Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
White House Increases Pressure on Turkey
Aired February 20, 2003 - 07:04 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: More now on Iraq. The White House is increasing pressure on Turkey to open its bases to U.S. troops. That, as the U.S. and Britain get ready for a second resolution to send to the U.N. by next week.
We have two reports for you this morning. Suzanne Malveaux joins us from the White House. Richard Roth is standing by at the United Nations. We're going to get started with Suzanne this morning who is, first off, monitoring the situation with Turkey.
Good morning -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula.
The White House really engaged in a political standoff with Turkey. The U.S. wants to base some 80,000 troops on Turkish soil. Turkey is saying show me the money. They want an economic aid package to the tune of some $30 billion; 10 of that in grants, 20 of that in loans. But the administration is offering up to 26 billion. They are talking about 6 billion in grants and up to 20 in loans. Yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell making it very clear that that was the United States' final offer.
Turkey, as you know, is critical if the United States goes to war with Iraq in terms of military strategy. It would allow those bases in the north to squeeze out Saddam Hussein, both from the north and the south, but the White House is downplaying the significance of this, saying already in place, a possible plan B.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Turkey, of course, is desirable from the strategic point of view for any military staging. But the military of the United States is sufficiently flexible that whatever decision is made, the United States will still be successful in carrying out any military operations, whatever decision is made.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: But, Paula, of course, timing is of the essence here. They are talking about U.S. troops that have already -- ships, rather, that have already steamed towards Turkey. They are waiting for the go-ahead now, but Secretary Rumsfeld saying that, yes, they will get support from other countries. They'll even perhaps ask to base some troops in northern Iraq in the Kurdish territory or either airlift them from other countries or U.S. ships in the region. But, of course, they are certainly hoping that Turkey comes through in the end -- Paula.
ZAHN: It's interesting, Suzanne, in "The New York Times" today, an unnamed administration official is quoted as saying the Turkish actions are -- quote -- "extortion in the name of alliance." Is that the widely-held belief there at the White House?
MALVEAUX: Well, what administration officials believe is that Turkey is holding out as long as they can, because they are in desperate need of economic aid. That it was in the Gulf War that they did not actually get the kind of aid that they were hoping for; that they had suffered greatly. But the administration also realizes they have to set the goal. They have to basically draw a line in the sand, and that they have done so.
They believe that as time passes that Turkey will come around, that Turkey needs the United States as a critical ally. But you know, one official calling it extortion; others just simply saying it's diplomacy at work.
ZAHN: Suzanne Malveaux, thanks so much.
Time to check in with Richard Roth now, who joins us from the U.N.
Good morning -- Richard.
RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula.
Once again, the U.N. Security Council is on a resolution-watch. The resolution, a second resolution proposed by the United States and Britain is expected here either tomorrow or early next week.
Yesterday, the Security Council wrapped up the final debate of non-council members speaking out on Iraq. And Iraq's ambassador -- you saw there -- Mohammed Aldouri also had some final comments, attacking the U.S. and Britain. He says his country can deal with that first resolution. It has no weapons of mass destruction.
However, British Ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock indicating the new resolution may come with a timetable and a deadline.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEREMY GREENSTOCK, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: It will be a debate about a specific proposition, and it will be on a timing which will concentrate people's minds. And you've heard ministers in both Washington and London saying weeks, not months, and that will be the framework for a debate on a specific proposition that the council will then have to focus on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: The resolution expected to say that Iraq, again, is in further material breach of the Gulf War cease-fire resolutions and agreement, and thus opening the way to a military attack. It will, in effect, be some type of authorization for war. Many Security Council permanent members with vetoes are opposed to this. France, among others, believes inspections should be allowed to continue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIERE, FRENCH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: We have to continue to this -- we have to continue the inspections and making some pressure on -- more pressure on Iraq and you'll have more results.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Meanwhile, U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix is expected to shortly send a letter to Baghdad demanding that Iraq destroy those Al Samoud 2 missiles test-fired beyond the allowable 93- mile range. Everyone here is watching closely to see if Iraq complies with this as a test indication of cooperation -- Paula.
ZAHN: Let's come back to the second resolution for a moment. Is it your understanding once this resolution is presented that inside of it would be a deadline that would be imposed for the Security Council to take action?
ROTH: That is a definite possibility, though until we see the fine print as these resolutions are tinkered with in Washington and London, I don't think we can confirm that officially. But the test may be on the Security Council, as Sir Jeremy Greenstock said there. They don't want to wait around. It's a matter of weeks, not months.
However, this debate is probably going to last past Hans Blix's next briefing to the Security Council.
ZAHN: Which would take us into what? Mid-March?
ROTH: Early March, and maybe if it drags on, on the resolution, if the U.S. wants to wait, mid-March.
ZAHN: Very good. Richard Roth, thanks for the update -- appreciate it.
