Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
North Korea Announces It Has Nukes; Congress Considers Immigration Bill
Aired February 10, 2005 - 18:00 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.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Thursday, February 10. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
KITTY PILGRIM, HOST: Good evening.
One day after President Bush challenged Iran on its nuclear program, North Korea today admitted for the first time publicly it had nuclear weapons. The North Korean government also declared it's pulling out of six-country diplomatic talks.
North Korea's announcement dramatically raises the stakes in its nuclear confrontation with the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM (voice-over): North Korea made a public and defiant statement that it has a nuclear bomb and is walking out of six-party diplomatic talks.
GORDON CHANG, AUTHOR, "SHOWDOWN OF THE CENTURY": It could be just about money. Beijing has been paying Pyongyang to show up at the six-party talks, and North Koreans may be just saying we want more money.
But the problem is they've crossed an important line by saying that they have nuclear weapons. And so this now for Washington is a challenge, and it must meet it effectively.
PILGRIM: Experts spend a lot of time analyzing just how advanced the program is, but with no access to North Korea, much is unknown. What experts do focus on is what North Korea could hit with a missile. And so far, they do not think North Korea has married a nuke to a missile yet.
WILLIAM MARTEL, NAVAL WAR COLLEGE: I would presume that if they're able to develop ballistic missiles and develop nuclear weapons that they will be able to accomplish that.
I think they can hit targets ranging from Japan, South Korea, and China with ballistic missiles that would have a range on the order of many hundreds of kilometers, maybe a thousand kilometers.
PILGRIM: Garry Milhollin of the Wisconsin Project says the biggest threat is North Korea could sell the nuke to terrorists. GARY MILHOLLIN, WISCONSIN PROJECT ON NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL: If the North Koreans have converted all the plutonium that we know they have into warheads, they would have enough to test. They could test one, and they could sell one, and they would still have enough left, I think, to deter any kind of invasion by us. So I think we have to worry about a test, and we have to worry about a sale.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: And North Korea has no qualms about selling missiles to other countries, including Pakistan and Iran.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice today called on North Korea to resume disarmament talks and avoid international isolation. Speaking in Luxembourg, she said the United States has no intention of attacking North Korea, but Rice declared that the United States is fully capable of defending itself.
Andrea Koppel reports from Luxembourg.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The news from North Korea reached Secretary of State Rice in Luxembourg, where she sought to downplay its significance.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE, SECRETARY OF STATE: This is an unfortunate move, most especially probably for the people of North Korea, because it only deepens the North Korean isolation from the rest of the international community.
KOPPEL: Rice was meeting with members of the European Union to discuss, among other issues, how to handle another proliferation threat, from Iran.
Nevertheless, Rice said it was no surprise to the United States that North Korea had nuclear weapons. In 2002, U.S. officials said Pyongyang had privately admitted it had a secret nuclear weapons program.
Since then, North Korea says it has reprocessed 8,000 spent plutonium fuel rods, enough nuclear material, experts say, for at least half a dozen nuclear weapons.
One of the world's most isolated regimes, known for its saber rattling, North Korea wants direct talks with Washington. But Rice said the only way out of this nuclear impasse for North Korea was to return to the bargaining table with the U.S., Russia and North Korea's neighbors.
RICE: And I know that we have support from the rest of the international community in saying to the North Koreans that they ought to take what is before them, a path to a more reasonable relationship, a path to a better life for their people, a path to security assurances from their neighbors, including from the United States.
KOPPEL: Rice reiterated that the United States has no intention of invading North Korea.
(on camera) Until now, the headline-grabber during Secretary Rice's swing through Europe has been Iran, another member of the axis of evil, and its suspected nuclear weapons program. Although it's unclear why North Korea has stepped up its saber rattling now, as Rice returns to Washington, it's clear another potentially more urgent threat looms.
Andrea Koppel, CNN, Luxembourg.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is also in Europe, and Rumsfeld declared he cannot say with 100 percent certainty that North Korea has nuclear weapons, but speaking in France, Rumsfeld acknowledged that North Korea's announcement raises serious concerns.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Given their dictatorial regime and the repression of their own people, one has to worry about a -- weapons of that power in the hands of leadership of that nature. I don't think that anyone would characterize the leadership in that country as being restrained.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: The White House has also responded cautiously to the North Korean nuclear declaration. President Bush, in public at least today, focused on Social Security reform during visits to North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
Senior White House correspondent John King reports from Blue Bell, Pennsylvania.
John, why is everyone but the president had something to say about North Korean -- North Korea's nuclear declaration today?
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, two reasons, Kitty.
No. 1, as you noted, the president is traveling the country right now, trying to rally public support and trying to convince Congress to give its votes to his signature domestic initiative of the second term, which is changing Social Security. That is an urgent priority for the president. And the White House concedes it's an uphill fight right now to get public support and to get congressional support for that initiative. So the president wants to stay focused there.
But they also did not want to elevate this. The low-key approach from the administration is part of its strategy, and this strategy goes back some time in dealing with what if considers to be these belligerent and these provocative statements from the government in Pyongyang.
They did not want the president to talk about this, because that would elevate the crisis, if you will, or elevate the showdown, so they left it to Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary Rice and the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, who said that the White House has heard blustery rhetoric like this before and that he hopes North Korea will reconsider and come back to the bargaining table.
PILGRIM: That makes sense, John. But what is the White House saying, anything, about how to get the six-country talks on North Korea back on track?
KING: No. 1, the White House says it will not change its position. There will be no direct negotiations between the United States and North Korea.
And what has happened in the past, when you have had episodes like this, North Korea making dramatic public statements, is that the White House has waited, had private consultations with all of the others involved -- Russia, South Korea, Japan and China -- and the White House would say that China is the key player here.
It has the closest relationships, both economic and diplomatic, of all those countries with North Korea. And the Chinese in the past have sent emissaries and tried to get North Korea back to the bargaining table.
White House officials say it will have communications among the group, the other four countries involved in the talks, but that the key player is China. And they believe, given the Chinese statement issued in Beijing today, that China will reach out to North Korea and say, "You want to reconsider. You want to come back to the negotiating table."
So watching the Chinese could be the next big step, Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much. John King reporting. Thanks, John.
Iran today stepped up the pressure in its escalating war of words with the United States with its nuclear program. The Iranian president told tens of thousands of supporters in Tehran that any aggressor would face, quote, "a burning hell" if they attacked Iran.
The Iranian leader declared Iran is not looking for war, violence or confrontation, but he insisted, Iran will not abandon its nuclear program.
And many believe that the invasion of illegal aliens into this country is another serious threat to our national security. And today on Capitol Hill, the House voted in favor of new measures to crack down on illegal aliens and tighten our border security.
The proposals are likely to face a much tougher battle in the Senate, and congressional correspondent Joe Johns has our report on that -- Joe.
JOE JOHNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kitty, it's already being viewed by here -- by some here as an attempt, essentially, to squeeze the United States Senate. House Republicans are hoping that by attaching the Real I.D. Act that they passed here today to the Iraq supplemental spending bill, they can effectively get the Senate to consider it, even though a number of Republican senators have opposed the driver's license provisions.
They could frame it as if you vote against the Iraq supplemental spending bill with the immigration provisions included, you are effectively voting against the troops.
Now, all along, the House Republicans who have supported the Real I.D. Act have posed it as a national security question.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM SENSENBRENNER (R), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Today there are over 350 valid driver's license designs issued by the 50 states, and we all know it is very difficult for security officials at airports to tell the real I.D. cards from the counterfeit ones.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Now, here's what the Real I.D. Act does. It essentially bans illegal immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses. It completes U.S./Mexico border fences in California. It allows deportation of people on terrorism-related grounds, and it makes it harder for asylum applications to get approved.
Democrats are arguing that this bill essentially is a back-door attempt to create a national identification card.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. SILVESTRE REYES (D), TEXAS: By forcing state governments to maintain and share files on almost every adult in the state, this bill will truly usher in the era of Big Brother. The database could be used to track American movements, store information on political activities, and even store information on gun ownership.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Now, the Iraq supplemental spending request is expected to come up here from the White House on Monday, and it will probably play out on the House floor sometime in March.
Kitty, back to you.
PILGRIM: Joe, what does today's action tell us about the sentiment on the Hill about the president's overall proposals for immigration reform?
JOHNS: Well, one of those things, of course, a lot of people here on Capitol Hill talk about is the guest worker program that the administration has floated.
And a number of conservatives have already said, at least off the record so far, that, in their view, this is the kind of thing that the president cannot gin up support for by simply throwing his support behind this immigration provision that was on the floor today.
They say that bill was already going to pass, and the fact is there are a lot of people here who are still very much opposed to the guest worker idea that was floated a few weeks ago, Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much.
Joe Johns.
