Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Two More American Service Personnel Killed in Iraq

Aired August 22, 2003 - 08:02   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.


BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Back to Iraq right now. The U.S. confirming this morning that two more American service personnel have been killed. Meanwhile, investigators in Tuesday's suicide attacking looking into the possibility that it could have been an inside job. That's according to a report today in the "New York Times."
Back to Baghdad with more on what's happening at the scene, here's Rym Brahimi back with us -- Rym, hello.

RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Bill.

Indeed, the two U.S. soldiers killed on Thursday. One of them from the 1st Armored Division, was killed when a small arms range caught fire. Not clear under what circumstances that fire erupted. Six other of the U.S. soldiers there were wounded. They were MediVaced, as well, and 19 other people at the scene were medically checked and then released on duty. Another U.S. soldier was killed in Hillah, which is a town about 100 kilometers or about an hour's drive south of the Iraqi capital.

Meanwhile, as you know, Bill, the investigation does continue at the scene of the bombing against the U.N. compound here in Baghdad. A greater area around that site has been cordoned off to allow the heavy machinery to continue to sweep the rubble out and also FBI investigators to continue their job.

And the main question, as you said, was it an inside job? That stems from the fact mainly that some of the U.N. security guards were apparently members before the war of the Iraqi secret service. Now, it wasn't unusual, also, even if you weren't a member of the Iraqi secret service at the time, that any person, any Iraqi working for an international or foreign company would have to report to the intelligence service here in Iraq. There will be a lot of questions raised, a lot of people interrogated with regard to that.

Also a claim by an unknown group known as the Armed Vanguards of the Second Army of Muhammad. That's also going to be checked out in the next few days.

Meanwhile, Bill, a memorial service was being held at Baghdad International Airport to commemorate Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N. special representative who died in the attack, along with 22 other colleagues, including his chief of staff, Nadia Younes, an Egyptian woman who was very much appreciated, as well, by her U.N. colleagues during her outstanding career at the United Nations -- Bill.

HEMMER: Rym, back to this theory about the possibility of it being an inside job. This bomb went off at 4:30 in the afternoon in Baghdad. What normally takes place for the U.N. employees and workers there at that time of day?

BRAHIMI: Well, it's pretty much a normal day on a Tuesday. It's not the day off for anybody. It's a day where there would have been the same number of security as any day in the week and the security men are -- the thing is, Bill, there are two issues there. The security at the United Nations usually, most of them are at the main gate entrance. So there's some at the first gate and then there's a second gate a little further down. It's just maybe a hundred meters after that.

But you see the truck didn't enter that main security gate. The truck actually entered through a side wall and the wall wasn't very, very high. What's also impressive is basically that in a way that truck hit the exact location of the office of the U.N. special envoy. And so that also is what makes people wonder whether it wasn't an inside job -- Bill.

HEMMER: Rym Brahimi in Baghdad.

Our military analysts have warned us for weeks right now about the possibility of inside agents working on behalf of Iraqi security.

General David Grange has talked about that for weeks and it's possible, based on those reports we're getting right now, that that could have been the case.

Much more on this a bit later -- Soledad.

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Discussions continue today about improving security in Iraq. British Foreign Minister Jack Straw is to meet with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in less than an hour and then later with Secretary of State Colin Powell.

CNN's Michael Okwu is live for us from the U.N. headquarters this morning -- Michael, good morning.

MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Soledad.

The secretary general has been doing a whole round of meetings, as you mentioned. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw scheduled to meet with him within an hour or so. No doubt the two men will discuss this pending resolution that would send a multinational force to Iraq. Straw, who arrived yesterday to sign a condolence book, has been very supportive of a much stronger role for the United Nations.

Now, his meeting comes a day after Secretary of State Colin Powell met Annan. Powell said he's willing to hear what other countries have to say about the resolution, but that's only half the challenge. Countries like France, Russia and others have made it clear that they want to see the United States and Great Britain relinquish some political as well as military control before any kind of resolution is supported.

There has been some discussion about having those troops be -- operate under some sort of umbrella of command, having various command centers in the way that they do with Afghanistan. But in either case, it's very clear that Security Council diplomats and other countries here would like to see the U.N. play a much more vital role in the country than it already is.

