Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
High Stakes, High Drama at U.N.
Aired March 12, 2003 - 10:02 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.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Let's begin with the high stakes and the high drama at the United Nations.
CNN's Andrea Koppel began reporting a diplomatic breakthrough just a short time ago. She joins us now from her post at the U.S. State Department.
Good morning, Andrea.
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi. And then there were two, as viewers know. Six undecided countries, now both senior administration officials and British officials telling CNN that Mexico and Chile are the only remaining holdouts as things stand right now.
President Bush, last night, spoke both with the Chilean president and with the Mexican president Vicente Fox. The U.S. competing, if you will, with France. Those opposed to war with Iraq competing for the support of those six undecided votes because the U.S. needs nine votes in order to pass any kind of resolution.
But even if it passes it, France has already threatened to veto. So why go for the votes? Well, the Bush administration saying it would be a moral victory, and that's why they're pushing for it.
Now, having said that, CNN has also learned the six benchmarks that the British government and the Bush administration and the Spanish government had been shopping around for the last couple of days, focusing, as I said, on Mexico and Chile. But those six benchmarks include the following. Allowing Iraqi scientists to be interviewed outside of Iraq, surrendering anthrax that the U.S. says Saddam Hussein is continuing to hide, accounting for all UAVs, surrendering all the mobile production labs, destruction of missiles as well as a public statement by Saddam Hussein in which he would admit that he has WMD, but would state that his regime has decided to give them up.
These are six benchmarks that reflect, really, the concerns of those six undecided countries. What is still a question mark, Heidi, is just how much more time beyond the March 17 deadline would the U.S. agree to. This is still being debated, and it's also being discussed with those other countries. Now I should add sort of a footnote to all of this. The U.S., Great Britain and Spain do not want to, as one person put it, sort of brag or crow about the diplomatic breakthrough that it seems to have made as of now because these countries are skittish. They don't want it to be made quite public that they have come over to the U.S. side right now, Heidi, but the U.S. does feel quite confident that it has the support right now of eight out of nine needed votes to go for this resolution -- Heidi.
COLLINS: Andrea, I am just curious, looking at those benchmarks, anyway to know on here which one seems to be the most important kind of a sticking point with these countries?
KOPPEL: We don't know that. And in fact, the British prime minister, Tony Blair, outlined three of the six benchmarks in public. Debate this morning in the British House of Commons. I don't know whether or not they have any kind of priority, but the important thing here is that they're all -- all six of these would have to be met if Saddam Hussein would be to avoid any kind of military action taken against his regime.
COLLINS: Right. All or nothing. All right, Andrea Koppel from the State Department. Thank you so much.
We're also following a developing story out of London. British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now proposing a set of benchmarks, as we have just been talking about, that Iraq would have to meet in order to prove compliance.
CNN's senior European political correspondent Robin Oakley is in London now with the latest on that. We have just heard a little bit about these, and Robin, I'd love to know from your perspective, what you think about these benchmarks.
ROBIN OAKLEY, CNN SENIOR EUROPEAN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, as Andrea was mentioning, there are three of those benchmarks were specifically picked out by Tony Blair when he was talking to MPs in his weekly question time session today.
He focused particularly on the question of the interviews with Iraqi scientists being able to take place outside Iraq in Cyprus. He talked about those drone planes which are capable, he believes, of spraying chemicals, and the third one that he went for was the destruction of anthrax stocks held by Saddam Hussein.
He said the other -- the benchmark he was particularly keen on there was that either the anthrax stock should be destroyed or documentation should be produced to show that they have been destroyed.
But actually, the British administration has spent most of the morning really trying to clear up a confusion sown by Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S. defense secretary, when he was suggesting at a press conference yesterday that maybe the U.S. would be going it alone in terms of military action, that it was unclear whether the British would be involved at the end of the day, certainly until this U.N. Security Council resolution was sorted out.
