Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Look at Pending War

Aired December 09, 2002 - 08:03   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.


PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: We continue to follow Iraq's multi-page weapons declaration. The U.S. got its way late last night and we'll get an unedited look at the documents. So will the four other permanent members of the Security Council.
To tell us what's behind that decision, let's turn to Michael Okwu, who's standing by at the U.N. -- big change in fate here, isn't it, Michael?

Good morning.

MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Paula, and welcome back.

ZAHN: Thank you.

OKWU: It's certainly a big change, but it's certainly something also that had been looming on the horizon. There had been chatter about this for some days, but clearly that chatter reached a crescendo last night.

Just to recap, the five permanent members of the Security Council will be receiving access or have already been granted access to an unsanitized or unedited copy of this declare, the five permanent members, again, being Russia, France, the United States, China and Great Britain.

Now, the decision came after the United States essentially applied pressure on the Security Council president, the Colombian ambassador here at the United States, Alfonso Valdivieso. In a statement late Sunday, Valdivieso said, quoting now, "After consulting with the members of the Security Council, the presidency decided to allow access to the Iraqi declaration to those members with the expertise to assess the risks of proliferation and other sensitive information to begin its immediate review."

Now, acting on behalf of the Council last week, Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix said that he would be looking at the document himself, editing out any sensitive information having to do with the making of weapons of mass destruction.

Clearly, that will not be the case. He will be doing it in consultation with the P5, as well as with the IAEA. In the meantime, the head of the IAEA, Mohamed al-Baradei, says that he will have a preliminary report in about 10 days -- Paula.

ZAHN: So, Michael, when you talk about the sensitive information that will not be exposed to the folks outside the Security Council, what are we talking about here?

OKWU: We are talking about specifically those parts of the document that have to do with the making of weapons of mass destruction. The Security Council last week had come to a decision, when they said essentially this information is very sensitive. We don't want to essentially provide a cookbook to those people who might not already have weapons of mass destruction. So there was an agreement made to keep that secret.

ZAHN: Michael Okwu, thank you so much for the update.

Appreciate it.

So as U.N. officials begin to analyze Iraq's 12,000 page war planes declaration, what can they realistically expect to find and what was Saddam's motivation for apologizing to Kuwait over the weekend?

Here to talk about that is Con Coughlin, executive editor of the "London Sunday Telegraph" and the author of "Saddam: King of Terror."

Good to see you again, sir.

Thank you for joining us this morning.

CON COUGHLIN, "LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH": Hi. Good morning.

ZAHN: So our reporters are estimating it's going to take the United States at least a week to pore through these thousands of pages of documents. But most analysts agree when all is said and done the headline will be Iraqi will claim it has no weapons of mass destruction and has ceased all previous programs.

Is that what you anticipate?

COUGHLIN: Yes, it doesn't seem we're to find very much in it. A British diplomat described this document as the mother of all gobbledygook and I think the Iraqis have had a high old time the last few days basically throwing in details about cement works and all kinds of strange development projects which actually have nothing to do with their weapons of mass destruction program.

ZAHN: At the same time, it would appear as though the Iraqis are trying to taunt the U.S. let's talk a little bit about what General Amir al-Saadi had to say when he basically challenged the U.S. to turn over any evidence that, in fact, Iraq does have weapons of mass destruction.

What's the strategy here?

COUGHLIN: Well, Saddam is up to his old games. I mean Saddam is a very canny operator and he's demonstrated this over the last 15 years. That's why he's still there when we all thought he was finished at the end of the Gulf War. He's playing games. In fact, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 is quite clear, the onus is on Saddam to tell us what he has. It's not for the Americans. It's not for the British. Its not for anyone else to say what Saddam has, it's for Saddam to come clean.

ZAHN: Well, let's talk about what this Iraq adviser also admitted, that the Iraqis came very close to building a nuclear weapon in '91. What is that admission all about?

