Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Road Ahead in Libya; Kidnapped Under Gadhafi Regime; U.S. Troops Out of Iraq; Obama News Conference
Aired October 21, 2011 - 12:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Top of the hour. I'm Suzanne Malveaux.
Want to get you up to speed.
We begin with new video from Misrata, Libya. We want to warn you, this is quite disturbing, quite frankly.
It shows Moammar Gadhafi's body in a big cooler. Libya's new leaders say that DNA tests confirm that it is Gadhafi. They say he is being buried today according to Islamic law.
Well, the United Nations Human Rights Office and Amnesty International want the former dictator's death investigated. They say that Gadhafi's head wounds suggest that he could have been executed.
NATO is meeting on Libya now at its headquarters in Brussels. Ambassadors are expected to announce an end to the Libyan military mission.
We're going to hear from there any moment. We're going to bring that to you live as soon as they speak. NATO enforced a no-fly zone over Libya to protect civilians from Gadhafi's fighters.
Well, a woman who lost her daughter on the downed Pan Am Flight 103 says that Gadhafi's death gave her the best day of her life since December 21, 1988. Two hundred seventy people died that day, when a bomb brought down that plane over Lockerbie, Scotland.
A man whose brother was on board sums up his feelings on Gadhafi's death.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRIAN FLYNN, BROTHER OF PAN AM 103 VICTIM: I was thrilled, and I didn't expect to have that reaction. I've been dreaming about this more than 20 years, but it was always with the sense that you don't want to be the vengeful one that thinks, I want my brother's murderer killed, but in a way you do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Libya accept responsibility for the bombing back in 2003. Some families feel that Gadhafi personally ordered the attack, but that was never proven. Two days of violent protests and one death didn't stop Greece's parliament. Lawmakers approved a plan to cut about 30,000 jobs and further gut paychecks and pensions for government workers. The European Union demanded these new belt-tightening measures before it would give Greece more bailout money.
Flooding in Thailand's capital, Bangkok, is about to get a lot worse. Officials plan to open floodgates to allow high water to flow towards the sea. That's going to put much of the eastern part of Bangkok under water but keep larger parts of the city relatively dry.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We were further into this neighborhood just a little earlier today, and we were thigh- high in water. There were people who were desperately trying to save any possessions they could from the ground floor of their houses and trying to move it to higher ground. Some people were evacuating and trying to take all their possessions on any boat that they could find, any plastic tarp, any Styrofoam, even, anything that would actually float.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: This year's harsh monsoon season has caused flooding across an unusually large area of Thailand.
A Russian rocket hauls two European satellites into space today. The pair will eventually be part of a constellation of six to eight satellites that are going to make up Europe's global positioning system. It's going to be a commercial rival for the American GPS system.
Wells Fargo says oops, sorry. Some customers opened their September bank statements to find other people's statements mixed in with their own. Wells Fargo blames a faulty printer.
It's offering affected customers free identity theft protection for a year. That error happened with statements mailed to South Carolina and Florida addresses, and reports say that more than 4,000 customers were involved in Florida alone. The bank did not confirm that number.
More jubilation in Libya today over the death of Moammar Gadhafi. But once the celebrations end, this country faces a tough road ahead.
The National Transitional Council has to chart a new course for Libya, and it's not going to be easy. Analysts say that the leaders have to respond quickly to the people's basic needs. So we're talking about providing water, power, repairing building Libya's infrastructure. And the new government is going to have to overcome differences as well. So we're talking about tribal and regional tensions.
There's also the question of how to incorporate former Gadhafi supporters into a new Libya. And the leadership, it's going to need to secure all the weapons that are still circulating around the country to make sure they don't end up in the hands of criminals, as welling a gangs.
But for now, Libya celebrates. Last hour, I talked by phone with journalist Ben Farmer, who was in Sirte about the scene there today.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEN FARMER, REPORTER, "DAILY TELEGRAPH": It's full of rebels still celebrating, but it's quieter than yesterday. There's still happy fire, still celebratory fire in the air, machine guns and the odd rockets and rocket-propelled grenade. But also, there's a kind of a relaxed sightseeing feel to it.
People are driving around, taking photographs of the bombed buildings and the bombed streets, which have seen so much blood shed in the past two weeks. There's also a lot of rebels who are starting to make their way home. These aren't professional soldiers, these are teachers, engineers, a lot of students, and they fought now for eight months, some of them. And after the success of yesterday, they've started to pack up and make their way back to their families.
MALVEAUX: Ben, there's been a lot of curiosity around Gadhafi, and particularly the way he was killed, and now his body. We are looking at more pictures now of people who are just lining up to get a glimpse, to get a chance to see his body.
We're taking a look. Those are the pictures there. We saw those pictures earlier. It looked like it was a supermarket refrigeration unit where he was brought forward, and people who were just standing around, milling around.
