- update - retraction
-
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/corrections/story/0,3604,971436,00.html
-
-
- Corrections and clarifications
-
- Thursday June 5, 2003
-
- A report which was posted on our website on June 4 under
the heading "Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil" misconstrued
remarks made by the US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, making
it appear that he had said that oil was the main reason for going to war
in Iraq. He did not say that. He said, according to the Department of Defence
website, "The ... difference between North Korea and Iraq is that
we had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats
on a sea of oil. In the case of North Korea, the country is teetering on
the edge of economic collapse and that I believe is a major point of leverage
whereas the military picture with North Korea is very different from that
with Iraq." The sense was clearly that the US had no economic options
by means of which to achieve its objectives, not that the economic value
of the oil motivated the war. The report appeared only on the website and
has now been removed.
-
- Apologies to all.
-
- It is the policy of the Guardian to correct significant
errors as soon as possible. Please quote the date and page number. Readers
may contact the office of the readers' editor by telephoning 0845 451 9589
between 11am and 5pm Monday to Friday (all calls are charged at local rate).
Mail to Readers' editor, The Guardian, 119 Farringdon Road, London EC1R
3ER. Fax 020-7239 9997. Email: reader@guardian.co.uk
-
-
-
- Comment
-
- From Mike
- 6-6-3
-
- Hey, Jeff,
-
- Doesn't he say the same thing?
- This is a reinforcement of the original statement by
Wolfowitz.
-
- What a smarmy bastard.
-
-
-
- ----
-
- Original article...
-
- Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq,
a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those
opposed to the US-led war.
-
- The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz
- who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse
for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq
is "swimming" in oil.
-
- The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in
an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the
weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die
Welt.
-
- Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was
being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction
had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it
simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that
economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea
of oil."
-
- Mr Wolfowitz went on to tell journalists at the
conference that the US was set on a path of negotiation to help defuse
tensions between North Korea and its neighbours - in contrast to the more
belligerent attitude the Bush administration displayed in its dealings
with Iraq.
-
- His latest comments follow his widely reported
statement from an interview in Vanity Fair last month, in which he said
that "for reasons that have a lot to do with the US government bureaucracy,
we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on: weapons of mass
destruction."
-
- Prior to that, his boss, defence secretary Donald
Rumsfeld, had already undermined the British government's position by saying
Saddam Hussein may have destroyed his banned weapons before the war.
-
- Mr Wolfowitz's frank assessment of the importance
of oil could not come at a worse time for the US and UK governments, which
are both facing fierce criticism at home and abroad over allegations that
they exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein in order to justify
the war.
-
- Amid growing calls from all parties for a public
inquiry, the foreign affairs select committee announced last night it would
investigate claims that the UK government misled the country over its evidence
of Iraq's WMD.
-
- The move is a major setback for Tony Blair, who
had hoped to contain any inquiry within the intelligence and security committee,
which meets in secret and reports to the prime minister.
-
- In the US, the failure to find solid proof of chemical,
biological and nuclear arms in Iraq has raised similar concerns over Mr
Bush's justification for the war and prompted calls for congressional investigations.
-
- Mr Wolfowitz is viewed as one of the most hawkish
members of the Bush administration. The 57-year old expert in international
relations was a strong advocate of military action against Afghanistan
and Iraq.
-
- Following the September 11 terror attacks on the
World Trade Centre and Pentagon, Mr Wolfowitz pledged that the US would
pursue terrorists and "end" states' harbouring or sponsoring
of militants.
-
- Prior to his appointment to the Bush cabinet in
February 2001, Mr Wolfowitz was dean and professor of international relations
at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), of
the Johns Hopkins University.
-
- (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes.)
-
- © : t r u t h o u t 2003
- http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/060503A.shtml
|
