Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Sunday
Powell Visits Baghdad
Aired September 14, 2003 - 10:00 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.
STEPHEN FRAZIER, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to begin with Colin Powell's first visit to Iraq. As the U.S. secretary of state arrived in Baghdad to discuss ways to stabilize the country, attackers killed yet another American soldier and wounded three. CNN's Ben Wedeman is with us now from the Iraqi capital -- Ben.
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CAIRO BUREAU CHIEF: Yes, Stephen. Well, Secretary Powell arrived here this morning. And since then, he's been engaged in a series of meetings.
He first met with the members of the Governing Council. That council appointed by the coalition authority in July. The council being the first of a step in a seven-step plan that is supposed to culminate in the election of a free and independent Iraqi government. He also met with Hoshiaar Zeebari, the recently appointed Iraqi foreign minister.
After that meeting, Mr. Powell told reporters that the major new threat to the coalition and Iraq are what he describes is terrorists who have infiltrated into the country. And he said that they would not -- the coalition would not allow that to happen. Now, afterwards, also, Mr. Zeebari, the Iraqi foreign minister, said that stabilizing security in Iraq is one of the main prerequisites for allowing Iraqis to take full control of their country. He said that he hoped by mid to late 2004, an elected independent government would be in place.
Now, as Mr. Powell arrived here in Iraq, there was another attack on U.S. forces. This one in the troubled area of Fallujah to the west of Baghdad. In that incident, one American soldier was killed and three wounded by a roadside bomb. Now, according to security sources here, they are alarmed by what appears to be a severe surge, in their words, in the number of attacks on U.S. forces in that Ramadi-Fallujah area to the west of Baghdad -- Stephen.
FRAZIER: Ben Wedeman reporting to us from Baghdad. Ben, thank you very much.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Well, there's no doubt President Bush is keeping a close watch on Colin Powell's visit to Iraq. To the White House now, and CNN's Suzanne Malveaux. Good morning to you, Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi. Well, President Bush and his top aides are trying to convince the American people they have a clear strategy inside of Iraq. That was the message the president delivered to troops earlier in the week at Fort Stewart, Georgia. It was also the centerpiece of his weekly radio address yesterday.
Now, as you know, Secretary Powell keeping a very busy schedule this weekend. He was in Geneva yesterday. That's where he met with his counterparts, the U.N. Security Council, the five permanent members, to try to come up with a U.N. Security Council resolution that would be to everyone's liking, essentially accomplishing two goals: to expand U.N. authority over Iraq, at the same time trying to transfer power back to the Iraqi people as quickly as possible.
Now, the sticking point seems to be in the timetable of all of this. France is saying that it should be able to be accomplished within a month or so. Secretary Powell saying that is totally unrealistic. He is, as you know, in Iraq today. He spoke with our Wolf Blitzer just within the last hour.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: France believes that we ought to do this as quickly as possible, suggesting even perhaps within a month. The only problem with that is that there is not yet a functioning government that you could turn authority over to. And the last thing we want to do is to set up the Iraqis to fail.
They need time to bring their ministries up to speed, to man them, to start functioning. They need time to write a constitution. They need time after that constitution is written and ratified to hold elections.
We want to turn the government over, from us to the Iraqi people, but with an Iraqi leadership that has been elected by the people, not just a group of individuals who have been appointed. And I think that's the flaw in the French plan.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: So, Heidi, really, U.S. strategy right now is to try to generate as much support as possible from the U.N. Security Council. Those 15 members, not just the permanent five, at the same time press for France not to use its veto power against that resolution. And finally, the president is going to bring forward that resolution to the U.N. general assembly in September, later next week.
COLLINS: CNN's Suzanne Malveaux reporting from the White House. Thanks so much, Suzanne.
FRAZIER: Of course one reason for Secretary Powell's visit to Iraq is to try to improve troop morale. And you saw that group picture of him gathered before a helicopter with others. Because of lower troop levels, a lot of reservists in Iraq are now facing year- long service there. And that is a huge surprise to many of them.