O'BRIEN: All right, Michael Okwu at the U.N. for us this morning.

Michael, thanks.

The U.S. and U.N. are working on a draft resolution that might call on U.N. member states to do more in Iraq. But would more countries sign onto the mission if the U.S. does not give up control?

Secretary of State Colin Powell talked about that issue yesterday at the U.N.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: My conversations with a number of foreign ministers, Security Council foreign ministers over the last several days reaffirmed to me that they were interested in moving forward and helping the Iraqi people. And you talked about the disagreements over the winter, but during the spring and in the early summer, we passed 1483, we passed 1500. So I think there is a willingness to come together to help the Iraqi people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'BRIEN: Lawrence Korb is a former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration and also the director of national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

He joins us from Washington this morning.

Good morning.

Thanks for joining us.

LAWRENCE KORB, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Good morning.

O'BRIEN: Do you see any way in which the secretary of state can configure some kind of a deal in which he can get more international troops but not give up U.S. control in Iraq?

KORB: No, you can't have it both ways. To get a significant number of troops -- right now you've got about 20 countries, each of whom have given less than a thousand troops. But if we want significant numbers from countries like India, Pakistan, Turkey, France or Germany, the U.S. is going to have to give up some control. If they don't, the burden is going to continue to fall on American men and women, both in terms of fighting people and the costs.

O'BRIEN: So you're saying it's clear cut, if the U.S. were willing to cede some control -- and, granted, we all agree that is a huge, huge unlikely if -- what countries outside of the list, in addition to the list that you just mentioned, would give up troops, would commit troops and how many troops are we talking about?

KORB: Well, I mean the countries I mentioned are the ones that would give you significant numbers. For example, India is willing to send a whole division. That's 15,000 troops. That's one country will give you almost as much as you're getting from 20 countries. And that would be to get India. Pakistan and Turkey would also contribute a similar number. And it would be important for them because they are Muslim countries and this would not be seen then as a U.S. occupation.

France and Germany also have a large number of troops that they could contribute. So those are really the countries that you're looking for. And as your correspondent from the United Nations said, maybe you can come up with some sort of formula like you have in Afghanistan where security assistance is provided by the -- now it's by NATO, whereas the United States is still carrying out a traditional military mission of going out and hunting, in this case, the al Qaeda and Taliban.

O'BRIEN: So there are many countries, of course, that say listen, we're not going to share troops if we're not going to share information and we're not going to share authority, as well. Do you think essentially if the request didn't come from Colin Powell, but it came from the Iraqi Governing Council, that would make any difference?

KORB: Well, it might a little bit. But remember, this Governor Council has been welcomed by the United Nations, but has not been authorized. That, too, is seen as a creation of the United States. In fact, the late Mr. De Mello refused to get involved in legitimizing that because the U.N. did not have a role in selecting those people. That was done by Ambassador Bremer, with the concurrence of Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld.

O'BRIEN: Is there some kind of middle ground where you could essentially divvy up control or divvy up regions of control that you could see?

KORB: Yes, I think, again, that might be, using the Afghanistan model, that might work, whereas the United States, for example, could provide security in the so-called Sunni Triangle, Baghdad north and west to the border, and other areas, the Kurdish area, the area of the Shiites, could be given to the United Nations and then you could get those troops in there under a separate command like you have in Afghanistan, where the NATO now controls the area of Kabul and provides assistance to President Karzai there.

O'BRIEN: We only have a few moments left. But outside of just sheer numbers, adding just to the sheer numbers of troops there, wouldn't having an international presence also just make a huge difference, as well?

KORB: Oh, very definitely, because the worst thing to have is this seen as a reimposition of colonialism, particularly by the United States and the British. And particularly, if you could get countries to contribute who, you know, are predominantly Muslim, that would go a long way to make this look like the international community rather than the United -- just the United States. And I think it would make it more difficult for the terrorists to recruit the Iraqi people to join them in carrying out some of these horrendous acts.

O'BRIEN: Lawrence Korb from the Council On Foreign Relations, thanks for joining us this morning. Thanks for your time.

KORB: Nice to be with you.

