Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs This Week
Petraeus Testimony Nears; Mexican Prez Defends His Citizens in U.S.
Aired September 09, 2007 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KITTY PILGRIM, HOST: Tonight, the war in Iraq could be at a turning point. The U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, prepares to give crucial testimony to Congress.
And anger over the Bush administration's deal with Mexico -- a deal allowing Mexican trucks unrestricted access to the United States.
All that and much more straight ahead tonight.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS THIS WEEK -- news, debate and opinion -- for Sunday, September 9. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
PILGRIM: Good evening, everybody. The U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, will give testimony to the Congress on Monday on the progress of the war in Iraq. General Petraeus will give his assessment of whether the surge is working.
Republican and Democratic lawmakers will be looking for any indication that U.S. troops can begin withdrawing from Iraq. President Bush, who visited al Anbar Province in Iraq, said the United States will only withdraw from Iraq from a position of, quote, strength and success.
Joining me now, three of CNN's best correspondents: our senior Pentagon correspondent, Jamie McIntyre; our congressional correspondent, Jessica Yellin; and our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider. And thank you all for being here.
I have to start with the whole issue of troop levels. General Petraeus was earlier in the week quoted as saying he could accept or was willing to consider a drawdown of a reported 4,000 troops. That's something he shot down and said that the U.S. force level should be maintained.
Just to set this in context, under the current plan, if no adjustments are made, the U.S. troops would drop from more than 160,000 to 130,000, beginning in March or April, 2008. But we're currently at 168,000 troops because of rotations.
Jamie, you sit at the Pentagon every day. You hear these numbers, you hear the analysis. What's your assessment of whether we can draw down troops or not, or will there be acceptance of it?
JAMIE MCINTYRE, SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Anybody who's paying any attention at all to what General Petraeus has said and whay all of his commanders have said, is not going to be shocked when they discover that he's not recommending any troop drawdowns until that surge begins to essentially peter out next year.
You may recall, when the troops went in, they went in at a brigade at a time, a brigade a month -- took five months to get it built up. It's going to take the same amount of time to sort of wind down. And General Petraeus believes the surge is working -- not fast enough, needs more time. And he is not recommending that they bring any troops out.
Now, some of those published reports that suggested that he could accept it or that he would consider it, that's technically true. If the president decides he's going to pull a brigade out to make a point, the general is going to accept that. But it won't be on his recommendation.
PILGRIM: Well, let's talk about -- President Bush had the surprise visit to Iraq last week. He said that successes have been made and he also seemed to indicate that a troop withdrawal was possible in the coming months.
Bill Schneider, what do you make of this?
BILL SCHNEIDER, SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: The president is making a gesture here to the reality of politics, that Americans wants troops out of Iraq -- at least, they want to see the beginning of a withdrawal.
You know, the Democrats are intensely frustrated here. They want to end the war. So there's some pressure from some Democrats to give in, reach a compromise, and change from a deadline for withdrawal to a goal, in which case probably the president can just ignore it and say -- and then nothing will happen. Or, they can insist on a firm deadline, but it still doesn't look like they can get enough Republicans to come onboard and pass it with a filibuster-proof majority, and then, nothing will happen. But at least they will expose the Republicans, a lot of Democrats argue, as being intransigent on the issue.
PILGRIM: Jessica, I would like to get you in on this, because to some observers, it seems that congressional leaders are showing some signs that they might be willing to compromise a little bit on the issue. And I point to Virginia Senator John Warner, who said the president should pull troops by Christmas. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid signalled that he would be willing to work with the Senate Republicans.
Are we seeing a sort of bartering going on in Congress at this point?
JESSICA YELLIN, CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's exactly what's going on. Democrats here are really groping to try to find a position that could allow for a compromise that would bring moderate Republicans onboard, so that they can get what Bill Schneider just referred to, that veto-proof majority, which would include a number of Republicans voting with the Democrats. The problem is, if Democrats allow for some of these compromises that Bill just mentioned, they risk losing some of the members of their own party -- some of the more liberal Democrats might refuse to go along with a piece of legislation that does not include a firm deadline for withdrawal. So they're sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place, and they're trying to just wait and feel out where the Republicans are going to be after Petraeus testifies next week.
And one of the things we see happening up here is that Democrats are trying to reposition on this testimony, trying to play down the importance of General Petraeus' testimony by pointing out that he has been wrong in the past in some of the data he cited. Harry Reid said that just today. And Senator Durbin has also said that he's worried that he might be manipulating the data. So, a real effort to put Petraeus in perspective.
MCINTYRE: If I could just jump in here a minute --
PILGRIM: Sure, Jamie.
MCINTYRE: One of the interesting dynamics about this whole argument is, there's a Catch-22 aspect to the arguments about what to do in Iraq. In fact, there's a Catch-22 on top of a Catch-22 -- kind of a Catch-44. And it's in this, in that, to the extent that there's progress, that creates an argument that it's time to -- we're making progress, we should leave. But it also -- there's a counterargument, we're making progress, we need to stay and ensure that progress.
