U.S. Gave Green Light for Iraq to Invade Kuwait

Arabic-Media ^ | March 3,2003 | Untitled

[Pan_Yan]

April in July

On July 25, 1990, eight days before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, a quiet, largely unreported meeting took place between Saddam Hussein and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie at the Presidential Palace in Baghdad, which has since been destroyed by the war. The transcript of this meeting is as follows:

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:

"I have direct instructions from President Bush to improve our relations with Iraq. We have considerable sympathy for your quest for higher oil prices, the immediate cause of your confrontation with Kuwait. (pause) As you know, I have lived here for years and admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. We know you need funds. We understand that, and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. (pause) We can see that you have deployed massive numbers of troops in the south. Normally that would be none of our business, but when this happens in the context of your other threats against Kuwait, then it would be reasonable for us to be concerned. For this reason, I have received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship - not confrontation - regarding your intentions: Why are your troops massed so very close to Kuwait's borders?"

Saddam Hussein:

"As you know, for years now I have made every effort to reach a settlement on our dispute with Kuwait. There is to be a meeting in two days; I am prepared to give negotiations only this one more brief chance. (pause) When we [the Iraqis] meet [with the Kuwaitis] and we see there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death."

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:

"What solutions would be acceptable?"

Saddam Hussein:

"If we could keep the whole of the Shatt al Arab - our strategic goal in our war with Iran - we will make concessions (to the Kuwaitis). But, if we are forced to choose between keeping half of the Shatt and the whole of Iraq (which, in Saddam's view, includes Kuwait) then we will give up all of the Shatt to defend our claims on Kuwait to keep the whole of Iraq in the shape we wish it to be. (pause) What is the United States' opinion on this?"

(Pause, then Ambassador Glaspie speaks carefully)

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:

"We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America."

(Saddam smiles.)

---

The Green Light and the Limosine

At a Washington press conference called the next day, State Department spokesperson Margaret Tutweiler was asked by journalists:

"Has the United States sent any type of diplomatic message to the Iraqis about putting 30,000 troops on the border with Kuwait? Has there been any type of protest communicated from the United States government?"

to which she responded:

"I'm entirely unaware of any such protest."

On July 31st, two days before the Iraqi invasion, John Kelly, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs, testified to Congress that the

"United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."

Eight days later, on August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein's massed troops invaded and occupied Kuwait (ironically, this was done in a method historically similar to the American anexation of Texas). One month later in Baghdad, British journalists obtained the tape and transcript of the Hussein-Glaspie meeting on July 25, 1990. In order to verify this astounding information, they attempted to confront Ms. Glaspie as she was leaving the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

Journalist 1:

"Are the transcripts (holding them up) correct, Madam Ambassador?"

(Ambassador Glaspie does not respond)

Journalist 2:

"You knew Saddam was going to invade (Kuwait), but you didn't warn him not to. You didn't tell him America would defend Kuwait. You told him the oppose - that America was not associated with Kuwait."

Journalist 1:

"You encouraged this aggression - his invasion. What were you thinking?"

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:

"Obviously, I didn't think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take ALL of Kuwait."

Journalist 1:

"You thought he was just going to take SOME of it? But how COULD YOU?! Saddam told you that, if negotiations failed, he would give up his Iran (Shatt al Arab Waterway) goal for the "WHOLE of Iraq, in the shape we wish it to be." You KNOW that includes Kuwait, which the Iraqis have always viewed as an historic part of their country!"

(Ambassador Glaspie says nothing, pushing past the two journalists to leave)

"America green-lighted the invasion. At a minimum, you admit signalling Saddam that some aggression was okay - that the U.S. would not oppose a grab of the al-Rumalya oil field, the disputed border strip and the Gulf Islands (including Bubiyan) - territories claimed by Iraq?"

(Again, Ambassador Glaspie says nothing as a limousine door closes behind her and the car drives off.)

---

Ross Perot gets to The National Honor

Two years later, during NBC News Decision '92's 3rd round of The Presidential Debate, 1992 presidential candidate Ross Perot was quoted as saying:

"...we told him he could take the northern part of Kuwait; and when he took the whole thing we went nuts. And if we didn't tell him that, why won't we even let the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee see the written instructions for Ambassador Glaspie? - "

At this point, he was interrupted by former president George Bush who yelled:

"I've got to reply on that. That gets to the National Honour!... That is absolutely absurd!"

Later on in the debate, President Bill Clinton stated:

"...Several government departments, several, had information that he was converting our aid to military purposes and trying to develop weapons of mass destruction, but in late '89 the President signed a secret policy saying we were going to continue to try to improve relations with him, and we sent him some sort of communication on the eve of his invasion of Kuwait that we still wanted better relations..."

On August 23rd, Iraq offered to withdraw in return for the lifting of economic sanctions, guaranteed access to the Gulf, and full control of the Rumalyah oil field. The proposal was not accepted. In late February, the Soviets negotiated a peace proposal involving a three-week withdrawal period on the part of the Iraqis, in exchange for removal of the sanctions. George Bush did not accept.

