Posted on 11/07/2003 7:13:06 PM PST by Happy2BMe
The official, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity, said Iraqi officials had Saddam's "full consent" when they approached the United States with the deal, offering oil contracts for U.S. companies and open access for U.N. weapons inspectors.
The aide was not part of the national leadership, but his job provided him daily contact with the dictator and insight into the regime's decision-making process during the past decade and its critical final days.
The former aide's comments to the AP came a day after a Lebanese-American businessman, Imad Hage, confirmed the last-minute offer and said he was the go-between for the Iraqis in approaching the Bush administration.
Hage said the deal fell through because the Iraqis refused to comply with a U.S. demand that Saddam step down.
He said that in the 2½ months before U.S.-led forces invaded Iraq on March 20, he had six meetings with the then-head of Iraqi intelligence foreign operations, Hassan al-Obeidi, and the director of Iraqi intelligence, Tahir Jalil Haboush, and had passed on details of his discussions to contacts at the Pentagon.
Asked in the interview Thursday whether the Iraqi officials were acting for Saddam or on their own, he replied: "Given my understanding and everybody's understanding of Iraq, I don't think a person of the caliber of Dr. al-Obeidi could come to Lebanon without the knowledge of his higher ups."
It was impossible to immediately confirm the statement from the aide about Saddam's involvement. Most of Saddam's cronies from the Baath Party leadership have either been captured and are being held incommunicado, or are hiding inside or outside Iraq.
In Washington, a senior U.S. intelligence official said Thursday that during the run-up to the war, a wide variety of people sent signals -- via foreign intelligence services, other governments and third parties -- that some Iraqis might want to negotiate.
All leads that were "plausible and even some that weren't" were followed up, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. But no one offering a deal was in a position to make an acceptable one, the official said.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to say whether the purported Iraqi effort to avert the war was brought to President Bush's attention.
State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said: "We never received any legitimate or credible opportunity to resolve the world's differences with Iraq in a peaceful manner.
"What we did see were vague overtures through third parties that appeared to be focused on attempts to forestall military action."
And while the ex-Saddam aide said the dictator had approved the overture to the Americans, it remained unclear whether Saddam was sincere.
"There have been indications about these Iraqi concessions (for oil contracts and freer access to search for weapons of mass destruction) but until now there has been no proof that they existed," said Wahed Abdel Maged, deputy head of the Ahram Center for Strategic Studies in Cairo.
"But there has never been any hint that the concessions ever included Saddam leaving power, and I believe that this is the main reason why they were not accepted," he said. "The minimum the Americans wanted was for him to leave. They were not interested in any other concessions."
Hage said his initial contact with the U.S. government was another Lebanese-American, Mike Maloof, an analyst in the office of Douglas Feith, the U.S. undersecretary of defense for policy and planning.
The New York Times on Wednesday quoted internal Pentagon e-mails from Maloof to an aide to Deputy U.S. Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, outlining the Iraqi overtures.
In early March, Richard Perle, an adviser to top Pentagon officials, met Hage in London, U.S. officials said. The CIA initially authorized a meeting between Perle and the Iraqis, but eventually told him they didn't want to pursue the contact.
The aide said that Iraq's former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz -- considered Iraq's foremost international policy expert -- knew the details of the scheme although he was not personally involved in it. Aziz surrendered to the U.S. military in April, and has been under interrogation at an undisclosed location.
=o)
The very second that this guy Imad Hage said that Saddam was offering to hold open and free elections is where I wrote him off as a fraud, and Richard Perle did just what he should have by trying to arrange a meeting, but it was also correct to deny the meeting. This is a non-story and a Penguin has a better chance of getting off the ground than this story does
We knew all along that it wasn't "Blood for Oil". This seems to prove that what it was, was "Blood for Saddam's Worthless Hide".
An altogether supportable proposition, it seems to me.
Recall, also, that this "breaking story" meant Petah didn't have to address the furore over the Democrats' Senate Intelligence Committee memo.
Very convenient, don't you think?
-------------------------------
I have no earthly use for Hussein. However, as I watched the prelude to this war unfold it became obvious to me that as Hussein gave in under negotiations, the Bush administration escalated its demands so as to back Hussein against the wall so as to bring about that war. The Bush administration needed and wanted that war. The presidency had been a dismal bland failure with a disapproval rating og 50 or more percent. 9/11 boosted its support by 35% in a few hours. The subsequent miliraty actions gave Bush a wave he could ride on.
GASP! You aren't suggesting that the democRATs would try to play politics with national security are you? Surely not! [/sarchasm]
"X X X" Oh, I'm so sorry ! Wrong answer !!! Well, better luck next time, Saddam !!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.