Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Has Military Assets in Place Near Iraq; Terrorist Fighters Push Closer to Baghdad; GM Recalls Three Million More Cars

Aired June 17, 2014 - 09:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROOKE CABRERA, HOST, NEWSROOM: More manpower, more fire power. The United States now has military assets in place in and near Iraq. Top of the list, those 275 armed forces that were deployed to protect Americans in Baghdad and the surrounding region and more options are still on the table. CNN's Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr explains.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: As the fighting rages on in Iraq, the Pentagon is moving more fire power and manpower into the region to prepare for whatever President Obama orders. Already at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, dozens of marines and army troops have moved in to beef up security. A top priority, evacuate all Americans at the embassy if it comes to that.

The aircraft carrier George H. W. Bush and five other warships are now in the Persian Gulf. More than 500 marines and dozens of helicopters are on standby if an evacuation is ordered. The former top U.S. commander for the region warns it may not be enough.

GEN. ANTHONY ZINNI (RET.), UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS: I also think we ought to have a more robust capability to evacuate Americans if necessary. I don't believe just the carrier itself. I would like to see an amphibious ready group in there, more helicopters, more marines.

STARR: Fighter jets on the carrier could be used to strike ISIS targets. The U.S. has increased drones surveillance over western and northern Iraq in an effort to gather more intelligence to share with Iraqi forces for targeting ISIS on the ground. But a former U.S. commander in Iraq says it will be very tough.

MARK HERTLING, LIEUTENANT GENERAL, FORMER IRAG COMMANDER: It's the same reason it was so hard to target them when we had 160,000 troops there. They intermingle with the people. You know, I think some of the media has shown these truck convoys going down the roads, and I think the uninitiated might say what's so hard about that? Let's just drop a couple bombs.

STARR: President Obama has ruled out troops on the ground, but can there be effective military strikes without putting some troops in to find out exactly where ISIS fighters are operating.

ZINNI: I do believe we ought to put special forces teams on the ground. With the Iraqi forces, certainly with the Kurds in the north and also with the Jordanians, they can provide some of that ground intelligence.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

CABRERA: Joining me now is Barbara Starr there at the Pentagon and retired Army Major General and CNN military analyst James "Spider" Marks. Good morning to both of you.

Barbara, I want to start with you. The president has basically ruled out combat troops in Iraq, but the fighting we see inches closer to Baghdad. How much longer can the troops stay on the sidelines?

STARR: Well, the president definitely ruling out U.S. forces on the ground. Of course still the question is would he order air strikes. I think you've hit the exact point, Ana, the question is Baghdad right now. This is the debate going on inside the administration, has ISIS been slowed down enough that it could give -- on its way to Baghdad, that it could give the Iraqi regime time to regroup, protect Baghdad, strike back at ISIS and slow their advance.

If ISIS makes it to Baghdad, if they start to lay siege to Baghdad or even shell parts of the city, that really becomes a quite different problem, preserving the Iraqi current government, preserving the regime and doing whatever the U.S. military has to do to get Americans out of harm's way. Baghdad right now may well be the turning point one way or the other.

CABRERA: General Marks, the president suggests these troops could be used in the security in Baghdad if it collapses or maybe even for training purposes, which seems, at least to me not fully understanding, it seems kind of odd that they might be doing training during a time of an emergency, but maybe you can explain that a little bit better, and also talk a little bit about what other purposes some troops might serve.

JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS, RETIRED ARMY MAJOR GENERAL, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Ana, great question and thank you for having me this morning. There are several missions that these soldiers -- these troops need to perform, and clearly, I think, they're an insufficient number to do the various tasks that are exigent, that need to be addressed right now. No. 1, there has to be an ability to stop the bleeding so that ISF forces can get some distance between themselves and ISIS, so that you can preserve the government in Baghdad.

That's mission No. 1. Maliki has to exist, day after tomorrow, so we can move forward, irrespective of our tenuous relationship with Iran.

Mission No. 2 is among those 300 some odd soldiers that are on the ground, clearly there will be an advisory role as well as intelligence sharing. Mission No. 1 of achieving distance is there has to be some targetable intelligence and the United States can generate that, can share that with ISF as well as help develop its own target folders for strikes that might be provided for ISF in support of their operations.

And then the advisory role is really all about capacity building. We're well beyond the point of capacity building as a first step. We've been doing that for years. Obviously it's failed so far. That doesn't mean everything is lost. We have to be able to gin that back up. That's a necessary step but not an essential step, critical step right now.