Here now to put that in perspective is retired U.S. Army Colonel Patrick Lang from Washington. Colonel Lang, thanks for joining us this morning.
COL. PATRICK LANG, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Sure. FRAZIER: We're talking about a year in Iraq and then many, many months on either side of that for training and then demobilization, correct?
LANG: Yes, that's right. Reserve units are not normally kept up to a level of training, because the time available in their schedules as civilians basically. So they can be fully prepared to be deployed. So it takes a while to get them ready to go. And when they come back, it takes a while to stand them down again. So it will be longer than a year for sure.
FRAZIER: Well, some of them are worried beyond the risks that they face while they're on the ground in Iraq about their jobs at home. Employers are required, aren't they, to hold jobs open. But for how long?
LANG: Well, I think that employers are required to hold them open for the period of their active duty. But the problem is, in fact, that even though the law says that, if you're gone long enough, after a while, people start trying to figure out how to do work around you, how to create other structures that essentially do your work. And you lose a lot of ground that you tried to make up in whatever career you had.
Then there are a lot of problems with families, too. You know, these long deployments are really killers on families.
FRAZIER: They have to be. Why is it that they're being asked to stay so long at this time?
LANG: Well, essentially, the Army was reduced in size during the first Bush administration, the Clinton years from the Cold War force, which had 18 divisions in it. It's down to about 10. So the regular force is extremely stretched with all these aggressive forward deployments we have. And a decision was made starting after Vietnam to put most of the in-depth support services, like supply and repair, things like that in the reserves.
Probably the story is that part of that was done to make sure the regular Army would never have to go to war alone again. So as a result, we cannot maintain a large force overseas without calling up the Army Reserve, and using them to sustain our fighting forces in the field. So these guys are just stuck, because you can't change that force structure in a short time.
FRAZIER: I want to make sure we understand the distinction between the National Guard, the Air Guard or the Army Guard, versus the Reserves. Because the guard is combat trained, isn't it?
LANG: Yes, there's a big difference. In the Army Reserve, in particular, you have supply, quartermaster, maintenance repair, medical units, civil affairs, things like that. But very few combat units, armor infantry, things like that.
And the Army Reserve is immediately available to the Army, even though their family members can complain about what's going on. But the National Guard are state troops, especially Army Guard. And they are made up of combat units, by and large. And they have a great deal of political influence through their governors, their congressional delegations, things like this. And they're not very easy to push around at all. And if they start getting repeated deployments to places like Iraq, they're going to make some noise.
FRAZIER: What do you think could be an alternative to this then? This is not a Pentagon that wants to gen up more permanent combat divisions. You mentioned 18 down to 10. We're not going back, are we?
LANG: Well, you know, I think the only logical way to size the armed forces that you have is according to the foreign policy you're following. At least that's what they taught me at the war college. And in fact, you know, the size force we have now is not suitable to the foreign policy we're following.
So even though there are terrible budget deficit problems, if we're going to follow this policy, we need a bigger force. There's just no avoiding it.
FRAZIER: Well, you raise two interesting points here. One is the jelling of current policy with military policy. The other is the whole idea of reservists being assigned to be in such precarious and delicate positions, almost like combat troops.
LANG: Yes. Well, there's a kind of a myth out in the great world that says that support troops are not supposed to get shot at, I guess. But that's not in fact the truth. I don't know of any war that I've ever seen in which it isn't possible for some maintenance unit like the 509th Maintenance Company of Nasiriyah fame now to get in a lot of trouble. And they should be prepared to deal with this.
As long as people are in the Army Reserve or the National Guard, I think they have to be prepared to deal with the same kind of dangers as the regulars do. There's just no avoiding that. They're part of a structure, and as long as they're there, that goes with the game.
FRAZIER: Well, we appreciate these insights, formed largely when you were head of Middle East intelligence at the Pentagon. Colonel Lang, thank you for joining us this morning.
