Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Troops to Mideast?
Aired June 17, 2003 - 08:33 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.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: One former U.S. ambassador to NATO is skeptical about the use of American forces in the Mideast. With us now from Washington is former ambassador Robert Hunter, now a senior adviser at the RAND Corporation.
Mr. Ambassador, good morning. Thanks for being with us.
AMB. ROBERT HUNTER, FMR. U.S. AMB. TO NATO: Good morning to you.
KAGAN: Do you think it's a good idea or A bad idea to put international troops in the Middle East to help keep the peace with Israelis and Palestinians?
HUNTER: I think it's a good idea, which is what President Bush is trying to do, which is laying prestige on the line and his commitment to bring this war in to a halt, because it is a, war and drive it to and through the peace table until it's successful.
I doubt whether the United States will be trying put troops in the ground, and that's the only country that can really do it.
Now if Israel wanted it, if they felt this was going to be helpful to them and if the Palestinians wanted it, I think that's something we should start thinking about, but you have to remember, there are people out there who will are going to try to disrupt the peace process, just like Hamas is doing now, and they'll try to kill Americans. I'm not so sure we want to get in the middle of that.
KAGAN: Well, a bunch of issues you bring up there, sir. First of all, who would want it and who wouldn't? The Palestinians have been very clear they would welcome that. The Israelis have been pretty clear that they would not welcome that.
So are you saying that unless you have both sides agreeing, that you don't want to put American troops down on the ground.
HUNTER: If Israel doesn't do the military job, nobody else can. They know it much better, and they are one of the world's most formidable military forces. If both sides didn't want someone there to help them get Hamas under control, that would be fine.
But right now, I don't see that happening. The basic thing, however, President Bush is committed, he's driving forward, and this is the thing everybody needs to get behind.
KAGAN: What would happen if we take this for the sake of argument to the point where U.S. troops would be involved? What happens the first time that a U.S. soldier would be killed, either by Hamas or gets in the middle of an Israeli military incursion?
HUNTER: I think Hamas would try to kill Americans, just as terrorists have targeted us and just as you have suicide bombers. That's really a call for the American people, and I think the president would be very leery of getting us in the middle of something where it's the constancy of the American commitment that matters. If you have Americans getting killed, I wonder if Americans would even want to have the president carry on with his valuable, critical, indispensable peacemaking efforts.
KAGAN: And this has been a conflict that President Bush since the beginning of the administration, seemed reluctant to get himself in the middle of. But now he has immersed himself in the middle of. How much patience do you think he has to be part of the day by day dealings of the violence going back and forth on the way to look for a peace agreement between these two groups.
HUNTER: The president just won a major war. The United States now has a responsibility and opportunity in the Middle East we haven't had before. His position actually is more forward leaning, more forthcoming I think than any other president's taken. He's going to have to succeed.
Now, I wouldn't have him get in the day to day details, but he's got to be the man sitting there saying, let's move this forward. He needs to send out a top-flight person very close to him to be the negotiator.
KAGAN: Who is that person?
HUNTER: That's irrelevant. It needs to be somebody close to the president who speaks for the president. Somebody said James Baker, though he's not terribly close to him. He can't send the vice president, though he'd be ideal. Maybe the national security adviser, Condi Rice, people have talked about her. He's got to demonstrate to people day by day the president of the United States means business, just as he said.
He shouldn't do the detail. Nobody wants to drag a president there, but his personal commitment, and I salute him for that, and this has one of the best chances ever to drive this away from the battlefield really to a solution.
KAGAN: And so you're not discouraged by the recent violence over the last week?
HUNTER: It's going to happen. It's predictable. Every time for the last 35 years, there has been somebody out there trying to make peace. The people who don't want it start killing people. This is why Leon Klinghoffer, if you remember, was killed on the Achille Lauro, it was an effort to destroy the peace process at that time. It destroyed this man's life, it destroyed the peace process. The president has to be deaf to the people out there causing the violence. Carry on just as he carried on in Iraq. This president deserves our support. He can make this happen.
KAGAN: Ambassador Robert Hunter. Ambassador, thanks for your time today.