COUGHLIN: Well, this is, well, I think we actually know this because after the Gulf War we discovered information that showed that Saddam was within three months of having an atom bomb. What we also know, and which, of course, Saddam is denying, is that a lot of the equipment and technology required for developing a nuclear weapon is still intact. It's still in Iraq. He still has the scientific know how. And we also have to remember that it was one Hans Blix in the 1980s, when he was head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who went to Baghdad and gave Saddam's nuclear program a clean bill of health.

So, I mean, again, one can understand why Washington is slightly frustrated with the way Hans Blix is conducting this process at the moment.

ZAHN: Let's talk about some of the other things that might be frustrating U.N. negotiators at the moment. According to one of the Saddam's top advisers, the 12,000 page declaration offers no new evidence to support Iraqi claims that they have, indeed, destroyed any weapons of mass destruction. And the "Washington Post" reports this morning that that lack of new evidence could lead to a key point of contention.

Do you agree?

COUGHLIN: I agree entirely. I mean as I said at the outset, I do think Saddam is up to his old tricks. Saddam is addicted to his weapons of mass destruction. I mean when I was researching my book, I was really struck at how from the 1970s onwards Saddam had invested so much money and resources to developing these weapons. He's not going to give them up.

These are the weapons that will give him the power he craves in the Middle East. If you take them away, he will see himself as impotent.

ZAHN: Well, let me ask you this, Senator Bob Graham over the weekend made a very chilling comment when he talked about the potential military involvement and how that might lead to Iraqi terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens in America.

COUGHLIN: Yes.

ZAHN: Do you share that same concern?

COUGHLIN: I certainly do. I mean I think, again, if you looked at the history of Saddam's presidency, he has had groups of terrorists working for him over the years. The infamous Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal was based in Baghdad. He attacked a lot of American targets in Europe over the years. We know that Saddam has sleeper cells in the Middle East, in Europe, in America. It would be very easy for him to activate those cells and to carry out terrorist attacks against America.

So it is not beyond the bounds of reason that this could happen.

ZAHN: Con Coughlin, always good to have your perspective.

As always, good of you to join us.

Appreciate it.

Bill?

BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: I think he gave us a new phrase there, Paula, the mother of all gobbledygook.

ZAHN: Yes.

HEMMER: Referring to these 12,000...

ZAHN: I think he got it right.

HEMMER: Con Coughlin, he shoots it between the lines.

COMMERCIAL

HEMMER: Well, there are some who suggest that Iraq has been winning the P.R. war by appearing to cooperate with U.N. inspectors and submitting that declaration a day ahead of schedule. The P.R. offensive, though, hit Kuwait, as well, Saddam Hussein apologizing for the invasion of August 1990.

And with reaction now from Kuwait City, Walter Rodgers now joins us by way of video phone. He's been speaking with Kuwaitis there and joins us with an update -- Walter, hello.

WALTER RODGERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Bill.

In that statement by Saddam Hussein over the weekend apologizing to Kuwaitis, most people here see that as an attempt to assert Saddam's leadership over what he sees as the entire Arab world. He has long seen himself as the preeminent Arab leader.

Now, of course, he's also appealing to the Arab street and the apology may be more directed at the Arab street than, indeed, at the Kuwaitis, because the Kuwaitis have rejected the apology.

One of the things that came out in the Saddam statement over the weekend was a call for young Kuwaitis to rise up and have the Jihad. There are 15,000 American soldiers -- excuse me, 12,000 American soldiers here in Kuwait at this time and Saddam called for a Jihad, that is, to have young Kuwaitis rise up and carry out attacks, terror attacks against the Americans, the 12,000 Americans who are now here in Kuwait.

Now, most people in Kuwait see that as incitement to terror on the part of Saddam Hussein. The Kuwaitis themselves have dismissed his apology. One Kuwaiti newspaper today said a leopard, that is Saddam Hussein, a leopard cannot change his spots. The Kuwaitis still see him, as they report in their newspapers, as a liar.

That being the case, however, with this new heightened sense of terror threats in this region, the U.S. military forces here are keeping a very low profile just in case anybody heeds or tries to heed Saddam's call for a Jihad -- Bill.

HEMMER: Walter, thank you.

Walter Rodgers in Kuwait.

