Nelson Mandela on war with Iraq

“From Newsweek on Line

Sept. 10 - Nelson Mandela, 84, may be the world's most respected statesman. Sentenced to life in prison on desolate Robben Island in 1964 for advocating armed resistance to apartheid in South Africa, the African National Congress leader emerged in 1990 to lead his country in a transition to non-racial elections. As president, his priority was racial reconciliation; today South Africans of all races refer to him by his Xhosa clan honorific, Madiba. Mandela stepped down in 1999 after a single five-year term. He now heads two foundations focused on children. He met with NEWSWEEK'S Tom Masland early Monday morning in his office in Houghton, a Johannesburg suburb, before flying to Limpopo Province to address traditional leaders on the country's AIDS crisis. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: Why are you speaking out on Iraq? Do you want to mediate, as you tried to on the Mideast a couple of years ago? It seems you are reentering the fray now.

Nelson Mandela: If I am asked, by credible organizations, to mediate, I will consider that very seriously. But a situation of this nature does not need an individual, it needs an organization like the United Nations to mediate. We must understand the seriousness of this situation. The United States has made serious mistakes in the conduct of its foreign affairs, which have had unfortunate repercussions long after the decisions were taken. Unqualified support of the Shah of Iran led directly to the Islamic revolution of 1979. Then the United States chose to arm and finance the [Islamic] mujahedin in Afghanistan instead of supporting and encouraging the moderate wing of the government of Afghanistan. That is what led to the Taliban in Afghanistan. But the most catastrophic action of the United States was to sabotage the decision that was painstakingly stitched together by the United Nations regarding the withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. If you look at those matters, you will come to the conclusion that the attitude of the United States of America is a threat to world peace. Because what [America] is saying is that if you are afraid of a veto in the Security Council, you can go outside and take action and violate the sovereignty of other countries. That is the message they are sending to the world. That must be condemned in the strongest terms. And you will notice that France, Germany Russia, China are against this decision. It is clearly a decision that is motivated by George W. Bush's desire to please the arms and oil industries in the United States of America. If you look at those factors, you'll see that an individual like myself, a man who has lost power and influence, can never be a suitable mediator.

What about the argument that's being made about the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and Saddam's efforts to build a nuclear weapons. After all, he has invaded other countries, he has fired missiles at Israel. On Thursday, President Bush is going to stand up in front of the United Nations and point to what he says is evidence of...

.Scott Ritter, a former United Nations arms inspector who is in Baghdad, has said that there is no evidence whatsoever of [development of weapons of] mass destruction. Neither Bush nor [British Prime Minister] Tony Blair has provided any evidence that such weapons exist. But what we know is that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. Nobody talks about that. Why should there be one standard for one country, especially because it is black, and another one for another country, Israel, that is white.

So you see this as a racial question?

Well, that element is there. In fact, many people say quietly, but they don't have the courage to stand up and say publicly, that when there were white secretary generals you didn't find this question of the United States and Britain going out of the United Nations. But now that you've had black secretary generals like Boutros Boutros Ghali, like Kofi Annan, they do not respect the United Nations. They have contempt for it. This is not my view, but that is what is being said by many people.

What kind of compromise can you see that might avoid the coming confrontation?

There is one compromise and one only, and that is the United Nations. If the United States and Britain go to the United Nations and the United Nations says we have concrete evidence of the existence of these weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we feel that we must do something about it, we would all support it.

Do you think that the Bush administration's U.N. diplomatic effort now is genuine, or is the President just looking for political cover by speaking to the U.N. even as he remains intent on forging ahead unilaterally?

Well, there is no doubt that the United States now feels that they are the only superpower in the world and they can do what they like. And of course we must consider the men and the women around the president. Gen. Colin Powell commanded the United States army in peacetime and in wartime during the Gulf war. He knows the disastrous effect of international tension and war, when innocent people are going to die, young men are going to die. He knows and he showed this after September 11 last year. He went around briefing the allies of the United States of America and asking for their support for the war in Afghanistan. But people like Dick Cheney. I see yesterday there was an article that said he is the real president of the United States of America, I don't know how true that is. Dick Cheney, [Defense secretary Donald] Rumsfeld, they are people who are unfortunately misleading the president. Because my impression of the president is that this is a man with whom you can do business. But it is the men who around him who are dinosaurs, who do not want him to belong to the modern age. The only man, the only person who wants to help Bush move to the modern era is Gen. Colin Powell, the secretary of State.

I gather you are particularly concerned about Vice President Cheney?
Well, there is no doubt. He opposed the decision to release me from prison (laughs). The majority of the U.S. Congress was in favor of my release, and he opposed it. But it's not because of that. Quite clearly we are dealing with an arch-conservative in Dick Cheney.

I'm interested in your decision to speak out now about Iraq. When you left office, you said, "I'm going to go down to Transkei, and have a rest." Now maybe that was a joke at the time. But you've been very active.

