Return to Transcripts main page
Your World Today
Your World Today: Weekly William Cohen Segment
Aired January 13, 2004 - 12:33 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.
JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Now for more on the controversy over O'Neill's remarks and a host of other issues we're joined by...
ZAIN VERJEE, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: The former U.S. defense secretary, William Cohen. He is our regular weekly contributor on discussions of events that happened in the news.
He now has the Cohen Group, an international business consulting firm.
Mr. Cohen, it's good to see you here.
WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Good to be here.
VERJEE: O'Neill's comments, first of all. What do you make of them? I mean, they are a lot of opponents of the administration saying, "See? With those comments, that's proof that the administration exaggerated the case for war in Iraq."
What do you think? Do you think it's credible?
COHEN: Well, obviously, he sat in on many meetings in the White House and his comments can't be dismissed cavalierly.
I think it's going to take a really close examination of exactly what access to information did he have at the time, what documents is he referring to before people are able to make a judgment whether or not this was some -- his assumption or whether or not it was a well-founded conclusion.
But it's rather unusual for cabinet members to be writing memoirs during the term that their president has served and the term that they served.
It has been done before, certainly. David Stockman wrote about his experience in the Reagan administration. We had Robert Reich wrote about his experience in Bill Clinton's administration. So it's not unprecedented.
But in this particular case, it certainly is going to fuel the debate over whether or not the justification for going to war in Iraq was the one that truly was good for the American people.
VERJEE: The Bush administration officials are also saying, "Look, now what's the big deal here?" Because during the Clinton administration, there was policy and planning on Iraq about regime change in Iraq then, as well.
COHEN: I think we have to distinguish between what the Clinton administration meant in terms of regime change and what was meant by the Bush administration.
During the Clinton administration, the regime change was hoped that it could be brought about through internal revolt, by supporting groups from the inside that would bring about a regime change on the part of Saddam Hussein.
But you may recall that even Secretary of State Powell, when asked about regime change at one point, he said, "If Saddam should let the inspectors back into the country to do their job, that would constitute regime change" under his, or the State Department's, interpretation.
I think that others within the administration who thought regime change meant getting rid of Saddam Hussein by external force, if necessary.
So there was a difference between the Clinton approach, which was foment if we could or foster debate within Iraq to bring about a removal of Saddam by people from within, rather than a military force being used to expel him.
CLANCY: A report by the Army War College, by a noted professor there, saying that it was a strategic mistake to go to war in Iraq, because it spreads the U.S. military too thin and because it actually distracts from the war on terrorism.
Your view, you were secretary of defense?
COHEN: Well, you may recall that while I was secretary of defense, there was some criticism coming from current members of the administration to say that we were stretched too thin, that we had, quote, "hollowed out the military."
I took great exception to that, because the military was not hollow. Yes, we were being stretched thin with involvement in Bosnia and Kosovo, but we were not a hollow military.
And we now have essentially the same military but doing far more than they were doing during the Clinton administration. So we have stretched that force even more than they were ever stretched during the previous four years.
CLANCY: But is it a strategic mistake?
COHEN: Well, time will tell whether it's a strategic mistake or not. I think that, basically, Saddam being removed is important for stability in the region. Whether he ever imposed an immediate type of threat to the world, to the United States, is very much in doubt, in question.
VERJEE: On a political front, still staying in Iraq, one of the stories coming out today, being run by an influential Shiah, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, coming out and saying, "We want direct popular elections in Iraq."
Bremer is saying that, you know, "We agree with that idea but just not now. There's not the time; there's not the infrastructure."
But both sides aren't budging from those positions. And effectively, putting them in a collision course, you think, that would raise questions about a weakening security and a weakening political stability?
COHEN: I think it's putting them on a course of compromise. I think that Ayatollah Sistani is setting out the need for direct elections, with Jerry Bremer saying, "It's too soon. We can't put the right kind of system in place to ensure the integrity of the process." Leaves room for reaching some kind of appropriate compromise.
I think that that ultimately will take place. The United States wants to see elections take place. We know -- the United States knows that Sistani and his followers want the direct elections.
But I think what the United States is going to insist upon is saying, "Yes, we should have majority rule, provided we have protection for minority rights." That's going to be key to having any sort of survival of a democratic system in the region.
CLANCY: Final question, and that's on the Summit of the Americas. You've been inside Washington, in the White House. How seriously does the U.S. government really take Latin America?
I know they seem them as allies and partners in need and certainly partners in trade, but there's some doubts by the Latin Americans that the U.S. even takes them that seriously.
COHEN: Well, I can only tell you from my own experiences that we took them very seriously. I made many, multiple trips to Brazil, to Argentina, to Chile, to Central America throughout my Senate career. I think it's very important.
It's important to us strategically to have a North-South dialogue, as opposed to necessarily always East-West. And it's important that we build our relationship there. There have been evidence of failure -- the potential of failed states in Latin America could pose a threat to the security of the United States because of the economic issues, allowing terror groups to go in, to infiltrate, to build support and then start to export that terrorism to the United States.
So it's very important politically, culturally and certainly from a security point-of-view.
VERJEE: Former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen. It's good to see you. We'll see you next week.