HUNTER: Thank you.
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 June 17, 2003 - 08:33 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: One former U.S. ambassador to NATO is skeptical about the use of American forces in the Mideast. With us now from Washington is former ambassador Robert Hunter, now a senior adviser at the RAND Corporation.
Mr. Ambassador, good morning. Thanks for being with us.
AMB. ROBERT HUNTER, FMR. U.S. AMB. TO NATO: Good morning to you.
KAGAN: Do you think it's a good idea or A bad idea to put international troops in the Middle East to help keep the peace with Israelis and Palestinians?
HUNTER: I think it's a good idea, which is what President Bush is trying to do, which is laying prestige on the line and his commitment to bring this war in to a halt, because it is a, war and drive it to and through the peace table until it's successful.
I doubt whether the United States will be trying put troops in the ground, and that's the only country that can really do it.
Now if Israel wanted it, if they felt this was going to be helpful to them and if the Palestinians wanted it, I think that's something we should start thinking about, but you have to remember, there are people out there who will are going to try to disrupt the peace process, just like Hamas is doing now, and they'll try to kill Americans. I'm not so sure we want to get in the middle of that.
KAGAN: Well, a bunch of issues you bring up there, sir. First of all, who would want it and who wouldn't? The Palestinians have been very clear they would welcome that. The Israelis have been pretty clear that they would not welcome that.
So are you saying that unless you have both sides agreeing, that you don't want to put American troops down on the ground.
HUNTER: If Israel doesn't do the military job, nobody else can. They know it much better, and they are one of the world's most formidable military forces. If both sides didn't want someone there to help them get Hamas under control, that would be fine.
But right now, I don't see that happening. The basic thing, however, President Bush is committed, he's driving forward, and this is the thing everybody needs to get behind.
KAGAN: What would happen if we take this for the sake of argument to the point where U.S. troops would be involved? What happens the first time that a U.S. soldier would be killed, either by Hamas or gets in the middle of an Israeli military incursion?
HUNTER: I think Hamas would try to kill Americans, just as terrorists have targeted us and just as you have suicide bombers. That's really a call for the American people, and I think the president would be very leery of getting us in the middle of something where it's the constancy of the American commitment that matters. If you have Americans getting killed, I wonder if Americans would even want to have the president carry on with his valuable, critical, indispensable peacemaking efforts.
KAGAN: And this has been a conflict that President Bush since the beginning of the administration, seemed reluctant to get himself in the middle of. But now he has immersed himself in the middle of. How much patience do you think he has to be part of the day by day dealings of the violence going back and forth on the way to look for a peace agreement between these two groups.
HUNTER: The president just won a major war. The United States now has a responsibility and opportunity in the Middle East we haven't had before. His position actually is more forward leaning, more forthcoming I think than any other president's taken. He's going to have to succeed.
Now, I wouldn't have him get in the day to day details, but he's got to be the man sitting there saying, let's move this forward. He needs to send out a top-flight person very close to him to be the negotiator.
KAGAN: Who is that person?
HUNTER: That's irrelevant. It needs to be somebody close to the president who speaks for the president. Somebody said James Baker, though he's not terribly close to him. He can't send the vice president, though he'd be ideal. Maybe the national security adviser, Condi Rice, people have talked about her. He's got to demonstrate to people day by day the president of the United States means business, just as he said.
He shouldn't do the detail. Nobody wants to drag a president there, but his personal commitment, and I salute him for that, and this has one of the best chances ever to drive this away from the battlefield really to a solution.
KAGAN: And so you're not discouraged by the recent violence over the last week?
HUNTER: It's going to happen. It's predictable. Every time for the last 35 years, there has been somebody out there trying to make peace. The people who don't want it start killing people. This is why Leon Klinghoffer, if you remember, was killed on the Achille Lauro, it was an effort to destroy the peace process at that time. It destroyed this man's life, it destroyed the peace process. The president has to be deaf to the people out there causing the violence. Carry on just as he carried on in Iraq. This president deserves our support. He can make this happen.
KAGAN: Ambassador Robert Hunter. Ambassador, thanks for your time today.
HUNTER: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
