Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Saturday
Turkish Parliament Nullifies Vote to Allow U.S. Troops in Country
Aired March 01, 2003 - 15:18 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: Well, first, it was a yes and then it was a no.
Turkey's parliament today voted to allow U.S. combat troops to use Turkey as a staging ground for an attack on Iraq. That is a critical piece in the U.S. military plan.
But then, the speaker of the parliament nullified the vote.
With us is Harris Whitbeck. He's joining us live from Ankara.
Harris, it was like a slingshot motion. Exactly what happened?
HARRIS WHITBECK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Carol, it certainly was.
It's now 10:15 in the evening at Ankara and at this hour, cabinet ministers are meeting to try to figure out exactly what happened.
The vote, which was in a closed session of parliament, initially did show that there were more yes votes than there were no votes. But then the opposition in parliament pointed out the fact that there were 19 abstentions and that, among other things, indicated that the vote -- that the result of that voting would have to be nullified.
Opposition saying that there was not a clear majority, an absolute majority that would allow the Turkish government to allow U.S. troops to use Turkish territory to open a northern front in the event that war with Iraq ensued.
So at this hour, the government is trying to figure out what steps to take next. The opposition is saying that as far as they're concerned, the matter is closed.
However, there is another session of parliament on Tuesday. It is not clear whether the topic of U.S. being allowed to use that Turkish territory will be discussed. But certainly, a lot of people are wondering what exactly will happen.
What I can tell you, Carol, is that the vast majority of people in Turkey have expressed their opposition to the U.S. using Turkey territory. There was a big demonstration here in Ankara this morning in which people were voicing opposition to the war itself and also to Turkey being used by the United States -- Carol.
LIN: And that's what's confusing for many Americans, I think, Harris. I mean, we keep hearing, at least $26 billion in aid for this country.
So what exactly would it take for the Turkish majority to support having U.S. troops on their territory?
WHITBECK: Well, the Turkish opposition says that this is not about money, that this is about principles. They say that they're opposed to the U.S. plans of -- vis-a-vis Iraq on principle and that that is what they are defending.
Now even some people in the government say that the financial aid package being offered by the United States is not as palatable as or attractive as it seems. A lot of that money involves loans that would have to be approved by the Turkish parliament and also by the U.S. Congress. So it is not even a sure thing that the money would be available.
And in many cases, many of those dollars would be in the form of debt, which would only contribute to increasing Turkey's foreign debt load. So they're saying that it's not as rosy as it might seem.
LIN: All right. Thank you very much, Harris Whitbeck, reporting live from Ankara. The Turkish parliament expected to meet on Tuesday, but this is not even on the agenda, Renay.
RENAY SAN MIGUEL, CNN ANCHOR: Exactly. Joining us now to talk about the vote coming out of Turkey today, and also the Iraq situation with its Al-Samoud missiles, is retired air force Major General Don Shepperd. He is joining us from southern Arizona.
And General, you know, we've talked about this earlier, but the idea that the entry points for a possible invasion of Iraq by U.S.-led forces, the idea that Turkey would -- this is not shutting the door, but it does create problems for military planners in the U.S., right?
MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Renay, it really complicates our plans.
We have boats waiting in the Mediterranean off the ports of Turkey to unload equipment, that needs to be taking a long trek from the ports all the way to northeastern Turkey. And then to establish that northern front. So this puts a major crank in those plans.
We have other plans, we can do it other ways, but this really delays us and we really need a decision. Hopefully, we'll get a decision in the affirmative by Tuesday, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: We've got a map showing, you know, which nations have -- the six nations that are surrounding Iraq, which ones have given a go-ahead, which ones are still waffling and which ones we definitely not, you know, be basing any -- the U.S. would not be basing any troops out of.
Let's start with Syria and Iran, no chance there.
SHEPPERD: No chance at all. Turkey's in question. Of course, Kuwait is going to allow us, and there are troops there now massing. Saudi Arabia clearly has provided us air access, air bases and also air space. Jordan, no announcements have been made either by Jordan or by us, but there are rumors that lots of cooperation is going on there.
So it looks like we have a good southern way, a good western way and now the northern way is in question if combat breaks out, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: And the reason I say that the door is not shut here, even if Turkey were to come back and say no again early next week, joint chiefs of staff chairman, Richard Myers, appearing with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld late this week said one way or the other, the U.S. is going to have troops in northern Iraq.
So basically the idea is that there is going to be a staging offensive there, it's just going to be more difficult to get those troops in there.
SHEPPERD: Much more difficult. The only other option -- the only other options are two. One is to go into the Kuwaiti ports and then drive west of Baghdad, circle around and establish a front in the north.
Another, of course, is to fly them in.
