|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Iraqi Weapons Report Rejected by Bush Administration; Why are Middle Eastern Men Being Rounded Up in California?
Aired December 19, 2002 - 15:00 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.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Hello, everyone. And welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.
Today, a crucial turning point in the standoff with Iraq: A senior White House official says the president is ramping up for war. We'll get to that, how that all came about.
And then stay tuned as we find out why Mideastern men are being rounded up in California. Who are they?
And then: Former President Clinton uses the Lott affair to paint an ugly picture of all Republicans. Stay tuned to see and hear what he had to say.
But first, President Bush is prepared to declare Iraq in violation of the United Nations resolution of disarmament. In essence, the administration says there were omissions in Iraq's massive report on its weapons of mass destruction and it failed to reflect the whole truth. And while that in itself is not an immediate trigger for war, some U.S. officials say it sets the course.
Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke moments ago. And here's what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: The United States, the United Nations and the world waited for this declaration from Iraq, but Iraq's response is a catalogue of recycled information and flagrant omissions.
It should be obvious that the pattern of systematic holes and gaps in Iraq's declaration is not the result of accidents or editing oversights or technical mistakes. These are material omissions that, in our view, constitute another material breach.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Now, chief U.N. weapons inspectors Hans Blix presented his own assessment of Iraq's weapons declaration to the Security Council earlier today.
And for more on that, here's CNN's United Nations correspondent, Richard Roth.
And, Richard, what is Dr. Blix's take?
RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix says Iraq has not come up with enough information to satisfy him and neither the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Blix told journalists after briefing the Security Council behind closed doors what the problem is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HANS BLIX, CHIEF U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: As to the assessment of the declaration, we are consistent in the view that there has been relatively little given in the declaration by way of evidence concerning the programs of weapons of mass destruction.
There has been some material concerning the period between 1998 and 2002 in the non-nuclear weapons field. And we will evidently continue the analysis. And the council is clear that it wants us to come back some time in January for a more profound, thorough briefing than we have been able to do so far.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Blix said an opportunity was missed by the Iraqi government.
The U.S. says it's a material breach. Iraq, here at the U.N., said it's not, that Washington just wants regime change in Baghdad -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: So, Richard, what does all this mean, though? What happens now?
ROTH: The United States is pushing for a briefing by Dr. Blix a lot sooner than the planned January 27 date, Secretary Powell saying a body of evidence is being collected, the U.S. trying to gather support from its allies and from others in the U.N. system in case they want to go to war against Iraq.
NEVILLE: And let's talk about Iraq. What is Iraq saying?
ROTH: Iraq says this is all a continuing pattern, that the allegations by Washington and Britain, nothing new.
So, you have, in a way, both sides, from Baghdad to Washington, saying: You've said this before. It really doesn't matter anymore, whether it's on the documents, on the allegations of cooperation. What may be new: There's more pressure from the U.S. on the inspectors to get the scientists that live and work in Iraq to come out of the country to be able to tell them what may be going on without the prying eyes of Iraqi government officials.
Iraq is preparing a list. By the end of the month, they're supposed to hand it over to the U.N., a list of scientists. But nobody knows if these scientists are willing to leave or leave on their own.
NEVILLE: So, Richard, everybody is wondering, what's the bottom line? Does this mean war?
ROTH: Jack Straw, the British foreign secretary, says war is not inevitable. Neither does the secretary-general.
The U.S. is building its case. President Bush has said, in some cases, he hasn't even made up his mind yet. They're keeping their options open, no matter which way it goes. Right now, they are pursuing diplomatic means through the inspectors. They want to give it time. But we know that forces are being built up in the region.
NEVILLE: OK, Richard Roth, thanks so much for that update.
And with us now is CNN's Frank Buckley at the White House with reaction from the administration -- Frank.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think it's important to pick up, Arthel, on the fact that Secretary Powell said that he is discouraged about the prospects of a peaceful resolution, as Richard mentioned, Secretary Powell saying that a body of evidence is slowly building and that Iraq is on its way to losing this last chance.
And, for the first time, we heard some specific examples of what the U.S. has problems with, issues with, with this Iraqi declaration. One of the major points: the possession of anthrax, or at least the capability to produce some 26,000 liters of anthrax, according to inspectors who left Iraq in 1998. The U.S. says that that capability is not accounted for.
Iraq has said that they have destroyed all of the anthrax and all of the capability to produce it, but they have not produced the evidence of that. That was just one of the major points that came out of this conversation, this presentation by Secretary Powell.
NEVILLE: And, Frank, of course, we've heard that the optimum time for military action would be during the winter. So, again, people are wondering, OK, we're looking at January 27, which is the final date that the U.N.'s weapons inspectors have to go ahead and submit their final report. So, again, are we looking at a possible war come next month?
BUCKLEY: Well, certainly,war is possible. And what we are seeing, according to our colleagues at the Pentagon, is a buildup that is taking place, a very visible buildup that will be taking place during the month of January to show Saddam Hussein, to show Iraq that the U.S. and the international community is serious about this.
And you heard from Secretary Powell that the U.S., if, in fact, Saddam Hussein does not disarm, Secretary Powell once again echoing what we've heard over and over from this president, from this administration, that the U.S., with a coalition of the willing, as the president often puts it, will disarm Saddam Hussein. So, we are not going to war tomorrow. And we are told that this term that you have heard over and over, material breach, is not going to be the immediate trigger for immediate military action. But you've also heard Colin Powell say that a body of evidence is slowly building against Iraq.
NEVILLE: Frank, you mentioned a coalition of willingness. How many allies will the U.S. have in the event of military action?
BUCKLEY: Well, administration officials have told us that there is a coalition that is growing.