CABRERA: I was just reading a "New York Times" article, actually from a whole decade ago. 2004, we were in Iraq, it was titled, "The Strategy to Secure Iraq Did Not Foresee a Second War". And in this article, you criticize the U.S. strategy at that time saying we didn't have enough troops for intelligence, not enough troops to act on that intelligence and they, the insurgents, took advantage of our limited numbers.

How do we avoid that happening here with the resistance to put troops on the ground? And do you think, knowing what we know of the president's proposals, that we're proceeding in the right way?

MARKS: Past is prologue, isn't it? It's a very difficult situation we're in right now. Clearly the assumption was, is that the U.S. effort over the course of the last decade to grow and build ISF was going to be sufficient to give Iraq a new start, to assist in their democracy moving forward, and to secure itself through a professional military force. Sadly what has happened with ISIS is that the ISF, the Iraqi Security Forces, have crumbled in those engagements with ISIS. Clearly, what that means is there isn't within ISF a shared objective that the notion of protecting the government of Iraq gets beyond sectarian interests, but can be more encompassing of the entire Iraq and the notion that Iraq moving forward has a future.

What we have seen in combat is that's just not the case, and that the growth of a professional force clearly takes time. That's what we're seeing right now is a force that's immature in its infrastructure and now it's really, really struggling.

CABRERA: And we have no time. Barbara, are you hearing any more about how quickly the U.S. might take some action?

STARR: All indications from the White House, Ana, are the president has made no decisions about how he wants to proceed, but you just have to look at the map. You can see that all of the ships and aircraft are in place for any contingency that comes, whether it is evacuating measures from the embassy or engaging in air strikes.

CABRERA: All right. We're ready, at the ready at least, you could say. Barbara Starr, Major General James "Spider" Marks, thanks to you both.

Still to come, terrorist fighters gaining ground and pushing closer to Baghdad. Up next, why long-term success in this region could hinge on a strategy in Syria.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CABRERA: Thanks for staying with us. As violent clashes spread all across Iraq, hundreds of U.S. troops are on standby now in that region preparing for possible military action. Last night, President Obama met with his national security team to discuss a possible military response to these deadly gains we're seeing by the terrorist fighters of ISIS.

This morning pressure is mounting for the U.S. to take action. Right now, ISIS fighters are just 35 to 40 miles north of Baghdad.

Let's bring in the Vice President of the Woodrow Wilson International Center and author of "The End of Greatness" -- Aaron David Miller. Aaron, I know you have a lot to say about all this. Do you think the U.S. needs to put boots on the ground to repel militants?

AARON DAVID MILLER, EXPERT IN MIDDLE EAST AFFAIRS: Well boots on the ground in large numbers, absolutely not. We've seen this movie before. It cost 1,600 plus American lives including Afghanistan, trillions of dollars expended, much of American credibility to produce a situation with today leaves Iraq a fractured and dysfunctional state even before ISIS began making its advances in the last several weeks.

So no, I think the President is going to be under enormous pressure to act and he has to act to protect the embassy. He may well be put in the position, if they can identify ISIS targets in formations, concentrated or moving along corridors or highways to use air strikes. Because if you can't fix the situation in Syria, how do you stop the bleed into Iraq of Sunni jihadist.

But in the end the reality is no amount of military pressure or force is going to substitute for what fundamentally ails Iraq, and that is what it has become, which is a sectarian battleground in which the Iraqi Prime Minister, using American political, economic, and military support, has maintained a Shia dominance throughout the country. And it is -- it is that problem, bad governance, sectarian triumphalism that is feeding and accelerating ISIS gains.

CABRERA: And this is something that goes way back. In fact you've called Iraq a trap for the U.S. in the past. And what I'm hearing you say is maybe there isn't a good military option. But to be more blunt, should the U.S. get involved here at all?

MILLER: Well, look, you know, as I said before, I don't think we have many options. We certainly don't have many good options. I mean the President is going to have to choose between an awful migraine headache on one hand and the pain from a root canal operation on the other. There is no comprehensive solution to what ails Iraq. There are a series of outcomes. And the administration has now put into position with ISIS massacres, some of the worst we've seen in recent years of Shia combatants, with the reality that it is ensconced itself in certain enclaves, the administration is under pressure and is going to have -- he's going to have to act. It just has to be extremely careful and doesn't get taken in by the notion that blowing up a lot of stuff, even ISIS, is going to fundamentally alter the basic problem in Iraq. Iraq is driven and plagued by two realities that are hard for nations to change. Number one, what it is: and its demographic balance, which is now hopelessly skewed in a way that alienates Sunnis and Kurds. And second, where it is. It is in a neighborhood in which other states, Iran and Syria, even though there's chaos and civil war there, are contributing to the problem.