In the Senate today, lawmakers today strongly supported legislation designed to curb class-action lawsuits. Now the bill will shift most class-action lawsuits from state courts to federal courts. Federal courts have generally been less sympathetic to class-action lawsuits. The legislation approved by the Senate is part of President Bush's drive to overhaul this country's civil justice system.
Well, next, the nuclear threat from North Korea and why this country may not have enough troops to respond.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Iraqi police today fought a two-hour gun battle with insurgents in a southern Baghdad suburb. Six police officers were killed and 20 wounded. The number of insurgent casualties is not known.
Well, after the battle, police rounded up dozens of suspects. The firefight began when Iraqi police launched an operation to find insurgent weapons.
And, in central Baghdad today, a car bomb narrowly missed an American military patrol. Three Iraqis were killed, and three wounded. There were no American casualties.
Despite the stress on the military from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon wants to delay any decision on permanently increasing the size of the Army.
But the United States faces dangerous new threats from Iran and North Korea. A war in the Korean peninsula could possibly place huge unsustainable demands on our military.
The United States reportedly plans to send almost 700,000 troops to South Korea in the event of a war with North Korea, yet the military has barely enough forces to maintain 150,000 forces in Iraq.
Well, joining me now is General David Grange.
And thanks very much for being with us.
How do you assess the threat from North Korea this evening, General?
BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, North Korea has always been a threat for years and years. They're unpredictable. I do believe, though, they could be contained. I think with the situation, with the power of the South Korean Army, the military capabilities of Japan and the fact that China wants nothing to do with North Korea going to war will, in fact, prevent war, but it's something that has to be planned for.
PILGRIM: Of course, the response for other nations is key in this. However, the 700,000 troops if war breaks out -- that is the statement from South Korea today -- how do you assess that statement, and do you think it's possible to send that many troops if there's a problem?
GRANGE: Well, I don't know if the South Korean assessment of the numbers of troops -- and that's probably a number from all the different services of the armed forces, plus some coalition forces, but there's no doubt in my mind that the U.S. armed forces can defend South Korea and attack and destroy whatever is necessary in North Korea if there is a war.
The question would be: Can you put an occupation force on the ground that's suitable enough to accomplish the mission after the war at the same time you're doing what we're doing in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere?
PILGRIM: The military option for the Korean peninsula is probably the last resort. The number of casualties would be huge, wouldn't they, General?
GRANGE: I believe so. It is a tough army. They're rather fanatical. Seoul is within distance of quite a few conventional weapons systems so there would be a lot of South Korean civilian casualties before you could do enough damage to keep that -- those fires off of -- off South Korea. So, yes, there would be a lot of casualties.
PILGRIM: Let me move to Iran for a second. Former weapons inspector David Kay said the statements that the United States has made about Iran lately suggest it's deja vu all over again. He, of course, referring to bellicose statements against Iraq. Do you think that that's an accurate assessment?
GRANGE: Well, I don't agree with Dr. Kay on a lot of those points because, in several strategic forums, we didn't agree. I don't think that it's the same situation because everybody is saying, OK, the war would be just because of WMD.
You know, the Iraq war -- the main reason wasn't about that, it was about changing the region for the better of mankind in that area and for the security of the United States, and I fully believe that.
War in Iran may not be a cookie-cutter look of what happened in Iraq. It may be limited strikes on facilities, very similar to what the Israeli Air Force did to the Iraqi reactors when they attacked those in Iraq.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much.
General David Grange.
Thank you.
GRANGE: My pleasure.
PILGRIM: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has launched a charm offensive towards France, and it comes two years after Rumsfeld famously blasted the French for being part of what he called "old Europe."
Well, Rumsfeld has been attending a NATO meeting in the southern French city of Nice, and, today, there was no talk of strained relations between the United States and France in the period before the war in Iraq. Instead, Rumsfeld spoke fondly about his previous visits to France, and he praised NATO as "an enormously valuable alliance."
Back in Washington, there were less kind words about Europe and the Muslim world from Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz today. Wolfowitz said the European military response to the tsunami disaster could have been greater.
But Wolfowitz who visited Indonesia was more critical of the Muslim world's response. Wolfowitz said there's been very little generosity so far from parts of the Muslim world "that are big on talking about jihad and other things," even though many of the victims were Muslim.
Well, next, how our nation's power grid is vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: We continue now with our series of special reports on "America's Security Risks" and, tonight, the nation's power grid vulnerable to a terrorist attack, and the government and the power industry are urgently trying to fix that problem before it's too late.
Casey Wian reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Northeast power outage in August 2003 was just a preview of what security experts say could be coming soon, a large-scale attack on the computer systems that control the nation's electric power grid.
The complicated network of generating plants, transmission stations and electric lines was developed before anyone imagined the Internet could cheaply link them all together, yet provide access to a hacker in Hackensack or a terrorist in Tehran.
KENNETH WATTS, IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY: There is vulnerabilities to the electrical power grid, you know, from insider attacks, terrorists, hackers, maybe even nation states who could attack these systems. I believe, yes, it could happen. I don't quite understand why it hasn't happened yet.
WIAN: A government-funded program at the Idaho National Laboratory is working to plug the cyberholes in power grid computer systems. Researchers run tests using their own power plant and grid, then share results with the industry. The project is expected to take another seven years.
While a temporary disruption of the power grid would be bad enough, security experts are most worried about a combination attack. Imagine a giant bomb blast in a big city timed with a widespread power outage to disrupt emergency communication and rescue efforts.
Bill Flynt is the former director of the U.S. Army's Homeland Security Threat Office.
LT. COL. BILL FLYNT (RET.), CEO, THE FLYNT GROUP: Certainly, the most dangerous would be a hybrid threat that was sophisticated enough to combine both physical attack with a cyberattack in simultaneity against multiple targets.
The government would be well-served to initiate and continue and sustain programs that send -- to figuratively quote Warren Zevon on lawyers, guns and money in the private sector -- to the private sector and assist them in these efforts.
WIAN: Several government and power industry groups are working on the problem, and federal funding for improvements to power grid cybersecurity and other critical infrastructure systems has increased sevenfold since 2001.
(on camera): But time may be running short. According to a General Accounting Office report, a survey of security experts and industry executives found that most believe they'll be the target of a large-scale cyberattack before the middle of next year.
Casey Wian, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: More detail tonight on a dramatic story we told you about last night and that story about the Coast Guard rescuing three men off the coast of Massachusetts when their boat sank. Now we have learned that one of the men rescued is the brother of a fisherman who was lost at sea in 1991 aboard the Andrea Gail. That tragedy was portrayed in the book and film "The Perfect Storm."
In California tonight, a 14-year-old girl was rescued after she fell some 40 feet down the side of a cliff while hiking. She was hanging 150 feet above the ground. Firefighters and sheriff's deputies used a helicopter to bring the girl to safety. She only received minor injuries.
Next, North Korea's desperation and how it could affect the nuclear standoff. Two of the leading members of the House International Relations Committee join me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
In a moment, two leading members of the House International Relations Committee join me to talk about today's disturbing admission from North Korea.
But, first, these stories.
Pope John Paul II is back at the Vatican tonight after more than a week in the hospital for a respiratory infection. The pope's illness raised questions about whether he would step down. The Vatican did not rule out a resignation, but said the pope would make the decision himself.
In Saudi Arabia, men are voting in a landmark election. One step in a slow process of reforming the country's monarchy. Voters will elect just half the members of local councils, while the government will appoint other members. Women are excluded from the voting.
A New York lawyer was convicted today of helping a terrorist group. Lynne Stewart was found guilty of helps a radical Egyptian sheik urge his followers to carry out terror attacks. The sheik is serving a life sentence for a conspiracy to blow up several U.S. landmarks. Two other defendants were also convicted in the case.
And in Britain, Prince Charles is set to marry Camilla Parker Bowles in April in a civil service. The couple has been a long on and off romance which began before Prince Charles met Princess Diana. They received the blessing of Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth II.
The United States is tonight facing an escalating nuclear confrontation with Iran and North Korea at the same time our troops are fighting a war in Iraq. Well, the confrontation took a dramatic new turn today when North Korea admitted for the first time publicly that it had nuclear weapons.
Well, joining me now are two leading congressmen on the International Relations Committee. Congressman Tom Lantos is the ranking Democrat on that committee, and he visited North Korea last month. And Congressman Chris Smith is the vice chairman of the International Relations Committee. And they both join me from Capitol Hill.
And thanks for being with us.
REP. TOM LANTOS (D), CALIFORNIA: It's a pleasure.
PILGRIM: Congressman Lantos, I really have to ask you first you were in Pyongyang January 8 to the 11th, and you said that the North Koreans were cooperative. They invited you back. Is today's announcement a surprise?