These are both bad options. It's a logical nightmare either way. And if you don't have a northern front, that allows Saddam to concentrate on a western and southern front, making it more dangerous for coalition forces.
So this is in no small measure a big deal, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: Let me get you to shift gears now and talk a little bit about the Al-Samoud missiles that Iraq has started to -- reportedly started destroying today.
The U.N. wants these missiles destroyed because they can fly a few miles beyond the U.N. limits set by the U.N. How important an issue is that?
SHEPPERD: It's not just the additional miles they can fly, but this missile is capable of delivering chemical and biological agents. It can also be modified.
These are a variation of the scuds we saw in the Gulf War. They're shorter range, but if you put a bigger motor on them they can go further and then you've got Al-Hussein missile that can go up to 400 miles, could hit Israel if he has any of those left, or if these are modified.
The major thing about this, though, is not just the distance they can fly and the fact they can carry chemical and biological with the danger to U.S. troops, but further, where do you draw the line on compliance?
If you let this slip, when are you going to let it slip again? When are you really going to draw a line and say, OK, this is the line. If you Don't do this, we're coming in. This is what this issue is about, more than anything else, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: The effectiveness of these missiles, are you saying they are more accurate than the scuds? I mean, there were a lot of questions raised about accuracy of the SCUD missiles in the '91 Gulf War.
SHEPPERD: No, it's a lousy missile. Probably half a kilometer is the best of the accuracy, so it's not that it's a terrific weapon from the standpoint of accuracy and destruction.
It's a terror weapon and also, should they have the capability now to put chemical and biological in them, that would be a big deal and put our troops in danger. And another 20 or 30 miles might make a big difference to 20 or 30 miles worth of coalition troops. So it's important.
SAN MIGUEL: And you talked about, from a more political standpoint here, the idea of where do you draw with the line with compliance involving Saddam Hussein and his arsenal.
Is it more likely, then, that maybe Saddam is seeing this as, the Al Samoud 2s, as just kind of an expendable bargaining chip for him?
SHEPPERD: You know, I can't get inside his mind, I don't know what he's thinking. But I think the real issue is, again, is the United States has got, I believe, it's 18 declarations now out there. He has not complied with any of them.
So when do you say, listen, this time we really mean it, and if you don't do it, we're going to go in. I think we're finally drawing a line here. And that's much more important than the distance.
SAN MIGUEL: All right, General Don Shepperd, joining us from Tucson. Thank you so much for your insight.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Country>
Aired March 1, 2003 - 15:18 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: Well, first, it was a yes and then it was a no.
Turkey's parliament today voted to allow U.S. combat troops to use Turkey as a staging ground for an attack on Iraq. That is a critical piece in the U.S. military plan.
But then, the speaker of the parliament nullified the vote.
With us is Harris Whitbeck. He's joining us live from Ankara.
Harris, it was like a slingshot motion. Exactly what happened?
HARRIS WHITBECK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Carol, it certainly was.
It's now 10:15 in the evening at Ankara and at this hour, cabinet ministers are meeting to try to figure out exactly what happened.
The vote, which was in a closed session of parliament, initially did show that there were more yes votes than there were no votes. But then the opposition in parliament pointed out the fact that there were 19 abstentions and that, among other things, indicated that the vote -- that the result of that voting would have to be nullified.
Opposition saying that there was not a clear majority, an absolute majority that would allow the Turkish government to allow U.S. troops to use Turkish territory to open a northern front in the event that war with Iraq ensued.
So at this hour, the government is trying to figure out what steps to take next. The opposition is saying that as far as they're concerned, the matter is closed.
However, there is another session of parliament on Tuesday. It is not clear whether the topic of U.S. being allowed to use that Turkish territory will be discussed. But certainly, a lot of people are wondering what exactly will happen.
What I can tell you, Carol, is that the vast majority of people in Turkey have expressed their opposition to the U.S. using Turkey territory. There was a big demonstration here in Ankara this morning in which people were voicing opposition to the war itself and also to Turkey being used by the United States -- Carol.
LIN: And that's what's confusing for many Americans, I think, Harris. I mean, we keep hearing, at least $26 billion in aid for this country.
So what exactly would it take for the Turkish majority to support having U.S. troops on their territory?
WHITBECK: Well, the Turkish opposition says that this is not about money, that this is about principles. They say that they're opposed to the U.S. plans of -- vis-a-vis Iraq on principle and that that is what they are defending.
Now even some people in the government say that the financial aid package being offered by the United States is not as palatable as or attractive as it seems. A lot of that money involves loans that would have to be approved by the Turkish parliament and also by the U.S. Congress. So it is not even a sure thing that the money would be available.
And in many cases, many of those dollars would be in the form of debt, which would only contribute to increasing Turkey's foreign debt load. So they're saying that it's not as rosy as it might seem.