And the same thing happens for the lack of progress: we're not making progress, it's time to go -- but, we're not making progress -- which is what's happening now -- and we need to stay and get that progress. And the argument that, well, the Iraqis aren't standing up, so we need to stay and help them, but they're only going to stand up when we leave. Every argument has this sort of Catch-22 aspect, and you end up, when you are arguing about what's going to happen, you just go round and round in circles.
SCHNEIDER: It reminds me of --
PILGRIM: Jamie, you're always the voice of common sense.
But you know, Bill, I turn to you for this. There's also the other Catch-22 of political posturing and trying to make hay out of this situation, which of course is reprehensible because we're talking about American lives. But this is exactly what's going on, isn't it?
SCHNEIDER: To some extent, it is. But the Democrats are very serious here. They want to end the war. And they don't know what's the right way to do it. The fact is, they don't have enough votes to force the president to do anything, unless they get more Republicans onboard. And they're kind of disappointed that, over the August recess, they weren't able to keep the pressure on the Republicans and get more of them to move over to the Democrats. And they don't think General Petraeus' testimony will work.
It was interesting, following on Jamie's comment, that, when the president talked about some limited successes in Iraq, I kept thinking of the famous comment made by Senator George Aiken back during the Vietnam war, who said, What we should do is declare victory and come home. Well, some people are talking about doing just that in Iraq -- we're succeeding, this is working, now we can get out.
MCINTYRE: Except, Bill, the real deadline for that is not and has never been now. It's really next spring, when the surge runs out. That's when they're really going to have to seriously consider a Plan B, if they don't have any more results to show than what they have today.
And more and more people, when they are thinking about Plan B and they're talking about declaring victory and leaving, they're talking about some kind of soft partition or de facto partition of the country.
PILGRIM: You know, Jessica, I'd like to get you in here, just with some thoughts about the political theater that's due to happen this coming week in Washington. This was, as you mentioned, was set up as a sort of make-or-break moment. Do you think that we'll now have a sliding scale and start talking about the spring. Or will this diminish in importance as they go forward in these discussions and this testimony, or will this gain in importance?
YELLIN: Well, right now, I think it will gain in importance, because the Democrats do feel intense pressure right now to force through some sort of legislation that makes it look, to their constituents, like they really are doing something.
The problem is, they're incredibly conscious of their low approval ratings right now. And Democrats, the leadership, really attributes that to the lack of a sort of unified policy on Iraq, any sort of legislation that's forced a change in policy. So they do feel they need to pass some sort of legislation that makes it clear that the Democrats have in some way taken a lead on Iraq, have done something to force the president's hand, even if it's something that just shows that Congress gets more oversight. They really do feel the urgency of doing something at least by early October.
MCINTYRE: Jessica, one thing they can do -- and maybe Bill Schneider would want to jump in on this -- is legislate something that's going to happen anyway. So, for instance, if they were to call for troop reductions by the spring, that's going to happen, and they could look pretty effective.
YELLIN: And actually -- I heard that from one person, who said, Let's just call -- one member of leadership said, Whatever happens, we'll just call it a victory -- sort of ironically, but --
SCHNEIDER: Yes, declare victory and keep on.
PILGRIM: Well, you know, I wish it were that simple. And, of course, the realities on the ground actually deny that strategy.
But we look forward to the testimony. Thanks very much for your analysis this evening on the issue. We have Jamie McIntyre, Jessica Yellin and Bill Schneider -- thank you very much.
Still to come, new insults from the Mexican president; our threat to our sovereignty. We'll have the story.
Also, pro-illegal alien lawmakers try to reintroduce their failed amnesty legislation piece-by-piece.
We'll have a special report -- War on the Middle Class.
And more recalls of dangerous imports from Communist China -- new evidence of corporate America's dependence on cheap overseas labor markets.
We'll have that story. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Mexico's president, Felipe Calderon, blasted U.S. government enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. President Calderon declared, quote, "where there is a Mexican, there is Mexico." Well, Calderon said the United States is persecuting Mexican workers in the United States illegally.
And as Casey Wian now reports, Calderon is demanding the United States stop enforcing its immigration laws.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Welcome to Mexico. Welcome to Mexico. Welcome to Mexico. At least that's how Mexican President Felipe Calderon apparently sees it. Calderon delivered his first state of the nation address at the Mexican National Palace last weekend.
FELIPE CALDERON, MEXICAN PRESIDENT (through translator): I have said that Mexico doesn't end at the border, that where there is a Mexican, Mexico is there.
WIAN: Calderon received a standing ovation after he criticized recent U.S. law enforcement crackdowns on illegal aliens.
CALDERON (through translator): I again strongly protest the unilateral measures taken by the United States Congress and government, measures that are making the persecution and humiliating treatment of undocumented Mexican workers worse.
WIAN: Calderon also renewed his demand for amnesty for the estimated 6.6 million Mexican citizens living illegally in the United States.
A day later, Calderon's comments were echoed by Los Angeles Catholic Cardinal Roger Mahony. Mahony held a Labor Day Mass and blessed the tools of workers in jobs largely held by illegal aliens.