LANTOS: No, it really isn't a surprise. This is part of their marketing tactics. I think it's important for us to keep our cool. North Korea is not looking for any military action. It's a desperately poor country, and they are holding out for better terms before they return to the six-party talks. I told them in three days of very serious discussions that is their only chance to improve their economic conditions. The United States will not sit down with them alone. This is not an American problem, it's a regional problem. And our colleagues in the six-party talks: China, Russia, South Korea, and Japan, are very pleased to sit down with them and us together to work out their future.
It is a country which desperately needs economic and energy help. 90 percent of their energy comes from China. China has enormous leverage over them. And I think it's important for us to cool the rhetoric. There will not be a war in Korea.
PILGRIM: In fact, the rhetoric was on their part today, that they're walking out of six-party talks. Does that take you by surprise given your positive conversations you had about the diplomatic talks?
LANTOS: Well, they're not walking out because the six-party talks at present are simply nonexistent. They are holding out for better terms before they return. And my judgment is that before long, the six-party talks will resume and North Korea will participate.
PILGRIM: All right. Congressman Smith, I want to get you in on this. There have been 3 rounds of six-party talks. The fourth was scheduled for September, and then it went away. Has not been able to get back on track and yet. And you have this declaration from North Korea. It doesn't seem they're all that willing to participate? What is your assessment?
REP. CHRIS SMITH, (R) INTL. RELATIONS COMMITTEE: I think, and I would agree with my good friend and colleague Tom Lantos, that even using the idea it's a showdown in the offing here is misleading. The foreign ministry's own statement says at the very end, there's no change in our principal stance of resolving the issue through dialogue and negotiations. And the ultimate goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula.
The six-party talks are a means to that end and an end to some of the gross human rights violations that take place in North Korea every day. Upwards of 200,000 political prisoners, an unbelievable manmade famine directly attributable to Kim Jong-Il's policies.
The six-party talks, I think, are a means to try to get at least some democratization, some opening up -- an end to the isolation. Nobody wants an isolated North Korea. We want it more open and more robust in terms of his exchanges with countries.
And I also would also agree that China is disproportionately advantaged to make a difference here. And my hope is they would push more aggressively for the six-party talks to resume so we that will not see any other -- no miscalculations or anything of the kind.
We have made it very clear, the United States government, that we had no, zero, intentions of invading. And they need to take our word at face value, because that is our word, and it's real and it's not going to change. We want to see, again, an opening up of that country.
The Congress, by almost unanimous votes, House and Senate, passed the Human Rights in North Korea Act, and has sent it to the president, he signed it into law. It is a very significant statement of solidarity, Republican/Democrat, that we are united, like the other countries of the world -- North Korea has it within their means to come out of isolation. We are asking them -- there's an engraved invitation, if you will, for them to enter into the free world, even if its by baby steps. And great things will happen consistent with that movement towards opening up and stopping the repression of their own people.
PILGRIM: It has been suggested by political strategists that this is entirely a move to solicit additional funds, help, support, aid. Do you see it as a strategy?
SMITH: You know, again I think Tom was right when he said -- you're talking about walking out of the talks, the talks are nonexistent. They talk about suspending the talks.
I think now -- to say that they have nuclear weapons when we think they've had as many as 6 to 12 for some time now, and maybe it's a bluff, we don't know. But I would take that, and I think we all need to take it somewhat at face value and say you have them. There is a nuclear deterrent on the Korean Peninsula. Our hope is to make it non-nuclear. And they are arguing, I think, to get the best deal possible.
And, you know, we're willing to provide a best deal possible, but come forward. Their statement is riddled with -- they talk about freedom and democracy flourishing in their country. There was an election in 2003, a parliamentary election. Only Democratic front candidates could run for their parliament. And we all know Kim Jong- Il has an ironclad grasp on the leadership right now.
So, you know, we want to talk with absolute honesty and transparency. And again, there is an invitation on our side that good things, positive things will flow from the whole world community. Russia has denounced this action today as have just about every other country in the world, including China.
PILGRIM: Congressman Lantos, your assessment, is it an attempt to gain more aid?
LANTOS: I believe so.
One of the most interesting things I found during my 3 days of discussions with them, that they were fascinated by my story of the Libyan example.
As you know, I went to Libya 3 times last year, had lengthy discussions with Colonel Gadhafi. Libya has given up all its nuclear programs. And of course Libya is now welcomed back into the community of civilized nations. Tony Blair was there, Jacques Chirac was there, Schroeder of Germany was there. We are looking for a site for our new embassy complex.
And the North Koreans were fascinated by this story. I told them that the Libyan example is there for them to follow. If they give up their nuclear program, there will be economic aid, energy aid and an infinitely better life for the people of Korea.
PILGRIM: Well, let's hope that that is an example that has resonance with North Korea. Thanks very much for joining us.
LANTOS: I think it will.
SMITH: Thank you.
PILGRIM: Congressman Tom Lantos and Chris Smith, thank you.
That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. "How should the United States deal with the escalating nuclear threat from North Korea? By diplomacy, economic sanctions, military action, or ignore it." Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. And we'll bring you the results later in the show.
Next, unfair trade could be costing of millions of American jobs.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: The U.S. trade deficit soared to a staggering new all- time high, $617 billion last year. Our trade deficit with China also reached another record, $162 billion. That's the largest deficit ever recorded with a single country. Those bleak numbers represent the loss of thousands of American jobs. Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): 25 Pennsylvania union workers visited Capital Hill this week seeking help for the pipe and tube industry. Their company Wheatlan Tube (ph) has been battered by a surge of Chinese imports. Nearly 200 employees have been laid off since December.
DOMINIC VADALA, RETIRED STEELWORKER: Our country is being devastated by imports. It's got to be -- it's got to stop. Where's Patriotism Act? Whatever happened to buy America first? Whatever happened to that?
SYLVESTER: The workers found sympathetic ears but no quick fix. The Commerce Departments new figures show the trade deficit in 2004 climbed to $617.7 billion, a 24.4 percent increase above the previous record. The trade deficit with China alone with $162 billion, up just over 30 percent. The United States lost significant ground in manufactured high-tech products, computers and electronics. Even in areas like agriculture, the United States saw 40 percent decline in the trade surplus. Economists say the United States is borrowing an average of $3 billion each business day to pay for the imports.
ROBERT SCOTT, ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE: At some point the banker is going to cut us off, and we're getting close to that point right now. If they cut off the supply of loans, then interest rates are going to go up, our economy is quite likely to tank.
SYLVESTER: But not everyone believes the trade deficit is a drag on the U.S. economy.
DAN GRISWOLD, CATO INSTITUTE: The trade deficit isn't a cause of bad things in our economy. It's generally a sign of good things. One of those good things is robust domestic demand. U.S. consumers and businesses are able to buy in the international marketplace.
SYLVESTER: That does not ease concerns that as the United States imports from other countries, it exports its wealth.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: A bill was introduced this afternoon by Senators Hillary Clinton and Byron Dorgan and Representative Ben Cardin. It would force the U.S. Trade Representative Office to take action if the trade deficit exceeds 5 percent of GDP, which it did last year -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much, Lisa Sylvester.
Richard Trumka is the head of the nation's largest trade union and he believes that exploding trade deficit represents loss of millions of American jobs. Richard Trumka, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO joins me tonight from Washington. Thanks very much for being with us.
RICHARD TRUMKA, SECRETARY-TREASURER, AFL-CIO: Thanks for having me. I appreciate it very much.
PILGRIM: This trade deficit up 30 percent from last year with China. How many American jobs do you think have been affected?
TRUMKA: Hundreds of thousands. With China alone, the last two years, we've lost almost half a million. With NAFTA, the NAFTA agreement has cost us over 900,000 jobs. We've lost 2.7 million manufacturing jobs. At first they were blue collar jobs, now they're advancing into the advanced technology jobs. And what we're seek, Kitty, is that the loss of manufacturing jobs is a threat to our economic, but the loss of manufacturing capacity, the intellectual and the technical ability to produce things is actually a threat to our national security. So you're seeing hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, you're seeing the economy teetering right now.
PILGRIM: Now, what about the argument that the U.S. economy is growing so rapidly, U.S. consumers are benefiting from the cheaper imports from China, that it's actually a net plus for the economy, do you agree with that?
TRUMKA: Of course I don't. When you lose your manufacturing capacity, that's not good. When you lose your ability to design things, that means the next best idea, the next generation of products and the next investment will be somewhere else. That's not good for us. We're losing our manufacturing capabilities, we're giving away the best jobs that we have. We're negotiating bad trade deals, and as you can see each year it gets worse. First it was manufacturing, now it's advanced -- moved to advanced technology, agriculture for the last couple months of last year went into a deficit, and service, which heretofore have been a plus have been cut in half. Our surplus has been cut in half over the last three years. So the trends are all downward and the loss of jobs are all upward.
