Iraqis Hand Over Weapons Declaration
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: U.N. weapons inspectors in Baghdad now have Iraq's declaration of weapons of mass destruction. There are nearly 12,000 pages of documents, plus 12 CDs containing 529 megabytes of information. Our CNN international correspondent, Nic Robertson, is in the Iraqi capital. Nic, what did you have a chance to see?</s>NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Kyra, we took a look at those documents. Now, there were some -- we were told -- 11,807 pages total. What we could see on all the carefully presented,</s>PHILLIPS: So, Nic, did you get a chance to see if it was in Arabic, English, both languages?</s>ROBERTSON: From what we could see on the covers, it appeared to be in English. We were told that some of the supporting documentation would likely be in Arabic. But not being able to look inside all the collected papers there, very difficult to tell what we would have found if we'd rummaged deep inside. An Iraqi official there when we asked them if this would answer outstanding U.N. issues dating back to 1998, he said he wouldn't be able to tell us that. So we got very little information about what was contained inside.</s>PHILLIPS: And another note, this apology made to Kuwait. Someone else speaking on behalf of Saddam Hussein. The significance behind this, what do you think, Nic?</s>ROBERTSON: The information minister speaking -- very, very significant on many levels. It was an address to the people of Kuwait, not to the Kuwaiti leadership. Iraq very much feels at this time its only way of offsetting a chance of war at this time or one of its primary ways is to win support in the region from its friends and allies in the region. It has had major diplomatic efforts this year to try to win support from the Iraqi -- from the Kuwaiti leadership. But what it has done today it seems to be to throw that to one side, appeal to the Kuwaiti people, telling them that they're being isolated by their leadership. That their leadership are becoming agents for international oil companies. So very much appealing to the Kuwaiti people. Very significant that in this statement that they would apologize to the Kuwaiti people for the events of 1994, Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.</s>PHILLIPS: Our Nic Robertson, live from Baghdad. Thanks, Nic. President Bush is withholding judgment on the Iraq weapons inventory until U.S. officials can examine it in detail. The president says that will take some time. Our White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux has more. Hi, Suzanne.</s>SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Kyra. President Bush is in Camp David for the weekend. But there is quite a bit of activity outside of the White House; a growing number of anti- war protesters. It was just moments ago that a woman was taken into custody. It's a peaceful protest, but police have moved back that group across Pennsylvania Avenue. You may hear them in the background. As for that declaration, President Bush in his weekly radio address said that the administration would reserve judgment until it goes over the documentation fully. Also, expressed some serious skepticism that Saddam Hussein would be truthful. And again, issuing another warning that he must be truthful, that he must comply or face the consequences. And finally, that Saddam Hussein, it is in his hands, the choice of war.</s>GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will judge the declaration's honesty and completeness only after we have thoroughly examined it, and that will take some time. The declaration must be credible and accurate and complete, or the Iraqi dictator will have demonstrated to the world once again that he has chosen not to change his behavior.</s>MALVEAUX: Now yesterday, President Bush met with the National Security Council here at the White House for about an hour. They discussed a number of things -- how to handle the declaration, and they came upon a couple of agreements at least. One of them being that if there were any type of misstatements in the declaration, that Iraq would be declared in material breach of the U.N. Security Council resolution, but that military action would not be imminent. Rather they would let the weapons inspectors go about doing their job for the next two or three weeks, that U.S. would provide some intelligence to those inspectors but certainly not all of the intelligence. And then of course, Kyra, the administration has a tough decision to make at that time if they find that Saddam Hussein is not complying with the resolution, if they find, indeed, that there are discrepancies, that there are weapons of mass destruction. This administration insists that there are -- Kyra.</s>PHILLIPS: All right, Suzanne Malveaux, live from the White House. Thank you. Jonathan Karl is running our documents desk today in Washington. He has more to tell us what we know about the Iraqi weapons inventory. So, John, if you are running the desk today, does that mean you are also in charge of the translation that is ahead?</s>JONATHAN KARL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we heard some good news there from Nic Robertson that potentially much of this information might actually be in English. But we do have a team of translators as well to go through the stuff. But my team right here includes, beginning right next to me, General Wesley Clark, of course former NATO supreme commander and a CNN analyst, Mike Moodie, one of the nation's leading experts on chemical and biological weapons, and David Albright, who is himself a former weapons inspector. General Clark, I'd look to start with you, though. As we see these documents -- and eventually they'll be delivered not only to the U.N. but also to theoretically the Security Council and folks like us will see parts of this. Is there anything the Iraqis can do to actually prove what they have been saying, which is that they don't have these programs? How do you prove a negative? GEN. WESLEY CLARK</s>CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I think they're going to have to go to every single charge that's been levied against them in the international community, including the document that was presented last September by the British government, and they are going to have to refute every charge, not only that the charges aren't true, but how it could have been thought to be true. So it is a tall order for them. And they are probably going to have to confess to some mistakes. You know, one trick that Saddam Hussein hasn't played yet is the idea that he, Saddam, didn't have these weapons, but there was a rogue element inside the Iraqi government. Not under his control, but under the control of someone else, that he's just discovered that may have been doing this.