Return to Transcripts main page

Q&A with Jim Clancy

Aid Workers Under Attack in Iraq

Aired October 27, 2003 - 11:32   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.


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR (voice-over): (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Baghdad. More than 30 people killed, as many as 200 others wounded. The coalition has been shaken, but officials there say the resolve is unchanged. Still, it is clear something must change.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I'm angry, because it's once again the Iraqis are paying the price for this.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The best way to describe the people (UNINTELLIGIBLE) cold-blooded killers, terrorists. That's all they are.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) outrage against (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

CLANCY: On this edition of Q&A, international aid workers under attack in Iraq. Future hopes for a nation held hostage.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CLANCY: Welcome once again to Q&A. The attacks in Baghdad come less than a week after a U.N.-appointed panel reported its findings about security, in the United Nations, as the relationship develops with the United States. In Iraq, it found, and I'm quoting here: "The current security management system is dysfunctional and places hundreds of United Nations workers in Iraq at risk." After these recent attacks, it's obvious it's more than just the U.N. workers who are at risk. Has the world changed? Has the threat changed? What can anyone do about it?

The headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross and several police stations, of course, were the targets of the latest violence that we saw this day in Baghdad. With his assessment of the situation, we're joined now from Boston by Claude Bruderlein, he's a member of the independent panel on U.N. security and director of Harvard's program on humanitarian policy and conflict research.

We heard a few minutes ago from a spokeswoman in Baghdad for the International Committee of the Red Cross saying she couldn't believe that after all that those people have done for the people of Iraq that they would come under attack. As you did your report, as you look at the threat around the world, do you think it's surprising?

CLAUDE BRUDERLEIN, INDEPENDENT PANEL ON U.N. SECURITY: Oh, absolutely. I think there is a new situation in Iraq that is challenging the humanitarian organizations in their understanding about mutuality, about independence and about what really can work in such situations.

CLANCY: What did you find out about who was behind the attack in Baghdad?

BRUDERLEIN: Well, there is no clear information about who was behind and also about their motives, but certainly it seems to be organized groups with the clearest strategies, eventually some access to intelligence, and a very high dose of determination.

CLANCY: You've described this group. Can you put -- what was the feeling on the panel, within the panel about who was responsible, because clearly that is key to understanding the threat posed to security for the international aid workers.

BRUDERLEIN: Well, there are a number of sources. There have been a number of statements claiming responsibility of these attacks. Is it Saddam loyalists? Is it different sort of armed groups foreign elements? It's not clear yet, but certainly they seem to be getting more organized, more sophisticated. And having launched a list a targets from coalition forces in June and July, now to the United Nations, to foreign diplomats, and now even the ICRC. It shows the extent to which they will not discriminate in their attacks.

CLANCY: All right. That's one side of it, and in a moment I want to get to the relationship between the United Nations that you saw and the United States military on the ground, but this is what the United States military is saying about these latest attacks. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm sure there was an attempt at a coordinated attack, but as you can tell from this one, it was somewhat amateurish. We have had some intelligence recently that indicated that there was going to be an attempt at a coordinated attack. If this is it, it's not all that significant.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CLANCY: Claude Bruderlein, I want to ask you, from what you saw, the way you analyzed it, did you see sophistication? You seem to be saying you did.

BRUDERLEIN: Well, we can see, in terms of preparation, in terms of planning, the United Nations had advance warning of an attack for weeks. Also, we can see that humanitarian organizations had become a target of such attacks, and there has been, you know, collection of information, so in my sense, we clearly are in a new era.

CLANCY: Let me bring in -- Claude, if you'll stay with us right there -- I want to bring in Ben Wedeman, a man who's been covering Baghdad for years and who knows this story inside out.

Ben, we're trying to look at these latest attacks and make some kind of a determination or at least get an idea what kind of an effect they're going to have, what they really represent. What do you think?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, for one thing, it's very difficult for any would-be attackers to attack the coalition in large-scale attacks. They can go after them with AEDs (ph), these roadside bombs, but in terms of vulnerability, I think what they're doing is going after those vulnerable targets, like the United Nations, like the Red Cross, which tries to make a point of being accessible to ordinary Iraqis. So these are easy targets for these attackers.