Do we know anything more about what will happen with Gadhafi's body?
FARMER: All we know is that the National Transitional Council has said that he will be buried according to Islamic ritual. But we believe he will be buried secretly in Misrata. I think they are attempting to prevent creating an event which could be a focus for any Gadhafi loyalists that are still around. And also, they don't want to create a scene or grave which could become a focus for pilgrimage in the future.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: Here's a rundown of some of the stories we are covering over the next hour.
First, how will Libya's transition government make real lasting changes for the good of the people? I'll talk live with Libya's new ambassador to the United States.
And he was kidnapped and brutalized by Gadhafi's forces. Hear what "The New York Times" Beirut bureau chief thinks about the death of Moammar Gadhafi.
And then, find out what the largest study ever done on cell phone use and cancer has found.
Also, what do you get when you have an open mike? A street in Pakistan and people talking about America.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I really like America, and its he always been a dream -- my dream to go to America.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I love your people, but I'm sorry to tell you that your government is run by the rascals.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And later, scientists discover a new planet being formed. We've got the pictures.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: A group of journalists covering the fighting in Libya found out what it was like to be held captive under Moammar Gadhafi's regime. They were kidnapped in Libya in March. They were released into custody of Turkish diplomats six days after they were captured.
Anthony Shadid was one of those journalists. He is the Beirut bureau chief for "The New York Times," and he joins us now via Skype from Beirut.
And, first of all, thank you for being here with us.
Your gut feelings, your reaction to Moammar Gadhafi's death?
ANTHONY SHADID, BEIRUT BUREAU CHIEF, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Well, you know, I think it's another milestone on this long path that's ending in era that a lot of us were familiar with in the Arab world. I remember when I went to Tripoli after it fell, I was struck by a sign that was familiar to me. It was the same sign that I had seen when we were released from captivity in Libya.
Back then, the sign had read, "Forty-two years of permanent joy." He was referring to the 42-year reign of Moammar Gadhafi.
When I went back to Tripoli, after the capital fell, I saw the same sign. I'm not sure if it was the same sign, but it was the same slogan, and someone had scrawled out, "Forty-two years," and they wrote in red, "The first year of permanent joy."
I think Colonel Moammar Gadhafi's death, first and foremost, marks the end of an era. And it's clear across the Arab world that his kind of rule, that utterly arbitrary rule, is no longer going to be acceptable.
MALVEAUX: And Anthony, you were there in the early days, about a month after the uprising began. Did you ever think that this day would come? SHADID: You know, you figured it might come. It was so clear in the conversations you had with people, especially in those newly- liberated towns like Bata (ph), and Dudima (ph), in the east, that he could never re-exert his power, his authority over the country.
I think the question back then was, how long would it take? And it did take months.
You know, we're seeing a new stage of these Arab revolts and these Arab revelations. The uprisings that took just weeks in Egypt and Tunisia have dragged out far longer in places like Libya. They could take even longer in places like Yemen, Syria, Bahrain. People there even talk about years at this point.
MALVEAUX: Sure. And you experienced -- it was a harrowing experience, being kidnapped in Libya. Clearly, it must have been a frightening ordeal.
What was that like? Did you think you would make it out alive?
SHADID: It was a frightening ordeal, there's no question. I think we feared probably for our lives only on that first day.
I think from then on, it was kind of a window on what utter and arbitrary power represent. And oftentimes, how bizarre Colonel Gadhafi's world was.
I'll never forget going into the safe house where we were kept in Tripoli for a few days, and there was nothing to read in the house at all except for five volumes of Shakespeare that had been translated into English. And I remember back then Colonel Gadhafi had, at times, claimed that Shakespeare was of Arab origin. There's something --
MALVEAUX: Anthony, you've done a lot of reporting from the region -- I'm sorry, I'm losing you. Can you hear me?
SHADID: I can hear you, yes.
MALVEAUX: OK. I just wanted to follow here.
You've done a lot of reporting in the region here. What do you think is next for Libya and this new government? What do you think is going to be the greatest challenge for folks there?
SHADID: Well, I think the challenges are immense. The National transitional Council had said we have to wait until the fighting in Sirte ends, we have to wait until Colonel Gadhafi is captured or killed before we take on the real challenges.
Well, the day of those challenges has arrived, and everything from dealing with foreign influence that comes from NATO's intervention, dealing with reconciling disparate clans and regions, dealing with how to divide the vast resources of Libya, are formidable challenges for any country, especially a country like Libya, that has very little of a government left. MALVEAUX: All right. Anthony Shadid, thank you very much for your perspective. And, as always, we're glad you're safe. We appreciate it.
