HVS: I�m absolutely flabbergasted � about the disconnect between what I hear from people to whom I speak in formal meetings as well as on the street. I cannot understand why in a democracy there�s so little linkup between the public conscience, the public perception, the public sense of honesty and integrity, and the Washington attempt to disinform. Why is there not more impact of that public conscience on decision making in Washington?

HVS: I don�t want to give the impression that everything is fine in Europe and everything is wrong in America. But the art of disinformation is at a higher level of achievement in the United States than in Europe. In the case of Iraq, there�s a tremendous attempt to give a picture of demonization, to portray Iraq as if Iraq consisted of not 23 million normal Iraqis, but of 23 million Saddam Husseins. It�s totally wrong, and I think even Saddam Hussein as a dictator is completely wrongly portrayed in the media. There is the most systematic effort to misinform that I�ve ever seen in my lifetime in relations to the way the (U.S.) government and main media � consistently wrongly portray this dictatorship that none of us want. It�s one thing to have a dictator; it�s another thing to use illegal means to react to that dictator.

HVS: The key word here is a three letter word: O-I-L. America is very anxious to insure it retains a handle on this important source of energy and is willing to do anything to make sure that this remains. The immediate justification is the removal of a dictator, the liberation of a people. But 12 years of punishment of a people (through sanctions) doesn�t give me the confidence that this is the true motive for approaching Iraq as a country in conflict.

HVS: It�s a mixed bag. There�s some total support � you have others who are quite clear in very cautious ways to tell you they would like to see a regime change. The range of opinion is wide.

HVS: It is a very wrong statement that you keep reading in the press that says the no fly zones have any legal basis. There�s no mandate from the United Nations. It is willfully installed by the British and American governments. The official intentions for having these zones may be good intentions�trying to protect minorities, the Shias in the South and the Kurds in the North�but I believe that today, the behavior of these two air forces in Iraqi skies has not only to do with that, but definitely something to do with the destabilization of Iraq. In addition, every week you have civilian casualties as a result of attacks by these air forces on � civilian installations, allegedly in self-defense.

HVS: The UN has many faces. There�s a UN Secretariat, and I think there are 800 international staff serving Iraq to try to implement the Oil for Food Program and other development type programs. I think those people are very honest and trying their best under immensely difficult circumstances. That�s very different from the United Nations, presently the UN Security Council. The Security Council is today, unfortunately, totally bilateralized. It�s in the hands of the U.S. government. The dream of (Senator) Jesse Helms has come true, which is the UN as an instrument of international conflict resolution has been marginalized. � It�s become an instrument of maintaining that which is in the interest of the superpower that we have today in the world, and that�s the United States.

HVS: No doubt in 1990 when Saddam Hussein decided to invade Kuwait, he was out of order. � But when Iraq withdrew its forces, it had fulfilled the demands of the initial UN resolution. The tragedy is that over the years, the goal posts continuously changed and Iraq remained in the grip, whatever it did of the UN Security Council. New resolutions were imposed and the price for these goal post changes are paid by whom�by the people of Iraq, by the civilian people. What didn�t happen, which people thought could happen � that economic pressure on the Iraqi people would lead like on a conveyor belt to political change. There hasn�t been any political change. The same government is there and it�s more stable than most other governments around the world. But the people have been punished for the last 12 long years because of that kind of approach.

HVS: You have a very large team of UN people who are helping to implement UN programs including the Oil for Food Program. You also have an increasingly large number of embassies. All the Arab countries have ambassadors or senior diplomats there except for Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. But even Saudi Arabia started mending fences � so you have a totally different political landscape in the Middle East as far as Iraq is concerned. Isn�t that a great basis to find a solution to the Iraq conflict other than military confrontation?

HVS: Iraq must realize that it has to cooperate more than it has in allowing the return of the arms inspectors, particularly if, as Iraq argues, it has nothing to hide. But the public doesn�t fully realize that Iraq�s opposition to the return of arms inspectors isn�t because they don�t want them to come back, but mainly because Iraq feels this is one part of a wider package of measures that have to be agreed upon before they will agree to the return of these arms inspectors. One important aspect with them (is) that they must have a guarantee that the United Nations arms inspectors will not yet again be misused for intelligence and spying purposes. The other thing is they want a time frame, to make sure this is not an open-ended, year after year inspection regime. Third, they want to agree with the return of the arms inspectors in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions.

HVS: I�m sure the family feud thing is an element in this. Is it the decisive element? I don�t think so. It is no secret anymore that the American presence in the Middle East is on notice. Saudi Arabia doesn�t want American troops anymore; it has become a public issue. Other governments are uneasy about it. The smaller, weaker ones like Bahrain and Qatar are giving in under U.S. pressure, but if they had a choice, they also want (America out). So one could say that America is increasingly under pressure to withdraw from that area. I think that is to (the U.S.) an encouragement to make sure that they keep a handle on these sources of energy by getting into Iraq. That�s the frightening part�that this is all ultimately about a word with three letters, and that�s oil.

HVS: With the present approach, America will painfully realize that the world isn�t as simplistic in its approach as Washington wants it to be. (Countries) are extremely wary of seeing a government in Washington that continually says "no" to good, multilateral exercises. All the recent efforts to create a better multilateral framework for our life in the 21st century has been rejected and sometimes it�s breathtaking to see the rejection come in such areas as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, or the Convention on the Rights of the Child, or the Biological Weapons Agreement, or the Land Mine Agreement � wherever you look there is a "no" from the U.S. Then you get into such difficult areas as the relationship with the Middle East and you see a lack of leadership. � I see a very rocky road ahead for the two continents.

HVS: This is the first step of muzzling a democracy. If you start doing that, you are attacking the very substance, the fiber of a country that was created in order to give people a new hope in life�escaping from dictatorships and ruthless regimes that we had in Europe.

HVS: One reason is the U.S. is an important ally to European countries and it must take a lot before they are willing to question that relationship. But the extremism that is now coming out of Washington is facilitating that.

HVS: He was welcomed as a person who came with a sense of sympathy, of wanting to understand firsthand the conditions in Iraq. I think the Iraqi public, the few that I talked to, were impressed by an American delegation that came that wanted to update their knowledge and become honest interpreters of the reality in Iraq back home. That was what was very much appreciated. He�s known there; therefore, he had a warm welcome. That also means that the people were open to try to convey how they felt about the conditions in Iraq and the forthcoming possibility of an attack against Iraq.

HVS: I�m convinced that in the history books, the time that now is behind us, the time that the Iraqis since 1990 have suffered, will be identified as a horrendous mistake. The tragedy is that awareness and recognition of this mistake will not bring back thousands of people who have died as a result of wrong policy. Lawlessness of one kind in Iraq is no free ticket for lawlessness of another kind. What we have done internationally under U.S. leadership is systematic violation of the very laws that your earlier governments and others have created in order to protect individuals. It should worry us that we�re entering now into an era where it seems that international law is no more relevant.