Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Saturday

Interview With David Albright

Aired December 07, 2002 - 17:45   ET

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

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


CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: You have a situation here where Iraq says it has no weapons of mass destruction, and the White House claiming that Baghdad does have them and that the White House has the proof. David Albright is a former weapons inspector with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and he joins us live today. David, good to see you. One thing -- David, can you hear me?
DAVID ALBRIGHT, FORMER WEAPONS INSPECTOR: Yes, I can.

LIN: All right. One thing that is not clear to me, it's a question that Hans Blix is raising in Baghdad. If the Bush administration and the British have conclusive evidence that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, then why doesn't somebody tell him and his inspectors where to go to find the evidence and settle this matter right here and now?

ALBRIGHT: Well, they may. Certainly they have to wait for the declaration and then to go through the declaration and decide what information do they have that's specific, actionable that is not in the declaration. And so in a week or two, you may see the United States transferring information to the inspectors to use to try to prove that Iraq is not in compliance and that it has not listed everything it needs to list in the declaration.

LIN: Well, they can do that, but why not simply go to -- instruct the inspectors to go to a specific location and find the goods? I mean, physical evidence is going to trump whatever is stated in the paperwork, right?

ALBRIGHT: That may be how it happens, but the inspectors have to know where to go and what they're looking for. And so, the other side, from the other side of this, I mean, the United States has to determine will the information leak out and will the Iraqis get tipped off and move the material before the inspectors get there. They have to work out some procedures with the inspectors to make sure that there's adequate security of the information.

They also have to believe that war is not inevitable. I mean, if for example, they give intelligence information to the inspectors and they plan to attack Iraq anyway, they may worry that Iraq will get -- see that as a signal to move everything and the U.S. will lose its knowledge of where some of these things are hidden, and that Iraq doesn't know that they know that they're hidden there, but if they move them, then they don't know where they are.

LIN: That might make sense. Is there a security problem within the inspectors themselves? I mean, this is a multinational group of inspectors and there have been media reports out there indicating that not all of them can be trusted with the information. Do you feel that that might be the case?

ALBRIGHT: If there's a no-notice inspection using intelligence information, you can't really trust anybody. I mean, you have to spend a lot of time thinking through the security. Very few people will be notified within the inspection team. Maybe one or two will carry the vital information. And you have to assemble a team and work very hard to make sure that security is kept.

It's been done by the inspectors numerous times. So I mean, they know how to do it, and that can be recreated. So they can do it, but again, you know, people worry about it, and if the U.S. intelligence community has not worked with the inspectors, I mean, there does have to be a relationship established where they start to trust each other.

LIN: David Albright, I wish we had more time, but thank you very much for joining us this afternoon.

ALBRIGHT: Thank you.

LIN: All right, David Albright, former weapons inspector.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired December 7, 2002 - 17:45   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: You have a situation here where Iraq says it has no weapons of mass destruction, and the White House claiming that Baghdad does have them and that the White House has the proof. David Albright is a former weapons inspector with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and he joins us live today. David, good to see you. One thing -- David, can you hear me?
DAVID ALBRIGHT, FORMER WEAPONS INSPECTOR: Yes, I can.

LIN: All right. One thing that is not clear to me, it's a question that Hans Blix is raising in Baghdad. If the Bush administration and the British have conclusive evidence that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, then why doesn't somebody tell him and his inspectors where to go to find the evidence and settle this matter right here and now?

ALBRIGHT: Well, they may. Certainly they have to wait for the declaration and then to go through the declaration and decide what information do they have that's specific, actionable that is not in the declaration. And so in a week or two, you may see the United States transferring information to the inspectors to use to try to prove that Iraq is not in compliance and that it has not listed everything it needs to list in the declaration.

LIN: Well, they can do that, but why not simply go to -- instruct the inspectors to go to a specific location and find the goods? I mean, physical evidence is going to trump whatever is stated in the paperwork, right?

ALBRIGHT: That may be how it happens, but the inspectors have to know where to go and what they're looking for. And so, the other side, from the other side of this, I mean, the United States has to determine will the information leak out and will the Iraqis get tipped off and move the material before the inspectors get there. They have to work out some procedures with the inspectors to make sure that there's adequate security of the information.

They also have to believe that war is not inevitable. I mean, if for example, they give intelligence information to the inspectors and they plan to attack Iraq anyway, they may worry that Iraq will get -- see that as a signal to move everything and the U.S. will lose its knowledge of where some of these things are hidden, and that Iraq doesn't know that they know that they're hidden there, but if they move them, then they don't know where they are.

LIN: That might make sense. Is there a security problem within the inspectors themselves? I mean, this is a multinational group of inspectors and there have been media reports out there indicating that not all of them can be trusted with the information. Do you feel that that might be the case?

ALBRIGHT: If there's a no-notice inspection using intelligence information, you can't really trust anybody. I mean, you have to spend a lot of time thinking through the security. Very few people will be notified within the inspection team. Maybe one or two will carry the vital information. And you have to assemble a team and work very hard to make sure that security is kept.

It's been done by the inspectors numerous times. So I mean, they know how to do it, and that can be recreated. So they can do it, but again, you know, people worry about it, and if the U.S. intelligence community has not worked with the inspectors, I mean, there does have to be a relationship established where they start to trust each other.

LIN: David Albright, I wish we had more time, but thank you very much for joining us this afternoon.

ALBRIGHT: Thank you.

LIN: All right, David Albright, former weapons inspector.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com