Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Bush to Meet Today With U.N. Secretary General

Aired July 14, 2003 - 08:16   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.


BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: President Bush will meet today with the U.N. secretary general, Kofi Annan, to talk about a peacekeeping force for Liberia. The White House still weighing a decision to commit U.S. military might to the civil war torn country. The help would be largely humanitarian.
Liberian President Charles Taylor, promising to resign for the sake of peace and stability, has issued a challenge, though, to his detractors.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLES TAYLOR, LIBERIAN PRESIDENT: If you can stand up and call upon a legitimate government (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the president accepts the challenge, then I also advance the challenge (UNINTELLIGIBLE) for Liberia. If you cannot come and bring the good to our people, you have done the greatest injustice (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HEMMER: That's the latest message from Charles Taylor.

How likely is it that the U.S. will send peacekeepers to that country?

CNN military analyst, Retired General David Grange, back with us in Chicago.

Nice to see you, General.

Good morning.

BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, U.S. ARMY (RETIRED): Good seeing you, Bill.

HEMMER: Take the big question first. Is it time? Is it right to go now?

GRANGE: I believe so. I think that the United States should get involved. I say that, though, realizing the over commitment of U.S. troops around the world right now.

HEMMER: Did you see the op-ed over the weekend, President Jimmy Carter? He suggested 2,000 is the number the U.S. should send only if countries like Nigeria and Ghana send a force, as well.

Is that something you'd agree to? GRANGE: Well, 2,000, I'm not sure the figure is correct. It's hard to tell because any time you go in on an operation like this, it's not just humanitarian assistance. You have to be prepared to do a few other things just in case. And something always happens around the corner unexpectedly in these operations.

But, yes, the West African nations must be involved in this effort regionally to make it work.

HEMMER: You say do a few other things.

Like what?

GRANGE: Well, things go bad. You know, there may be, for instance, let's say Taylor leaves. Do all of his loyalists leave with him? Do they hang around? Do they become criminals, gang fighters? Do they try to disrupt ongoing relief operations? You never know what's going to happen. So you have to be prepared for the worst case on any operation you deploy U.S. troops on.

HEMMER: It is said that a million people are hungry in that country right now and so many of us remember the tragedy of Rwanda.

Is it that memory that forces the hand of the U.S. to say get involved now before it gets worse?

GRANGE: Bill, I think that is one of the key reasons. I don't think you can go around to other places in the world and ignore this particular continent. People have a bad taste in their mouth from that -- from Rwanda. Many people died because they went there too late. You have to preempt these things, get there as soon as you can if you're going to have an effect, because these type of operations don't get set up overnight. They take a little bit of time.

But the key thing is security and distribution of any kind of humanitarian aid. And that takes some kind of effort.

HEMMER: Yes, Afghanistan, Iraq, U.S. troops heavily deployed in both these parts of the world, in addition to every other responsibility right now laid out for the U.S. military.

If you probably asked a member of the U.S. Army or the Marines, they'd probably say yes, we can do the job.

But is it smart right now given the limited resources, a stretch by the military?

GRANGE: The G.I.s is always going to have a can do attitude. That's the way you train, that's your duty, that's just the way it is. And so they'll do that.

The tough part is on the families. You know, over 60 percent of the force now is married, so really the stress really goes on the families, and actually a lot of the National Guard and Reserves that are now mobilized for these types of things, and their employees. But is it the right thing to do? Yes, it is. But I would say we're starting to get an imbalance with tasks for our forces around the world compared to the size of force we have available.

HEMMER: Now, what would be the resolution, the solution to that, then? Do you increase the military numbers?

GRANGE: I think you have to increase them somewhat or you reduce the tasks. And it doesn't look like there's any reduction in the future coming about any time soon. And so, you know, there's not many countries around the world that can do some of the things the United States can do. The United States can project itself anyhow in the world for humanitarian assistance, combat, peacekeeping or whatever the case may be.

Most other countries cannot do that. Russia can barely handle the Chechnya situation. China couldn't do anything unless they walked there. They just, other countries don't have the capability and until that comes about, the United States is going to be left holding the bag somewhat.

So you have to make the U.S. forces a bit more robust if that's going to be your agenda.

HEMMER: A final question. Don't have much time here. Two answers back. You mentioned the word balance. How do you balance the need for U.S. troops when there are so many pressing issues around the globe? How is it and why is it that you say OK, Liberia is the next place where help is needed, let's go?

GRANGE: Well, what you have to -- the United States should take the lead on the parts of the operation that the U.S. is good at or capable. For instance, getting there quickly, establishing security, enforcing a situation where humanitarian aid then can be brought in, by, let's say, other countries. So the up front parts of the missions, which mainly involve more of a combat or security role than a sustainment of peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance where other countries can do that.

HEMMER: Thank you.

David Grange, the general, in Chicago.

We'll talk again.