And while the U.N. starts to digest that dossier from Iraq, the U.S. gets ready to prepare for the possibility of war. About 10,000 troops now deployed in Kuwait, 4,000 other military personnel in Qatar, where the U.S. now conducting war games as of today. And from Doha, Qatar with more, CNN military analysis General Don Shepperd has arrived on the scene there several days ago to oversee things.

And we say hello to you, General.

Good to have you with us here on AMERICAN MORNING once again.

It has been some time since we have spoken.

From a military perspective, these war games, what does it entail and ultimately how much does it help the U.S. military in terms of preparation?

MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD (RET.), U.S. AIR FORCE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Bill, this is critical preparation for any military action. The problem is it's not very exciting and not very visual. We can show you pictures of computers and cubicles, but there's no ships, there's no troops, there's no airplanes taking off and sound overhead.

This is about command and control, the ability of General Franks to operate seamlessly here from a deployable headquarters in the area of responsibility, just like he can in Florida. Not very exciting, but very, very important, Bill.

HEMMER: Now, General, if the call came in from the White House today to initiate military activity against Baghdad, given the amount of forces right now in the Persian Gulf region, could it carry it out to the level of success that the Pentagon and the White House would like to see? In other words, is it ready to go right now?

SHEPPERD: Bill, the troops here are ready to go. But the answer to your question is no. You can't do it with the approximately 40,000 to 60,000 troops from all services that are in the area. It's going to take reportedly around 200,000 to 250,000 to do the things that are contemplated if you take military action against Iraq and end up going to Baghdad to try to change the regime.

So you could react, you could defend, but you could not attack in the way that you would want to. If military action is ordered by the president, it's going to take some time to move the forces over, to get them in place and then to kick it off. But they're not ready yet, Bill. HEMMER: What you're suggesting is that the U.S. needs the numbers to occupy Iraq after Saddam Hussein. Is that correct?

SHEPPERD: Well, not just to occupy Iraq, but the things that you would have to do. It'd be very much like the Gulf War. And you'd launch an air assault, but it would be much more simultaneous this time. You'll see many more special forces operations and ground operations much earlier than you did. We had a 40 day air campaign and a four day ground war before. It would be much more simultaneous this time. You've got to take a lot of pieces of Iraq before you can move toward Baghdad.

So this is not going to be any kind of cake walk. It's, in some ways, even though Saddam Hussein may be weaker and we may be stronger than before, it's a more complicated scenario than just kicking him out of Kuwait -- Bill.

HEMMER: And I want to talk about the complications there. You talk to military strategists all the time. There is a theory out there that suggests the U.S. would like to come in from the south, in other words, through Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and also come in through the north through Turkey. But to this point, General, Turkey has not given the U.S. permission to put any ground troops on its soil.

If that's the case, how does that affect U.S. strategy then?

SHEPPERD: Well, it affects the strategy, but it doesn't paralyze you. The United States has the capability to airlift forces, to air drop forces, to do the things we need to do. And of course you're going to come in from the south. You'd also like to come in from the north. If you can't do that, you'll have alternative plans. And General Franks has thought his way through all of that, Bill.

HEMMER: Yes, now you talk about the 200,000 to 250,000 troops, near case scenario, earliest point, when would those men and women be in place?

SHEPPERD: A good guess is it would take somewhere between 30 and 60 days to move that number of troops into the area with their equipment. There are a lot of prepositioned stocks and prepo ships in the area that can move things fairly rapidly in the area. But it's going to take some time to move another 150,000 troops into the area, no question about it, Bill.

HEMMER: And, General, how much do you think Baghdad is watching and monitoring the military exercise there in Qatar this week?

SHEPPERD: Oh, I think they're watching very closely. There's a message in this exercise, diplomatic messages. There's one to Saddam Hussein, obviously. There's another to the U.N. that we're serious. There's a subtle message to Saudi Arabia that if we can't use your bases and your air space, we have other friends in the area.

So this exercise is very important not only from the military standpoint, but also from the diplomatic standpoint, Bill.

HEMMER: And we'll watch it from half a world away along with you.

Major General Don Shepperd there in Doha, Qatar.

Thank you, sir.