Now, another obvious goal or target of these attacks is to saw terrorists, to saw fear and uncertainty. It's said that the point of terrorism is not necessarily to kill a lot of people, it's to terrorize a lot of people, and that clearly is what's going on. We've seen the attacks today, the overwhelming majority of the victims of these attacks, the dead, more than 30, the wounded, more than 200, are Iraqis. There are few American soldiers among them. And obviously, this sends a message to a very broad spectrum of people in Iraq that they, as well as the coalition, are in danger, and therefore many of them are going to say, I'm going to try to stay away from the Red Cross, from the United Nations, just to be safe.

And that clearly is one of the goals, one of the messages that these people behind the bombings are trying to deliver.

CLANCY: All right, Ben, I'm going to ask you to stay a little bit there as I talk with Claude and ask you, because you are on the panel that investigated what happened to security for the United Nations when they got bombed back in August, a terrible toll. But they have said we want to stay -- keep our distance from the U.S. military. We don't want to be associated with them. They actually took down some barricades. It was all in your report.

BRUDERLEIN: Absolutely. Yes, indeed. American forces offered elementary (ph) protection to the U.N. headquarters, and they have been in several occasions request to take some of these positions down. Yes.

CLANCY: Well, what should the other -- and let's face it, I mean, when you look at it, what do you expect to see, Claude? No matter what they say about staying the course in public, a lot of these aid workers are going to be withdrawn, at least the ones that come from outside Iraq.

BRUDERLEIN: Absolutely. If we can see that the ICRC has become a target, clearly the situation is out of the depths of humanitarian workers, and we can expect many of them will withdraw. And somehow it's important that many of these operations will evolve to the Iraqi organizations themselves, so we have to see that there is over 4,000 Iraqi nationals involved in the distribution of humanitarian aid in Iraq, through the Oil for Food Programme. We don't actually need all these internationals in Iraq.

CLANCY: Ben Wedeman, let me ask you, on the ground, to the Iraqi people, what does it mean when the U.N. is pulling out their people, we might see the ICRC pull out some of their international staff. You have so many different groups that are needed so much in Iraq today. What effect does it have?

WEDEMAN: Well, there have been many people who have the feeling that they're being abandoned by the very organizations they had trusted, worked with for many years. The ICRC was operating in Iraq since 1980. It's an organization with which many Iraqis are familiar with, and of course when these attacks occur, people become afraid that they're basically going -- it's going to be the coalition, and then the whole wide spectrum of NGOs that have done good work in Iraq, the United Nations, are going to leave, and that does make people worry.

And I heard, for instance, that this evening and in just the hours after the bombing took place at the Red Cross that banners are put up some parts of town condemning these attacks, because these are organizations Iraqis want to see working among them, and when these attacks occurred, they realized that there's going to be (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and people will think twice.

These people with the NGOs, they're going to think twice before they come to Iraq. The coalition workers, the people who were the contractors, it's a different situation. They are here as they're well paid. The NGO workers don't get a lot out of it except the altruistic satisfaction of doing good in this country. So there is the concern that there may be an exodus of NGOs out of the country, following this attack and following, of course, the August bombing of the United Nations headquarters.

CLANCY: Claude, what is your read?

BRUDERLEIN: Well, my sense is, on the one hand, organizations should withdraw. I mean, their international staff should be withdrawn from Iraq. The current situation is getting much worse than expected. In addition, they should learn their lesson in terms of having a clear objective, humanitarian objectives. Actually, currently in Iraq, on their own standing, they believe there is no humanitarian crisis. They are involved into nation-building, into capacity building of the new government. This may be seen as being too close to the occupying forces, so they should re- evaluate their plans.

CLANCY: What does that mean, Claude, for the reconstruction of the country, for the future of this country? All of the things that it needs, how do you do that without the participation of the U.N. and of other groups, which the world says it wants?

BRUDERLEIN: Well, there is a need for resources, there is a need for expertise, but actually there is no need for, you know, heads of the NGOs and the so-called humanitarian organizations. If there is no humanitarian crisis in Iraq, these organizations should not be there as claiming as doing humanitarian work. They should send experts to work with Iraqi organization and governments, not actually being there institutionally.

CLANCY: All right. Claude Bruderlein, I want to thank you. I want to also thank Ben Wedeman, as always, one of our old hands, one of the people who really has an insight not only into what's going on on the streets in Baghdad, but throughout the Middle East. Gentlemen, thank you both. Some surprising views here. And we thank you for sharing them with us on Q&A.

We're going to take a short break. We'll be back with more news. And I want to remind you right now that we want to hear from you. Send us an e-mail to Q&A@cnn.com. On Friday, we're going to be reading some of these comments that you may have on the news, (UNINTELLIGIBLE). What does it all mean? What's your view? Send us an e-mail, at Q&A@cnn.com.