PILGRIM: It's very hard to reengineering trade flows, but some senators want to impose a 27 percent tariff On Chinese goods unless China stops manipulating its currency. And many believe that's why there's this imbalance in the system. What do you think about that 27 percent tariff?
TRUMKA: Well, there are a lot of good ideas. That's one thing that should be done. China should not be manipulating its currency, that violates all trade laws. It violates the treaty, the agreements that they have with us. It's actually closer to 40 percent, the advantage. But China also refuses to enforce its own health and safety laws, its own child labor laws and prison laws, and that gives them another 40 percent advantage. What we need is to get away from the failed model of NAFTA, because it's proven it doesn't work. It cost us jobs. It hurts us in trade.
We need to enforce the trade agreements that we currently have. We need to have some of the legislation that's being talked about, and then we need to stop rewarding companies with tax code and other financial incentives for taking jobs overseas. We have to stop all of that. A combination of those things will stop things and start to turn it around.
PILGRIM: One quick question, there's some -- bipartisan group of lawmakers that wants to discontinue the normal trade relations with China.
What do you think of that measure?
TRUMKA: We thought it shouldn't have been passed -- PNTR shouldn't have been passed in the first place, because it took away the only club we had. Before we had a club every year, they would have to renew it, and look at it, and the Congress would have to pass on it. Now they have to do nothing. And as you see it, the number of their human rights violations increases, their violations of the trade law increases, they simply thumb their nose at us. And last year, with a falling dollar, their deficit between the two of us increases 30 percent. We simply can't sustain that.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very much for being with us, Richard Trumka.
TRUMKA: Thanks for having me, Kitty. I appreciate it very much.
PILGRIM: Howard Dean is expected to be selected this weekend as the new chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Dean is the clear front-runner after his only major competitor for the job dropped out of the running. And Dean will replace outgoing chairmen Terry McAuliffe, who did not seek another term.
Well, according to the latest CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll, the Democratic Party believes Howard Dean is the man to lead the fight to regain power in Washington. Senior political analyst Bill Schneider reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST (voice-over): As the Democrats gather in Washington, souls have been searched, recriminations have been visited. And what have they concluded? The Gallup organization interviewed 223 members of the Democratic National Committee and asked them what went wrong this year. Current party chairman has his answer.
TERRY MCAULIFFE, CHMN, DEMOCRATIC NATL. COMMITTEE: We had the biggest voter turnout we've ever had. Judy, we ran against the incumbent president while at war.
SCHNEIDER: Members of the Democratic National Committee agree, according to the new CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup surveyor. Their number one reason of four choices offered, because Republicans ran an incumbent president during wartime. Only 20 percent said it was because Democrats couldn't match the Republicans' grassroots effort. Even fewer blame John Kerry's weaknesses as a candidate. And also almost no committee member said, it was because of the parties issue positions. Nothing wrong with what we believed, Democrats say, which is what the perspective new chairman says, too.
HOWARD DEAN, CANDIDATE FOR DNC CHAIR: We ought not to change our faith. We need to talk about who we are as Democrats, and we need to be proud to be Democrats every step of the way.
SCHNEIDER: But wait a minute, look at this. Most committee members interviewed said they would rather see the Democratic Party become more moderate, rather than more liberal. And they thought the key to future Democratic victory was to reach out to undecided and swing voters rather than mobilize the party base. So, what do Democratic National Committee members see in Dean, not ideology.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not the Democratic National Committee chairman that sets policy.
SCHNEIDER: What they see in Dean is fight.
DONNIE FOWLER, CANDIDATE FOR DNC CHAIR: Just like I think the party should do, Howard Dean stands up and fights back for what he believes in.
SCHNEIDER: Two thirds said Democrats should try to defeat the Republican agenda rather than try to find areas of compromise. If Democrats are ready to fight, Dean's their man.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right now the party seems pretty indecisive about whether it's going, but Governor Dean doesn't seem that way. That's why I think he has a lot of appeal. SCHNEIDER: The choice of Dean is not a statement about ideology, it's statement about strategy. The statement is -- Democrats are ready to stand and fight.
Bill Schneider, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Well, ideology, strategy, let's turn to democracy. And "Tonight's Thought" is on democracy. "Words like freedom, justice, democracy are not common concepts. On the contrary they are rare. People are not born knowing what these are. It takes enormous and, above all, individual effort to arrive at the respect for other people that these words imply."
Coming up next, why one of this country's leading national security experts says a nuclear attack on this country could be inevitable unless we act soon.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: As we reported, North Korea today claimed for the first time publicly that it had nuclear weapons. And my next guest says North Korea is known as Missiles R Us for its willingness to sell weapons. He also says it will be next to impossible for the United States to police any sale of nuclear materials. Graham Allison is the author of "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Disaster," and he joins me tonight from Boston. Thanks for joining us.
GRAHAM ALLISON, AUTHOR, "NUCLEAR TERRORISM": Thank you, Kitty.
PILGRIM: North Korea, very bellicose statement, I think. What is your assessment of the real threat?
ALLISON: Well, if this is true, and we still don't know, but we have no basis for dismissing it, this will be a huge setback. North Korea, as you've mentioned, known in the business as Missiles R Us. It's an economic basket case, a desperate state that sells missiles to whomever will pay. If it now has a nuclear arsenal and completes its current efforts to have a production line that will allow it to have another few bombs every year, I see no reason for believing that it won't become Nukes R Us, selling nuclear weapons to somebody like Osama bin Laden, who could bring them to one of our cities, or to other states. So I think this is a huge setback, if true, and I think it actually exposes the risk in the policy that we've been following, which is basically to threaten North Korea, but then to neglect them.
PILGRIM: Your book lays out some chilling scenarios about just how easy it would be to have a nuclear incident in an American city. North Korea is an exporter of arms. What policy options do we have against North Korea, short of a military option?
ALLISON: Well, I think that the options at this stage are not very good, and they get worse every day. I think one is to simply try to explain it away and live with it. And I think there will be a huge temptation in the administration to do that, because their neglect has brought us to this point. I think that's a very important point, that we've been basically looking elsewhere. We threatened North Korea in the president's State of the Union speech in January of 2002, and then we've been looking elsewhere, while they've been working on the stuff of their nuclear arsenal, which they've now announced.
Secondly -- so first it would be to just try to accept it. I think that could be catastrophic, because I don't see why such a North Korea, given what we know about its character, would not ultimately be selling weapons from which -- material from which a nuclear bomb could be made that would explode in an American city, or bombs themselves.
A second option would be to try to go sit down with them now, with a bundle of carrots and some sticks, and I try to lay out in the book a strategy to that end. I think that it requires, unlike what we've been doing in the past, a readiness to say to them, OK, the South Koreans and the Japanese are prepared to provide financial assistance to people who are desperate, that's fine. The U.S. would give them an assurance that we would not attack them to change their regime by force, but they would have to freeze where they are now, not complete these production lines for producing additional nuclear weapons, do that in a verifiable fashion, and then start backing up on a step-by-step basis.
Now, in the book, I explain why I think that in order to make that deal successful, we would have also to be able to pose to them a credible military threat to destroy the facilities that we can identify, but that's a harder and harder task the more nuclear weapons they have.
PILGRIM: I really can't let you go without asking you a very important question. How soon do you think we could see some sort of nuclear incident in the United States and is it likely?
ALLISON: Well, in my book I say it's inevitable if we just keep doing what we're doing. But the good news is, it's preventable. So a punchlist of feasible and affordable actions, some of which we're not taking, but that if we took we could essentially prevent it.
I would make the bets if we just keep doing what we're doing, and North Korea just keeps doing what it's doing and Russia and the others, I think it's more likely than not, so it's at least 51 percent, that we see actually a nuclear bomb explode, God forbid, in an American city in the decade ahead. And there's no reason why it couldn't happen, unfortunately, tomorrow. So I think the purpose in trying to understand the threat is not to terrify us, but to mobilize us.
PILGRIM: The status quo is dangerous. Thank you very much for joining us tonight, Graham Allison.
ALLISON: Thank you so much for having me.
PILGRIM: A reminder now to vote in tonight's poll -- how should the United States deal with the escalating nuclear threat from North Korea? Diplomacy, economic sanctions, military action, or ignore it? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll bring you the results in a few minutes, and we'll have a preview of what's ahead tomorrow.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Now, the results of tonight's poll. Sixty-three percent of you believe the United States should use diplomacy to deal with the escalating nuclear threat from North Korea; 22 percent say economic sanctions, 7 percent military action. And 8 percent say ignore it.
Thanks for joining us. Tomorrow, how safe or unsafe are our bridges and tunnels? Our special report.
Also, police across the country say the Bush administration is gutting the programs that help secure our homeland.