SHADID: Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Well, the largest study ever done on the connection between cell phone use and cancer got a surprising result. We're going to take a look at the findings and what the skeptics are saying.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: We've got some breaking news. Want to go to our own Chris Lawrence, who's at the Pentagon. This is regarding withdrawing U.S. troops out of Iraq.
Chris, what is the news? What do we know now?
CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Suzanne.
A U.S. official is now confirming to CNN, to us, that all U.S. troops will be out of Iraq by the end of the year. The U.S. troop presence there will be down to virtually zero.
Now, there will be about 150, 160 that will be there basically just to facilitate the sale of weapons to Iraq as the years go by, and also the U.S. Marines, who always guard the U.S. embassies. But again, a very negligible force, a force that's present in a lot of countries around the world. But we are hearing now that U.S. troop presence, for the most part, will be virtually zero by the end of the year.
We're also told -- my colleague Dan Lothian at the White House reported just a little while ago that President Barack Obama had a secure video conference call with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki just about 45 minutes ago, and I want to refer back to just a few days ago. My colleague Barbara Starr talking to a separate official, a defense official in this case, who told her that negotiations between the Iraqis and the Americans over extending the U.S. troop presence broke down, in part, over the issue of immunity. And Barbara's reporting indicated that the U.S. forces obviously wanted to keep and really mandated that the forces would keep their immunity, and the Iraqis could not agree to that.
Why is immunity so important? Because if you look even at the Iraqi constitution, it starts with the line, "No law will conflict with Islam." It's a very simple line, but in practice, it means -- it raises a number of questions. From the mundane, what if an American- Muslim soldier converts to Christianity? What if an American soldier criticizes Islam in the course of his work over there?
All of this could mean that they could fall under Iraqi law and be tried in Iraqi courts, something that obviously the U.S. government is just not willing to agree to -- Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: Chris, we are just getting some information now that the president is going to be making a statement about this matter, about withdrawing U.S. troops out of Iraq and what you had reported there, about the fact that all of them, you were saying, will be pulled out by the end of the year. But help our viewers understand, if you will, the importance of this.
We know the president had this conference call with Maliki, who -- and these negotiations that took place. Why was it so important that these U.S. troops that were going to be there had this kind of immunity and that this deal broke down?
LAWRENCE: Well, it sort of -- you know, just to be fair, it's sort of anticlimactic when you look at the fact that the U.S. and Iraq had this status of forces agreement that really mandated that U.S. troops be out by the end of the year. But there was so much discussion that went on over the past year from both sides about extending that, so the law on the books was clear that the U.S. would be out by the end of the year. And that's been the case for some time, for several years now.
But there have been a lot of discussions that the Iraqis would like to have a smaller -- maybe numbers were tossed around in the 3,000 to 5,000 number range of American troops who would stay on as trainers, as advisers, perhaps even a quick reaction force if need be. But again, this issue of immunity became very, very important.
And again, I refer back to some of Barbara's reporting, it just being an issue that the two sides could not seem to reconcile on the Iraqi side. They had to have parliament approve this.
They just were not able to get a consensus over allowing U.S. troops to stay with that immunity. For them, it could be a sense of national pride, of sovereignty for the nation.
On the U.S. side, to allow American troops to operate in a hostile war zone without that immunity, opening them up to Iraqi prosecution and Iraqi courts, I mean, again, I mentioned some of the mundane cases, but if you go back at some of the egregious crimes that a small number of U.S. troops have perpetrated while in Iraq, I think back to 2006, when we had -- I believe it was five U.S. troops who were charged with the rape and murder of a teenage girl after killing her family. You know, one of those troops was convicted in a civilian court here in the U.S., the rest went through the court-martial proceedings.
But again, without immunity, they may have faced prosecution under Iraqi law, with Iraqi punishment, in Iraqi courts.
MALVEAUX: Great explanation. Thank you very much, Chris. Stay with us, if you will.
I want to bring in Anthony Shadid. We just spoke with him. He was also the former Baghdad bureau chief for "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post."
So, Anthony, I want you to put that hat on, if you will. I covered President Bush. One of the things that was key was protecting U.S. troops from lawsuits and from some sort of Iraqi law, that they would get into some kind of trouble, that they didn't have the ultimate protection. It sounds to me like they were not able, under the Obama administration, to come up with some sort of agreement.
What do you make of the news?
SHADID: Well, I think it's hard for you to see an Iraqi politician that would agree to that kind of demand, to be honest. I mean, for so many years, the very idea of Iraqi sovereignty was pretty much trampled under the idea of an American occupation, the presence of so many U.S. troops on the ground there. I think at this point, where at least there is an idea of the government, they are trying to assert some kind of independence, any politician that's going to go out on a limb and say they would grant immunity, a very sensitive issue in Iraq, would be, at least politically, for an Iraqi politician, disastrous.
MALVEAUX: And is Chris still with us?
Chris, I want to ask you a question here.
