Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski

Aired August 19, 2002 - 07:46   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: More evidence this morning the U.S. may be getting ready to attack Iraq. According to "The New York Times" this morning, the U.S. has hired eight cargo ships to carry war material to the Persian Gulf area, including two giant ships capable of carrying armored vehicles and helicopters.
This, as the debate over whether the U.S. should back a military move against Saddam Hussein grows even louder. Some members of President Bush's own party are urging caution, or expressing some grave reservations.

And adding his words to the debate, Zbigniew Brzezinski, with an op-ed piece in Sunday's "Washington Post." He was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter. He is now a counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He joins us from northeast Harbor, Maine.

Good to see you again, sir. Thanks so much for being with us this morning.

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Nice to see you, Paula.

ZAHN: Under what circumstances would you support an attack on Iraq?

BRZEZINSKI: If there is continued Iraqi defiance of the U.N. resolutions. If Iraq is unwilling to accept intrusive, comprehensive inspections, then I think there is no choice.

But if we could get the international community and lead the international community to adopt a comprehensive system of international inspection, and then we could compel Iraq to accept it, then I think we would be better off, because we can always use Iraqi defiance or sabotage of the inspection system as the cause for war. And this way, we would have the support of the international community behind us.

ZAHN: But don't you think, Mr. Brzezinski, the Iraqis have already proven they will not accept intrusive and comprehensive inspections?

BRZEZINSKI: This is why military preparations to go to war are necessary. This is why a reasoned, well-documented statement by the president outlining the nature of the threat is necessary. This is why creating an international coalition to support us is necessary. This is also why moving more rapidly towards some form of peace in the Middle East is necessary, because war may be necessary.

But we have to do this by stages in a mature, responsible, comprehensive way, and not on the basis of a lot of hysteria, panic, demagogy, and relatively little practical evidence.

ZAHN: How much faith do you have, though, even if Saddam Hussein allows inspection teams to get back in that he will allow them to do their inspections wherever the heck they want to, unannounced, on their own timetable?

BRZEZINSKI: If he doesn't, then we have the perfect legitimacy for going to war, and we'll have massive international support. If we simply act on our own, there is the real risk that we'll destroy the western alliance, we'll be isolated, and a great deal of the world's public opinion might even be inclined to justify any retaliatory, rash action that Hussein might take against us or against Israel.

ZAHN: Do you personally believe, though, that Saddam Hussein would allow unfettered access to inspectors if they are allowed back in?

BRZEZINSKI: Quite frankly, I am doubtful, but that's another reason why we should press, because if we press in that direction and make the weapons of mass destruction the central issue, it will make inspection the central issue. We're in a better position then to justify the use of force, than if we simply declare in advance, one, inspections will not work, two, we don't want inspections, three, we don't really know what he has, but we're going to go to war anyhow.

That I don't think is a very compelling case, and the consequences of that could be extremely costly to us internationally, but even domestically, if the war should prove to be more difficult than perhaps we have reason currently to expect.

ZAHN: Well, what do you see as the potential fallout?

BRZEZINSKI: Of the war? I think a variety of things. First of all, massive upheaval in the Middle East, which could be very destructive of our interests. And we cannot ignore the fact that we do have major interests in the Middle East, even though some parties would really like to generate American-Arab hostility.

We could have a split in the western alliance. We could find ourselves isolated.

And worst of all, we could be the victims of a massive retaliatory attack of some sort from pre-planted bacteriological agents, fro example, either in the United States or delivered by missile to Israel.

All of these are serious things, and perhaps we have to run those risks. But if we are going to run those risks, it's much better to approach the issue on a comprehensive measured basis, which mobilizes international support, and gives us what in law is called a kazoos (ph) belly (ph), a legitimate cause for taking military action.

ZAHN: We're going to have to leave the debate there this morning. Zbigniew Brzezinski, as always, good to have you on the air.

BRZEZINSKI: It's nice to be with you, Paula.

ZAHN: Appreciate your stepping away from your vacation in northeast Harlem, Maine to join us.

BRZEZINSKI: From my tennis, from my tennis -- I'm giving up my tennis for you.

ZAHN: Oh, we'll let you get back to the game. I hope you were winning when you walked off the court. Thanks again -- appreciate your time.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.