Good to see you again.

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







Aired December 9, 2002 - 08:03   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: We continue to follow Iraq's multi-page weapons declaration. The U.S. got its way late last night and we'll get an unedited look at the documents. So will the four other permanent members of the Security Council.
To tell us what's behind that decision, let's turn to Michael Okwu, who's standing by at the U.N. -- big change in fate here, isn't it, Michael?

Good morning.

MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Paula, and welcome back.

ZAHN: Thank you.

OKWU: It's certainly a big change, but it's certainly something also that had been looming on the horizon. There had been chatter about this for some days, but clearly that chatter reached a crescendo last night.

Just to recap, the five permanent members of the Security Council will be receiving access or have already been granted access to an unsanitized or unedited copy of this declare, the five permanent members, again, being Russia, France, the United States, China and Great Britain.

Now, the decision came after the United States essentially applied pressure on the Security Council president, the Colombian ambassador here at the United States, Alfonso Valdivieso. In a statement late Sunday, Valdivieso said, quoting now, "After consulting with the members of the Security Council, the presidency decided to allow access to the Iraqi declaration to those members with the expertise to assess the risks of proliferation and other sensitive information to begin its immediate review."

Now, acting on behalf of the Council last week, Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix said that he would be looking at the document himself, editing out any sensitive information having to do with the making of weapons of mass destruction.

Clearly, that will not be the case. He will be doing it in consultation with the P5, as well as with the IAEA. In the meantime, the head of the IAEA, Mohamed al-Baradei, says that he will have a preliminary report in about 10 days -- Paula.

ZAHN: So, Michael, when you talk about the sensitive information that will not be exposed to the folks outside the Security Council, what are we talking about here?

OKWU: We are talking about specifically those parts of the document that have to do with the making of weapons of mass destruction. The Security Council last week had come to a decision, when they said essentially this information is very sensitive. We don't want to essentially provide a cookbook to those people who might not already have weapons of mass destruction. So there was an agreement made to keep that secret.

ZAHN: Michael Okwu, thank you so much for the update.

Appreciate it.

So as U.N. officials begin to analyze Iraq's 12,000 page war planes declaration, what can they realistically expect to find and what was Saddam's motivation for apologizing to Kuwait over the weekend?

Here to talk about that is Con Coughlin, executive editor of the "London Sunday Telegraph" and the author of "Saddam: King of Terror."

Good to see you again, sir.

Thank you for joining us this morning.

CON COUGHLIN, "LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH": Hi. Good morning.

ZAHN: So our reporters are estimating it's going to take the United States at least a week to pore through these thousands of pages of documents. But most analysts agree when all is said and done the headline will be Iraqi will claim it has no weapons of mass destruction and has ceased all previous programs.

Is that what you anticipate?

COUGHLIN: Yes, it doesn't seem we're to find very much in it. A British diplomat described this document as the mother of all gobbledygook and I think the Iraqis have had a high old time the last few days basically throwing in details about cement works and all kinds of strange development projects which actually have nothing to do with their weapons of mass destruction program.

ZAHN: At the same time, it would appear as though the Iraqis are trying to taunt the U.S. let's talk a little bit about what General Amir al-Saadi had to say when he basically challenged the U.S. to turn over any evidence that, in fact, Iraq does have weapons of mass destruction.

What's the strategy here?

COUGHLIN: Well, Saddam is up to his old games. I mean Saddam is a very canny operator and he's demonstrated this over the last 15 years. That's why he's still there when we all thought he was finished at the end of the Gulf War. He's playing games. In fact, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 is quite clear, the onus is on Saddam to tell us what he has. It's not for the Americans. It's not for the British. Its not for anyone else to say what Saddam has, it's for Saddam to come clean.

ZAHN: Well, let's talk about what this Iraq adviser also admitted, that the Iraqis came very close to building a nuclear weapon in '91. What is that admission all about?

COUGHLIN: Well, this is, well, I think we actually know this because after the Gulf War we discovered information that showed that Saddam was within three months of having an atom bomb. What we also know, and which, of course, Saddam is denying, is that a lot of the equipment and technology required for developing a nuclear weapon is still intact. It's still in Iraq. He still has the scientific know how. And we also have to remember that it was one Hans Blix in the 1980s, when he was head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who went to Baghdad and gave Saddam's nuclear program a clean bill of health.