CARDINAL ROGER MAHONY, LOS ANGELES ARCHDIOCESE: These wonderful men and women, our immigrant brothers and sisters, go to work not knowing if there's going to be a raid, not knowing if there's going to be separation from them and their children, not knowing what will happen next. All the time, they're helping to build up our society, our economy. And without them, we will fail.
WIAN: Like Mahony, Calderon seems to be taking advantage of every opportunity to criticize U.S. immigration enforcement efforts. The Mexican president met with recently deported alien Elvira Arellano. He promised to look into the possibility of obtaining a diplomatic visa for Arellano, so she can serve as a peace and justice ambassador and return to the United States.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN: Calderon appears to be trying to use illegal immigration to unite his politically divided country by catering to nationalist and anti-American sentiments in Mexico. Meanwhile, the Bush administration seems content to ignore Mexico's accusations. As one analyst puts it: "The White House is so focused on the Middle East, I'm not even sure it knows that Mexico exists -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Casey, these comments, obviously for domestic consumption in Mexico, but doesn't make them any less outrageous.
WIAN: Absolutely not. President Calderon is trying to unite his country. The congress is politically divided -- very sharply divided. He's trying to get fiscal reforms through. He is trying to get a budget through. And as one analyst puts it, the best way to do that in Mexico is to bash Uncle Sam -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Unbelievable. Thanks very much, Casey Wian.
Well, comprehensive immigration reform is back on the agenda of Congress. Now the legislation is starting debating this week, it's called the STRIVE act. That's an acronym for Security Through Regularized Immigration and Vibrant Economy act of 2007. That's quite a mouthful.
And as Bill Tucker now reports, the act would even allow more foreign workers into this country.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Months after dying in the Senate, comprehensive immigration reform is back and this time it's being brought back to life in the Immigration Subcommittee in the House.
REP. STEVE KING (R), IOWA: I'm a bit surprised when I received the notice of the hearing on a piece of immigration legislation. This clearly constitutes amnesty. The American people have spoken so forcefully against amnesty that the Senate was forced to reject it earlier this summer.
REP. SHEILA JACKSON-LEE (D), TEXAS: I believe the American people want this body to address this question. I was home in the district, and I can assure you that this whole question of immigration has not left the minds of the American people.
TUCKER: To call the STRIVE act ambitious is not a stretch. The bill is almost 700 pages long, with tidbits to tempt the most ardent of critics. It calls for an increase in border security, increasing the number of border agents, as well as the use of technology. It strengthens interior enforcement and creates a mandatory employer verification program.
REP. JEFF FLAKE (R), ARIZONA: As I mentioned, it's tough border enforcement. There's interior enforcement with biometric cards, so employers will finally have the tools. And it sets up a new worker program for low-skilled workers.
TUCKER: It also creates a path to what it calls earned legalization, what opponents call amnesty. Among the worker programs it creates is a new H-2C visa with a cap of 400,000 that offers a path to legalization for workers, their spouses, and their children.
JULIE KIRCHNER, FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM: By creating a massive new H-2C guest worker program and more than doubling the employment-based immigrant visas, the legislation floods the market with foreign workers willing to work for less and eager to compete with U.S. workers.
TUCKER: STRIVE would also expand the H-1B visa program cap from 65,000 to as much as 180,000 and create broader definitions for those who are exempt from the cap.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: Now the purpose of the hearing was declared to be for creating dialogue and exploring the issue of comprehensive immigration reform. Yet of the 12 witnesses that were heard from, only nine were there in support of the STRIVE act, while only two sat in opposition to it.
And all of these speaking in favor of the STRIVE act openly expressed the desire for that bill to pass out of committee, Kitty, and then into the House and pass out of the House and go to the Senate. They want to see this thing move forward.
PILGRIM: Just to cap this off, Bill, I mean, the increases in guest worker programs, what kind of numbers are we talking about?
TUCKER: These numbers came under criticism when this bill was in the Senate. Nobody knows where these numbers came from. The best guess is they came from business lobbyists who said these are the numbers, use these numbers. But they really are numbers that are pulled out of somebody's hat.
PILGRIM: But a significant increase.
TUCKER: Huge, potentially millions of people.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Bill Tucker. Well, coming up, American companies doing business in China. Now why aren't they doing more to protect American consumers from dangerous products? We'll have a special report.
Mexican trucks with unlimited access to American highways, we'll have a report on the possible threat to our national security.
And Middle East expert Fouad Ajami just back from a lengthy trip to Iraq. And we'll hear from him later in the broadcast, so stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: A Senate subcommittee is holding hearings on toy safety on Wednesday following a wave of recalls of dangerous Chinese-made products. The CEO of Mattel, Bob Eckert, and commissioners from the Consumer Products Safety Commission, are among those expected to testify. A representative of communist China's government has also been invited to testify. There's no word yet on whether that invitation has been accepted.