Do you suppose -- I'm sorry. We've lost Chris there.
I understand that Wolf Blitzer is joining us out of Washington.
Wolf, the fact that you had President Obama and you had Nuri al- Maliki on this conference call earlier in the morning trying to negotiate, and now this announcement that's going to be coming from the president later today, what do you make of that power play between these two leaders?
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": Well, it was clear to everyone who was watching this very closely that the U.S. really wanted to maintain a military presence in Iraq. The Obama administration was thinking maybe 3,000 U.S. troops, maybe 5,000 U.S. troops.
The troops -- the status of forces agreement, as you know, Suzanne, was supposed to end -- does end at the end of this year, so they were negotiating a new agreement, precisely to keep a few thousand American troops there, mostly as trainers, as advisers, helpers for the Iraqi military, which still needs a lot of help. But the government of Nuri al-Maliki didn't want any U.S. troops, certainly not with the status that they used to have in the past. And it does represent a significant setback.
Even earlier today, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, John McCain, was on television saying that this is going to basically embolden the Iranians. This is what the Iranians, Iraq's next-door neighbor, wanted, the complete removal of U.S. military forces from Iraq. And it's only going to strengthen strategically Iran's hand in the region. That's what the critics will say. And Nuri al-Maliki has been cozying up dramatically in recent months and, indeed, in recent years, to the Iranians under the -- I guess the sense that Iraq's going to have to live with Iran forever, and the U.S. is going to be pulling out sooner rather than later.
So, as a result, it is going to cost some heartburn, I'm sure, for a lot of people. It's going to cause some significant concern that the government of Nuri al-Maliki is going to move away from the U.S., towards the Iranians, and that Iran could pick up an important strategic advantage in that part of the world.
Already, we've seen, Suzanne, as you know, the government of Nuri al-Maliki defending, like the Iranians, the president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, and that's caused a lot of concern here in Washington as well.
So, all in all, eight years after the U.S. sent about 150,000 troops into Iraq, to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein after, what, $1 trillion, thousands of American troops lost, and maybe tens of thousands of Iraqis, if not more than 100,000, it puts up in the air a lot of questions about what the long-term impact of this U.S. operation in Iraq's going to be. I assume the president is going to address some of these questions when he goes into the White House briefing room. I think it is coming up in about 20 minutes or so.
MALVEAUX: Yes. We know he's going to be making a statement about this, Wolf.
Two questions come to mind, Chris, that I want to toss to you.
First of all, do you think that this represents a threat, a national security threat, the fact that you're going to have U.S. troops pulling out ahead of time than expected or desired by the administration?
And secondly, how do we suppose this is going to look? How is this going to unfold?
LAWRENCE: Well, to your first question, I mean, there's obviously some concern. I was embedded with a group of American troops. It was actually a joint unit, an American-Iraqi unit, that was positioned right on the eastern border of Iraq, almost -- they could look across and basically see Iran.
And I remember about a year-and-a-half ago talking to some of them, and just -- you could hear them talk about the fact that there were a lot of tribal loyalties that crosses the border. They talked about how difficult it was to sort of keep Iran out. They said a lot of these families have been going across this border for hundreds and hundreds of years, and it's very hard to tell them this is one country and this is another.
He also -- one of the young captains made a good point to me. He said, "Look, Iran doesn't have to operate under the same constraints we do. They're not operating under a status of forces agreement like we are to be out by a certain time." So he said, "Yes, there's a tremendous amount of Iranian influence there, especially on the border." And you have to wonder about how much that can be curtailed without a U.S. presence there.
As to your question about how it will work, it's already working. Just yesterday, they closed down the U.S. Division North, the military did, up in northern Iraq. It leaves the U.S. military on I believe about 18 bases in Iraq. They're down to about 39,000 troops.
We reported last weekend that a one brigade that was supposed to be one of the very last to pull out of Iraq was actually coming home early, and some of the family members told us then that the reason they were giving for why the troops were coming home early was because the U.S. and Iraq had not been able to reach an agreement. So the move is already on. I mean, we've seen massive convoys, 400 trucks hauling 14,000 pieces out at a time where there's just been a massive exodus of material out of the country.
MALVEAUX: Right. All right. Chris Lawrence, thank you very much for filling us in on the breaking news, as well as Wolf Blitzer and Anthony Shadid.
We thank you very much for all of you participating.
We're going to have more on this breaking news story, but the bottom line here, U.S. troops pulling out of Iraq by the end of the year.
We'll have more after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: We're following the breaking news story. The headline here virtually all U.S. troops are going to be out of Iraq by the end of the year. That is the current status of forces agreement with Iraq dictates.
They -- the change here is that the United States and Iraq was unable to come up with an agreement regarding immunity for U.S. troops that would have stayed in Iraq beyond 2011. There are larger implications as well that this calls into question the national concerns of the United States whether or not they pull out too quickly out of Iraq and also the influence of neighboring Iran.