GRANGE: My pleasure.

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 July 14, 2003 - 08:16   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: President Bush will meet today with the U.N. secretary general, Kofi Annan, to talk about a peacekeeping force for Liberia. The White House still weighing a decision to commit U.S. military might to the civil war torn country. The help would be largely humanitarian.
Liberian President Charles Taylor, promising to resign for the sake of peace and stability, has issued a challenge, though, to his detractors.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLES TAYLOR, LIBERIAN PRESIDENT: If you can stand up and call upon a legitimate government (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the president accepts the challenge, then I also advance the challenge (UNINTELLIGIBLE) for Liberia. If you cannot come and bring the good to our people, you have done the greatest injustice (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HEMMER: That's the latest message from Charles Taylor.

How likely is it that the U.S. will send peacekeepers to that country?

CNN military analyst, Retired General David Grange, back with us in Chicago.

Nice to see you, General.

Good morning.

BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, U.S. ARMY (RETIRED): Good seeing you, Bill.

HEMMER: Take the big question first. Is it time? Is it right to go now?

GRANGE: I believe so. I think that the United States should get involved. I say that, though, realizing the over commitment of U.S. troops around the world right now.

HEMMER: Did you see the op-ed over the weekend, President Jimmy Carter? He suggested 2,000 is the number the U.S. should send only if countries like Nigeria and Ghana send a force, as well.

Is that something you'd agree to? GRANGE: Well, 2,000, I'm not sure the figure is correct. It's hard to tell because any time you go in on an operation like this, it's not just humanitarian assistance. You have to be prepared to do a few other things just in case. And something always happens around the corner unexpectedly in these operations.

But, yes, the West African nations must be involved in this effort regionally to make it work.

HEMMER: You say do a few other things.

Like what?

GRANGE: Well, things go bad. You know, there may be, for instance, let's say Taylor leaves. Do all of his loyalists leave with him? Do they hang around? Do they become criminals, gang fighters? Do they try to disrupt ongoing relief operations? You never know what's going to happen. So you have to be prepared for the worst case on any operation you deploy U.S. troops on.

HEMMER: It is said that a million people are hungry in that country right now and so many of us remember the tragedy of Rwanda.

Is it that memory that forces the hand of the U.S. to say get involved now before it gets worse?

GRANGE: Bill, I think that is one of the key reasons. I don't think you can go around to other places in the world and ignore this particular continent. People have a bad taste in their mouth from that -- from Rwanda. Many people died because they went there too late. You have to preempt these things, get there as soon as you can if you're going to have an effect, because these type of operations don't get set up overnight. They take a little bit of time.

But the key thing is security and distribution of any kind of humanitarian aid. And that takes some kind of effort.

HEMMER: Yes, Afghanistan, Iraq, U.S. troops heavily deployed in both these parts of the world, in addition to every other responsibility right now laid out for the U.S. military.

If you probably asked a member of the U.S. Army or the Marines, they'd probably say yes, we can do the job.

But is it smart right now given the limited resources, a stretch by the military?

GRANGE: The G.I.s is always going to have a can do attitude. That's the way you train, that's your duty, that's just the way it is. And so they'll do that.

The tough part is on the families. You know, over 60 percent of the force now is married, so really the stress really goes on the families, and actually a lot of the National Guard and Reserves that are now mobilized for these types of things, and their employees. But is it the right thing to do? Yes, it is. But I would say we're starting to get an imbalance with tasks for our forces around the world compared to the size of force we have available.

HEMMER: Now, what would be the resolution, the solution to that, then? Do you increase the military numbers?

GRANGE: I think you have to increase them somewhat or you reduce the tasks. And it doesn't look like there's any reduction in the future coming about any time soon. And so, you know, there's not many countries around the world that can do some of the things the United States can do. The United States can project itself anyhow in the world for humanitarian assistance, combat, peacekeeping or whatever the case may be.

Most other countries cannot do that. Russia can barely handle the Chechnya situation. China couldn't do anything unless they walked there. They just, other countries don't have the capability and until that comes about, the United States is going to be left holding the bag somewhat.

So you have to make the U.S. forces a bit more robust if that's going to be your agenda.

HEMMER: A final question. Don't have much time here. Two answers back. You mentioned the word balance. How do you balance the need for U.S. troops when there are so many pressing issues around the globe? How is it and why is it that you say OK, Liberia is the next place where help is needed, let's go?

GRANGE: Well, what you have to -- the United States should take the lead on the parts of the operation that the U.S. is good at or capable. For instance, getting there quickly, establishing security, enforcing a situation where humanitarian aid then can be brought in, by, let's say, other countries. So the up front parts of the missions, which mainly involve more of a combat or security role than a sustainment of peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance where other countries can do that.

HEMMER: Thank you.

David Grange, the general, in Chicago.

We'll talk again.

GRANGE: My pleasure.

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