraw from occupied Arab territories and to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“These reports show Iraq fully respects its obligations pursuant to Security Council resolution 687 (1991), despite the absence of the monitoring and inspection teams. Bear in mind that these developments clearly reflect the wishes of Iraq and the United Nations and their readiness to begin confidence-building measures and pave the way for the Security Council to implement its own obligations. In spite of these developments the United States of America has tried to hamper such agreements by increasing its threats against Iraq, appearing before the Security Council in order to obtain the blank check needed to carry out its aggression and by calling for the imposition of unfair, impossible and arbitrary conditions on Iraq.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“I) The Iraqi technical delegation held talks in Vienna on 30 September and 1 October 2002 with delegations from the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under the chairmanship of Mr. Hans Blix and Mr. Mohamed ElBaradei, Both delegations agreed on arrangements for the return of the weapons inspectors and chose 19 October 2002 as the date when the first UNMOVIC team would reach Baghdad. The Iraqi delegation, in the course of that meeting submitted the semi-annual reports concerning the sites that are subject to monitoring, and that had not been monitored since the inspectors left Iraq four years ago.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“In his letter dated 16 September 2002, the Secretary-General conveyed to the President of the Security Council Iraq's agreement and mentioned the following: "As I had the honour to mention to the General Assembly a few days ago, this decision by the Government of the Republic of Iraq is the indispensable first step towards an assurance that Iraq no longer possesses weapons of mass destruction and, equally important, towards a comprehensive solution that includes the suspension and eventual ending of the sanctions that are causing such hardship for the Iraqi people and the timely implementation of other provisions of the relevant Security Council resolutions." (S/2002/IOS4, p.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“This paragraph calls on the Security Council to reach a comprehensive settlement concerning the relationship between Iraq and the Council, including clarification concerning the implementation of resolution 1284 (1999). In response to the calls and appeals of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Secretary- General of the League of Arab States, the Arab States and many friendly countries, the Iraqi Government on 16 September 2002 agreed, unconditionally, to the return of United Nations weapons inspectors, in order to dissipate any doubts concerning Iraq's continued possession of weapons of mass destruction, and as a first step towards a solution that would include lifting the overall embargo imposed on Iraq and implementing the other provisions of relevant Security Council resolutions.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“This was due to pressure by the United States, which prevented the Council from participating in the efforts to seek a comprehensive solution that would deal with all aspects of the relationship between Iraq and the Council while guaranteeing the implementation of all the requirements of the Council's resolutions- 1 repeat, guaranteeing the implementation of all requirements of the Security Council. This American position actually means that a comprehensive solution would not serve the aggressive intentions of the United States against Iraq and the region as a whole. That is the very reason which has led the United States to prevent the Security Council from examining the possibility of implementing operative paragraph 6 of the Council's resolution 1382 (2001).”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“Those two States are violating daily the resolutions of the Security Council and carrying out continuous aggression against Iraq. The Council has been unable to put an end to such aggression or even to condemn it. In order to end the impasse in the situation with the Security Council, Iraq took the initiative of opening a dialogue with the Secretary-General, with the aim of achieving full implementation of the obligations contained in resolutions of the Council in a balanced and equitable manner and in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations. The Iraqi side held four meetings with the Secretary-General which led to some progress but which did not achieve their objective.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“They constitute genocide by any standard; the number of victims goes far beyond the victims of the use of weapons of mass destruction throughout history. Parallel to the imposition of the comprehensive embargo, since April of 1991 the United States and Britain have declared two no-fly zones in the south and north of Iraq, in blatant violation of the Charter and the established rules of international law, as well as the relevant resolutions of the Security Council, which have underlined the importance of respecting Iraq's sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence. By imposing those no-fly zones, the United States and Britain have carried out military aggression continuously, killing thousands of Iraqi citizens and destroying property.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“Sanctions also go against Article 55 of the Charter, which calls upon the United Nations to guarantee higher standards of living for all people and to work towards economic and social progress and development. We do not want to dwell at length on the fact that they are also a violation of many other international conventions and instruments on human rights. All this has been documented by United Nations agencies, humanitarian organizations, human rights organizations and many researchers and writers in this area. The sanctions imposed on Iraq have caused a humanitarian catastrophe comparable to the worst catastrophes that have befallen the world throughout history. The sanctions have claimed the lives of thousands of children, women and elderly people.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“The sanctions are a violation of Article 1, paragraph 2 of the Charter, which deals with respect for the principle of equality among peoples - their equal rights and their right to self-determination - since no sanctions should be imposed that will cause international disagreements that are incompatible with the legal rights of the State or that prejudice the people's right to self-determination. The sanctions are also a violation of Article 1, paragraph 3 of the Charter, which concerns the promotion of and respect for human rights. The system of sanctions also violates Article 2, paragraph 7 of the Charter, which does not allow the United Nations to intervene in matters that are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source
“Thus, the inspectors left Iraq and the overall embargo continued from 6 August 1990, claiming the lives of Iraqi citizens, so much so that the number of embargo victims has reached 1,750,000 Iraqi citizens, as of the end of September of this year. The embargo continues to represent a moral problem for the United Nations, as described by the Secretary-General. It also is a blatant violation of several provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, such as Article 24, which calls for the Security Council to work in keeping with the purposes and principles of the Charter. It is also a violation of Article 1, paragraph 1, which states that sanctions and other measures adopted for the maintenance of international peace and security should be in keeping with the principles of international law and justice.”
2002-10-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4625 (2002) · source