Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Bush Administration Plans Major Shift in Military Strategy

Aired September 20, 2002 - 09:02   ET

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

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


BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: The Bush administration plans a major shift in military strategy. "The New York Times" says the White House will reportedly publish a document today, a 33-page one at that, giving its rationale for pre-emptive action against hostile states and terrorist groups.
John King is standing by at the White House with more. Now we have heard little bit and pieces of this along the way, haven't we, John?

JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We've heard this consistently from the president of United States and every one of his top national security advisers, especially since the events of September 11th a year ago. The president is required to submit this report to Congress, and he will indeed send it up today, reflecting what we views as the urgent priorities of U.S. national security policy, and what you will see in the overall document is what we are seeing in the debate about pursuing Al Qaeda, and now in the front and center debate about Iraq.

The president will say that United States must adopt a policy of preemption, that if you see a threat, like a terrorist organization, or like a regime that is amassing weapons of mass destruction, that the United States military policy will be not to wait until that threat attacks or until that threat reaches a critical stage, but to go out and preempt it and attack that threat. That will be presented to the Congress today in a report, the president is required to submit by law, and it will reinforced, if you will, in the president's discussions here this morning.

We are told President Bush is calling this morning, the Russian President Vladimir Putin. That phone conversation focusing on Iraq. The president trying to sway Russia to move it off its objections to a new Security Council resolution threatening military strikes, if Iraq does not comply with United Nations resolution, including letting weapons inspectors back in without any interference.

The phone call to President Putin, then face to face meetings with two top Russia officials here at the White House, the Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov. He stopped by the Pentagon yesterday as part of his visit to Washington, and the Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov will be here to meet with the president. Those two Russian leaders coming -- this meeting scheduled weeks ago, to discussion that landmark reduction in nuclear weapons the two countries agreed to a few months back, but White House officials also tell us certainly the president, in addition to his phone call with President Putin, will press with the Russian foreign minister and defense minister his priority that the Security Council adopt a tough new resolution about Iraq before sending weapons inspectors back in -- Paula.

ZAHN: John, coming back to this document that is going to be circulated today, what do you think the reaction to it will be by members of Congress?

KING: There is a debate, and this debate began when the Berlin wall fell really? What is role of the world's one superpower? How aggressive, proactive, should the world's one superpower be in reaching out and policing the world? The president does not like that term, but there is a debate. We've seen it within the president's own Republican Party, on the Iraq question. Should the United States reach out and possibly preemptively attack another country, another sovereign state, if it says there is a threat.

So there is a debate about this overall policy. The president appears to carrying the debate, if you narrowly focus it right now on Iraq, but there is a debate about the role of the United States in the world, and the role of the use of military power that will be intensified once the president sends this document up to Capitol Hill today.

ZAHN: Senator Mitchell was a guest on our show a little bit earlier this morning, and he said he obviously respects the right of the president to come forward with this document, but he said he thinks the key debate will come when you try to think under what conditions preemption action will be taken. Is that laid out in this document?

KING: In this document the president say that U.S. reserves the right do it on its own. Again, we are seeing it applied in the real world, if you will, in case of the president trying to get United Nations backing for what he believes might be necessary in the case of Iraq. But certainly, that is the big debate, when should the United States act unilaterally, when must it act multilaterally. Should the United States act unilaterally, say, in the case of Iraq -- we may get a test here, if the world's multilateral bodies like the United Nations say no. If a majority of countries around the world say no, they do not agree with military strikes, then can the United States and should the United States act on its own? That will be the debate triggered by the document, but it is also the debate that has been front and center in our national security discussion since September 11th.

ZAHN: Thanks, John, for the update. Appreciate it. Have a good weekend.

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




Strategy>


Aired September 20, 2002 - 09:02   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: The Bush administration plans a major shift in military strategy. "The New York Times" says the White House will reportedly publish a document today, a 33-page one at that, giving its rationale for pre-emptive action against hostile states and terrorist groups.
John King is standing by at the White House with more. Now we have heard little bit and pieces of this along the way, haven't we, John?

JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We've heard this consistently from the president of United States and every one of his top national security advisers, especially since the events of September 11th a year ago. The president is required to submit this report to Congress, and he will indeed send it up today, reflecting what we views as the urgent priorities of U.S. national security policy, and what you will see in the overall document is what we are seeing in the debate about pursuing Al Qaeda, and now in the front and center debate about Iraq.

The president will say that United States must adopt a policy of preemption, that if you see a threat, like a terrorist organization, or like a regime that is amassing weapons of mass destruction, that the United States military policy will be not to wait until that threat attacks or until that threat reaches a critical stage, but to go out and preempt it and attack that threat. That will be presented to the Congress today in a report, the president is required to submit by law, and it will reinforced, if you will, in the president's discussions here this morning.

We are told President Bush is calling this morning, the Russian President Vladimir Putin. That phone conversation focusing on Iraq. The president trying to sway Russia to move it off its objections to a new Security Council resolution threatening military strikes, if Iraq does not comply with United Nations resolution, including letting weapons inspectors back in without any interference.

The phone call to President Putin, then face to face meetings with two top Russia officials here at the White House, the Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov. He stopped by the Pentagon yesterday as part of his visit to Washington, and the Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov will be here to meet with the president. Those two Russian leaders coming -- this meeting scheduled weeks ago, to discussion that landmark reduction in nuclear weapons the two countries agreed to a few months back, but White House officials also tell us certainly the president, in addition to his phone call with President Putin, will press with the Russian foreign minister and defense minister his priority that the Security Council adopt a tough new resolution about Iraq before sending weapons inspectors back in -- Paula.

ZAHN: John, coming back to this document that is going to be circulated today, what do you think the reaction to it will be by members of Congress?

KING: There is a debate, and this debate began when the Berlin wall fell really? What is role of the world's one superpower? How aggressive, proactive, should the world's one superpower be in reaching out and policing the world? The president does not like that term, but there is a debate. We've seen it within the president's own Republican Party, on the Iraq question. Should the United States reach out and possibly preemptively attack another country, another sovereign state, if it says there is a threat.

So there is a debate about this overall policy. The president appears to carrying the debate, if you narrowly focus it right now on Iraq, but there is a debate about the role of the United States in the world, and the role of the use of military power that will be intensified once the president sends this document up to Capitol Hill today.

ZAHN: Senator Mitchell was a guest on our show a little bit earlier this morning, and he said he obviously respects the right of the president to come forward with this document, but he said he thinks the key debate will come when you try to think under what conditions preemption action will be taken. Is that laid out in this document?

KING: In this document the president say that U.S. reserves the right do it on its own. Again, we are seeing it applied in the real world, if you will, in case of the president trying to get United Nations backing for what he believes might be necessary in the case of Iraq. But certainly, that is the big debate, when should the United States act unilaterally, when must it act multilaterally. Should the United States act unilaterally, say, in the case of Iraq -- we may get a test here, if the world's multilateral bodies like the United Nations say no. If a majority of countries around the world say no, they do not agree with military strikes, then can the United States and should the United States act on its own? That will be the debate triggered by the document, but it is also the debate that has been front and center in our national security discussion since September 11th.

ZAHN: Thanks, John, for the update. Appreciate it. Have a good weekend.

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




Strategy>