This is something Iran had hoped for. I want to bring in our Wolf Blitzer out of Washington to talk a little bit about the political picture here, Wolf, the big picture, in that region because this is not something that the Obama administration wanted to pull out all of those U.S. troops as quickly as is going to be necessary as the Iraqis are dictating.
WOLF BLITZER, HOST, CNN'S "THE SITUATION ROOM": Right. The Defense Secretary Leon Panetta had made it clear in recent weeks that he was hoping that at least 3,000, maybe 5,000 U.S. troops could remain in Iraq to train Iraqi forces, maintain a military presence there. Remember the United States still maintains a military presence in South Korea, in Japan, in Germany. They were hoping that the U.S. would have a military presence in Iraq for years to come, but the government of Nuri Al-Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, has made it clear.
That the U.S. troops would not have, as you point out, that same immunity that they currently have had other these past eight, almost nine years in Iraq and that was a non-starter as far as the U.S. is concerned.
We're told the president made one last-ditch effort in a secure video conference with Nuri Al-Maliki from the White House and Nuri Al- Maliki in Baghdad. Apparently, that has failed and now the president is about to go into the White House briefing room in about 15 minutes or so, maybe less.
And tell all of us what's going on. The agreement with the Iraqis was always that all U.S. troops would be out by the end of this year, but the hope was that some, a few thousand, could remain under some new terms to be negotiated.
But those negotiations have now failed. John King is here, Gloria Borger is here. We're getting ready to hear the president, John. This is for some seen as a setback for the Obama administration.
But for others this is what the president said he would do, get U.S. troops out and they're coming home.
JOHN KING, HOST, CNN'S "JOHN KING USA": He did want that residual force. Why? Not so much for the situation inside Iraq, but to send a message to Iran, to have a U.S. presence in the region at a time when, to be honest, this administration an even at the end of the Bush administration.
They were concern that Prime Minister Maliki is too cozy with Iran, too cozy with Syria, that he's not been a U.S. ally even thought it was the United States military that brought about ultimately the fact that he can be the leader in Iraq.
So that is the concern and main purpose for residual troops is to send a message to Iran that the United States has a semi-permanent presence here. That having been said, this will probably help the president at home politically in the sense that his own liberal base didn't want to go into Iraq to begin with and wanted to get out yesterday or the year before.
So in that sense in this political environment at home, this is likely to help the president. We will hear from some conservatives that this is a setback. Hard to blame the president in the sense that they could not negotiate an agreement to give U.S. troops immunity, but you will hear some conservatives say this is dangerous.
BLITZER: Yes, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman, they will say this represents a significant setback, Gloria. And I think there will also be a sense, those Iraqis who are very pro- American will feel like let down right now because the pro-Iranian group in Iraq presumably will have the upper hand right now without -
There will be a significant U.S. diplomatic presence in there, a lot of civilian contractors, but you know what? No U.S. military forces and a lot of Iraqis who love the United States and are grateful to the United States will feel that they've been undermined.
GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. But when Maliki tells military officials that he doesn't have the votes to provide this kind of immunity for American troops, it is a huge problem for the United States.
I'm sure that's what the president will be saying. But also in terms of the Republicans here, you mentioned Joe Lieberman, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, how many more can you go beyond that?
Because when you look at the Republican presidential field and you look at the sort of isolationist tendencies there, they will, some of them will applaud this.
BLITZER: Ron Paul will be thrilled.
BORGER: Maybe Mitt Romney will not. But on the other hand, most Republicans are saying this is an issue we cannot afford and you look at American public opinion.
We have a recent poll from May how the president is handling this situation in Iraq, 54 percent of Americans believe he's handling it just fine, and they all knew about the December 31 withdrawal date.
BLITZER: As we get ready, Suzanne, for the president of the United States, very important historic moment and it's interesting, it comes the day after we learned that Gadhafi has been killed in Libya.
On this day, the president will make the formal announcement that despite U.S. efforts, all U.S. troops will be out of Iraq by the end of this year. The U.S. had wanted, as we pointed out, a few thousand, 3,000, maybe 5,000 U.S. troops to remain open-ended.
But that's apparently not going to happen unless there is a change of heart on the part of the Iraqi government of Nuri Al-Maliki. Doesn't look like right now, but you don't know until the end of the year. They could still change their mind, if they want.
But as all of our viewers know, the Pentagon makes their plans. It is not easy logistically to remove troops sometimes from dangerous areas so that withdrawal is moving full speed ahead.
MALVEAUX: Wolf, just want to let you know. I just got on background from White House official that came to my e-mail. I want to read this to the viewers. It says, today the president will announce that we will fulfill our commitment and complete the draw- down of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of the year. This will allow us to say definitively that the Iraq war is over, that the partnership between the U.S. and Iraq will be a normal one between two sovereign nations. During their conversation, President Obama and Prime Minister Maliki strongly agreed that this is the best way forward for both countries.