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com



Aired October 27, 2003 - 11:32   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR (voice-over): (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Baghdad. More than 30 people killed, as many as 200 others wounded. The coalition has been shaken, but officials there say the resolve is unchanged. Still, it is clear something must change.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I'm angry, because it's once again the Iraqis are paying the price for this.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The best way to describe the people (UNINTELLIGIBLE) cold-blooded killers, terrorists. That's all they are.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) outrage against (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

CLANCY: On this edition of Q&A, international aid workers under attack in Iraq. Future hopes for a nation held hostage.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CLANCY: Welcome once again to Q&A. The attacks in Baghdad come less than a week after a U.N.-appointed panel reported its findings about security, in the United Nations, as the relationship develops with the United States. In Iraq, it found, and I'm quoting here: "The current security management system is dysfunctional and places hundreds of United Nations workers in Iraq at risk." After these recent attacks, it's obvious it's more than just the U.N. workers who are at risk. Has the world changed? Has the threat changed? What can anyone do about it?

The headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross and several police stations, of course, were the targets of the latest violence that we saw this day in Baghdad. With his assessment of the situation, we're joined now from Boston by Claude Bruderlein, he's a member of the independent panel on U.N. security and director of Harvard's program on humanitarian policy and conflict research.

We heard a few minutes ago from a spokeswoman in Baghdad for the International Committee of the Red Cross saying she couldn't believe that after all that those people have done for the people of Iraq that they would come under attack. As you did your report, as you look at the threat around the world, do you think it's surprising?

CLAUDE BRUDERLEIN, INDEPENDENT PANEL ON U.N. SECURITY: Oh, absolutely. I think there is a new situation in Iraq that is challenging the humanitarian organizations in their understanding about mutuality, about independence and about what really can work in such situations.

CLANCY: What did you find out about who was behind the attack in Baghdad?

BRUDERLEIN: Well, there is no clear information about who was behind and also about their motives, but certainly it seems to be organized groups with the clearest strategies, eventually some access to intelligence, and a very high dose of determination.

CLANCY: You've described this group. Can you put -- what was the feeling on the panel, within the panel about who was responsible, because clearly that is key to understanding the threat posed to security for the international aid workers.

BRUDERLEIN: Well, there are a number of sources. There have been a number of statements claiming responsibility of these attacks. Is it Saddam loyalists? Is it different sort of armed groups foreign elements? It's not clear yet, but certainly they seem to be getting more organized, more sophisticated. And having launched a list a targets from coalition forces in June and July, now to the United Nations, to foreign diplomats, and now even the ICRC. It shows the extent to which they will not discriminate in their attacks.

CLANCY: All right. That's one side of it, and in a moment I want to get to the relationship between the United Nations that you saw and the United States military on the ground, but this is what the United States military is saying about these latest attacks. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm sure there was an attempt at a coordinated attack, but as you can tell from this one, it was somewhat amateurish. We have had some intelligence recently that indicated that there was going to be an attempt at a coordinated attack. If this is it, it's not all that significant.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CLANCY: Claude Bruderlein, I want to ask you, from what you saw, the way you analyzed it, did you see sophistication? You seem to be saying you did.

BRUDERLEIN: Well, we can see, in terms of preparation, in terms of planning, the United Nations had advance warning of an attack for weeks. Also, we can see that humanitarian organizations had become a target of such attacks, and there has been, you know, collection of information, so in my sense, we clearly are in a new era.

CLANCY: Let me bring in -- Claude, if you'll stay with us right there -- I want to bring in Ben Wedeman, a man who's been covering Baghdad for years and who knows this story inside out.

Ben, we're trying to look at these latest attacks and make some kind of a determination or at least get an idea what kind of an effect they're going to have, what they really represent. What do you think?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, for one thing, it's very difficult for any would-be attackers to attack the coalition in large-scale attacks. They can go after them with AEDs (ph), these roadside bombs, but in terms of vulnerability, I think what they're doing is going after those vulnerable targets, like the United Nations, like the Red Cross, which tries to make a point of being accessible to ordinary Iraqis. So these are easy targets for these attackers.

Now, another obvious goal or target of these attacks is to saw terrorists, to saw fear and uncertainty. It's said that the point of terrorism is not necessarily to kill a lot of people, it's to terrorize a lot of people, and that clearly is what's going on. We've seen the attacks today, the overwhelming majority of the victims of these attacks, the dead, more than 30, the wounded, more than 200, are Iraqis. There are few American soldiers among them. And obviously, this sends a message to a very broad spectrum of people in Iraq that they, as well as the coalition, are in danger, and therefore many of them are going to say, I'm going to try to stay away from the Red Cross, from the United Nations, just to be safe.