And what's next for Iraq?
For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.
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 February 10, 2005 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Thursday, February 10. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
KITTY PILGRIM, HOST: Good evening.
One day after President Bush challenged Iran on its nuclear program, North Korea today admitted for the first time publicly it had nuclear weapons. The North Korean government also declared it's pulling out of six-country diplomatic talks.
North Korea's announcement dramatically raises the stakes in its nuclear confrontation with the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM (voice-over): North Korea made a public and defiant statement that it has a nuclear bomb and is walking out of six-party diplomatic talks.
GORDON CHANG, AUTHOR, "SHOWDOWN OF THE CENTURY": It could be just about money. Beijing has been paying Pyongyang to show up at the six-party talks, and North Koreans may be just saying we want more money.
But the problem is they've crossed an important line by saying that they have nuclear weapons. And so this now for Washington is a challenge, and it must meet it effectively.
PILGRIM: Experts spend a lot of time analyzing just how advanced the program is, but with no access to North Korea, much is unknown. What experts do focus on is what North Korea could hit with a missile. And so far, they do not think North Korea has married a nuke to a missile yet.
WILLIAM MARTEL, NAVAL WAR COLLEGE: I would presume that if they're able to develop ballistic missiles and develop nuclear weapons that they will be able to accomplish that.
I think they can hit targets ranging from Japan, South Korea, and China with ballistic missiles that would have a range on the order of many hundreds of kilometers, maybe a thousand kilometers.
PILGRIM: Garry Milhollin of the Wisconsin Project says the biggest threat is North Korea could sell the nuke to terrorists. GARY MILHOLLIN, WISCONSIN PROJECT ON NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL: If the North Koreans have converted all the plutonium that we know they have into warheads, they would have enough to test. They could test one, and they could sell one, and they would still have enough left, I think, to deter any kind of invasion by us. So I think we have to worry about a test, and we have to worry about a sale.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: And North Korea has no qualms about selling missiles to other countries, including Pakistan and Iran.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice today called on North Korea to resume disarmament talks and avoid international isolation. Speaking in Luxembourg, she said the United States has no intention of attacking North Korea, but Rice declared that the United States is fully capable of defending itself.
Andrea Koppel reports from Luxembourg.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The news from North Korea reached Secretary of State Rice in Luxembourg, where she sought to downplay its significance.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE, SECRETARY OF STATE: This is an unfortunate move, most especially probably for the people of North Korea, because it only deepens the North Korean isolation from the rest of the international community.
KOPPEL: Rice was meeting with members of the European Union to discuss, among other issues, how to handle another proliferation threat, from Iran.
Nevertheless, Rice said it was no surprise to the United States that North Korea had nuclear weapons. In 2002, U.S. officials said Pyongyang had privately admitted it had a secret nuclear weapons program.
Since then, North Korea says it has reprocessed 8,000 spent plutonium fuel rods, enough nuclear material, experts say, for at least half a dozen nuclear weapons.
One of the world's most isolated regimes, known for its saber rattling, North Korea wants direct talks with Washington. But Rice said the only way out of this nuclear impasse for North Korea was to return to the bargaining table with the U.S., Russia and North Korea's neighbors.
RICE: And I know that we have support from the rest of the international community in saying to the North Koreans that they ought to take what is before them, a path to a more reasonable relationship, a path to a better life for their people, a path to security assurances from their neighbors, including from the United States.
KOPPEL: Rice reiterated that the United States has no intention of invading North Korea.
(on camera) Until now, the headline-grabber during Secretary Rice's swing through Europe has been Iran, another member of the axis of evil, and its suspected nuclear weapons program. Although it's unclear why North Korea has stepped up its saber rattling now, as Rice returns to Washington, it's clear another potentially more urgent threat looms.
Andrea Koppel, CNN, Luxembourg.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is also in Europe, and Rumsfeld declared he cannot say with 100 percent certainty that North Korea has nuclear weapons, but speaking in France, Rumsfeld acknowledged that North Korea's announcement raises serious concerns.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Given their dictatorial regime and the repression of their own people, one has to worry about a -- weapons of that power in the hands of leadership of that nature. I don't think that anyone would characterize the leadership in that country as being restrained.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: The White House has also responded cautiously to the North Korean nuclear declaration. President Bush, in public at least today, focused on Social Security reform during visits to North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
Senior White House correspondent John King reports from Blue Bell, Pennsylvania.
John, why is everyone but the president had something to say about North Korean -- North Korea's nuclear declaration today?
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, two reasons, Kitty.
No. 1, as you noted, the president is traveling the country right now, trying to rally public support and trying to convince Congress to give its votes to his signature domestic initiative of the second term, which is changing Social Security. That is an urgent priority for the president. And the White House concedes it's an uphill fight right now to get public support and to get congressional support for that initiative. So the president wants to stay focused there.
But they also did not want to elevate this. The low-key approach from the administration is part of its strategy, and this strategy goes back some time in dealing with what if considers to be these belligerent and these provocative statements from the government in Pyongyang.
They did not want the president to talk about this, because that would elevate the crisis, if you will, or elevate the showdown, so they left it to Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary Rice and the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, who said that the White House has heard blustery rhetoric like this before and that he hopes North Korea will reconsider and come back to the bargaining table.
PILGRIM: That makes sense, John. But what is the White House saying, anything, about how to get the six-country talks on North Korea back on track?
KING: No. 1, the White House says it will not change its position. There will be no direct negotiations between the United States and North Korea.
And what has happened in the past, when you have had episodes like this, North Korea making dramatic public statements, is that the White House has waited, had private consultations with all of the others involved -- Russia, South Korea, Japan and China -- and the White House would say that China is the key player here.
It has the closest relationships, both economic and diplomatic, of all those countries with North Korea. And the Chinese in the past have sent emissaries and tried to get North Korea back to the bargaining table.
White House officials say it will have communications among the group, the other four countries involved in the talks, but that the key player is China. And they believe, given the Chinese statement issued in Beijing today, that China will reach out to North Korea and say, "You want to reconsider. You want to come back to the negotiating table."
So watching the Chinese could be the next big step, Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much. John King reporting. Thanks, John.
Iran today stepped up the pressure in its escalating war of words with the United States with its nuclear program. The Iranian president told tens of thousands of supporters in Tehran that any aggressor would face, quote, "a burning hell" if they attacked Iran.
The Iranian leader declared Iran is not looking for war, violence or confrontation, but he insisted, Iran will not abandon its nuclear program.
And many believe that the invasion of illegal aliens into this country is another serious threat to our national security. And today on Capitol Hill, the House voted in favor of new measures to crack down on illegal aliens and tighten our border security.
The proposals are likely to face a much tougher battle in the Senate, and congressional correspondent Joe Johns has our report on that -- Joe.
JOE JOHNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kitty, it's already being viewed by here -- by some here as an attempt, essentially, to squeeze the United States Senate. House Republicans are hoping that by attaching the Real I.D. Act that they passed here today to the Iraq supplemental spending bill, they can effectively get the Senate to consider it, even though a number of Republican senators have opposed the driver's license provisions.
They could frame it as if you vote against the Iraq supplemental spending bill with the immigration provisions included, you are effectively voting against the troops.
Now, all along, the House Republicans who have supported the Real I.D. Act have posed it as a national security question.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM SENSENBRENNER (R), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Today there are over 350 valid driver's license designs issued by the 50 states, and we all know it is very difficult for security officials at airports to tell the real I.D. cards from the counterfeit ones.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Now, here's what the Real I.D. Act does. It essentially bans illegal immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses. It completes U.S./Mexico border fences in California. It allows deportation of people on terrorism-related grounds, and it makes it harder for asylum applications to get approved.
Democrats are arguing that this bill essentially is a back-door attempt to create a national identification card.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. SILVESTRE REYES (D), TEXAS: By forcing state governments to maintain and share files on almost every adult in the state, this bill will truly usher in the era of Big Brother. The database could be used to track American movements, store information on political activities, and even store information on gun ownership.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Now, the Iraq supplemental spending request is expected to come up here from the White House on Monday, and it will probably play out on the House floor sometime in March.
Kitty, back to you.
PILGRIM: Joe, what does today's action tell us about the sentiment on the Hill about the president's overall proposals for immigration reform?
JOHNS: Well, one of those things, of course, a lot of people here on Capitol Hill talk about is the guest worker program that the administration has floated.
And a number of conservatives have already said, at least off the record so far, that, in their view, this is the kind of thing that the president cannot gin up support for by simply throwing his support behind this immigration provision that was on the floor today.
They say that bill was already going to pass, and the fact is there are a lot of people here who are still very much opposed to the guest worker idea that was floated a few weeks ago, Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much.
Joe Johns.
