Former UN official says U.S. should learn military might has limits in Iraq

Thursday, June 29, 2006

Former UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix talks to journalists during a press conference at the foreign press association in Rome, Tuesday, June 13, 2006. (AP Photo Archive/Gregorio Borgia)

VANCOUVER (CP) - Former United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix said the U.S. should see Iraq as a wake up call that military might has limitations.

Speaking at the end of the World Peace Forum, Blix said America hasn't been successful in Iraq, either in finding weapons of mass destruction, or in pushing for democracy.

"In the first place their intelligence had limitations," he said, laughing. "And secondly (there were limitations in) what you could do. You go in order to eliminate weapons, then find no weapons. Instead you say OK we'll do democracy now."

Blix's allegations that the U.S. and Britain exaggerated the weapon's threat to boost support for the 2003 war against Iraq eventually proved to be accurate.

He said the military action certainly hasn't been a way to fight terrorism.

"On the contrary, the Iraq affair has been a breeding ground for terrorism, where there wasn't any."

Blix is travelling around the world promoting a report called "Weapons of Terror," about ridding the world of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

He told a seminar, which included members of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission, that many nuclear-capable countries are still thinking in the Cold War era, keeping their weapons for an enemy which no longer exists.

"What would they use them for today?" he asked. "Can you use nuclear weapons against terrorists? It's like killing mosquitoes with cannons, I think."

He said new weapons being developed by the United States are drawing concerns by the governments of Russia and China.

Blix said the world must wake up to reality that it's in a new armament era, "and this report is meant to be such a wake up call."

He believes much of the arms buildup over the past few years would not have occurred if it hadn't been for the 9-11 terror attacks.

Blix said public opinion would have prevented money being spent on weapons and war.

"That gave a political chance for a kind of muscular conduct, which otherwise would not have been acceptable," he said.

He said it may not be politicians or military strategists that eventually force disarmament, but taxpayers who see the bills mounting.

"That's a sad reflection," he said.

Randy Rydell, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission, said global military spending hasn't slowed down but is at about where is was during the Cold War.

"Of about a trillion dollars a year. . .it's very alarming I think that this trend is heading in an upward direction," he said.

Rydell hopes the disarmament report will refocus attention on the consequences and costs of the weapons.

"They're not free. Tens-of-thousands still remain. They cost enormous amounts of money to maintain, and pose real risks."

He said many had predicted there would be a so-called peace dividend at the end of the Cold War, where money spent on building up arms would instead be spent on things like housing and social programs.

But that never materialized, he said.

© The Canadian Press 2006