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 February 20, 2003 - 07:04 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: More now on Iraq. The White House is increasing pressure on Turkey to open its bases to U.S. troops. That, as the U.S. and Britain get ready for a second resolution to send to the U.N. by next week.
We have two reports for you this morning. Suzanne Malveaux joins us from the White House. Richard Roth is standing by at the United Nations. We're going to get started with Suzanne this morning who is, first off, monitoring the situation with Turkey.
Good morning -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula.
The White House really engaged in a political standoff with Turkey. The U.S. wants to base some 80,000 troops on Turkish soil. Turkey is saying show me the money. They want an economic aid package to the tune of some $30 billion; 10 of that in grants, 20 of that in loans. But the administration is offering up to 26 billion. They are talking about 6 billion in grants and up to 20 in loans. Yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell making it very clear that that was the United States' final offer.
Turkey, as you know, is critical if the United States goes to war with Iraq in terms of military strategy. It would allow those bases in the north to squeeze out Saddam Hussein, both from the north and the south, but the White House is downplaying the significance of this, saying already in place, a possible plan B.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Turkey, of course, is desirable from the strategic point of view for any military staging. But the military of the United States is sufficiently flexible that whatever decision is made, the United States will still be successful in carrying out any military operations, whatever decision is made.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: But, Paula, of course, timing is of the essence here. They are talking about U.S. troops that have already -- ships, rather, that have already steamed towards Turkey. They are waiting for the go-ahead now, but Secretary Rumsfeld saying that, yes, they will get support from other countries. They'll even perhaps ask to base some troops in northern Iraq in the Kurdish territory or either airlift them from other countries or U.S. ships in the region. But, of course, they are certainly hoping that Turkey comes through in the end -- Paula.
ZAHN: It's interesting, Suzanne, in "The New York Times" today, an unnamed administration official is quoted as saying the Turkish actions are -- quote -- "extortion in the name of alliance." Is that the widely-held belief there at the White House?
MALVEAUX: Well, what administration officials believe is that Turkey is holding out as long as they can, because they are in desperate need of economic aid. That it was in the Gulf War that they did not actually get the kind of aid that they were hoping for; that they had suffered greatly. But the administration also realizes they have to set the goal. They have to basically draw a line in the sand, and that they have done so.
They believe that as time passes that Turkey will come around, that Turkey needs the United States as a critical ally. But you know, one official calling it extortion; others just simply saying it's diplomacy at work.
ZAHN: Suzanne Malveaux, thanks so much.
Time to check in with Richard Roth now, who joins us from the U.N.
Good morning -- Richard.
RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula.
Once again, the U.N. Security Council is on a resolution-watch. The resolution, a second resolution proposed by the United States and Britain is expected here either tomorrow or early next week.
Yesterday, the Security Council wrapped up the final debate of non-council members speaking out on Iraq. And Iraq's ambassador -- you saw there -- Mohammed Aldouri also had some final comments, attacking the U.S. and Britain. He says his country can deal with that first resolution. It has no weapons of mass destruction.
However, British Ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock indicating the new resolution may come with a timetable and a deadline.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEREMY GREENSTOCK, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: It will be a debate about a specific proposition, and it will be on a timing which will concentrate people's minds. And you've heard ministers in both Washington and London saying weeks, not months, and that will be the framework for a debate on a specific proposition that the council will then have to focus on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: The resolution expected to say that Iraq, again, is in further material breach of the Gulf War cease-fire resolutions and agreement, and thus opening the way to a military attack. It will, in effect, be some type of authorization for war. Many Security Council permanent members with vetoes are opposed to this. France, among others, believes inspections should be allowed to continue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIERE, FRENCH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: We have to continue to this -- we have to continue the inspections and making some pressure on -- more pressure on Iraq and you'll have more results.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Meanwhile, U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix is expected to shortly send a letter to Baghdad demanding that Iraq destroy those Al Samoud 2 missiles test-fired beyond the allowable 93- mile range. Everyone here is watching closely to see if Iraq complies with this as a test indication of cooperation -- Paula.
ZAHN: Let's come back to the second resolution for a moment. Is it your understanding once this resolution is presented that inside of it would be a deadline that would be imposed for the Security Council to take action?
ROTH: That is a definite possibility, though until we see the fine print as these resolutions are tinkered with in Washington and London, I don't think we can confirm that officially. But the test may be on the Security Council, as Sir Jeremy Greenstock said there. They don't want to wait around. It's a matter of weeks, not months.
However, this debate is probably going to last past Hans Blix's next briefing to the Security Council.
ZAHN: Which would take us into what? Mid-March?
ROTH: Early March, and maybe if it drags on, on the resolution, if the U.S. wants to wait, mid-March.
ZAHN: Very good. Richard Roth, thanks for the update -- appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.