It soon became reported in American newspapers, magazines, and television media that the Iraqis had the world's fourth-largest army with estimates of up to a million soldiers, including the battle-hardened elite republican guard. Later, it was estimates were reduced to 2-3 hundred thousand Iraqi soldiers. By the end of the war, this number was further reduced to a hundred-thousand untrained troops, most of whom were forced to maintain their positions. This is ironic, considering that in the fall of 1990, after the start of the war, Canadian military analyst Gwynne Dyer remarked that "Saddam Hussein was not a problem that kept anybody awake in July." Three successive American administrations did nothing from 1980 to 1988, when Saddam Hussein was responsible for killing over 150,000 Iranians and 13,000 of his own civilians including approximately 4,000 unarmed Kurds.

---

[Pan_Yan]

This text is actually a internal link from a page of Iraqi history. I hadn't heard this story before. (I know it's from the Arabic Media, don't flame me)

I was doing some research on where Iraq's present boundaries came from when I stumbled on this page.

[dirtboy]

This is so, like, last Bush Administration.

Hard to know exactly what the truth was around that meeting. However, it set Saddam down a path of chronic misjudgement of what actions American was willing to take against him. You would have thunk that sooner or later the despot would have gotten the picture.

[zook]

This story made the rounds long long ago. It's total BS. Someone please pull this thread.

[prion]

Don't pull it. Let it get debunked. That's more useful, isn't it? I've heard the allegation before, I'd be interested to see some citations refuting it.

[Doctor Stochastic]

This rumor has been around since the fall of 1990. (1990 fell with a crash.)

[pitinkie]

Agree

[Pan_Yan]

The link to this article is under to words the go ahead in the section titled Saddam Hussein and the invasion of Kuwait. It is about 4/5 of the way down the page.

[Cicero]

These transcripts, or something very like them, were released before, during the first President Bush's presidency.

As you can see if you read them very carefully, the conversation with April Glaspie is ambiguous, although Saddam seems to have taken her words as a permission.

At the time, April Glaspie was blamed for screwing up and giving Saddam a false impression that he had permission to invade Kuwait. What the actual facts were we may never know.

It should also be remembered that there was a war going on then between Iran and Iraq. Iran was considered our worse enemy, Iraq was a fractious ally.

That was one reason why Bush I didn't finish the war with Saddam--balance of power politics. It was thought that if Saddam was crushed and his army destroyed, Iran would move into the power vacuum and take over the Middle East. In fact, that made a good deal of sense. We had no desire to go in there ourselves for the long term, which meant that preserving the balance of power was the only alternative.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

I hadn't heard this story before.

Ok no flame.

But I do remember this and it was debunked a long time ago.

You can probably find some threads on it if you search.

[evad]

The inept bunglings of Ambassador Glaspie are well documented.

Saddam was lead down the wrong path twice:
FIRST by Mzzz Glaspie.
SECOND by the French, leading to his ultimate demise.

Of course his own policy of murdering anyone who gave him a realistic interpretation of world events may have been also contributory.

[VadeRetro]

I hadn't heard this story before.

Old slam on W's daddy. Saddam may have understood creatively, but GHWB didn't authorize and was not pleased when Saddam took Kuwait.

[SamAdams76]

Even if the dialogue quoted above was verbatim (which I highly doubt), it is still quite a stretch to make the case from those conversations that the United States endorsed the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

[middie]

This story was widely reported during and immediately following the first Gulf War. In fact, unless the onset of senior citizenship has caused me recollection dementia, I believe there were some congressional hearings on this FUBAR. In any case, the matter is non sequitur.

[Fiddlstix]

[Cicero]

I should add that it's very hard to conceive why Bush would have given Saddam permission to go ahead. At the time it was clear that Saddam's real goal was Saudi Arabia. He would have knifed right through Kuwait and taken over the Saudi oil fields if we hadn't intervened.

For that reason, the most credible explanation is that April Glaspie simply didn't make it clear enough to Saddam that he would not be allowed to invade Kuwait. Usually the job of an ambassador is to get along with her hosts. Plus Saddam was a megalomaniac who may well have misinterpreted her warnings because they were not explicit enough. He has always thought that he was destined to conquer and rule.

[thoughtomator]

"U.S. Gave Green Light for Iraq to Invade Kuwait"... sure... and don't forget how the Jews use the blood of little Arab children to make matzo for Passover...

[Casloy]

And here is what really happened. Amb GLaspie did have a meeting with Saddam 8 days before the invasion. She never said any of the things mentioned in this transcript. She listened and that was about all. The released transcripts were a total fabrication by the Iraqis. She testified to this before the Senate. Terek Aziz later admitted she was telling the truth, that in fact all she did was listen. So, we are still debating Iraqi propoganda as truth.

[Pan_Yan]

It doesn't hurt my feelings if the story is false. I would like to think that we aren't quite so incompetent that we would imply to a thug we approve of a "little" invasion, just not a "big" invasion.

However, what I know of the State Department leaves the door open for this kind of idiocy.

This is what FR does best, right? Thousands of smart people use their collective information to cull the truth from various shady sources.

[zook]

The Ambassador denied this occured. She may have indicated that the US took no official stand regarding any boundary dispute. That, of course, is not "giving a green light for war."

Frankly, I'd rather see it pulled. It was refuted long ago and I'm tired of having to reinvent the wheel each time some old story pops up. There's enough of this stuff on DU.

[Pan_Yan]

No one is forcing you to read this tread or post to it. You made your opinion clear on post #3. I'll send a little extra in my monthy donation to pay for the band width that this thread is using up. I'm sorry it hurts you so much.