I really wanted to retire and rest and spend more time with my children, my grandchildren and of course with my wife. But the problems are such that for anybody with a conscience who can use whatever influence he may have to try to bring about peace, it's difficult to say no.

© 2002 Newsweek, Inc.”

“What a smart, smart man.”

“The racial issue is bogus.”

“Its kind of interesting that Halliburton subsidiaries under Cheney made millions helping Iraq to increase oil production, enabling them to siphon off funds for weapons production, but are now considered a threat to world stability by Vice President Cheney. In fact, several sales from the Halliburton subsidiaries Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump were blocked that would have rebuilt facilities destroyed during desert storm (when Cheney was secretary of defense).”

“Good article ped, thanks for posting it.

Good observation, violin.”

“I found something while I was digging in the dirt.

I couldn’t find the original transcript of the 1990 meeting between US Ambassador April Glaspie and Saddam Hussein because the New York Times only archives back to 1996 online but I was able to find http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html" target="_blank">this copy. I was looking for it because this is the meeting when Glaspie told Hussein that “we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait”. This has been interpreted by some as the US suckering Saddam into invading Kuwait. She also told him “We have many Americans who would like to see the price (of oil) go above $25 because they come from oil-producing states.”

What I found was a threat by Saddam to sponsor terrorism on American soil. At least that’s how I interpret this passage:
“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.”

I know this doesn’t exactly prove complicity in any particular act, but it sure shows intent. I’d really be interested in seeing any evidence of an Iraqi threat that the administration can produce.”

“I don't think its right to immediately dismiss the racial issue so thoroughly.

I note that Mandela doesn't entirely endorse this racial view... I think he mentions it because it is very important to how US actions are perceived. Secondly, he says that a racial element is there. I think there is a racial element.

Do you think the US would have been as slow to act in Bosnia if dark brown eyed brown haired poeple of Ottoman descent had been killing blonde blue eyed Northern Europeans in Europe?

Do you think that some of the disrespect and mockery of recent UN leaders isn't tied to race.

I've noticed that American's have made a lot of progress on racial issues. It's incredible how much bigotry we have put behind us... but we've got a way to go.”

“#&%!$. According to The Washington Post I won't be seeing that evidence anytime soon.”

“I agree Pedxing, that racial issues are more in existance than a lot of us ever imagine. I know that I always forget, and am startled by the evidence of ongoing racial discrimination in places where I would not expect to find it. My husband does not consider himself to be white and is always pointing out things to me that are discrimination against non-whites and it is sad that he is usually right, and that I don't see it right away myself.”

“"But what we know is that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. Nobody talks about that. Why should there be one standard for one country, especially because it is black, and another one for another country, Israel, that is white."

This is just plain insulting to Israelis. Israel is a decent, although flawed, democracy committed to upholding Western values, and capable of self-judgement and owning up to mistakes. Sadam is the worst sort of murderous despot who has no problems with using WMD on his own people. Israel, on the other hand, has been remarkably restrained with its military power over the years, even under constant heavy pressure from a bunch of murderous thugs. And Israeli Arabs are the most free and prosperous Arabs in the Arab world. So it's a specious argument to assert race is a factor in our focus on Sadam's WMD rather than Israel's.

As for race and U.S. foreign policy, as I see it, race may have some sort of correlation in our interventions, but it is in no way a causal factor in our decisions to intervene or ignore. The U.S. has rather consistently based its foreign policy on cruder impulses than forces as complicated as racism - e.g. money and security related issues. So while race may coincide with our policies (or lack thereof) in, say, Africa, the fact is Africa is not terribly important to America in economic or security terms. We've ignored them because they're of little consequence to us. (Of course that's all changing now.) However, in the ME, we've been very active in securing energy resources and maintaining regional stability - but our intentions have not been to oppress melanous peoples, although that's probably been an unfortunate side effect of our policies. But the U.S. has intervened all around the world. Latin America, Africa, Arabia, Central Asia, hell, we're even facing down billions of ChiComs to protect a few tens of million yellow skinned Taiwanese.

No, I say race is a historical legacy that can be correlated with geographical areas of interest in the American political radar, but it's not a driving force behind American policy. The U.S. gov. is very Machiavellian in its policies, and it does not give a rat's a$$ about the race of the people it wants to dominate/manipulate/fight.”

“Sorry for the cut n paste, but I thought this was intersting as well...