This is coming from a White House official. This is what the president will be saying when he goes to the White House briefing room in less than 10 minutes. A very significant development here.
Essentially this White House official saying that the president will say that definitively that the Iraq war is over and that the partnership between the U.S. and Iraq will be a normal one between two sovereign nations.
I want to go to Chris Lawrence at the Pentagon. Chris, what does this mean in terms of the practical movement, movement of the troops, of the resources, equipment on the ground, getting it out of Iraq and what that means for bringing our men and women home?
CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Suzanne. I mean, they've got anywhere around 14,000 troops moving at any time to move this material out. I think they moved already 1.5 million pounds of equipment out with about 800,000 to go.
I think there is though a danger in equating all American troops out with all Americans out. Because it does a disservice to the tremendous amount of work that the State Department now has to undertake as of January 1st.
The U.S. embassy in Iraq is the largest American embassy in the world. There will be that contingent there that will protect the embassy. Also the United States is going to keep selling arms to Iraq so you will have that 150 or so troops that will be there to facilitate the sale of those arms to Iraq.
But again, you get back to what the State Department now has ahead of it. With no U.S. troops really at all there, they're going to have a staff of maybe 5,000 private security contractors to make sure that they can safely get around the country.
Not only the huge embassy there in Baghdad, but Kirkuk, Erbil, the State Department will have a number of offices around the country. A lot of those security contractors are actually Americans. They can be ex-military people so you want to make sure that we're saying all Americans troops are going to be out of Iraq. Americans will still be in Iraq.
MALVEAUX: That's an important distinction, Chris. And also outside of Iraq, where are the biggest bases? Where will U.S. troops be stationed? What are the important areas so that there is still some sort of presence in the Middle East, the eyes are still on Iraq and some of the other hotspots in that region?
LAWRENCE: Obviously, the first one that you would point to would be Kuwait. You know, where the U.S. military staged in order to launch the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
I was speaking with a defense official earlier this week who said, no matter what would happen in terms of this agreement, you know, towards the end of the year. He said there would still be possibly a U.S. military presence there in Kuwait.
That possibly if the issue of immunity could be worked out at a later date, perhaps those troops could come in on a limited basis to provide support or assistance with particular missions, say training, that that was a possibility that was still out there.
That that book hadn't necessarily been closed, depending on how the issue of immunity could be worked out. But, yes, I think Kuwait would be the first place you would look to if the U.S. was going be to sort of keep an eye on the region.
MALVEAUX: All right, Chris, thank you very much. We're going to have much more on this breaking news right after a quick break. The president will be going to the briefing room in about less than 5 minutes. We are told to make the announcement that the Iraq war is over.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: We've got breaking news that we are following. President Obama to be speaking at the White House briefing room within just minutes to announce the end of the Iraq war.
A full withdrawal of American troops out of that country. Want to bring in Wolf Blitzer out of Washington to talk a little bit more about this, Wolf.
BLITZER: A very dramatic historic moment, March 2003, 150,000 or so U.S. troops went into Iraq. Most of them deployed from Kuwait and they removed Saddam Hussein within a matter of only a few days.
Now eight years, almost nine years later, all U.S. troops will be out by the end of this year. The president getting ready to announce the end of the war as far as the United States is concerned in Iraq.
Let's go to our chief White House correspondent Jessica Yellin. She's over in the briefing room right now. We expect the president to caulk out, make a statement, not necessarily answer questions. What are you hearing, Jessica?
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, they just came in an removed the president's remarks, it looked like. So we're not sure what that means. If there will, perhaps, be a slight delay here, Wolf.
But we don't know if he's going to take questions or not. We do know that, as you have been reporting, that the president is going to say that the Iraq War is over. We know more than $1 trillion, 4,400 -- more than 4,400 American lives, upwards of 100,000 Iraqi lives lost. And now the White House will tell us that this war is over. The question is, is mission accomplished, as George Bush had proclaimed at one point?
This president, as we know, ran saying that this war would be -- come to an end. And so he is going to fulfill that promise. But the question again remains, especially in light of this Iranian plot that we had been reporting on not so long ago, where does Iran's influence stand in this region. That's a question you raised. No doubt it will be a question that remains high on many people's minds in this city and around this country.
And as you hear, a two-minute warning. So the president will be out here very shortly, Wolf. We'll hear what he has to say for himself in less than two minutes.
Wolf.
BLITZER: Yes, all right, Jessica, sit down, get ready for the president.