Communist China's president defended the safety and quality of his nation's exports to the United States, even after the recalls of millions of dangerous children's toys. Now American companies are discovering the hidden costs of doing business in China.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM (voice-over): The problem is so bad, President Bush complained about the recalls of Chinese products in his meeting with President Hu Jintao. U.S. consumers feel inundated with imports of shoddy goods, tainted food, and toxic toys, as well as reports of Chinese sweatshop conditions.
Suddenly, U.S. companies who outsource manufacturing jobs to cheap Chinese labor are discovering hidden costs.
SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D), NORTH DAKOTA: I think this is the downside of the global outsourcing of American jobs. You know, it did look like a free ride for American corporations, those that wanted to outsource jobs in search of cheap labor, in search of lower standards and organizations. Now what we see are the results of that.
PILGRIM: A so-called brand doesn't always mean U.S. quality anymore. U.S. companies can pay the price for substandard Chinese manufacturing. Mattel boasts its toy brand, but found its quality control compromised by Chinese factories.
And U.S. companies often can't control factory conditions in China. In many Chinese factories, workers can't report long hours or abuses.
CHARLES KERNAGHAN, NATIONAL LABOR COMMITTEE: All you have to do is go by the factory at 11:00 at night and see it's still operating. All you have to do is go by on a Sunday and see them working. PILGRIM: Mattel openly publishes audits of its Chinese factories on its Web site done by an independent auditor, the International Center for Corporate Accountability.
DR. PRAKASH SETHI, INTL. CTR. FOR CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY: Mattel is finding all these problems. There is no reason to believe that those problems don't exist for the toys and the electronics and all the other goods that are being made for other companies.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: It's clear many U.S. companies have lost control of the supply chain by depending so heavily on these Chinese factories. But ultimately, U.S. companies have the responsibility by law to U.S. consumers. And these factories have to be monitored much more carefully. You can find all the latest information on product recalls on our Web site, loudobbs.com.
Coming up, the Bush administration ignores the will of the American people and Congress and allows Mexican trucks to travel on our highways. We'll have a special report.
And later, we'll talk to one of the world's leading authorities on Iraq about the Middle East and about Iraq's future. Professor Fouad Ajami will join us.
And we'll have all the week's political news with three of the best political minds in the country. So stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone. I'm Tony Harris with a look at what's happening "Now in the News." Tropical Storm Gabrielle, it is expected to hit the Carolina coast tomorrow. But is it packing a powerful punch? For the answer, let's turn to CNN meteorologist Jacqui Jeras in the severe weather center.
What's the answer to that question, Jacqui?
JACQUI JERAS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Hey, Tony. Not so much, but it could get stronger actually between now and then. It's something that we have to watch very closely. And even though it's only a weak tropical storm, with winds at 40 miles per hour, that in and of itself can cause some damage.
Rip currents, beach erosion, some heavy rainfall is going to be expected. And those kind of winds can do things like blow around your lawn furniture, snap off some tree branches. So we could be concerned about power outages too.
There you can see, this is Gabrielle, and it is moving on up to the north and the west, heading toward the outer banks of the Carolinas. We don't think that will happen until maybe late, late afternoon into the evening hours for tomorrow. And you can just kind of barely see the beginnings of those outer bands pushing towards the coastline. They should be arriving overnight sometime. Here you can see the official forecast track, keeping it as a tropical storm, not reaching hurricane strength. It has got a lot of battles here to fight in order to intensify. It has got a little bit of wind shear. And the air here across the southeast is actually very, very dry, and so that is going to make it difficult for this thing to strengthen.
But we think it should ramp up to maybe 50 miles per hour or so, and skirt towards the Outer Banks, possibly making landfall here and then eventually curve back out into the open waters.
There is a cold front that is bringing some showers and thunderstorms across the Northeast and also the Ohio Valley. We think that Gabrielle will get caught up with that as it heads towards the Canadian Maritimes middle to latter part of this upcoming week -- Tony.
HARRIS: So when we're here tomorrow evening, we could have a story with Gabrielle, huh?
JERAS: Absolutely, yes. And we'll be here and we'll be all over it, let you know what is going on.
HARRIS: All right. Jacqui, appreciate it, thank you.
The U.S. military is airdropping aid to the remote regions of Nicaragua battered this week by Hurricane Felix. Largely cut off the from the rest of the country, many in the area never heard warnings that the monster storm was bearing down. The official death toll is near 100. But no one seems to know how many people may be missing.
A campaign coup for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Oprah Winfrey is hosting a fundraiser for him at her estate in Southern California. The Garden Party, which is going on right now, is sold out, 1,500 tickets at $2,300 apiece. We do the math, and that comes to more than $3 million.
Laura Bush recovering from outpatient surgery at this hour. Today the first lady underwent a two-and-a-half hour procedure at a hospital in Washington to relieve pinched nerves in her neck. The White House calls the minimally invasive surgery a success. Officials say Mrs. Bush is now resting comfortably at the White House. I'm Tony Harris. More news at the top of the hour. Now back to LOU DOBBS THIS WEEK.