</s>KARL: And it would be convenient if it was some general he was worried about, questioned his loyalty.</s>CLARK: Exactly.</s>KARL: No doubt. Now, in the area of biological weapons, some of the most damning evidence or at least damning charges were presented by the British government about Saddam Hussein, Iraq, having the kind of weaponry that can actually be mobilized within 45 minutes of an order. What do we know? I mean, for instance in terms of smallpox, the charges that Iraq is one of four nations in the world that actually has smallpox. Is that true?</s>MICHAEL MOODIE, CHEMICAL/BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS EXPERT: That is a subject for debate among the experts. There is circumstantial evidence that suggests that they could. There was a smallpox outbreak in Iraq before smallpox was eradicated as a global infectious disease. Maybe they kept some strains. They admitted to working on camelpox, which while not a threat to humans, is structurally like smallpox. And so some people argue that it was a program as a surrogate for smallpox that they didn't want to get into that very dangerous substance. So the circumstantial evidence suggests they might. But there is nothing concrete to make you reach a definitive conclusion, either they did or they didn't.</s>KARL: Well, let's take a look at exactly what Iraq is technically being demanded of here. In terms of what they have to turn over in this declaration. We know that they have to detail, of course, all of their chemical, biological and nuclear programs, including all delivery system for weapons of mass destructions. Of course, the deadline is actually tomorrow. They must show all delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction, all unmanned aerial vehicles, all dispersal systems aboard aircraft -- I guess theoretically for the use of chemical or biological weapons -- and also all holdings and precise locations of weapons of mass destructions, all related material and equipment, and a listing of all R&D; and production facilities. Again, a tall order if you are denying that this -- this material exists. David Albright, you have actually been privy to those reports that have been given by Iraq in the past. What do you expect that we would see along these lines?</s>DAVID ALBRIGHT, FORMER WEAPONS INSPECTOR: This is a much larger declaration than they have been required to submit in the past. To get into these civil facilities that could be misused. And so there is a lot of extra analysis that has to be done. And it is going to take some time. But it can be gone through, and there may be nuggets in that. There may be hints about banned activities that would be contained in those kinds of lists. But it is a lot more than what you would expect in a declaration that would be about weapons of mass destruction.</s>KARL: Let's listen to something, a little snippet from the president's radio address today, where he addressed what the inspectors themselves are not trying to do. Take a listen.</s>BUSH: Inspectors do not have the duty or the ability to uncover terrible weapons hidden in a vast country. The responsibility of inspectors is simply to confirm evidence of voluntary and total disarmament. Saddam Hussein has the responsibility to provide that evidence, as directed and in full.</s>KARL: All right, so, General Clark, basically what the president is saying is that it would be impossible, and it's not even the mandate of these inspectors to go and look for weapons of mass destruction. They're simply there to get pointed in the right direction by the Iraqis themselves.</s>CLARK: That's the way we set up the inspections. Basically, they're there to verify Iraqi compliance with the U.N. Security Council direction. They're not there to enforce it; they're not there to prove that they have complied. That's really the obligation that is on the Iraqi government. And it's supposed to use the inspectors as its tool to say, see, I destroyed these. Now come let's have you inspectors look at this and you can confirm it to the United Nations. That's what inspection teams are supposed to do. They are there for verification.</s>KARL: David?</s>ALBRIGHT: Yeah, but they do do investigations. I mean, there have been very dramatic inspections where using combination of intelligence information, inspector-gained information, they've gone into sites and exposed major Iraqi violations. And that may happen again. I think the inspectors need information from intelligence agencies, actionable information so they can plan an inspection or strategy to uncover hidden Iraqi activities. But they can do it. And it gets to this issue of how do you show that Iraq's declaration is complete.</s>KARL: How do you do that in the biological area?</s>MOODIE: I'm not sure that you can. But I think this is also a political debate. What the president was saying there is the burden of proof here is on Saddam Hussein. A lot of the international community, though, I think are saying, it's up to the United States, and maybe perhaps the British who are making the claims to prove it.</s>KARL: Where's the smoking gun? Where's the evidence?</s>MOODIE: There is a political debate going on about whose job is it here, where does the burden of proof really fall. And I think the president is right in saying it's Saddam Hussein. We've heard a lot of this from him before. And we know it is not true.</s>KARL: But quickly, General Clark, doesn't this administration and the president need to do what John Kennedy did in the Cuban missile crisis, if it comes to war and actually present some of the details?</s>CLARK: I think that's exactly right, Jonathan, because ultimately this is going to come down to a "he said/she said," and there is going to have to be some evidence here and there are going to have to be some hard choices made about the protection of sources and methods and sensitive intelligence information. Because it is not just what the United States concludes, it's the credibility of the process we go through. That's the reason the president is right to say, he has got to take time. We have got to look at all of this. We have got to bring other nations on board with us so we are not acting alone here.</s>KARL: All right, well, thank you. And we'll be waiting, again, to get our hands on some pieces of the documents that have been turned over. And looking at them as they become public. Kyra, back to you.</s>PHILLIPS: All right, Jon, thank you so much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com