Gloria Borger is getting some information as well. What are you picking up?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: In communicating with an administration official on the Iran question that Jessica was just speaking about, this official says that -- and I'm reading from my Blackberry here -- it's our strong sense that Iraqi nationalism and resistance to Iranian influence remain a powerful force among all Iraqi political factions. And so the case is clearly going to be made that we have seen Iran defeated time and again in its attempts to determine outcomes. And so what they're clearly saying here is that Iraq can stand on its own two feet.
BLITZER: And, John King, there's no doubt the Iranians will declare victory with U.S. forces out of their neighbor, the country of Iraq.
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely they will declare victory. And not to get into a dispute with the senior administration official, but one of the reasons Nuri al Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister, cannot go to the parliament an say pass the new status of forces agreement that allows 3,000 or 5,000 Americans to stay an give them immunity as they now have, that if there -- whether it's a car accident, whether it's an accidental shooting, whether it's anything on the panoply of things that can go wrong, American troops now have immunity. They are deal with through the U.S. military justice system.
Nuri al Maliki says he can't get the votes in parliament. Why? Because the parties in the parliament, the religious parties that have good relationships with Iran, are dominant right now. And the White House would tell you, in a private conversation, they're concerned not just about the parliament but about the president, about Maliki's relationships with Iran and with Syria. So they need to put the best public face on this. But you can be certain they are concerned.
And as we talk about the importance of this today, the big question is, Chris Lawrence made the point about that big embassy, the largest one in the world, what will it be like in two years and four years and five years? Will there be a good relationship between the United States and Iraq? At least working relationship? Or will it deteriorate because of those cozy ties with Ahmadinejad and Iran. That's a big question and it's a, in some ways, a sobering question.
BLITZER: And the president is here. So let's listen.
(BEGIN LIVE COVERAGE)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Good afternoon, everybody.
As a candidate for president, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end for the sake of our national security and the strength of the American leadership around the world. After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011.
As commander in chief, ensuring the success of this strategy has been one of my highest national security priorities. Last year, I announced the end to our combat mission in Iraq and to date we've removed more than 100,000 troops. Iraqis have taken full responsibility for their country's security.
A few hours ago I spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki. I re- affirmed that the United States keeps its commitments. He spoke of the determination of the Iraqi people to forge their own future. We are in full agreement about how to move forward. So, today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America's war in Iraq will be over.
Over the next two months, our troops in Iraq, tens of thousands of them, will pack up their gear and board convoys for the journey home. The last American soldier will cross the border out of Iraq with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops. That is how America's military efforts in Iraq will end.
But even as we mark this important milestone, we're also moving into a new phase in the relationship between the United States and Iraq. As of January 1st, and in keeping with our strategic framework agreement with Iraq, it will be a normal relationship between sovereign nations. An equal partnership based on mutual interest and mutual respect.
In today's conversation, Prime Minister Maliki and I agreed that meeting of the higher coordinating committee of the strategic framework agreement will convene in the coming weeks. And I invited the prime minister to come to the White House in December as we plan for all the important work that we have to do together.
This will be a strong and enduring partnership. With our diplomats and civilian advisors in the lead, we'll help Iraqis strengthen institutions that are just, representative and accountable. We'll build new ties of trade and of commerce, culture and education, that unleash the potential of the Iraqi people. We'll partner with an Iraq that contributes to regional security and peace, just as we insist that other nations respect Iraq's sovereignty.
As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces. Again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world. After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant. Just as Iraqis have persevered through war, I am confident that they can build a future worthy of their history as a cradle of civilization.
Here at home, the coming months will be another season of home comings. Across America, our service men and women will be re-united with their families. Today I can say that our troops in Iraq will definitely be home for the holidays.
This December will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war. I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq. We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort.
And finally, I would note that the end of war in Iraq reflects a larger transition. The tide of war is receding. The draw-down in Iraq allowed us to refocus our fight against al Qaeda and achieve major victories against its leadership, including Osama bin Laden.
Now, as we remove our last troops from Iraq, we're beginning to bring our troops home from Afghanistan where we've begun a transition to Afghan security in leadership. When I took office, roughly 180,000 troops were deployed in both these wars. And by the end of this year, that number will be cut in half. And make no mistake, it will continue to go down.
Meanwhile, yesterday marked the definitive end of the Gadhafi regime in Libya. And there, too, our military played a critical role in shaping a situation on the ground in which the Libyan people can build their own future. Today, NATO is working to bring this successful mission to a close.
So to sum up, the United States is moving forward to a position of strength. The long war in Iraq will come to an end by the end of this year. The transition in Afghanistan is moving forward and our troops are finally coming home. As they do, fewer deployments and more time training will help keep our military the very best in the world. An as we welcome home our newest veterans, we'll never stop working to give them and their families the care, the benefits and the opportunities that they have earned.