PILGRIM: For the first time in a quarter century, Mexican trucks have unrestricted access to our highways. The Department of Transportation ignored protests about the threat to our safety and security and granted Mexican trucks the right to haul cargo anywhere in the United States.
As Casey Wian reports, up to 100 Mexican trucking companies will eventually be operating on our highways.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) WIAN (voice-over): Literally under the cover of darkness, the Transportation Department late Thursday launched its one-year pilot program that will allow hundreds of Mexican trucks unrestricted access to U.S. highways, that despite the objections of Congress, trucking unions, and border security advocates.
TODD SPENCER, OWNER-OPERATOR INDEPENDENT DRIVERS ASSOCIATION: The arrogance and the attitude that we're witnessing right now, that's going to try to shove this program through, open up the border, regardless of the views of the American people, regardless of the views of the Congress.
WIAN: Since 1982, most Mexican trucks have been restricted to 25-mile cargo transfer zones near the border. The Bush administration says it's meeting long-overdue obligations under the North American Free Trade Agreement and points out that U.S. trucks will now have greater access to Mexico.
BRIGHAM MCCOWN, FORMER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICIAL: For the first time ever, U.S. companies will be allowed to go south of the border. And so, my money is on the Americans, believe it or not, because I think Americans can compete, and I think we will do very well.
WIAN: Many say the deal compromises border security, American trucking jobs and U.S. highway safety. One congressman compares the Mexican truck program to an agreement later rescinded to sell several U.S. port operations to a company based in Dubai.
REP. STEVE KAGEN (D), WISCONSIN: America is not for sale. When President Bush arranged the Dubai Ports deal, the American people rejected it. And now the administration is attempting to do it again. Mexican trucks do not meet our U.S. standards, period.
WIAN: The final hurdle was cleared after the Transportation Department issued its response to deficiencies in the program uncovered by its inspector general. One example, concerns that regulators would not live up to their promise to inspect every Mexican truck involved in the pilot program every time it crosses the border.
That will be a tough task, considering more than 2,000 Mexican trucks cross at San Diego's Otay Mesa port of entry daily. More than 3,000 cross each day in Laredo, Texas. And at many crossings, Customs and border protection says it has a shortage of manpower and can't assist with the program.
Casey Wian, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Presidential candidate and Congressman Duncan Hunter is furious over Mexican trucks having unrestricted access to the United States. Congressman Hunter has been fighting the issue since it was first brought up under the guise of the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. Now Congressman Hunter gave Lou Dobbs his reaction to the Mexican truck deal. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R-CA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Let me tell you, Lou, I don't know if you saw my closing speech when we passed NAFTA in '94, but I gave the closing argument against it from the Republican side. And I predicted it would be disastrous for our country.
This is a piece of the NAFTA deal, the so-called trucking piece. This is going to allow every truck in Mexico, if they simply sign up with one of the 100 trucking companies, to access our borders.
And we're going to have -- you know, the drug dealers are going to have their best thugs behind these 18-wheelers moving those narcotics across. We'll have a big security problem. We have no transparency into the criminal records or driving records of the guys behind the wheels. We can't get that out of Mexico.
DOBBS: Yes.
HUNTER: It's a mess and I will do everything I can to stop it. And as president, I will do everything I can to stop this type of deal.
DOBBS: Well, let's go to these Mexican truckers being held to the same safety standards. This is what Congresswoman Nancy Boyda, a Democrat, as you know, had to say about the impact of this so-called pilot program by this so-called administration.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY BOYDA (D), KANSAS: On Friday, the courts ruled to let this program go forward for now. What a slap in the face to working people and to our families.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: What's your reaction, Congressman?
HUNTER: Well, I think Nancy is exactly right. And after I dropped a bill trying to stop the truckers from Mexico, I think Nancy followed with her bill about five hours later. And I think she's on the right track and we ought to stop this.
And -- but remember, when Bill Clinton signed this doggone thing in '94, part of the thing that he signed was that the trucking piece, which we all saw there. And they've been working for last 12 years to try to get the trucking piece into implementation.
DOBBS: Congressman...
HUNTER: They finally got it. It's bad for the country.
DOBBS: Congressman Duncan Hunter, we thank you for being here. Appreciate it.
HUNTER: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Still to come, crucial testimony this week on the course of the war in Iraq.
And our political roundtable will discuss the various options for our military, the Congress and President Bush. We'll also have expert analysis from one of the world's leading authorities on Iraq and the Middle East.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: The U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, is about to give Congress his assessment of the progress of the war in Iraq. And one of the nation's leading authorities on Iraq and the Middle East, professor Fouad Ajami, has just met with General Petraeus and other top officials in Iraq.
Now Fouad Ajami is professor of Middle East studies at Johns Hopkins University and the author of the book "The Foreigner's Gift." Professor Ajami gave Lou his opinion of the progress of the war.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FOUAD AJAMI, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, AUTHOR, "THE FOREIGNER'S GIFT": I returned with, you know, more hope than I had when I went to Iraq. It's always this case for me. I go to Iraq full of doubt. I find some unbelievable evidence of optimism. And we have an incredible soldier on the ground in the person of General Petraeus. We have a very able diplomat in the person of Ambassador Crocker.
