"VX is now a dead issue... It is political, really"

The statement "VX is now a dead issue... It is political, really", attributed to Rihab Taha, also known as "Dr. Germ", conveys several layers of meaning regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons program. First, referring to VX, one of the most lethal nerve agents ever developed, as “a dead issue” suggests that, at the time of the statement, Iraqi officials considered the matter closed or irrelevant. This may indicate a claim, accurate or otherwise, that Iraq no longer possessed, produced, or pursued the agent. It also implies exasperation or impatience with ongoing scrutiny, possibly directed toward United Nations weapons inspectors or the international community's persistent focus on VX in the broader context of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities.

The latter phrase, “It is political, really,” reveals further nuance. By labeling discussions around VX as “political,” the speaker is asserting that debate or inquiry about the nerve agent had transitioned from being a material or scientific concern to one rooted in diplomatic or strategic motives. This could imply a belief that international actors, particularly Western governments, were using the specter of VX as leverage in a broader political campaign against Iraq, perhaps to justify sanctions, inspections, or even military intervention. In this framing, the persistence of VX as an issue is not because of any present danger, but because it serves the political interests of certain governments.

The entire statement reveals a defensive posture, a standard rhetorical move by regimes under international pressure. By dismissing the VX issue and casting it as politically motivated, Taha may be implicitly criticizing external oversight while attempting to reframe Iraq’s narrative as one of unjust victimization or misunderstood intentions. This underscores the challenge international bodies face in verifying compliance and the frequent overlap between technical disarmament and the contentious realm of global politics, especially in the tense context of post-Gulf War Iraq. Ultimately, the quote exposes the deep entanglement between WMD disarmament and the motivations of political actors on both sides.