In the Senate today, lawmakers today strongly supported legislation designed to curb class-action lawsuits. Now the bill will shift most class-action lawsuits from state courts to federal courts. Federal courts have generally been less sympathetic to class-action lawsuits. The legislation approved by the Senate is part of President Bush's drive to overhaul this country's civil justice system.
Well, next, the nuclear threat from North Korea and why this country may not have enough troops to respond.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Iraqi police today fought a two-hour gun battle with insurgents in a southern Baghdad suburb. Six police officers were killed and 20 wounded. The number of insurgent casualties is not known.
Well, after the battle, police rounded up dozens of suspects. The firefight began when Iraqi police launched an operation to find insurgent weapons.
And, in central Baghdad today, a car bomb narrowly missed an American military patrol. Three Iraqis were killed, and three wounded. There were no American casualties.
Despite the stress on the military from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon wants to delay any decision on permanently increasing the size of the Army.
But the United States faces dangerous new threats from Iran and North Korea. A war in the Korean peninsula could possibly place huge unsustainable demands on our military.
The United States reportedly plans to send almost 700,000 troops to South Korea in the event of a war with North Korea, yet the military has barely enough forces to maintain 150,000 forces in Iraq.
Well, joining me now is General David Grange.
And thanks very much for being with us.
How do you assess the threat from North Korea this evening, General?
BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, North Korea has always been a threat for years and years. They're unpredictable. I do believe, though, they could be contained. I think with the situation, with the power of the South Korean Army, the military capabilities of Japan and the fact that China wants nothing to do with North Korea going to war will, in fact, prevent war, but it's something that has to be planned for.
PILGRIM: Of course, the response for other nations is key in this. However, the 700,000 troops if war breaks out -- that is the statement from South Korea today -- how do you assess that statement, and do you think it's possible to send that many troops if there's a problem?
GRANGE: Well, I don't know if the South Korean assessment of the numbers of troops -- and that's probably a number from all the different services of the armed forces, plus some coalition forces, but there's no doubt in my mind that the U.S. armed forces can defend South Korea and attack and destroy whatever is necessary in North Korea if there is a war.
The question would be: Can you put an occupation force on the ground that's suitable enough to accomplish the mission after the war at the same time you're doing what we're doing in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere?
PILGRIM: The military option for the Korean peninsula is probably the last resort. The number of casualties would be huge, wouldn't they, General?
GRANGE: I believe so. It is a tough army. They're rather fanatical. Seoul is within distance of quite a few conventional weapons systems so there would be a lot of South Korean civilian casualties before you could do enough damage to keep that -- those fires off of -- off South Korea. So, yes, there would be a lot of casualties.
PILGRIM: Let me move to Iran for a second. Former weapons inspector David Kay said the statements that the United States has made about Iran lately suggest it's deja vu all over again. He, of course, referring to bellicose statements against Iraq. Do you think that that's an accurate assessment?
GRANGE: Well, I don't agree with Dr. Kay on a lot of those points because, in several strategic forums, we didn't agree. I don't think that it's the same situation because everybody is saying, OK, the war would be just because of WMD.
You know, the Iraq war -- the main reason wasn't about that, it was about changing the region for the better of mankind in that area and for the security of the United States, and I fully believe that.
War in Iran may not be a cookie-cutter look of what happened in Iraq. It may be limited strikes on facilities, very similar to what the Israeli Air Force did to the Iraqi reactors when they attacked those in Iraq.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much.
General David Grange.
Thank you.
GRANGE: My pleasure.
PILGRIM: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has launched a charm offensive towards France, and it comes two years after Rumsfeld famously blasted the French for being part of what he called "old Europe."
Well, Rumsfeld has been attending a NATO meeting in the southern French city of Nice, and, today, there was no talk of strained relations between the United States and France in the period before the war in Iraq. Instead, Rumsfeld spoke fondly about his previous visits to France, and he praised NATO as "an enormously valuable alliance."
Back in Washington, there were less kind words about Europe and the Muslim world from Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz today. Wolfowitz said the European military response to the tsunami disaster could have been greater.
But Wolfowitz who visited Indonesia was more critical of the Muslim world's response. Wolfowitz said there's been very little generosity so far from parts of the Muslim world "that are big on talking about jihad and other things," even though many of the victims were Muslim.
Well, next, how our nation's power grid is vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: We continue now with our series of special reports on "America's Security Risks" and, tonight, the nation's power grid vulnerable to a terrorist attack, and the government and the power industry are urgently trying to fix that problem before it's too late.
Casey Wian reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Northeast power outage in August 2003 was just a preview of what security experts say could be coming soon, a large-scale attack on the computer systems that control the nation's electric power grid.
The complicated network of generating plants, transmission stations and electric lines was developed before anyone imagined the Internet could cheaply link them all together, yet provide access to a hacker in Hackensack or a terrorist in Tehran.
KENNETH WATTS, IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY: There is vulnerabilities to the electrical power grid, you know, from insider attacks, terrorists, hackers, maybe even nation states who could attack these systems. I believe, yes, it could happen. I don't quite understand why it hasn't happened yet.
WIAN: A government-funded program at the Idaho National Laboratory is working to plug the cyberholes in power grid computer systems. Researchers run tests using their own power plant and grid, then share results with the industry. The project is expected to take another seven years.
While a temporary disruption of the power grid would be bad enough, security experts are most worried about a combination attack. Imagine a giant bomb blast in a big city timed with a widespread power outage to disrupt emergency communication and rescue efforts.
Bill Flynt is the former director of the U.S. Army's Homeland Security Threat Office.
LT. COL. BILL FLYNT (RET.), CEO, THE FLYNT GROUP: Certainly, the most dangerous would be a hybrid threat that was sophisticated enough to combine both physical attack with a cyberattack in simultaneity against multiple targets.
The government would be well-served to initiate and continue and sustain programs that send -- to figuratively quote Warren Zevon on lawyers, guns and money in the private sector -- to the private sector and assist them in these efforts.
WIAN: Several government and power industry groups are working on the problem, and federal funding for improvements to power grid cybersecurity and other critical infrastructure systems has increased sevenfold since 2001.
(on camera): But time may be running short. According to a General Accounting Office report, a survey of security experts and industry executives found that most believe they'll be the target of a large-scale cyberattack before the middle of next year.
Casey Wian, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: More detail tonight on a dramatic story we told you about last night and that story about the Coast Guard rescuing three men off the coast of Massachusetts when their boat sank. Now we have learned that one of the men rescued is the brother of a fisherman who was lost at sea in 1991 aboard the Andrea Gail. That tragedy was portrayed in the book and film "The Perfect Storm."
In California tonight, a 14-year-old girl was rescued after she fell some 40 feet down the side of a cliff while hiking. She was hanging 150 feet above the ground. Firefighters and sheriff's deputies used a helicopter to bring the girl to safety. She only received minor injuries.
Next, North Korea's desperation and how it could affect the nuclear standoff. Two of the leading members of the House International Relations Committee join me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
In a moment, two leading members of the House International Relations Committee join me to talk about today's disturbing admission from North Korea.
But, first, these stories.
Pope John Paul II is back at the Vatican tonight after more than a week in the hospital for a respiratory infection. The pope's illness raised questions about whether he would step down. The Vatican did not rule out a resignation, but said the pope would make the decision himself.
In Saudi Arabia, men are voting in a landmark election. One step in a slow process of reforming the country's monarchy. Voters will elect just half the members of local councils, while the government will appoint other members. Women are excluded from the voting.
A New York lawyer was convicted today of helping a terrorist group. Lynne Stewart was found guilty of helps a radical Egyptian sheik urge his followers to carry out terror attacks. The sheik is serving a life sentence for a conspiracy to blow up several U.S. landmarks. Two other defendants were also convicted in the case.
And in Britain, Prince Charles is set to marry Camilla Parker Bowles in April in a civil service. The couple has been a long on and off romance which began before Prince Charles met Princess Diana. They received the blessing of Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth II.
The United States is tonight facing an escalating nuclear confrontation with Iran and North Korea at the same time our troops are fighting a war in Iraq. Well, the confrontation took a dramatic new turn today when North Korea admitted for the first time publicly that it had nuclear weapons.
Well, joining me now are two leading congressmen on the International Relations Committee. Congressman Tom Lantos is the ranking Democrat on that committee, and he visited North Korea last month. And Congressman Chris Smith is the vice chairman of the International Relations Committee. And they both join me from Capitol Hill.
And thanks for being with us.
REP. TOM LANTOS (D), CALIFORNIA: It's a pleasure.
PILGRIM: Congressman Lantos, I really have to ask you first you were in Pyongyang January 8 to the 11th, and you said that the North Koreans were cooperative. They invited you back. Is today's announcement a surprise?