>Slide From the Impossible to the Apocalyptic
>by Felicity Arbuthnot
>
>A little over a month after the 1991 Gulf War, Maarti Ahtisaari,
>then UN special rapporteur, commented on conditions inside Iraq:
>'Nothing we had heard or read could have prepared us for this particular
>devastation, a country reduced to a pre-industrial age, for a
>considerable time to come.'
>
>Since Ahtisaari's remarks, Iraq has slid from the impossible to the
>apocalyptic. The Unicef report, State Of The World's Children (2001),
>rates the country 11 points below Eritrea, with the highest increase in
>infant mortality on earth.
>
>Water-borne diseases such as cholera, typhoid, polio -- largely
>eradicated prior to 1990 -- have become epidemic. A child with dysentery
>in 1989 had a one-in-600 chance of dying. By 1999 it was one in 50. Had
>the weapons inspectors (UNSCOM) in their search for biological weapons
>turned on any tap in Iraq, they would have found them.
>
>The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that each month an average
>of 5000 children aged under five die as a result of 'embargo-related
>causes'. Last December, 11,500 people died, the majority of them
>children.
>
>By 1993 doctors had made a new diagnosis. With inflation
>stratospheric the price of staple foods rose by up to 11,000 times.
>Malnourishment became rampant. Mothers too weak to breast feed, and
>unable to afford milk powder, fed babies sugared water or tea. They
>became wasted, bloated and
>almost all died. Doctors called them the 'sugar babies'.
>
>'Time is running out for the children of Iraq,' wrote Dieter
>Hannusch of the World Food Program in 1995. Time ran out for
>seven-year-old Yasmin that year. Diagnosed with a minor heart ailment in
>1990, a small surgical procedure would correct it when facilities were
>restored. But in five years a minor ailment become a major one and her
>damaged heart failed her frail
>body.
>
>'I hope they told her before she died that she had failed to comply with
>the United Nations embargo,' remarked an Iraqi friend with searing fury.
>Dignity in death too, is the embargo's victim -- shroud cloth and
>coffins have been vetoed by the UN Sanctions Committee
>
>In Basra, Iraq's beautiful, battered southern city, decimated in
>Desert Storm, Dr Jenan Hussein's thesis compares the rate of cancers and
>birth abnormalities with those in Hiroshima. A quarter of live births
>now are of premature weight. In the Pediatric and Maternity Hospital,
>small faces, the haunted eyes of parents and the conditions haunt the
>stoniest heart.
>
>When I returned after six months, Dr Hussein said hesitantly: 'You
>remember those children you wrote about in June? I am sorry, they have
>all died.'
>
>They included 17 babies in the premature baby unit without even oxygen.
>Incubators too were vetoed.
>
>The US and UK have bombed Iraq on an ongoing basis since Operation
>Desert Fox in December 1998 -- and again we prepare to bomb the 'most
>traumatized child population on earth', according to experts.
>
>Denial is rampant. One child told Count Hans von Sponeck, who
>succeeded Denis Halliday as UN aid co-ordinator, that when the bombs
>come: 'I play the piano so I can't hear them.'
>
>An eight-year-old said that when the bombing starts: 'My father goes
>outside and stands by the gate to protect our house.'
>
>One doctor reached on a crackly line inside Iraq said: 'I can cope with
>anything now, patients who die for want of simple treatment, operating
>without anesthetics. What I cannot cope with is the children's fear.
>When the bombing starts I swear that I can hear the cries of every
>child, in every house in every street in the entire neighborhood.'
>
>This psychological effect permeates every level of life. It would
>seem the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child lies in the mass grave
>of the children of Iraq -- some report a million and rising -- who die
>of 'embargo-related causes'.
>
>Now America again threatens to attack a country with no functioning fire
>engines, no disaster provision, and where even radios for ambulances are
>vetoed. In 1991, General Norman Schwartzkopf boasted of a 'turkey shoot'
>for the Allied forces inside Iraq. This time, we will be bombing a
>sitting duck.”

“"This time, we will be bombing a sitting duck."

I don't think so. Sadam knows that if his command/control structures can withstand the initial areal assault, he has a decent chance of turning what America hopes is a lightning-quick operation into a war of attrition - at least in the cities. Now whether or not Sadam is decentralizing command/control or beefing up low-tech communication systems (or both) remains to be seen, but it is not at all certain that he's a 'sitting duck'.”

“roseymonster -

The State Department says that Saddam is deliberately not spending money available to him under the oil for food program to weaken international support for sanctions. Child mortality in Northern Iraq (area under UN control) has actually dropped. Money is being diverted to build lavish palaces for family and government supporters. They are rewarded for their part in running a brutal dictatorship. Food intended for the Iraqi population has been illegally exported. Food and medicines have never been part of the sanctions. Saddam has been accused of hoarding medicines in government warehouses instead of distributing them.”

“So is Sadam Hussein responsible for any of the hardships the Iraqi people suffer or is just the United States?

I hadn’t noticed that Iraqis were black, interesting. I need to get my eyes checked. Most of the time I can’t tell the Israelis from the Palestinians by thier color.”

“I tell ya - that Saddam (pronounced "SAD-um"... which means boy in Iraqeese) is a real loser. The people of Iraq are gonna owe us BIG TIME after we kick his brown ass to Hell.