Now, British sources were reluctant at first to comment, but they finally confirmed that, yes, the British will be involved in any military action that does go ahead, and that does mean they will be involved in combat missions, not just in noncombat duties -- Heidi.
COLLINS: Robin Oakley live in London for us today. Thank you so much.
Now let's go ahead and go to the United Nations, the hub of the diplomatic maneuvering. We have CNN senior U.N. correspondent Richard Roth standing by at his post, who will bring us up to the very minute -- hi, Richard.
RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Heidi. Diplomats here say that the British benchmarks idea could be circulated today through the Security Council or to the members outside of the chamber proper, but it will certainly move forward. The proposal, as Robin and Andrea Koppel mentioned, is an attempt to get some compromises going here to win support from the undecided, give Iraq perhaps more time if it starts to cooperate with some of those benchmarks, and maybe there will be an extension of the deadline down the road, but still lying in the wake of the France and Russian possible vetoes.
The Security Council held an open, public debate, 28 countries speaking, most of them against any type of military action against Iraq.
Same speeches as we've heard before, a little bit more urgency to the issue, and before there had not been a resolution on the table. Some countries thought there would be devastation to the region that would never be able to be reversed.
Others said the weapons inspectors should be given more time. These benchmarks from the British government will be a stiff test for the Iraqi government. I mean, having President Saddam Hussein appear on national television to renounce weapons of mass destruction and having weapons. Scientists fly out of Baghdad to Cyprus where inspectors have a base there, that's something that many diplomats say will be impossible for Iraq to achieve.
And other countries worry, what's the trigger mechanism in any new resolution? If it's approved, would the U.S. attack anyway within a matter of hours? So there is still a lot of fear here at the United Nations about the United States going on the attack, despite whatever is approved or not approved here.
The vote expected by the U.S. later this week. That, of course, could still be postponed. We've had all kinds of things happen in this timetable to war or peace -- Heidi.
COLLINS: We have had an awful lot going on. We do appreciate it. Senior U.N. correspondent Richard Roth live from the U.N. this morning.
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 March 12, 2003 - 10:02 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Let's begin with the high stakes and the high drama at the United Nations.
CNN's Andrea Koppel began reporting a diplomatic breakthrough just a short time ago. She joins us now from her post at the U.S. State Department.
Good morning, Andrea.
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi. And then there were two, as viewers know. Six undecided countries, now both senior administration officials and British officials telling CNN that Mexico and Chile are the only remaining holdouts as things stand right now.
President Bush, last night, spoke both with the Chilean president and with the Mexican president Vicente Fox. The U.S. competing, if you will, with France. Those opposed to war with Iraq competing for the support of those six undecided votes because the U.S. needs nine votes in order to pass any kind of resolution.
But even if it passes it, France has already threatened to veto. So why go for the votes? Well, the Bush administration saying it would be a moral victory, and that's why they're pushing for it.
Now, having said that, CNN has also learned the six benchmarks that the British government and the Bush administration and the Spanish government had been shopping around for the last couple of days, focusing, as I said, on Mexico and Chile. But those six benchmarks include the following. Allowing Iraqi scientists to be interviewed outside of Iraq, surrendering anthrax that the U.S. says Saddam Hussein is continuing to hide, accounting for all UAVs, surrendering all the mobile production labs, destruction of missiles as well as a public statement by Saddam Hussein in which he would admit that he has WMD, but would state that his regime has decided to give them up.
These are six benchmarks that reflect, really, the concerns of those six undecided countries. What is still a question mark, Heidi, is just how much more time beyond the March 17 deadline would the U.S. agree to. This is still being debated, and it's also being discussed with those other countries. Now I should add sort of a footnote to all of this. The U.S., Great Britain and Spain do not want to, as one person put it, sort of brag or crow about the diplomatic breakthrough that it seems to have made as of now because these countries are skittish. They don't want it to be made quite public that they have come over to the U.S. side right now, Heidi, but the U.S. does feel quite confident that it has the support right now of eight out of nine needed votes to go for this resolution -- Heidi.