LANTOS: No, it really isn't a surprise. This is part of their marketing tactics. I think it's important for us to keep our cool. North Korea is not looking for any military action. It's a desperately poor country, and they are holding out for better terms before they return to the six-party talks. I told them in three days of very serious discussions that is their only chance to improve their economic conditions. The United States will not sit down with them alone. This is not an American problem, it's a regional problem. And our colleagues in the six-party talks: China, Russia, South Korea, and Japan, are very pleased to sit down with them and us together to work out their future.
It is a country which desperately needs economic and energy help. 90 percent of their energy comes from China. China has enormous leverage over them. And I think it's important for us to cool the rhetoric. There will not be a war in Korea.
PILGRIM: In fact, the rhetoric was on their part today, that they're walking out of six-party talks. Does that take you by surprise given your positive conversations you had about the diplomatic talks?
LANTOS: Well, they're not walking out because the six-party talks at present are simply nonexistent. They are holding out for better terms before they return. And my judgment is that before long, the six-party talks will resume and North Korea will participate.
PILGRIM: All right. Congressman Smith, I want to get you in on this. There have been 3 rounds of six-party talks. The fourth was scheduled for September, and then it went away. Has not been able to get back on track and yet. And you have this declaration from North Korea. It doesn't seem they're all that willing to participate? What is your assessment?
REP. CHRIS SMITH, (R) INTL. RELATIONS COMMITTEE: I think, and I would agree with my good friend and colleague Tom Lantos, that even using the idea it's a showdown in the offing here is misleading. The foreign ministry's own statement says at the very end, there's no change in our principal stance of resolving the issue through dialogue and negotiations. And the ultimate goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula.
The six-party talks are a means to that end and an end to some of the gross human rights violations that take place in North Korea every day. Upwards of 200,000 political prisoners, an unbelievable manmade famine directly attributable to Kim Jong-Il's policies.
The six-party talks, I think, are a means to try to get at least some democratization, some opening up -- an end to the isolation. Nobody wants an isolated North Korea. We want it more open and more robust in terms of his exchanges with countries.
And I also would also agree that China is disproportionately advantaged to make a difference here. And my hope is they would push more aggressively for the six-party talks to resume so we that will not see any other -- no miscalculations or anything of the kind.
We have made it very clear, the United States government, that we had no, zero, intentions of invading. And they need to take our word at face value, because that is our word, and it's real and it's not going to change. We want to see, again, an opening up of that country.
The Congress, by almost unanimous votes, House and Senate, passed the Human Rights in North Korea Act, and has sent it to the president, he signed it into law. It is a very significant statement of solidarity, Republican/Democrat, that we are united, like the other countries of the world -- North Korea has it within their means to come out of isolation. We are asking them -- there's an engraved invitation, if you will, for them to enter into the free world, even if its by baby steps. And great things will happen consistent with that movement towards opening up and stopping the repression of their own people.
PILGRIM: It has been suggested by political strategists that this is entirely a move to solicit additional funds, help, support, aid. Do you see it as a strategy?
SMITH: You know, again I think Tom was right when he said -- you're talking about walking out of the talks, the talks are nonexistent. They talk about suspending the talks.
I think now -- to say that they have nuclear weapons when we think they've had as many as 6 to 12 for some time now, and maybe it's a bluff, we don't know. But I would take that, and I think we all need to take it somewhat at face value and say you have them. There is a nuclear deterrent on the Korean Peninsula. Our hope is to make it non-nuclear. And they are arguing, I think, to get the best deal possible.
And, you know, we're willing to provide a best deal possible, but come forward. Their statement is riddled with -- they talk about freedom and democracy flourishing in their country. There was an election in 2003, a parliamentary election. Only Democratic front candidates could run for their parliament. And we all know Kim Jong- Il has an ironclad grasp on the leadership right now.
So, you know, we want to talk with absolute honesty and transparency. And again, there is an invitation on our side that good things, positive things will flow from the whole world community. Russia has denounced this action today as have just about every other country in the world, including China.
PILGRIM: Congressman Lantos, your assessment, is it an attempt to gain more aid?
LANTOS: I believe so.
One of the most interesting things I found during my 3 days of discussions with them, that they were fascinated by my story of the Libyan example.
As you know, I went to Libya 3 times last year, had lengthy discussions with Colonel Gadhafi. Libya has given up all its nuclear programs. And of course Libya is now welcomed back into the community of civilized nations. Tony Blair was there, Jacques Chirac was there, Schroeder of Germany was there. We are looking for a site for our new embassy complex.
And the North Koreans were fascinated by this story. I told them that the Libyan example is there for them to follow. If they give up their nuclear program, there will be economic aid, energy aid and an infinitely better life for the people of Korea.
PILGRIM: Well, let's hope that that is an example that has resonance with North Korea. Thanks very much for joining us.
LANTOS: I think it will.
SMITH: Thank you.
PILGRIM: Congressman Tom Lantos and Chris Smith, thank you.
That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. "How should the United States deal with the escalating nuclear threat from North Korea? By diplomacy, economic sanctions, military action, or ignore it." Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. And we'll bring you the results later in the show.
Next, unfair trade could be costing of millions of American jobs.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: The U.S. trade deficit soared to a staggering new all- time high, $617 billion last year. Our trade deficit with China also reached another record, $162 billion. That's the largest deficit ever recorded with a single country. Those bleak numbers represent the loss of thousands of American jobs. Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): 25 Pennsylvania union workers visited Capital Hill this week seeking help for the pipe and tube industry. Their company Wheatlan Tube (ph) has been battered by a surge of Chinese imports. Nearly 200 employees have been laid off since December.
DOMINIC VADALA, RETIRED STEELWORKER: Our country is being devastated by imports. It's got to be -- it's got to stop. Where's Patriotism Act? Whatever happened to buy America first? Whatever happened to that?
SYLVESTER: The workers found sympathetic ears but no quick fix. The Commerce Departments new figures show the trade deficit in 2004 climbed to $617.7 billion, a 24.4 percent increase above the previous record. The trade deficit with China alone with $162 billion, up just over 30 percent. The United States lost significant ground in manufactured high-tech products, computers and electronics. Even in areas like agriculture, the United States saw 40 percent decline in the trade surplus. Economists say the United States is borrowing an average of $3 billion each business day to pay for the imports.
ROBERT SCOTT, ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE: At some point the banker is going to cut us off, and we're getting close to that point right now. If they cut off the supply of loans, then interest rates are going to go up, our economy is quite likely to tank.
SYLVESTER: But not everyone believes the trade deficit is a drag on the U.S. economy.
DAN GRISWOLD, CATO INSTITUTE: The trade deficit isn't a cause of bad things in our economy. It's generally a sign of good things. One of those good things is robust domestic demand. U.S. consumers and businesses are able to buy in the international marketplace.
SYLVESTER: That does not ease concerns that as the United States imports from other countries, it exports its wealth.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: A bill was introduced this afternoon by Senators Hillary Clinton and Byron Dorgan and Representative Ben Cardin. It would force the U.S. Trade Representative Office to take action if the trade deficit exceeds 5 percent of GDP, which it did last year -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much, Lisa Sylvester.
Richard Trumka is the head of the nation's largest trade union and he believes that exploding trade deficit represents loss of millions of American jobs. Richard Trumka, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO joins me tonight from Washington. Thanks very much for being with us.
RICHARD TRUMKA, SECRETARY-TREASURER, AFL-CIO: Thanks for having me. I appreciate it very much.
PILGRIM: This trade deficit up 30 percent from last year with China. How many American jobs do you think have been affected?
TRUMKA: Hundreds of thousands. With China alone, the last two years, we've lost almost half a million. With NAFTA, the NAFTA agreement has cost us over 900,000 jobs. We've lost 2.7 million manufacturing jobs. At first they were blue collar jobs, now they're advancing into the advanced technology jobs. And what we're seek, Kitty, is that the loss of manufacturing jobs is a threat to our economic, but the loss of manufacturing capacity, the intellectual and the technical ability to produce things is actually a threat to our national security. So you're seeing hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, you're seeing the economy teetering right now.
PILGRIM: Now, what about the argument that the U.S. economy is growing so rapidly, U.S. consumers are benefiting from the cheaper imports from China, that it's actually a net plus for the economy, do you agree with that?
TRUMKA: Of course I don't. When you lose your manufacturing capacity, that's not good. When you lose your ability to design things, that means the next best idea, the next generation of products and the next investment will be somewhere else. That's not good for us. We're losing our manufacturing capabilities, we're giving away the best jobs that we have. We're negotiating bad trade deals, and as you can see each year it gets worse. First it was manufacturing, now it's advanced -- moved to advanced technology, agriculture for the last couple months of last year went into a deficit, and service, which heretofore have been a plus have been cut in half. Our surplus has been cut in half over the last three years. So the trends are all downward and the loss of jobs are all upward.