So, I mean, again, one can understand why Washington is slightly frustrated with the way Hans Blix is conducting this process at the moment.

ZAHN: Let's talk about some of the other things that might be frustrating U.N. negotiators at the moment. According to one of the Saddam's top advisers, the 12,000 page declaration offers no new evidence to support Iraqi claims that they have, indeed, destroyed any weapons of mass destruction. And the "Washington Post" reports this morning that that lack of new evidence could lead to a key point of contention.

Do you agree?

COUGHLIN: I agree entirely. I mean as I said at the outset, I do think Saddam is up to his old tricks. Saddam is addicted to his weapons of mass destruction. I mean when I was researching my book, I was really struck at how from the 1970s onwards Saddam had invested so much money and resources to developing these weapons. He's not going to give them up.

These are the weapons that will give him the power he craves in the Middle East. If you take them away, he will see himself as impotent.

ZAHN: Well, let me ask you this, Senator Bob Graham over the weekend made a very chilling comment when he talked about the potential military involvement and how that might lead to Iraqi terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens in America.

COUGHLIN: Yes.

ZAHN: Do you share that same concern?

COUGHLIN: I certainly do. I mean I think, again, if you looked at the history of Saddam's presidency, he has had groups of terrorists working for him over the years. The infamous Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal was based in Baghdad. He attacked a lot of American targets in Europe over the years. We know that Saddam has sleeper cells in the Middle East, in Europe, in America. It would be very easy for him to activate those cells and to carry out terrorist attacks against America.

So it is not beyond the bounds of reason that this could happen.

ZAHN: Con Coughlin, always good to have your perspective.

As always, good of you to join us.

Appreciate it.

Bill?

BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: I think he gave us a new phrase there, Paula, the mother of all gobbledygook.

ZAHN: Yes.

HEMMER: Referring to these 12,000...

ZAHN: I think he got it right.

HEMMER: Con Coughlin, he shoots it between the lines.

COMMERCIAL

HEMMER: Well, there are some who suggest that Iraq has been winning the P.R. war by appearing to cooperate with U.N. inspectors and submitting that declaration a day ahead of schedule. The P.R. offensive, though, hit Kuwait, as well, Saddam Hussein apologizing for the invasion of August 1990.

And with reaction now from Kuwait City, Walter Rodgers now joins us by way of video phone. He's been speaking with Kuwaitis there and joins us with an update -- Walter, hello.

WALTER RODGERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Bill.

In that statement by Saddam Hussein over the weekend apologizing to Kuwaitis, most people here see that as an attempt to assert Saddam's leadership over what he sees as the entire Arab world. He has long seen himself as the preeminent Arab leader.

Now, of course, he's also appealing to the Arab street and the apology may be more directed at the Arab street than, indeed, at the Kuwaitis, because the Kuwaitis have rejected the apology.

One of the things that came out in the Saddam statement over the weekend was a call for young Kuwaitis to rise up and have the Jihad. There are 15,000 American soldiers -- excuse me, 12,000 American soldiers here in Kuwait at this time and Saddam called for a Jihad, that is, to have young Kuwaitis rise up and carry out attacks, terror attacks against the Americans, the 12,000 Americans who are now here in Kuwait.

Now, most people in Kuwait see that as incitement to terror on the part of Saddam Hussein. The Kuwaitis themselves have dismissed his apology. One Kuwaiti newspaper today said a leopard, that is Saddam Hussein, a leopard cannot change his spots. The Kuwaitis still see him, as they report in their newspapers, as a liar.

That being the case, however, with this new heightened sense of terror threats in this region, the U.S. military forces here are keeping a very low profile just in case anybody heeds or tries to heed Saddam's call for a Jihad -- Bill.

HEMMER: Walter, thank you.

Walter Rodgers in Kuwait.