Let's Roll!”

“Gojo, its black not brown. Didn’t you read what the smart man said?”

“Mutt: I agree tho his forces are a third of what they were in the Gulf War and most of them are poorly trained. He's got an elite squad of about 20,000 (i think) that will supposedly be difficult, especially when they take it to the streets of Baghdad.

Violin: I suspect most of what you say is true. However, there is an undeniable impact the sanctions are having on the innocents in Iraq. I found the bit about Ira

Yeah Gojo, if there are any of them left.”

“I found the bit about Ira

roseymonster
04:43:29 PM
09/11/02



ummm... Ira who?”

“Mutt: I agree tho his forces are a third of what they were in the Gulf War and most of them are poorly trained. He's got an elite squad of about 20,000 (i think) that will supposedly be difficult, especially when they take it to the streets of Baghdad.

Violin: I suspect most of what you say is true. However, there is an undeniable impact the sanctions are having on the innocents in Iraq. I found the bit about Iraq having the worst infant mortality rate in the world quite interesting.

Mtn Gal: I read an interesting in the latest Newsweek that said since Sept. 11, race motivated crimes against Middle Easterners jumped about 400 percent. Sounds like an element of racism to me...

Yeah Gojo, I'm sure you'd be thanking a foreign govt. that just obliterated your family and friends.”

“Sorry. IT WAS THE COMPUTER'S FAULT!”

“There are a few people that can stop the sanctions, the war preparations, and the oppression of the Iraqi people. The one that can do this at the least cost is Sadam Hussein. So why is so little of the liberal discontent directed at him? USA’s leaders have some dirt on them but Mr. Hussein is made of it top to bottom.”

“I remember Bush campaigning against Gore by criticizing the (then) current administration because of their foreign campaigns in Eastern Europe.
Does he not now propose to involve the US military in a campaign that has NO end strategy and an UNLIMITED cost?
Are we going to run Iraq from Washington DC?
Can we afford to continue to cut taxes while spending billions and billions on un-ending military campaigns?
Who is going to pay for this, and when does the bill come due?”

“MG: I think most people outside of Iraq and the Middle East agree Saddam is scum. But again, the majority of the people in his country support him. Are we to tell them what is "right"?”

“I thought something got cut off there. I named the State Dept. as my source because I'm sure it's not as free of propaganda as the pure Iraqi source. <grin>

BTW it didn't say worst infant mortality rate, it said "the highest increase in infant mortality on earth". Still nothing to turn a blind eye to but Saddam doesn't exactly have a stellar human rights record either. A man who would kill his own kin, gas his citizens, force them to relocate by bulldozing their villages, torture them, etc. is probably not above using images of sick and dying children to his own advantage.”

“Seriously. They're talking $20 billion a year to revamp Iraq after an invasion. This country is already growing $100 billion + a year in debt and we're not even close to closing the book on Afghanistan.

Sure. Let's decimate another country...”

“Whoa. Where did you get the info that most Iraqis support Saddam?”

“Race is a socially contrived idea. Skin colors vary even within the “races” to the point that they over lap. I say two photos on the cover of a major news magazine. These were for a story about a Palestinian girl boomer and a an Israeli girl about the same age that died in the attack. I could not tell from the photo which girl was the “white” Israeli. This smart, smart man is using race only to advance his own interests in this case. It is a lie. Arabs are not a different race than “whites” but there is a difference in ethnicity. It is their heritage that made some bad people target them. Not their skin color. Granted some idiot may think he can tell who is Arab by their skin color but he is an idiot.”

“I stand corrected, V. :P

I'm sure he's (Saddam)working that angle as much as he can.”

“MG: I guess were getting into the semantics of "race".

How exactly is Mandela promoting his own interests?”

“Again, though I don't agree with all of what Mandela says, his opinions are worth serious consideration. I do agree that it would be better to get the UN on board, (ala the first Bush), before invading any country. Hussein is one bad SOB, undoubtedly, but have we exhausted all other means of neutralizing his influence?”

“Violin: I pulled that one outta my arse, but since everyone isn't running to Northern Iraq and the majority live in South-Central, I assumed the majority supported him.”

“I suggest you conduct a scientific poll next time roseymonster.

I wonder if some of the saber rattling might not be to encourage a defection by a sufficiently large number of their military leaders to allow a coup led by the Iraqi National Congress or other opposition groups? If they can be persuaded that Saddam is leading the country to ruin, it just might work.”

“Whether they support him or are just scared as hell to say anything against him, you don't hear many Iraquis dissin' the boss.”

“The latest NW article was quite enlightening. It broke down all the numbers. Basically, Saddam has a force of 500,000. The Kurds and bretheren (INC and others) have a combined force of about 20,000, maybe. They would be slaughtered.”