COLLINS: Andrea, I am just curious, looking at those benchmarks, anyway to know on here which one seems to be the most important kind of a sticking point with these countries?
KOPPEL: We don't know that. And in fact, the British prime minister, Tony Blair, outlined three of the six benchmarks in public. Debate this morning in the British House of Commons. I don't know whether or not they have any kind of priority, but the important thing here is that they're all -- all six of these would have to be met if Saddam Hussein would be to avoid any kind of military action taken against his regime.
COLLINS: Right. All or nothing. All right, Andrea Koppel from the State Department. Thank you so much.
We're also following a developing story out of London. British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now proposing a set of benchmarks, as we have just been talking about, that Iraq would have to meet in order to prove compliance.
CNN's senior European political correspondent Robin Oakley is in London now with the latest on that. We have just heard a little bit about these, and Robin, I'd love to know from your perspective, what you think about these benchmarks.
ROBIN OAKLEY, CNN SENIOR EUROPEAN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, as Andrea was mentioning, there are three of those benchmarks were specifically picked out by Tony Blair when he was talking to MPs in his weekly question time session today.
He focused particularly on the question of the interviews with Iraqi scientists being able to take place outside Iraq in Cyprus. He talked about those drone planes which are capable, he believes, of spraying chemicals, and the third one that he went for was the destruction of anthrax stocks held by Saddam Hussein.
He said the other -- the benchmark he was particularly keen on there was that either the anthrax stock should be destroyed or documentation should be produced to show that they have been destroyed.
But actually, the British administration has spent most of the morning really trying to clear up a confusion sown by Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S. defense secretary, when he was suggesting at a press conference yesterday that maybe the U.S. would be going it alone in terms of military action, that it was unclear whether the British would be involved at the end of the day, certainly until this U.N. Security Council resolution was sorted out.
Now, British sources were reluctant at first to comment, but they finally confirmed that, yes, the British will be involved in any military action that does go ahead, and that does mean they will be involved in combat missions, not just in noncombat duties -- Heidi.
COLLINS: Robin Oakley live in London for us today. Thank you so much.
Now let's go ahead and go to the United Nations, the hub of the diplomatic maneuvering. We have CNN senior U.N. correspondent Richard Roth standing by at his post, who will bring us up to the very minute -- hi, Richard.
RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Heidi. Diplomats here say that the British benchmarks idea could be circulated today through the Security Council or to the members outside of the chamber proper, but it will certainly move forward. The proposal, as Robin and Andrea Koppel mentioned, is an attempt to get some compromises going here to win support from the undecided, give Iraq perhaps more time if it starts to cooperate with some of those benchmarks, and maybe there will be an extension of the deadline down the road, but still lying in the wake of the France and Russian possible vetoes.
The Security Council held an open, public debate, 28 countries speaking, most of them against any type of military action against Iraq.
Same speeches as we've heard before, a little bit more urgency to the issue, and before there had not been a resolution on the table. Some countries thought there would be devastation to the region that would never be able to be reversed.
Others said the weapons inspectors should be given more time. These benchmarks from the British government will be a stiff test for the Iraqi government. I mean, having President Saddam Hussein appear on national television to renounce weapons of mass destruction and having weapons. Scientists fly out of Baghdad to Cyprus where inspectors have a base there, that's something that many diplomats say will be impossible for Iraq to achieve.
And other countries worry, what's the trigger mechanism in any new resolution? If it's approved, would the U.S. attack anyway within a matter of hours? So there is still a lot of fear here at the United Nations about the United States going on the attack, despite whatever is approved or not approved here.
The vote expected by the U.S. later this week. That, of course, could still be postponed. We've had all kinds of things happen in this timetable to war or peace -- Heidi.
COLLINS: We have had an awful lot going on. We do appreciate it. Senior U.N. correspondent Richard Roth live from the U.N. this morning.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