PILGRIM: It's very hard to reengineering trade flows, but some senators want to impose a 27 percent tariff On Chinese goods unless China stops manipulating its currency. And many believe that's why there's this imbalance in the system. What do you think about that 27 percent tariff?
TRUMKA: Well, there are a lot of good ideas. That's one thing that should be done. China should not be manipulating its currency, that violates all trade laws. It violates the treaty, the agreements that they have with us. It's actually closer to 40 percent, the advantage. But China also refuses to enforce its own health and safety laws, its own child labor laws and prison laws, and that gives them another 40 percent advantage. What we need is to get away from the failed model of NAFTA, because it's proven it doesn't work. It cost us jobs. It hurts us in trade.
We need to enforce the trade agreements that we currently have. We need to have some of the legislation that's being talked about, and then we need to stop rewarding companies with tax code and other financial incentives for taking jobs overseas. We have to stop all of that. A combination of those things will stop things and start to turn it around.
PILGRIM: One quick question, there's some -- bipartisan group of lawmakers that wants to discontinue the normal trade relations with China.
What do you think of that measure?
TRUMKA: We thought it shouldn't have been passed -- PNTR shouldn't have been passed in the first place, because it took away the only club we had. Before we had a club every year, they would have to renew it, and look at it, and the Congress would have to pass on it. Now they have to do nothing. And as you see it, the number of their human rights violations increases, their violations of the trade law increases, they simply thumb their nose at us. And last year, with a falling dollar, their deficit between the two of us increases 30 percent. We simply can't sustain that.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very much for being with us, Richard Trumka.
TRUMKA: Thanks for having me, Kitty. I appreciate it very much.
PILGRIM: Howard Dean is expected to be selected this weekend as the new chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Dean is the clear front-runner after his only major competitor for the job dropped out of the running. And Dean will replace outgoing chairmen Terry McAuliffe, who did not seek another term.
Well, according to the latest CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll, the Democratic Party believes Howard Dean is the man to lead the fight to regain power in Washington. Senior political analyst Bill Schneider reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST (voice-over): As the Democrats gather in Washington, souls have been searched, recriminations have been visited. And what have they concluded? The Gallup organization interviewed 223 members of the Democratic National Committee and asked them what went wrong this year. Current party chairman has his answer.
TERRY MCAULIFFE, CHMN, DEMOCRATIC NATL. COMMITTEE: We had the biggest voter turnout we've ever had. Judy, we ran against the incumbent president while at war.
SCHNEIDER: Members of the Democratic National Committee agree, according to the new CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup surveyor. Their number one reason of four choices offered, because Republicans ran an incumbent president during wartime. Only 20 percent said it was because Democrats couldn't match the Republicans' grassroots effort. Even fewer blame John Kerry's weaknesses as a candidate. And also almost no committee member said, it was because of the parties issue positions. Nothing wrong with what we believed, Democrats say, which is what the perspective new chairman says, too.
HOWARD DEAN, CANDIDATE FOR DNC CHAIR: We ought not to change our faith. We need to talk about who we are as Democrats, and we need to be proud to be Democrats every step of the way.
SCHNEIDER: But wait a minute, look at this. Most committee members interviewed said they would rather see the Democratic Party become more moderate, rather than more liberal. And they thought the key to future Democratic victory was to reach out to undecided and swing voters rather than mobilize the party base. So, what do Democratic National Committee members see in Dean, not ideology.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not the Democratic National Committee chairman that sets policy.
SCHNEIDER: What they see in Dean is fight.
DONNIE FOWLER, CANDIDATE FOR DNC CHAIR: Just like I think the party should do, Howard Dean stands up and fights back for what he believes in.
SCHNEIDER: Two thirds said Democrats should try to defeat the Republican agenda rather than try to find areas of compromise. If Democrats are ready to fight, Dean's their man.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right now the party seems pretty indecisive about whether it's going, but Governor Dean doesn't seem that way. That's why I think he has a lot of appeal. SCHNEIDER: The choice of Dean is not a statement about ideology, it's statement about strategy. The statement is -- Democrats are ready to stand and fight.
Bill Schneider, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Well, ideology, strategy, let's turn to democracy. And "Tonight's Thought" is on democracy. "Words like freedom, justice, democracy are not common concepts. On the contrary they are rare. People are not born knowing what these are. It takes enormous and, above all, individual effort to arrive at the respect for other people that these words imply."
Coming up next, why one of this country's leading national security experts says a nuclear attack on this country could be inevitable unless we act soon.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: As we reported, North Korea today claimed for the first time publicly that it had nuclear weapons. And my next guest says North Korea is known as Missiles R Us for its willingness to sell weapons. He also says it will be next to impossible for the United States to police any sale of nuclear materials. Graham Allison is the author of "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Disaster," and he joins me tonight from Boston. Thanks for joining us.
GRAHAM ALLISON, AUTHOR, "NUCLEAR TERRORISM": Thank you, Kitty.
PILGRIM: North Korea, very bellicose statement, I think. What is your assessment of the real threat?
ALLISON: Well, if this is true, and we still don't know, but we have no basis for dismissing it, this will be a huge setback. North Korea, as you've mentioned, known in the business as Missiles R Us. It's an economic basket case, a desperate state that sells missiles to whomever will pay. If it now has a nuclear arsenal and completes its current efforts to have a production line that will allow it to have another few bombs every year, I see no reason for believing that it won't become Nukes R Us, selling nuclear weapons to somebody like Osama bin Laden, who could bring them to one of our cities, or to other states. So I think this is a huge setback, if true, and I think it actually exposes the risk in the policy that we've been following, which is basically to threaten North Korea, but then to neglect them.
PILGRIM: Your book lays out some chilling scenarios about just how easy it would be to have a nuclear incident in an American city. North Korea is an exporter of arms. What policy options do we have against North Korea, short of a military option?
ALLISON: Well, I think that the options at this stage are not very good, and they get worse every day. I think one is to simply try to explain it away and live with it. And I think there will be a huge temptation in the administration to do that, because their neglect has brought us to this point. I think that's a very important point, that we've been basically looking elsewhere. We threatened North Korea in the president's State of the Union speech in January of 2002, and then we've been looking elsewhere, while they've been working on the stuff of their nuclear arsenal, which they've now announced.
Secondly -- so first it would be to just try to accept it. I think that could be catastrophic, because I don't see why such a North Korea, given what we know about its character, would not ultimately be selling weapons from which -- material from which a nuclear bomb could be made that would explode in an American city, or bombs themselves.
A second option would be to try to go sit down with them now, with a bundle of carrots and some sticks, and I try to lay out in the book a strategy to that end. I think that it requires, unlike what we've been doing in the past, a readiness to say to them, OK, the South Koreans and the Japanese are prepared to provide financial assistance to people who are desperate, that's fine. The U.S. would give them an assurance that we would not attack them to change their regime by force, but they would have to freeze where they are now, not complete these production lines for producing additional nuclear weapons, do that in a verifiable fashion, and then start backing up on a step-by-step basis.
Now, in the book, I explain why I think that in order to make that deal successful, we would have also to be able to pose to them a credible military threat to destroy the facilities that we can identify, but that's a harder and harder task the more nuclear weapons they have.
PILGRIM: I really can't let you go without asking you a very important question. How soon do you think we could see some sort of nuclear incident in the United States and is it likely?
ALLISON: Well, in my book I say it's inevitable if we just keep doing what we're doing. But the good news is, it's preventable. So a punchlist of feasible and affordable actions, some of which we're not taking, but that if we took we could essentially prevent it.
I would make the bets if we just keep doing what we're doing, and North Korea just keeps doing what it's doing and Russia and the others, I think it's more likely than not, so it's at least 51 percent, that we see actually a nuclear bomb explode, God forbid, in an American city in the decade ahead. And there's no reason why it couldn't happen, unfortunately, tomorrow. So I think the purpose in trying to understand the threat is not to terrify us, but to mobilize us.
PILGRIM: The status quo is dangerous. Thank you very much for joining us tonight, Graham Allison.
ALLISON: Thank you so much for having me.
PILGRIM: A reminder now to vote in tonight's poll -- how should the United States deal with the escalating nuclear threat from North Korea? Diplomacy, economic sanctions, military action, or ignore it? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll bring you the results in a few minutes, and we'll have a preview of what's ahead tomorrow.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Now, the results of tonight's poll. Sixty-three percent of you believe the United States should use diplomacy to deal with the escalating nuclear threat from North Korea; 22 percent say economic sanctions, 7 percent military action. And 8 percent say ignore it.
Thanks for joining us. Tomorrow, how safe or unsafe are our bridges and tunnels? Our special report.
Also, police across the country say the Bush administration is gutting the programs that help secure our homeland.
And what's next for Iraq?
For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