Look, if you could cut a deal with the Iranians, I mean a real deal, in which they would pressure Maliki to either leave and create -- find another Shia leader that was willing and able to create a real, real set of policies driven by good governance and a fair confessional balance, then I think you could actually begin to imagine this country with a better future.

But give up the notion that you're going to see any time soon any sort of comprehensive solution. You're going to see an outcome. And the question for this President is can he fashion an outcome through regional cooperation, through limited and wise military intervention.

CABRERA: I have a quick question for you.

MILLER: Yes.

CABRERA: -- Aaron, I don't mean to interrupt but I want to make sure we just touch on this a little bit because we don't have a lot of time to talk.

But I know that you've already talked about Syria a little bit and that involvement. I mean realistically are we -- are we not focusing on the bigger picture when we're just honing in on Iraq because that's sort of where the bleeding is happening right now. But obviously Syria is sort of where ISIS was able to build up strength and establish a base and establish enough power to do what's it's doing, so should any strategy do you think include both Syria and Iraq in how we approach this?

MILLER: Well certainly, if there was a way to reverse the current situation which has made the Iraqi-Syrian border essentially completely porous, in which ISIS will continue to move its forces and elements across the border.

No, the Syrian bleed really is much of the source of this contagion. The problem is, again, the President, if he had an opportunity in 2011 to do more, and frankly I'm not sure that was the case, really faces a situation now where he has a profoundly sectarian civil war which again is immune to American military action, so again we really are caught in a situation in which American military power right now either in Syria and/or Iraq are going to provide limited gains and benefits.

We need to also focus on the reality that ISIS over time, in these enclaves could in fact present over time, not next Tuesday, a threat to our interests in the region and actually to the continental United States, but that is a longer term threat and we face that today in Yemen, we face it in Pakistan, we're going to face it in Afghanistan and we face it as well in Somalia and parts of North Africa. So this is a long war.

(CROSSTALK) CABRERA: And we know the American people want to get to a solution that is a long term solution. Not just a short term solution because a lot of America is not wanting to be in this situation in Iraq, been there, done that, and unfortunately, Aaron David Miller, we're going to leave it on that. Thank you so much for your time.

NEWSROOM is back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Here we go again.

General Motors dealing with yet another round of recalls. This time more than three million cars are affected. It deals with an ignition switch defect in which a key chain with quote "extra weight" can turn off the car, if you can believe it, if you hit something like a pothole. Now this year alone the company has recalled more than 20 million vehicles worldwide.

Christine Romans is here with more. And Christine everyone is thinking, it sounds like a broken record.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENTT: Yes. It's recall fatigue. And a lot of drivers say is this different than the last recall about an ignition switch? Yes it is, it is the different ignition switch altogether designed by the same engineer who no longer is with the company and a heavy key chain if you go over a pothole as Ana could cause a problem.

So there are going to be some fixes in the next few weeks. They're going to put a sleeve inside that ignition switch. They don't have to swap the whole switch out but that should stop the problem.

In the meantime GM is saying take off any heavy key chain adornments you have on your key chain to prevent any kind of jostling, 3.4 million new vehicles and that's a lot. This is recall fatigue for a company whose CEO is going to go before Congress this week to try to justify for what is happening there and the way forward. 20 million recalled vehicles so far this year.

Can I tell you though sales are up, month-after-month, we have seen sales rising, so even though people are now going to have to talk about the Chevrolet Impala, the Cadillac Brazille, the DTX, the Buick LaCrosse, the Lucerne, the Regal. They are still buying other GM cars. Sales up 13 percent in May and the stock is actually up 1.4 percent since the first big recall happened.

(CROSSTALK)

CABRERA: And what's up with that, do you think?

ROMANS: I think that people when they go to buy a car, it's a very big purchase and there's been so much pent-up demand for vehicles people are still buying them. We do know though will cost General Motors, they have already taken -- put some profit aside in the first quarter to pay for it. They're taking more money -- hundreds of million dollars setting it aside to pay for this most recent recall. So there's still financial hurdles for General Motors even as customers are still buying the cars.

But isn't it frustrating that when you spend so much money for something, you expect it to work.

CABRERA: Right.

ROMANS: You expect it not to have a keychain that

CABRERA: Things that inconvenience. They have to go take it in, even if it's something simple.

ROMANS: That's why there are so many recalled cars on the road. A lot of people don't take their recalled cars in.

CABRERA: Which is kind of scary to think about.

ROMANS: Yes.

CABRERA: Right. Christine Romans -- thanks for that.

Thanks again for joining me. The next hour of CNN NEWSROOM with Don Lemon after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)