Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Crisis in the Middle East

Aired October 06, 2003 - 10:14   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: Now a closer look at the diplomatic maneuverings in the latest Mideast crisis through the eyes of a career foreign service officer. Richard Murphy is a former assistant secretary of state and now serves as a senior fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations. He joins from our New York bureau this morning. Ambassador Murphy, thanks for being here.
RICHARD MURPHY, SENIOR FELLOW, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: My pleasure.

COLLINS: I want to ask you, it would seem that this is a very sticky situation for the United States, fighting a war on terrorism, and then also trying to promote the road map for peace. What should the United States be doing at this time in these latest incidents?

MURPHY: Well, it's already taken the stand calling both sides to, you know, calm down, don't let this escalate. This is the first such attack in I guess in 30 years deep inside Syria. Now, it has to, in my opinion, find some way to get the message across, we are going to make another fresh try at this road map.

The solution doesn't lie in terrorist bombings. The solution doesn't lie in Israeli reprisal attacks, revenge on those bombings. The solution lies at the table.

COLLINS: Is there still hope for the road map for peace?

MURPHY: Yes, there's hope because, you know, it was never designed as a clear, you do this, they do that, sequential progress. It's a list of obligations on both sides, Israelis and Palestinians, of things that have to be accomplished in order for there to be a viable Palestinian state. And they put a date on it, which now looks increasingly tight and unrealistic of the end of 2005.

COLLINS: What about the United Nations having a little bit more of a role as the fix-it man, if you will? Obviously, traditional the United States has sort of been in that position. Are they the only ones that have that kind of power?

MURPHY: Well, we're the only ones that Israel has wanted to deal with. There are other states that would like to play a role, the other states we welcomed in terms of the quartet working together with the road map, the European Union, the Russians and the United Nations secretary-general.

But that hasn't moved ahead very far. And the initiative always seems to come back, what is the United States ready to do? How much effort is ready to put in, in this whole process?

COLLINS: Tell us in your best assessment, why did Israel go into Syria at this point?

MURPHY: I think it looked at the options it had to reply to that horrific attack in Haifa on Sunday. It already has been doing a tighter control on Palestinian movements. It went out and blew up the house of the suicide bomber. It knew that America was very much opposed to it doing anything about taking Arafat out of Ramallah or hurting him in any way.

And this commended itself, I think, as an option where Sharon has sent warnings in the past that Syria would not been immune and Israel has always held it -- long held against Syria that it has provided training, incitement, even funding for the militant groups, be they Lebanese or Palestinian.

So it was an opportunity and it showed he was ready to expand, if needed, to bring the war to an end now. You can argue is it going to achieve that, but, that's, I think, why he picked Syria.

COLLINS: What do you make of Syria requesting that the U.N. Security Council denounce the Israeli strike? what about the possibility of Syria denouncing the suicide attack that happened in Haifa before making that request of the U.N. Security Council?

MURPHY: That might have helped the prospects of getting an American -- at least an American abstention. It's hard for me to imagine -- I mean anything is possible. But it's hard for me to imagine that Syria would come anywhere near accusing itself of providing cover, sanctuary, training, etc. for these militant groups.

But had it denounced the attack immediately, that might have enhanced the prospects of getting a resolution through the council.

COLLINS: Ambassador Murphy, what's next in all of this?

MURPHY: Well this debate will wind up, I suspect, fairly quickly. Perhaps as early as tomorrow. And then the president has to decide is he ready to reinvest his prestige, his energies having been at Aqaba, having been at Sharmishaf (ph) in the month of May and then seeing the effort to get the Palestinian prime minister in operation controlling the security organizations.

It was a discouraging show by the end of the summer and it appears the administration wasn't ready to do anything. Now this may energize it.

COLLINS: All right, former assistant secretary of state, Ambassador Richard Murphy. Thanks so much for your time this morning, we do appreciate your insight.

MURPHY: 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 October 6, 2003 - 10:14   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Now a closer look at the diplomatic maneuverings in the latest Mideast crisis through the eyes of a career foreign service officer. Richard Murphy is a former assistant secretary of state and now serves as a senior fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations. He joins from our New York bureau this morning. Ambassador Murphy, thanks for being here.
RICHARD MURPHY, SENIOR FELLOW, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: My pleasure.

COLLINS: I want to ask you, it would seem that this is a very sticky situation for the United States, fighting a war on terrorism, and then also trying to promote the road map for peace. What should the United States be doing at this time in these latest incidents?

MURPHY: Well, it's already taken the stand calling both sides to, you know, calm down, don't let this escalate. This is the first such attack in I guess in 30 years deep inside Syria. Now, it has to, in my opinion, find some way to get the message across, we are going to make another fresh try at this road map.

The solution doesn't lie in terrorist bombings. The solution doesn't lie in Israeli reprisal attacks, revenge on those bombings. The solution lies at the table.

COLLINS: Is there still hope for the road map for peace?

MURPHY: Yes, there's hope because, you know, it was never designed as a clear, you do this, they do that, sequential progress. It's a list of obligations on both sides, Israelis and Palestinians, of things that have to be accomplished in order for there to be a viable Palestinian state. And they put a date on it, which now looks increasingly tight and unrealistic of the end of 2005.

COLLINS: What about the United Nations having a little bit more of a role as the fix-it man, if you will? Obviously, traditional the United States has sort of been in that position. Are they the only ones that have that kind of power?

MURPHY: Well, we're the only ones that Israel has wanted to deal with. There are other states that would like to play a role, the other states we welcomed in terms of the quartet working together with the road map, the European Union, the Russians and the United Nations secretary-general.

But that hasn't moved ahead very far. And the initiative always seems to come back, what is the United States ready to do? How much effort is ready to put in, in this whole process?

COLLINS: Tell us in your best assessment, why did Israel go into Syria at this point?

MURPHY: I think it looked at the options it had to reply to that horrific attack in Haifa on Sunday. It already has been doing a tighter control on Palestinian movements. It went out and blew up the house of the suicide bomber. It knew that America was very much opposed to it doing anything about taking Arafat out of Ramallah or hurting him in any way.

And this commended itself, I think, as an option where Sharon has sent warnings in the past that Syria would not been immune and Israel has always held it -- long held against Syria that it has provided training, incitement, even funding for the militant groups, be they Lebanese or Palestinian.

So it was an opportunity and it showed he was ready to expand, if needed, to bring the war to an end now. You can argue is it going to achieve that, but, that's, I think, why he picked Syria.

COLLINS: What do you make of Syria requesting that the U.N. Security Council denounce the Israeli strike? what about the possibility of Syria denouncing the suicide attack that happened in Haifa before making that request of the U.N. Security Council?

MURPHY: That might have helped the prospects of getting an American -- at least an American abstention. It's hard for me to imagine -- I mean anything is possible. But it's hard for me to imagine that Syria would come anywhere near accusing itself of providing cover, sanctuary, training, etc. for these militant groups.

But had it denounced the attack immediately, that might have enhanced the prospects of getting a resolution through the council.

COLLINS: Ambassador Murphy, what's next in all of this?

MURPHY: Well this debate will wind up, I suspect, fairly quickly. Perhaps as early as tomorrow. And then the president has to decide is he ready to reinvest his prestige, his energies having been at Aqaba, having been at Sharmishaf (ph) in the month of May and then seeing the effort to get the Palestinian prime minister in operation controlling the security organizations.

It was a discouraging show by the end of the summer and it appears the administration wasn't ready to do anything. Now this may energize it.

COLLINS: All right, former assistant secretary of state, Ambassador Richard Murphy. Thanks so much for your time this morning, we do appreciate your insight.

MURPHY: 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