They will report to the nation next week. They will tell us that the surge has worked. They will tell us that national reconciliation among the Iraq leaders is not -- hasn't fared as well. But they will bring us some hope that this engagement, this project in Iraq, will not come to grief.
DOBBS: The General Accountability Office today reporting that on 11 of 18 benchmarks, U.S. policy has failed.
AJAMI: Well, I surely wouldn't want the U.S. Congress to be given the same test, by the way, since your report about the dysfunctional Congress we have. These are very artificial benchmarks. But people really, in a way, I think they're judging the Iraqis too harshly and too severely.
This is a country in the throes of a civil -- of a war. And this is also a country hunted down, in many ways, cornered by its neighbors. You have the neighboring Arab states exporting all their troubles onto Iraq's side...
DOBBS: Syria, Iran.
AJAMI: Syria, Iran, the Gulf countries, whose money and whose jihadists find their way to Iraq. So I don't want to -- I wouldn't want to proceed on this benchmark. I'll tell you two things that that are very remarkable.
The Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr is really beaten. When Muqtada al-Sadr says he wants a six month cease-fire, it's because he has lost the war. And then the Sunnis in the Anbar province, where President Bush visited, the Sunni Arabs have turned away from al Qaeda and have turned away from the insurgency.
DOBBS: And the Sunnis, of course, a very, very small minority of the population.
AJAMI: Absolutely.
DOBBS: But at the same time, we have Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran saying it's a -- that there is going to be a worsening power vacuum, that Iran, without apology or in any way a veil over it, says it will fill that power void.
AJAMI: Lou, you've had me here before. I will come back again. The idea that Iran could claim Iraq for itself is ludicrous. I mean, the Iraqis are a tough breed. Iraq has its own sense of nationalism. And the most difficult equation -- the most difficult part of the equation for the Iranians in Iraq are the Shia of Iraq. They don't want to be students of Iran. They don't see themselves as pawns of the Iranians.
This is a country of 25 million people. They have their own wealth, they have their own resources. And the claim by Ahmadinejad is just of a piece with Ahmadinejad's own insanity, by and large.
DOBBS: His insanity, does it include his reference to the fact that Saudi Arabia would be his partner in filling that void?
AJAMI: Well, Saudi Arabia is not coming into Iraq, I assure you. The idea that the Saudis will come to the rescue in the Sunni Arabs of Iraq is a legend. And the Iraqis -- every single Iraqi Sunni Arab leader I talked to understands that.
DOBBS: The test for me is how soon and how many of our troops we can bring home.
AJAMI: Well, I think you're absolutely right. Your politics on the war are not different from mine in that way. We want to see our country succeed in Iraq. We want our troops back. And we have children there. We have relatives there. We have -- you know, we have our country invested there and we want this project to come to a good outcome.
DOBBS: Your best assessment? Withdrawal soon?
AJAMI: I don't think -- I don't think that's in the cards. I don't think there's a substantial American withdrawal. I think that it's probably about a year or so away.
DOBBS: Professor Ajami, thank you for being here. Fouad Ajami joins us next Tuesday evening, on the eve of -- on the evening of General David Petraeus' testimony to Congress on the progress, or lack of it, on the war in Iraq.
AJAMI: I look forward to it.
DOBBS: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: And coming up next, more on the war in Iraq and its political impact in this country. Three top political analysts and strategists will join us. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Joining me now with a look at the week's top political news, three of the best analysts and strategists in the business: Errol Louis with The New York Daily News; Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf; and Diana West with The Washington Times. And Diana, by the way, is the author of an important new book, "The Death of the Grown-up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization."
And Diana, thanks for being on the show with us today. Let's turn to Diana, first, as she's the most remote guest and she has a new book. And let's start with some of the reports that have already come out on Iraq, Diana. We have the GAO report, found 11 of the 18 benchmarks in Iraq had not been met. And General James Jones also concludes that Iraqi security forces would be unable to take control in the next 18 months.
And the White House assessment of the benchmarks is entirely different. Where do we stand or will we hit an impasse in the discussion next week when we get some testimony?
DIANA WEST, THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Well, I'm afraid of that impasse and I think it's coming, I think it's going to lock us down. The worst thing that can happen is if we debate whether the surge is working. There are so many more important questions to get to.
Namely, is the point of the surge -- the strategy behind the surge, which is Iraqi reconciliation, a functioning Iraq, is that where we want to sink American blood and treasure? Does that eliminate the jihadist threat coming out of, for example, a nuclear Iran?
This is the central question, what the Middle Eastern regional problems are, not what's going on in Iraq. But I'm afraid we're going to have a snipe and battle, a very ugly week on just that.
PILGRIM: One of the operative questions is, should troops stay in or should they start to be withdrawn? General Petraeus was rumored to support a 4,000-troop withdrawal. He's denying this in his most recent comments, Hank. So he seems to want to maintain. What do you think it will come down to, generals versus Congress on this issue?