LANG: You're welcome.
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 September 14, 2003 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
STEPHEN FRAZIER, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to begin with Colin Powell's first visit to Iraq. As the U.S. secretary of state arrived in Baghdad to discuss ways to stabilize the country, attackers killed yet another American soldier and wounded three. CNN's Ben Wedeman is with us now from the Iraqi capital -- Ben.
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CAIRO BUREAU CHIEF: Yes, Stephen. Well, Secretary Powell arrived here this morning. And since then, he's been engaged in a series of meetings.
He first met with the members of the Governing Council. That council appointed by the coalition authority in July. The council being the first of a step in a seven-step plan that is supposed to culminate in the election of a free and independent Iraqi government. He also met with Hoshiaar Zeebari, the recently appointed Iraqi foreign minister.
After that meeting, Mr. Powell told reporters that the major new threat to the coalition and Iraq are what he describes is terrorists who have infiltrated into the country. And he said that they would not -- the coalition would not allow that to happen. Now, afterwards, also, Mr. Zeebari, the Iraqi foreign minister, said that stabilizing security in Iraq is one of the main prerequisites for allowing Iraqis to take full control of their country. He said that he hoped by mid to late 2004, an elected independent government would be in place.
Now, as Mr. Powell arrived here in Iraq, there was another attack on U.S. forces. This one in the troubled area of Fallujah to the west of Baghdad. In that incident, one American soldier was killed and three wounded by a roadside bomb. Now, according to security sources here, they are alarmed by what appears to be a severe surge, in their words, in the number of attacks on U.S. forces in that Ramadi-Fallujah area to the west of Baghdad -- Stephen.
FRAZIER: Ben Wedeman reporting to us from Baghdad. Ben, thank you very much.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Well, there's no doubt President Bush is keeping a close watch on Colin Powell's visit to Iraq. To the White House now, and CNN's Suzanne Malveaux. Good morning to you, Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi. Well, President Bush and his top aides are trying to convince the American people they have a clear strategy inside of Iraq. That was the message the president delivered to troops earlier in the week at Fort Stewart, Georgia. It was also the centerpiece of his weekly radio address yesterday.
Now, as you know, Secretary Powell keeping a very busy schedule this weekend. He was in Geneva yesterday. That's where he met with his counterparts, the U.N. Security Council, the five permanent members, to try to come up with a U.N. Security Council resolution that would be to everyone's liking, essentially accomplishing two goals: to expand U.N. authority over Iraq, at the same time trying to transfer power back to the Iraqi people as quickly as possible.
Now, the sticking point seems to be in the timetable of all of this. France is saying that it should be able to be accomplished within a month or so. Secretary Powell saying that is totally unrealistic. He is, as you know, in Iraq today. He spoke with our Wolf Blitzer just within the last hour.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: France believes that we ought to do this as quickly as possible, suggesting even perhaps within a month. The only problem with that is that there is not yet a functioning government that you could turn authority over to. And the last thing we want to do is to set up the Iraqis to fail.
They need time to bring their ministries up to speed, to man them, to start functioning. They need time to write a constitution. They need time after that constitution is written and ratified to hold elections.
We want to turn the government over, from us to the Iraqi people, but with an Iraqi leadership that has been elected by the people, not just a group of individuals who have been appointed. And I think that's the flaw in the French plan.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: So, Heidi, really, U.S. strategy right now is to try to generate as much support as possible from the U.N. Security Council. Those 15 members, not just the permanent five, at the same time press for France not to use its veto power against that resolution. And finally, the president is going to bring forward that resolution to the U.N. general assembly in September, later next week.
COLLINS: CNN's Suzanne Malveaux reporting from the White House. Thanks so much, Suzanne.
FRAZIER: Of course one reason for Secretary Powell's visit to Iraq is to try to improve troop morale. And you saw that group picture of him gathered before a helicopter with others. Because of lower troop levels, a lot of reservists in Iraq are now facing year- long service there. And that is a huge surprise to many of them.