COHEN: See you next week.
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 January 13, 2004 - 12:33:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Now for more on the controversy over O'Neill's remarks and a host of other issues we're joined by...
ZAIN VERJEE, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: The former U.S. defense secretary, William Cohen. He is our regular weekly contributor on discussions of events that happened in the news.
He now has the Cohen Group, an international business consulting firm.
Mr. Cohen, it's good to see you here.
WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Good to be here.
VERJEE: O'Neill's comments, first of all. What do you make of them? I mean, they are a lot of opponents of the administration saying, "See? With those comments, that's proof that the administration exaggerated the case for war in Iraq."
What do you think? Do you think it's credible?
COHEN: Well, obviously, he sat in on many meetings in the White House and his comments can't be dismissed cavalierly.
I think it's going to take a really close examination of exactly what access to information did he have at the time, what documents is he referring to before people are able to make a judgment whether or not this was some -- his assumption or whether or not it was a well-founded conclusion.
But it's rather unusual for cabinet members to be writing memoirs during the term that their president has served and the term that they served.
It has been done before, certainly. David Stockman wrote about his experience in the Reagan administration. We had Robert Reich wrote about his experience in Bill Clinton's administration. So it's not unprecedented.
But in this particular case, it certainly is going to fuel the debate over whether or not the justification for going to war in Iraq was the one that truly was good for the American people.
VERJEE: The Bush administration officials are also saying, "Look, now what's the big deal here?" Because during the Clinton administration, there was policy and planning on Iraq about regime change in Iraq then, as well.
COHEN: I think we have to distinguish between what the Clinton administration meant in terms of regime change and what was meant by the Bush administration.
During the Clinton administration, the regime change was hoped that it could be brought about through internal revolt, by supporting groups from the inside that would bring about a regime change on the part of Saddam Hussein.
But you may recall that even Secretary of State Powell, when asked about regime change at one point, he said, "If Saddam should let the inspectors back into the country to do their job, that would constitute regime change" under his, or the State Department's, interpretation.
I think that others within the administration who thought regime change meant getting rid of Saddam Hussein by external force, if necessary.
So there was a difference between the Clinton approach, which was foment if we could or foster debate within Iraq to bring about a removal of Saddam by people from within, rather than a military force being used to expel him.
CLANCY: A report by the Army War College, by a noted professor there, saying that it was a strategic mistake to go to war in Iraq, because it spreads the U.S. military too thin and because it actually distracts from the war on terrorism.
Your view, you were secretary of defense?
COHEN: Well, you may recall that while I was secretary of defense, there was some criticism coming from current members of the administration to say that we were stretched too thin, that we had, quote, "hollowed out the military."
I took great exception to that, because the military was not hollow. Yes, we were being stretched thin with involvement in Bosnia and Kosovo, but we were not a hollow military.
And we now have essentially the same military but doing far more than they were doing during the Clinton administration. So we have stretched that force even more than they were ever stretched during the previous four years.
CLANCY: But is it a strategic mistake?
COHEN: Well, time will tell whether it's a strategic mistake or not. I think that, basically, Saddam being removed is important for stability in the region. Whether he ever imposed an immediate type of threat to the world, to the United States, is very much in doubt, in question.
VERJEE: On a political front, still staying in Iraq, one of the stories coming out today, being run by an influential Shiah, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, coming out and saying, "We want direct popular elections in Iraq."
Bremer is saying that, you know, "We agree with that idea but just not now. There's not the time; there's not the infrastructure."
But both sides aren't budging from those positions. And effectively, putting them in a collision course, you think, that would raise questions about a weakening security and a weakening political stability?
COHEN: I think it's putting them on a course of compromise. I think that Ayatollah Sistani is setting out the need for direct elections, with Jerry Bremer saying, "It's too soon. We can't put the right kind of system in place to ensure the integrity of the process." Leaves room for reaching some kind of appropriate compromise.
I think that that ultimately will take place. The United States wants to see elections take place. We know -- the United States knows that Sistani and his followers want the direct elections.
But I think what the United States is going to insist upon is saying, "Yes, we should have majority rule, provided we have protection for minority rights." That's going to be key to having any sort of survival of a democratic system in the region.
CLANCY: Final question, and that's on the Summit of the Americas. You've been inside Washington, in the White House. How seriously does the U.S. government really take Latin America?
I know they seem them as allies and partners in need and certainly partners in trade, but there's some doubts by the Latin Americans that the U.S. even takes them that seriously.
COHEN: Well, I can only tell you from my own experiences that we took them very seriously. I made many, multiple trips to Brazil, to Argentina, to Chile, to Central America throughout my Senate career. I think it's very important.
It's important to us strategically to have a North-South dialogue, as opposed to necessarily always East-West. And it's important that we build our relationship there. There have been evidence of failure -- the potential of failed states in Latin America could pose a threat to the security of the United States because of the economic issues, allowing terror groups to go in, to infiltrate, to build support and then start to export that terrorism to the United States.
So it's very important politically, culturally and certainly from a security point-of-view.
VERJEE: Former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen. It's good to see you. We'll see you next week.
COHEN: See you next week.
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