HANK SHEINKOPF, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: No, sanity versus insanity. This is a larger issue here. This is not working. We can talk benchmarks. We're not going to meet them. We can talk about decent men trying to do their best, Petraeus is an example.
The facts are (INAUDIBLE) we have no long-term view of the region. We have never had a long-term view. We don't understand what the problems are. And we're heading into a disaster because our allies now believe throughout the world that we're weak and cannot meet our commitments nor do what we're supposed to do.
PILGRIM: You know, there's also a great deal of discussions about the mission of U.S. troops, maybe a shift in the role. And retired General James Jones did raise the possibility of a shift in how U.S. troops might act.
Let's listen to what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEN. JAMES JONES JR., U.S. MARINE CORPS (RET.): The gradual shift of coalition to strategic overwatch positions, accompanied by force adjustments is possible to envision. This is a very recent development. The gradual transfer of combat operations against internal threats to the Iraqi security force is possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: And yet, Errol, we hear that the Iraqi security forces are not capable. So how can we do that? It is very nice to suggest it, but...
ERROL LOUIS, THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS: It's a great idea, an internal monitor recently recommended that the level of corruption and deep collaboration with the insurgents meant -- within the Iraqi police meant that it should be entirely disbanded.
I think what's going to happen, and it's going to be unpleasant to watch, especially on the anniversary of 9/11, we're going to watch Congress try to trade troop strength and the number of brigades for withdrawal timetables or the language around timetables for withdrawal and it's going to be really kind of ugly.
And it won't get to that central question. I mean, earlier in this broadcast, the report from thinkers -- advanced thinkers like Colonel Yingling, who are starting to develop a new advanced and far more accurate and useful military doctrine for the United States, that's what needs to get debated, that's what needs to be ramped up and brought on-line as soon as possible.
But we're not going to see it anytime soon, and in the meantime we're going to continue to watch unfortunately bloodshed.
PILGRIM: Diana, you wanted to jump in for a sec.
WEST: Yes, I think -- one thing I wish people would start to consider is how to proceed without assuming that the destiny of Iraq is the destiny of the United States. And by that, I mean in our best national interest. We have tremendous national interests in the region. And yet we are sinking ourselves into nation-building, which is exactly what President Bush told us he would never, ever do long ago when he first ran for president.
SHEINKOPF: Look, it is also -- Diana is right. But let's bring it to another level. What we're doing is allowing the most extraordinary people in the world, our young men and women in the armed forces, to be used as dolls in a shooting gallery.
We're not being able to do their work and by the same token, being mercilessly slaughtered and having terrible things done to them. I mean, this is a terrible thing for the world to see, that the greatest military power in the history of the world can be abused this way by a bunch of people who are faceless and nameless.
PILGRIM: We seem to have a disconnect in perception with the Bush administration, however, this surprise visit to Iraq over the holiday weekend. Why is there this disconnect and this insistence that things not be somewhat adjusted to fit the reality on the ground?
Diana, do you think that this administration is capable of adjusting its perceptions?
WEST: I would like to say yes. But it does seem that there is a -- to use the psychological term, there is denial going on. There is such an emphasis on the surge itself, on some of the recent developments in the Sunni provinces where we've seen Sunnis fighting al Qaeda troops, formerly Sunnis who are attacking us.
These are being seized on as something much more significant, I believe, than they are because, of course, it doesn't get us any closer to a stable country, which remains the goal, and I think misguided goal.
LOUIS: And denial is a kind word. I mean...
WEST: OK.
LOUIS: ... what we've got here is an administration that's still trying to win this war as a P.R. war. I mean, it's no more accurate to stake the future of this conflict on the success of the surge than "mission accomplished" by steaming a couple of miles off the coast of San Diego and landing in a flight suit.
I mean, it's all perception with this administration, it's all spin. And we're so far past that that if the decision from the White House is going to be to just try and spin out the last 14 months of this administration, then militarily and politically, the disaster in Iraq is simply going to be extended.
PILGRIM: Well, 14 months is a very long time.
WEST: It's a long time, right.
PILGRIM: Hank. SHEINKOPF: They have failed at something very basic, Osama bin Laden's head is still not on a stake someplace where people can see it. He is still walking around. The people closer to him are by and large still walking around. That is the failure of this administration. And that is what makes us look like we're an incompetent set of fools as opposed to the most extraordinary democracy in the history of the world.
PILGRIM: Well, on that not, we will have to take a quick break. But we'll be right back with our political roundtable. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: We're back with our political panel: Errol Louis with The New York Daily News; Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf; and Diana West with The Washington Times.
And we were in mid discussion about Iraq. But let me switch into another geopolitical region, very important, and that's China. President Bush met with President Hu at the APEC Summit in Australia. Unfortunately he referred to it as the OPEC Summit. But we will overlook that gaffe.
And there's a great bit of worry right now about the relationship with China, given the trade imbalance and the amount of damaged and tainted and disastrous products that are coming to the American consumer.