And that clearly is one of the goals, one of the messages that these people behind the bombings are trying to deliver.

CLANCY: All right, Ben, I'm going to ask you to stay a little bit there as I talk with Claude and ask you, because you are on the panel that investigated what happened to security for the United Nations when they got bombed back in August, a terrible toll. But they have said we want to stay -- keep our distance from the U.S. military. We don't want to be associated with them. They actually took down some barricades. It was all in your report.

BRUDERLEIN: Absolutely. Yes, indeed. American forces offered elementary (ph) protection to the U.N. headquarters, and they have been in several occasions request to take some of these positions down. Yes.

CLANCY: Well, what should the other -- and let's face it, I mean, when you look at it, what do you expect to see, Claude? No matter what they say about staying the course in public, a lot of these aid workers are going to be withdrawn, at least the ones that come from outside Iraq.

BRUDERLEIN: Absolutely. If we can see that the ICRC has become a target, clearly the situation is out of the depths of humanitarian workers, and we can expect many of them will withdraw. And somehow it's important that many of these operations will evolve to the Iraqi organizations themselves, so we have to see that there is over 4,000 Iraqi nationals involved in the distribution of humanitarian aid in Iraq, through the Oil for Food Programme. We don't actually need all these internationals in Iraq.

CLANCY: Ben Wedeman, let me ask you, on the ground, to the Iraqi people, what does it mean when the U.N. is pulling out their people, we might see the ICRC pull out some of their international staff. You have so many different groups that are needed so much in Iraq today. What effect does it have?

WEDEMAN: Well, there have been many people who have the feeling that they're being abandoned by the very organizations they had trusted, worked with for many years. The ICRC was operating in Iraq since 1980. It's an organization with which many Iraqis are familiar with, and of course when these attacks occur, people become afraid that they're basically going -- it's going to be the coalition, and then the whole wide spectrum of NGOs that have done good work in Iraq, the United Nations, are going to leave, and that does make people worry.

And I heard, for instance, that this evening and in just the hours after the bombing took place at the Red Cross that banners are put up some parts of town condemning these attacks, because these are organizations Iraqis want to see working among them, and when these attacks occurred, they realized that there's going to be (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and people will think twice.

These people with the NGOs, they're going to think twice before they come to Iraq. The coalition workers, the people who were the contractors, it's a different situation. They are here as they're well paid. The NGO workers don't get a lot out of it except the altruistic satisfaction of doing good in this country. So there is the concern that there may be an exodus of NGOs out of the country, following this attack and following, of course, the August bombing of the United Nations headquarters.

CLANCY: Claude, what is your read?

BRUDERLEIN: Well, my sense is, on the one hand, organizations should withdraw. I mean, their international staff should be withdrawn from Iraq. The current situation is getting much worse than expected. In addition, they should learn their lesson in terms of having a clear objective, humanitarian objectives. Actually, currently in Iraq, on their own standing, they believe there is no humanitarian crisis. They are involved into nation-building, into capacity building of the new government. This may be seen as being too close to the occupying forces, so they should re- evaluate their plans.

CLANCY: What does that mean, Claude, for the reconstruction of the country, for the future of this country? All of the things that it needs, how do you do that without the participation of the U.N. and of other groups, which the world says it wants?

BRUDERLEIN: Well, there is a need for resources, there is a need for expertise, but actually there is no need for, you know, heads of the NGOs and the so-called humanitarian organizations. If there is no humanitarian crisis in Iraq, these organizations should not be there as claiming as doing humanitarian work. They should send experts to work with Iraqi organization and governments, not actually being there institutionally.

CLANCY: All right. Claude Bruderlein, I want to thank you. I want to also thank Ben Wedeman, as always, one of our old hands, one of the people who really has an insight not only into what's going on on the streets in Baghdad, but throughout the Middle East. Gentlemen, thank you both. Some surprising views here. And we thank you for sharing them with us on Q&A.

We're going to take a short break. We'll be back with more news. And I want to remind you right now that we want to hear from you. Send us an e-mail to Q&A@cnn.com. On Friday, we're going to be reading some of these comments that you may have on the news, (UNINTELLIGIBLE). What does it all mean? What's your view? Send us an e-mail, at Q&A@cnn.com.

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com