This include enlisting our veterans in the greatest challenge that we now face as a nation, creating opportunity in jobs in this country. Because after a decade of war, the nation that we need to build and the nation that we will build it our own. An America that sees its economic strength restored just as we've restored our leadership around the globe.
Thank you very much.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about Iran, sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you worried about Iran?
(END LIVE COVERAGE)
BLITZER: All right, so you heard the first question, what about Iran? The president deciding he wasn't going to answer any questions, so he walked out. Some of his aides, though, will be answering some questions and I assume there will be some significant questions about what happens in Iraq at the end of this year when all is said and done.
Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, is there. I assume he or one of the national security advisors to the president is going to answer some questions right now, because there are a lot of unanswered questions. But the president declaring definitively, as far as the United States is concerned, by Christmas, New Year's, the war for the U.S. in Iraq is over.
John King, Gloria Borger watched as closely as I did. About six minutes the president spoke. Made the case that things are moving in the right direction. But as you know, John, there will be critics.
KING: There will be critics, there will be questions, there will be doubts that this new Iraq and the current Iraqi leadership will not say good-bye, good riddance to the United States military and then continue to build stronger ties with Iran and Syria and others in the region who, frankly, the United States has severe issues and problems and troubles with.
And it is choosing time in the region. President himself mentioned Gadhafi. We see the changes in Egypt. We see the changes in Tunisia. We don't know where all these changes are going, but we do know it is dramatic realignment in the region and the future of Iraq is a question mark. And with no U.S. military presence there, will the government have less influence? Yes, there will be a big diplomatic presence.
But I think it was quite interesting what the president said, though. The first word out of his mouth were, as a candidate for president in 2008. So he put the politics in his statement. In his very first statement, he captured the politics of the moment. Tide of war is receding. He mentioned essentially we'd be out of Afghanistan soon as well if he gets his way. A very carefully crafted statement by a president who then ended by saying, we've got a lot of problems here at home. That's what I'm going to worry about.
BLITZER: Gloria, hold on for a second, because Jessica Yellin is in the briefing room. I know a briefing is about to begin. But before it does, Jessica, just talk a little bit about the news here, the president sort of skipping over the fact that he had wanted Leon Panetta, the defense secretary, had wanted the U.S. military and wanted to maintain a presence of about 3,000 or 5,000 troops in Iraq, but failed to reach a status of forces agreement. A new one with the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki. The president insisted he spoke with Maliki earlier in the day. Everything was great. But a lot of people who have been following this very closely will suggest not necessarily all that great.
YELLIN: That's right. He insisted this is what they both wanted and that, in fact, he and Maliki are on the same page on this and Maliki will be here -- he was invited here in December.
What I heard the president say repeatedly is that essentially this was a promise that he's made good on. You heard him say over and over that he pledged to bring a responsible end to this war, that he promised to draw down troops, both here and in Afghanistan, and that he is making good on those pledges. Again, remember, this is the man who ran in 2008 against the war in Iraq and is seeing a conclusion to that war.
The president also reflected on the Gadhafi -- the end to the Gadhafi regime. And no doubt we are going to hear these themes in the election that's coming up in 2012. A man who did not run on his national security credentials but very well could use that to bolster a leadership claim going into 2012 that on the national security front, at least on foreign policy, that he has had what this administration perceives as some successes.
Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, Jessica.
Gloria Borger is here as well.
The president is saying things are moving in the right direction in Afghanistan as well. There's still 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. As far as Afghanistan is concern, he's pledged to keep those troops there through the end of 2014. Another three years plus. So they're not coming home from Afghanistan all that quickly.
BORGER: No, but he -- but he was very careful to make the case that we're beginning to withdraw our troops and we -- and that number -- the numbers will continue to go down, make no mistake about it. So what he was talking about was essentially promises made, promises kept. I agree with John, this was sort of pointing it out to the American people.
By the way, we got Osama bin Laden, we're beginning to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan, what occurred in Libya yesterday was partly because of us, and now we're moving forward on our foreign policy. He said, quote, "from a position of strength." And after a decade of war, we are focusing on the problems at home, which means jobs, jobs, jobs. The only thing he didn't say is, pass the jobs bill.
KING: And I hate to say this, and they don't like this at the Obama White House, but the parallel to George H.W. Bush is striking. After the first Persian Gulf war, George H.W. Bush had stratospheric poll ratings when it came to foreign policy. This president can claim bin Laden, al Awlaki, you know, the United States' role in the Libya crisis. He's keeping his promise, as he says, to bring the troops home from Iraq.
We can debate whether he wanted more or not. But especially to his base, this is great news. And yet -- and yet people give him credit on that. A lot of Republicans give him credit on that. But the number one issue in the country is the economy and will these accomplishments on foreign policy, how will they translate a year from now when people decide whether he gets four more years. If you go back to the George H.W. Bush experience, they don't -- didn't count for much.
BLITZER: Yes.