They will never speak to the exact number of nations that are actually going to participate. We know that, some time ago, that they were reaching out to a group of some 50 nations. The one nation that we know is on board and is willing to participate is the United Kingdom. But, beyond that, we know of various countries in the region that have offered bases or some assistance.
But, beyond that, we don't have a specific list and a specific number of nations that are a part of this coalition of the willing.
NEVILLE: Right. I was just trying to get an assessment of the support the U.S. would have.
Frank Buckley, thank you so much for that report.
And now to the debate. Here to talk about it is Robert George, associate editor of "The New York Post" editorial page; and Roland Martin, a syndicated columnist and author of "Speak, Brother: A Black Man's View of America." Roland is also editor of BlackAmericaWeb.com and news editor of "Savoy" magazine.
And, Robert, I'll start with you today.
You've heard all the positions here. Whose view do you share?
ROBERT GEORGE, "NEW YORK POST": I tend to share the administration's view.
I think we've been kind of heading down this direction for quite a while right now. I think the administration went through the appropriate steps, going to the U.N., getting Security Council authorization. And the Iraqis had a chance to come clean with their weapons programs. And even Hans Blix is basically saying that there are some -- there are serious things that are missing here. So, it seems like...
NEVILLE: Many questions unanswered, he says.
GEORGE: Yes. Certainly, it seems to be we're going in a certain direction that suggests military action at some point.
NEVILLE: And speaking of that certain direction you're talking about, there's a new poll that says that most Americans support ousting Saddam Hussein by using ground troops. So, Roland, I ask you, is war inevitable?
ROLAND MARTIN, BLACKAMERICAWEB.COM: Well, obviously, I think war is inevitable, because that is what President Bush and the war hawks in his administration have been pushing for.
But, again, as you said in your question-and-answer session, the inspectors have until January 27 to file their final report. That also gives the Iraqis time to provide the necessary information. But, again...
NEVILLE: Yes, but come on, Roland. Do you really believe they're going to provide that necessary information?
MARTIN: Well, again, it's up to them whether they're going to provide it. We doubt it very seriously they're going to provide it. But at least we went through the process.
Remember, two or three months ago, we weren't even talking about a process. We were talking about going straight to war. So, again, we have to give the inspectors time to file their final report and then allow the U.N. Security Council to make their final decision and also our partners to decide if they want to be with us if we choose to go to war. But, clearly, with our buildup, that's the direction that we're going.
NEVILLE: So, then, you might believe that the administration is jumping the gun by revving up the war rhetoric?
MARTIN: Well, look, we've been in a war-rhetoric state for the past three or four months. So, it's not like they can do any more than they have done over the past three or four months.
But, again, they followed the process. And, as Colin Powell said, he was disappointed in whatever they turned over in 12,000-plus pages and all the various CD-ROMs. But, again, at least we went through the process, as opposed to talking about war, war, war. We said, no, go to the U.N. Have the inspectors go in. Have them validate the claims that we have made. And then, if Iraq is continuing to not trust us, continuing not to provide information, then we have justification for the war.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Hang on. Excuse me, Robert.
Roland, are you satisfied, then, with the information that's coming out of the Iraqi report that they submitted and the information that is being shared by the administration?
MARTIN: No, I'm not satisfied because, clearly, they have not turned over all the information.
I mean, Hans Blix is saying this. The administration is now saying it. It's different if the administration was saying something different from the inspection team. Then we would have an issue on our hands.
NEVILLE: Go ahead, Robert.
GEORGE: No, I was just saying that, in a sense, the Iraqis have been given enough rope to hang themselves.
I do agree slightly with Roland that the early war talk from the U.S. was somewhat counterproductive. But, right now, we've got U.N. sanction to follow through with this. And Iraq is now, really, the country that is completely isolated, because, again, it had the option to come clean and it's decided to duck it.
NEVILLE: Listen, I have to take a break right now.
We're going to keep talking about possible war with Iraq.
And then later, now, who's hands will be rummaging through your luggage, is the question. A new rule will make you think twice before packing a suitcase.
Also, why are all these Iranian-Americans protesting in the streets in Los Angeles?
We're going to find out later in the show. So, don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everyone. I'm Arthel Neville.
We are now joined by Karel, a talk show host on KGO A.M. 810 in San Francisco.
KAREL, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hi, Arthel.
NEVILLE: Hi, Karel.
Karel is a contributor to "Billboard" magazine and a columnist for TheAdvocate.com.
Good to see you.
Also with us is Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.
And, Tom, I'm going to start with you right now. Good to see you as well.
Listen, do you think that, by the end of the winter, the U.S. will be at war?
TOM FITTON, PRESIDENT, JUDICIAL WATCH: Oh, I think so. And it's going to be despite the U.N.
And the U.N. is window dressing here. Let's be clear here. It's an ineffectual organization. It was 1998 they were kicked out. They only went back in once the United States took a leadership role here. And I think the only reason they're coming up with an analysis that the administration can support is because the administration has made it clear they're going to do what they think they need to do with or without them.
You know, the U.N. is a bad way for the U.S. to act on its own in terms of self-defense. It should act on its own. It shouldn't wait for the blessing of Third World bureaucrats and other bureaucrats internationally in order to act. They should act on its own. We should not wait.
NEVILLE: And then what about repercussions?
FITTON: Well, we can consult with our allies, democratic allies.
But the U.N. is full of tyrants and dictators and murderers in terms of representation. And the idea that we need their moral blessing in order to proceed is something I don't think is useful to the U.S. in the long term. It may be helpful right now. But every time we rely on the U.N. for a blessing before we take international action, it detracts from our sovereignty and our ability to act in our own interests.
(INTERRUPTED FOR BREAKING NEWS)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
are Middle Eastern Men Being Rounded Up in California?>
|