Now here's what President Bush had to say about China. Let's listen to that first before we discuss.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our relationship with China is complex. On the one hand, we appreciate the opportunity to trade goods and services. We certainly hope that China changes from a saving society to a consuming society.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: It seems completely off the mark, a saving society -- it seems like he's talking about Japan actually. Why would you be that off the mark and why not bring up the real issues that we're talking about, American safety, the trade imbalance, the currency issues? Does it strike you as that we have no real grasp of the relationship with China, Hank?
SHEINKOPF: None whatsoever, we have about as much grasp on this administration of what that region is doing as opposed to what the other region that we just finished discussing, the Middle East, is doing.
What we have is a China that is taking American dollars in trade and building a blue water fleet and probably the most extraordinary military machine in that part of the world for a repeat of the 30s battle, probably with India, over energy. When he will get to talking about those serious things that impact directly in the United States, we will all be much better off.
PILGRIM: Yes. And further out, the military buildup is very worrisome, done basically through U.S. commerce with China. But the most immediate thing is that the toys on the floors of American homes are tainted with lead and are dangerous.
Diana, are we really losing in this relationship?
WEST: Well, I think that's very true. I mean, you were kind enough to mention my book earlier. But I think it is a "Death of the Grown-up" issue for American consumers who should have figured it out by now that by buying all the cheap Chinese stuff that's now proving to be quite dangerous, they -- we are actually enriching China and making that military buildup possible.
So I think we need to bypass the president on this one and start thinking about our own responsibility in this.
LOUIS: And then, Kitty, let me throw one more thing in the hopper. China is the number one enabler of the genocide Sudanese regime which is committing atrocities, which this administration has acknowledged and called genocide for years now...
WEST: That's a good point.
LOUIS: ... in Darfur. China is uniquely positioned right now to be put on the hook, not only because of the trade issues but because they're going to host the Olympics next year. They don't want to get the kind of bad publicity, if you want to call it that, in the eyes of the world that they very richly deserve.
This administration can and should start applying pressure right now.
PILGRIM: The human rights issues do appear to be swept under the rug in the light of just making nice for the Olympics. Is this the proper attitude that the United States should be taking?
WEST: No, I...
SHEINKOPF: This is not the proper attitude. We should be standing up. If we are the clarions of freedom, and if we're willing to put the bodies of our young men and women on the line, then certainly the president of the United States should do his very least, which is to put his mouth on the line, because we are paying the price.
PILGRIM: Let me bring up South Korea, because it's a very important issue. And the president got into a reasonably tough exchange with the president of South Korea. There's some worry that South Korea's alliance with the United States is very much strained at this point.
Let's listen to what the president had to say. South Korea wants us to formally end the Korean War. And here's what President Bush had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: Can't make it any more clear, Mr. President. We look forward to the day when we can end the Korean War. But that will end -- that will happen when Kim Jong-il verifiably gets rid of his weapons programs and his weapons. Thank you, sir.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: So he's linking to this North Korean weapons. Do you think that this was on target? Was this tough enough? And, Diana, I'll start with you, as you are most remote from us.
WEST: Well, yes, actually, I do agree with the president's assessment of this. But I find it fascinating in light of what we're experiencing in the Middle East. Korea was the first limited war that we fought. And we see some 50 years later we are still in a state of war and North Korea is still a problem.
This is not a good trend. We should take some lessons from this. This shows the limitations of limited war. And you really shouldn't get involved unless you can really finish a job.
PILGRIM: Errol, any thoughts on the issue?
LOUIS: Well, it's a little frightening to hear Diana say that since there was an opportunity to fight with nuclear weapons when troops were trapped -- or cornered at one point in the Korean conflict in the...
WEST: But now we're looking...
LOUIS: ... 1950s. Thankfully we did not trigger global thermonuclear war at that point. And hopefully it won't happen now. But I think you're right in the sense that it's not just about nuclear weapons. I mean, the war was not simply about that. The conflict -- the fact that this Cold War model of sort of let's spend them into oblivion and stay armed to the teeth right on their border, it worked with the Soviet Union, it hasn't worked with North Korea. Clearly some fresh, new thinking, an entirely new approach, is in order.
PILGRIM: All right.
WEST: But we lost 55,000 men in Korea and the problem is -- you know, that you talk about the nuclear problem. But we may be looking at a nuclear North Korea. I think we are.
SHEINKOPF: Yes, but what we're doing here is still fighting proxy wars. And the Cold War, the cost thereof is questionable as to whether it should have been done. And we fought proxy wars throughout it, to what end? Here, our ally is saying to us, guys, let's make something happen. I need to get people communicating. I need to get families together. I need trade. I'm isolated. We're saying, well, by the way, we'll let you know later. Not so good. PILGRIM: This discussion could go all afternoon. We can't allow it to. We will come back to do it another day. Thank you very much for being with us, Diana West, Errol Louis, Hank Sheinkopf.
And thank you for joining us. Please join us tomorrow. For all of us here, thanks for watching. Enjoy your weekend. Goodnight from New York. "THIS WEEK AT WAR" starts right now with Tom Foreman.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com