LIN: All right. Thank you very much, Harris Whitbeck, reporting live from Ankara. The Turkish parliament expected to meet on Tuesday, but this is not even on the agenda, Renay.
RENAY SAN MIGUEL, CNN ANCHOR: Exactly. Joining us now to talk about the vote coming out of Turkey today, and also the Iraq situation with its Al-Samoud missiles, is retired air force Major General Don Shepperd. He is joining us from southern Arizona.
And General, you know, we've talked about this earlier, but the idea that the entry points for a possible invasion of Iraq by U.S.-led forces, the idea that Turkey would -- this is not shutting the door, but it does create problems for military planners in the U.S., right?
MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Renay, it really complicates our plans.
We have boats waiting in the Mediterranean off the ports of Turkey to unload equipment, that needs to be taking a long trek from the ports all the way to northeastern Turkey. And then to establish that northern front. So this puts a major crank in those plans.
We have other plans, we can do it other ways, but this really delays us and we really need a decision. Hopefully, we'll get a decision in the affirmative by Tuesday, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: We've got a map showing, you know, which nations have -- the six nations that are surrounding Iraq, which ones have given a go-ahead, which ones are still waffling and which ones we definitely not, you know, be basing any -- the U.S. would not be basing any troops out of.
Let's start with Syria and Iran, no chance there.
SHEPPERD: No chance at all. Turkey's in question. Of course, Kuwait is going to allow us, and there are troops there now massing. Saudi Arabia clearly has provided us air access, air bases and also air space. Jordan, no announcements have been made either by Jordan or by us, but there are rumors that lots of cooperation is going on there.
So it looks like we have a good southern way, a good western way and now the northern way is in question if combat breaks out, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: And the reason I say that the door is not shut here, even if Turkey were to come back and say no again early next week, joint chiefs of staff chairman, Richard Myers, appearing with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld late this week said one way or the other, the U.S. is going to have troops in northern Iraq.
So basically the idea is that there is going to be a staging offensive there, it's just going to be more difficult to get those troops in there.
SHEPPERD: Much more difficult. The only other option -- the only other options are two. One is to go into the Kuwaiti ports and then drive west of Baghdad, circle around and establish a front in the north.
Another, of course, is to fly them in.
These are both bad options. It's a logical nightmare either way. And if you don't have a northern front, that allows Saddam to concentrate on a western and southern front, making it more dangerous for coalition forces.
So this is in no small measure a big deal, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: Let me get you to shift gears now and talk a little bit about the Al-Samoud missiles that Iraq has started to -- reportedly started destroying today.
The U.N. wants these missiles destroyed because they can fly a few miles beyond the U.N. limits set by the U.N. How important an issue is that?
SHEPPERD: It's not just the additional miles they can fly, but this missile is capable of delivering chemical and biological agents. It can also be modified.
These are a variation of the scuds we saw in the Gulf War. They're shorter range, but if you put a bigger motor on them they can go further and then you've got Al-Hussein missile that can go up to 400 miles, could hit Israel if he has any of those left, or if these are modified.
The major thing about this, though, is not just the distance they can fly and the fact they can carry chemical and biological with the danger to U.S. troops, but further, where do you draw the line on compliance?
If you let this slip, when are you going to let it slip again? When are you really going to draw a line and say, OK, this is the line. If you Don't do this, we're coming in. This is what this issue is about, more than anything else, Renay.
SAN MIGUEL: The effectiveness of these missiles, are you saying they are more accurate than the scuds? I mean, there were a lot of questions raised about accuracy of the SCUD missiles in the '91 Gulf War.
SHEPPERD: No, it's a lousy missile. Probably half a kilometer is the best of the accuracy, so it's not that it's a terrific weapon from the standpoint of accuracy and destruction.
It's a terror weapon and also, should they have the capability now to put chemical and biological in them, that would be a big deal and put our troops in danger. And another 20 or 30 miles might make a big difference to 20 or 30 miles worth of coalition troops. So it's important.
SAN MIGUEL: And you talked about, from a more political standpoint here, the idea of where do you draw with the line with compliance involving Saddam Hussein and his arsenal.
Is it more likely, then, that maybe Saddam is seeing this as, the Al Samoud 2s, as just kind of an expendable bargaining chip for him?
SHEPPERD: You know, I can't get inside his mind, I don't know what he's thinking. But I think the real issue is, again, is the United States has got, I believe, it's 18 declarations now out there. He has not complied with any of them.
So when do you say, listen, this time we really mean it, and if you don't do it, we're going to go in. I think we're finally drawing a line here. And that's much more important than the distance.
SAN MIGUEL: All right, General Don Shepperd, joining us from Tucson. Thank you so much for your insight.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Country>