O'BRIEN: Likewise.

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 August 22, 2003 - 08:02   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Back to Iraq right now. The U.S. confirming this morning that two more American service personnel have been killed. Meanwhile, investigators in Tuesday's suicide attacking looking into the possibility that it could have been an inside job. That's according to a report today in the "New York Times."
Back to Baghdad with more on what's happening at the scene, here's Rym Brahimi back with us -- Rym, hello.

RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Bill.

Indeed, the two U.S. soldiers killed on Thursday. One of them from the 1st Armored Division, was killed when a small arms range caught fire. Not clear under what circumstances that fire erupted. Six other of the U.S. soldiers there were wounded. They were MediVaced, as well, and 19 other people at the scene were medically checked and then released on duty. Another U.S. soldier was killed in Hillah, which is a town about 100 kilometers or about an hour's drive south of the Iraqi capital.

Meanwhile, as you know, Bill, the investigation does continue at the scene of the bombing against the U.N. compound here in Baghdad. A greater area around that site has been cordoned off to allow the heavy machinery to continue to sweep the rubble out and also FBI investigators to continue their job.

And the main question, as you said, was it an inside job? That stems from the fact mainly that some of the U.N. security guards were apparently members before the war of the Iraqi secret service. Now, it wasn't unusual, also, even if you weren't a member of the Iraqi secret service at the time, that any person, any Iraqi working for an international or foreign company would have to report to the intelligence service here in Iraq. There will be a lot of questions raised, a lot of people interrogated with regard to that.

Also a claim by an unknown group known as the Armed Vanguards of the Second Army of Muhammad. That's also going to be checked out in the next few days.

Meanwhile, Bill, a memorial service was being held at Baghdad International Airport to commemorate Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N. special representative who died in the attack, along with 22 other colleagues, including his chief of staff, Nadia Younes, an Egyptian woman who was very much appreciated, as well, by her U.N. colleagues during her outstanding career at the United Nations -- Bill.

HEMMER: Rym, back to this theory about the possibility of it being an inside job. This bomb went off at 4:30 in the afternoon in Baghdad. What normally takes place for the U.N. employees and workers there at that time of day?

BRAHIMI: Well, it's pretty much a normal day on a Tuesday. It's not the day off for anybody. It's a day where there would have been the same number of security as any day in the week and the security men are -- the thing is, Bill, there are two issues there. The security at the United Nations usually, most of them are at the main gate entrance. So there's some at the first gate and then there's a second gate a little further down. It's just maybe a hundred meters after that.

But you see the truck didn't enter that main security gate. The truck actually entered through a side wall and the wall wasn't very, very high. What's also impressive is basically that in a way that truck hit the exact location of the office of the U.N. special envoy. And so that also is what makes people wonder whether it wasn't an inside job -- Bill.

HEMMER: Rym Brahimi in Baghdad.

Our military analysts have warned us for weeks right now about the possibility of inside agents working on behalf of Iraqi security.

General David Grange has talked about that for weeks and it's possible, based on those reports we're getting right now, that that could have been the case.

Much more on this a bit later -- Soledad.

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Discussions continue today about improving security in Iraq. British Foreign Minister Jack Straw is to meet with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in less than an hour and then later with Secretary of State Colin Powell.

CNN's Michael Okwu is live for us from the U.N. headquarters this morning -- Michael, good morning.

MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Soledad.

The secretary general has been doing a whole round of meetings, as you mentioned. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw scheduled to meet with him within an hour or so. No doubt the two men will discuss this pending resolution that would send a multinational force to Iraq. Straw, who arrived yesterday to sign a condolence book, has been very supportive of a much stronger role for the United Nations.

Now, his meeting comes a day after Secretary of State Colin Powell met Annan. Powell said he's willing to hear what other countries have to say about the resolution, but that's only half the challenge. Countries like France, Russia and others have made it clear that they want to see the United States and Great Britain relinquish some political as well as military control before any kind of resolution is supported.

There has been some discussion about having those troops be -- operate under some sort of umbrella of command, having various command centers in the way that they do with Afghanistan. But in either case, it's very clear that Security Council diplomats and other countries here would like to see the U.N. play a much more vital role in the country than it already is.