Here now to put that in perspective is retired U.S. Army Colonel Patrick Lang from Washington. Colonel Lang, thanks for joining us this morning.
COL. PATRICK LANG, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Sure. FRAZIER: We're talking about a year in Iraq and then many, many months on either side of that for training and then demobilization, correct?
LANG: Yes, that's right. Reserve units are not normally kept up to a level of training, because the time available in their schedules as civilians basically. So they can be fully prepared to be deployed. So it takes a while to get them ready to go. And when they come back, it takes a while to stand them down again. So it will be longer than a year for sure.
FRAZIER: Well, some of them are worried beyond the risks that they face while they're on the ground in Iraq about their jobs at home. Employers are required, aren't they, to hold jobs open. But for how long?
LANG: Well, I think that employers are required to hold them open for the period of their active duty. But the problem is, in fact, that even though the law says that, if you're gone long enough, after a while, people start trying to figure out how to do work around you, how to create other structures that essentially do your work. And you lose a lot of ground that you tried to make up in whatever career you had.
Then there are a lot of problems with families, too. You know, these long deployments are really killers on families.
FRAZIER: They have to be. Why is it that they're being asked to stay so long at this time?
LANG: Well, essentially, the Army was reduced in size during the first Bush administration, the Clinton years from the Cold War force, which had 18 divisions in it. It's down to about 10. So the regular force is extremely stretched with all these aggressive forward deployments we have. And a decision was made starting after Vietnam to put most of the in-depth support services, like supply and repair, things like that in the reserves.
Probably the story is that part of that was done to make sure the regular Army would never have to go to war alone again. So as a result, we cannot maintain a large force overseas without calling up the Army Reserve, and using them to sustain our fighting forces in the field. So these guys are just stuck, because you can't change that force structure in a short time.
FRAZIER: I want to make sure we understand the distinction between the National Guard, the Air Guard or the Army Guard, versus the Reserves. Because the guard is combat trained, isn't it?
LANG: Yes, there's a big difference. In the Army Reserve, in particular, you have supply, quartermaster, maintenance repair, medical units, civil affairs, things like that. But very few combat units, armor infantry, things like that.
And the Army Reserve is immediately available to the Army, even though their family members can complain about what's going on. But the National Guard are state troops, especially Army Guard. And they are made up of combat units, by and large. And they have a great deal of political influence through their governors, their congressional delegations, things like this. And they're not very easy to push around at all. And if they start getting repeated deployments to places like Iraq, they're going to make some noise.
FRAZIER: What do you think could be an alternative to this then? This is not a Pentagon that wants to gen up more permanent combat divisions. You mentioned 18 down to 10. We're not going back, are we?
LANG: Well, you know, I think the only logical way to size the armed forces that you have is according to the foreign policy you're following. At least that's what they taught me at the war college. And in fact, you know, the size force we have now is not suitable to the foreign policy we're following.
So even though there are terrible budget deficit problems, if we're going to follow this policy, we need a bigger force. There's just no avoiding it.
FRAZIER: Well, you raise two interesting points here. One is the jelling of current policy with military policy. The other is the whole idea of reservists being assigned to be in such precarious and delicate positions, almost like combat troops.
LANG: Yes. Well, there's a kind of a myth out in the great world that says that support troops are not supposed to get shot at, I guess. But that's not in fact the truth. I don't know of any war that I've ever seen in which it isn't possible for some maintenance unit like the 509th Maintenance Company of Nasiriyah fame now to get in a lot of trouble. And they should be prepared to deal with this.
As long as people are in the Army Reserve or the National Guard, I think they have to be prepared to deal with the same kind of dangers as the regulars do. There's just no avoiding that. They're part of a structure, and as long as they're there, that goes with the game.
FRAZIER: Well, we appreciate these insights, formed largely when you were head of Middle East intelligence at the Pentagon. Colonel Lang, thank you for joining us this morning.
LANG: You're welcome.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