And while the U.N. starts to digest that dossier from Iraq, the U.S. gets ready to prepare for the possibility of war. About 10,000 troops now deployed in Kuwait, 4,000 other military personnel in Qatar, where the U.S. now conducting war games as of today. And from Doha, Qatar with more, CNN military analysis General Don Shepperd has arrived on the scene there several days ago to oversee things.

And we say hello to you, General.

Good to have you with us here on AMERICAN MORNING once again.

It has been some time since we have spoken.

From a military perspective, these war games, what does it entail and ultimately how much does it help the U.S. military in terms of preparation?

MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD (RET.), U.S. AIR FORCE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Bill, this is critical preparation for any military action. The problem is it's not very exciting and not very visual. We can show you pictures of computers and cubicles, but there's no ships, there's no troops, there's no airplanes taking off and sound overhead.

This is about command and control, the ability of General Franks to operate seamlessly here from a deployable headquarters in the area of responsibility, just like he can in Florida. Not very exciting, but very, very important, Bill.

HEMMER: Now, General, if the call came in from the White House today to initiate military activity against Baghdad, given the amount of forces right now in the Persian Gulf region, could it carry it out to the level of success that the Pentagon and the White House would like to see? In other words, is it ready to go right now?

SHEPPERD: Bill, the troops here are ready to go. But the answer to your question is no. You can't do it with the approximately 40,000 to 60,000 troops from all services that are in the area. It's going to take reportedly around 200,000 to 250,000 to do the things that are contemplated if you take military action against Iraq and end up going to Baghdad to try to change the regime.

So you could react, you could defend, but you could not attack in the way that you would want to. If military action is ordered by the president, it's going to take some time to move the forces over, to get them in place and then to kick it off. But they're not ready yet, Bill. HEMMER: What you're suggesting is that the U.S. needs the numbers to occupy Iraq after Saddam Hussein. Is that correct?

SHEPPERD: Well, not just to occupy Iraq, but the things that you would have to do. It'd be very much like the Gulf War. And you'd launch an air assault, but it would be much more simultaneous this time. You'll see many more special forces operations and ground operations much earlier than you did. We had a 40 day air campaign and a four day ground war before. It would be much more simultaneous this time. You've got to take a lot of pieces of Iraq before you can move toward Baghdad.

So this is not going to be any kind of cake walk. It's, in some ways, even though Saddam Hussein may be weaker and we may be stronger than before, it's a more complicated scenario than just kicking him out of Kuwait -- Bill.

HEMMER: And I want to talk about the complications there. You talk to military strategists all the time. There is a theory out there that suggests the U.S. would like to come in from the south, in other words, through Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and also come in through the north through Turkey. But to this point, General, Turkey has not given the U.S. permission to put any ground troops on its soil.

If that's the case, how does that affect U.S. strategy then?

SHEPPERD: Well, it affects the strategy, but it doesn't paralyze you. The United States has the capability to airlift forces, to air drop forces, to do the things we need to do. And of course you're going to come in from the south. You'd also like to come in from the north. If you can't do that, you'll have alternative plans. And General Franks has thought his way through all of that, Bill.

HEMMER: Yes, now you talk about the 200,000 to 250,000 troops, near case scenario, earliest point, when would those men and women be in place?

SHEPPERD: A good guess is it would take somewhere between 30 and 60 days to move that number of troops into the area with their equipment. There are a lot of prepositioned stocks and prepo ships in the area that can move things fairly rapidly in the area. But it's going to take some time to move another 150,000 troops into the area, no question about it, Bill.

HEMMER: And, General, how much do you think Baghdad is watching and monitoring the military exercise there in Qatar this week?

SHEPPERD: Oh, I think they're watching very closely. There's a message in this exercise, diplomatic messages. There's one to Saddam Hussein, obviously. There's another to the U.N. that we're serious. There's a subtle message to Saudi Arabia that if we can't use your bases and your air space, we have other friends in the area.

So this exercise is very important not only from the military standpoint, but also from the diplomatic standpoint, Bill.

HEMMER: And we'll watch it from half a world away along with you.

Major General Don Shepperd there in Doha, Qatar.

Thank you, sir.

Good to see you again.

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