O'BRIEN: All right, Michael Okwu at the U.N. for us this morning.

Michael, thanks.

The U.S. and U.N. are working on a draft resolution that might call on U.N. member states to do more in Iraq. But would more countries sign onto the mission if the U.S. does not give up control?

Secretary of State Colin Powell talked about that issue yesterday at the U.N.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: My conversations with a number of foreign ministers, Security Council foreign ministers over the last several days reaffirmed to me that they were interested in moving forward and helping the Iraqi people. And you talked about the disagreements over the winter, but during the spring and in the early summer, we passed 1483, we passed 1500. So I think there is a willingness to come together to help the Iraqi people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'BRIEN: Lawrence Korb is a former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration and also the director of national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

He joins us from Washington this morning.

Good morning.

Thanks for joining us.

LAWRENCE KORB, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Good morning.

O'BRIEN: Do you see any way in which the secretary of state can configure some kind of a deal in which he can get more international troops but not give up U.S. control in Iraq?

KORB: No, you can't have it both ways. To get a significant number of troops -- right now you've got about 20 countries, each of whom have given less than a thousand troops. But if we want significant numbers from countries like India, Pakistan, Turkey, France or Germany, the U.S. is going to have to give up some control. If they don't, the burden is going to continue to fall on American men and women, both in terms of fighting people and the costs.

O'BRIEN: So you're saying it's clear cut, if the U.S. were willing to cede some control -- and, granted, we all agree that is a huge, huge unlikely if -- what countries outside of the list, in addition to the list that you just mentioned, would give up troops, would commit troops and how many troops are we talking about?

KORB: Well, I mean the countries I mentioned are the ones that would give you significant numbers. For example, India is willing to send a whole division. That's 15,000 troops. That's one country will give you almost as much as you're getting from 20 countries. And that would be to get India. Pakistan and Turkey would also contribute a similar number. And it would be important for them because they are Muslim countries and this would not be seen then as a U.S. occupation.

France and Germany also have a large number of troops that they could contribute. So those are really the countries that you're looking for. And as your correspondent from the United Nations said, maybe you can come up with some sort of formula like you have in Afghanistan where security assistance is provided by the -- now it's by NATO, whereas the United States is still carrying out a traditional military mission of going out and hunting, in this case, the al Qaeda and Taliban.

O'BRIEN: So there are many countries, of course, that say listen, we're not going to share troops if we're not going to share information and we're not going to share authority, as well. Do you think essentially if the request didn't come from Colin Powell, but it came from the Iraqi Governing Council, that would make any difference?

KORB: Well, it might a little bit. But remember, this Governor Council has been welcomed by the United Nations, but has not been authorized. That, too, is seen as a creation of the United States. In fact, the late Mr. De Mello refused to get involved in legitimizing that because the U.N. did not have a role in selecting those people. That was done by Ambassador Bremer, with the concurrence of Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld.

O'BRIEN: Is there some kind of middle ground where you could essentially divvy up control or divvy up regions of control that you could see?

KORB: Yes, I think, again, that might be, using the Afghanistan model, that might work, whereas the United States, for example, could provide security in the so-called Sunni Triangle, Baghdad north and west to the border, and other areas, the Kurdish area, the area of the Shiites, could be given to the United Nations and then you could get those troops in there under a separate command like you have in Afghanistan, where the NATO now controls the area of Kabul and provides assistance to President Karzai there.

O'BRIEN: We only have a few moments left. But outside of just sheer numbers, adding just to the sheer numbers of troops there, wouldn't having an international presence also just make a huge difference, as well?

KORB: Oh, very definitely, because the worst thing to have is this seen as a reimposition of colonialism, particularly by the United States and the British. And particularly, if you could get countries to contribute who, you know, are predominantly Muslim, that would go a long way to make this look like the international community rather than the United -- just the United States. And I think it would make it more difficult for the terrorists to recruit the Iraqi people to join them in carrying out some of these horrendous acts.

O'BRIEN: Lawrence Korb from the Council On Foreign Relations, thanks for joining us this morning. Thanks for your time.

KORB: Nice to be with you.

O'BRIEN: Likewise.

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