Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Interview With Filmmaker Michael Kirk
Aired February 20, 2003 - 14:41 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.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Within the Bush administration, there is arguably only one strategic thinker, and it is not the secretary of defense, it is not Colin Powell. The one strategic thinker is Paul Wolfowitz, who is the No. 2 man at Defense.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: That insight, which certain people would surely dispute, comes from a PBS documentary called "The War Behind Closed Doors." It is the latest project from the prolific filmmaker Michael Kirk, and it airs tonight on the PBS series "Frontline".
The producer, writer, and director is in Boston to talk about it -- hi, Michael.
MICHAEL KIRK, DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER: Hi, Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well, first of all, tell me how you came up with this idea. How did you get to where we are now?
KIRK: Well, a lot of people I know have been asking me the question which is, I think, on everybody's mind right now, which is, Why does the president of the United States seem so determined to go to war?
So I set out to try to find the answer to that question.
PHILLIPS: All right. Well, let's talk about some of the questions that you answer in this documentary. We just aired a clip talking about Paul Wolfowitz. Big thinker, big character, let's talk about the assistant defense secretary and why he plays such a big part in your documentary.
KIRK: Well, one of the things that we discovered, Kyra, was that there are basically two groups that have been at war behind closed doors in the Oval office and in the secret councils of power around the president of the United States, essentially since September 11.
One side, a group of people who go all the way back to the Reagan administration, call themselves the neo-Reaganites, neo-conservatives, hawks, and that is Paul Wolfowitz, who is arguably the brains of the outfit. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, William Crystal (ph), who used to be the chief of staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, and many others who have have found themselves at the Defense Department arguing for a new kind of American posture in the world based on the notion of preemption.
The other side, led by Colin Powell, who we all know used to be the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, worked for the president's father, represents a group of Republicans called the realists, who are very much in favor of the idea of containment, that is that we could contain Saddam Hussein, that we could contain our enemies around the world. These two forces have been at war with each other behind closed doors basically since the end of the Gulf War last time.
PHILLIPS: All right. Let's talk about -- you brought up Colin Powell and the realists, as you put it. He's kind of caused a lot of confusion. He came out talking about containment, but then when he had his big speech a couple of weeks ago, he was showing evidence of why the U.S. should invade Iraq. What happened here? How did this change occur?
KIRK: I think it's one of the most confusing and one of the most interesting things that have happened in the last few months as we charted what happened in this war behind closed doors. Very much Colin Powell's argument is that he could -- that Saddam Hussein could be contained. Certainly that the United States should not go to war without a coalition of partners, much like the president's father, who they all call "41" did.
To be sure, "41" wanted to go to war, but he wanted to go to war with a coalition. His son has not until just recently. Colin Powell argued very hard for that. I think near the end, what we've witnessed and what we certainly show in our program tonight is the way that Colin Powell has been, if not marginalized, at least put into a position where he's serving the ends of the hawks in this particular moment.
Powell goes to the United Nations because -- he kind of won a small tactical argument with the president to get him to go in September. I think Bush expected it to all go pretty quickly when it got to the United Nations. It took eight weeks for the resolution, it took weeks more to get the inspectors there.
I do believe that the president has lost patience, and has all but signaled to Powell who was, after all, a soldier, and does, after all, salute the commander in chief, signaled that he should go to the United Nations and resolve this in the United States' favor, and that's why Powell went a week and a half ago.
PHILLIPS: All right, Michael. Let's roll a clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Containing Saddam would prove to be a big job, creating no-fly zones, economic sanctions, U.N. inspections. There were attempts to overthrow him, and later even kill him. Nevertheless, Saddam would survive and was always challenging containment. Right after the Gulf War, Paul Wolfowitz began to work on a new policy.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIPS: So -- we're sort of setting up the clip, or we sort of set up the clip here, Michael. Let's talk a little bit more. What do you think is probably the biggest argument -- do you think you disproved something, or proved something strongly in this documentary, or you think you're just sort of laying out the overall debate of containment versus war?
KIRK: I think what people who watch the program will walk away with is not only a very good understanding of why the president -- when the president decided to go to war and why. The answer is he decided to go to war right after September 11, within that first week. Why? Because I think the argument was made very strongly that we're in a new world, and that world is not the world of the Cold War. That world is the world of rogue states. That is the world of a demonstration that we should exercise American power to protect American values. That is a world that appeals to George W. Bush. It is a world of dichotomies, good versus evil, justice versus repression. Those are the themes George Bush sounded in the axis of evil speech, the State of the Union speech a year ago in January, and that is what started us on the course to war.
So the program tonight demonstrates why the president of the United States seems so determined to go to war, who the winners, who the losers were in that war behind closed doors, and in a funny way -- or I think in an interesting way, sets the tone for the kind of foreign policy America will face in the next 10, 20, 30 and 40 years.
PHILLIPS: That is no doubt going to change forever, I think. Michael Kirk, "The War Behind Closed Doors." It's a "Frontline" special. It airs tonight at 9:00 p.m. Eastern time on your local public television station.
Thanks so much for being with us.
KIRK: Thank you, Kyra.
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 20, 2003 - 14:41 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Within the Bush administration, there is arguably only one strategic thinker, and it is not the secretary of defense, it is not Colin Powell. The one strategic thinker is Paul Wolfowitz, who is the No. 2 man at Defense.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: That insight, which certain people would surely dispute, comes from a PBS documentary called "The War Behind Closed Doors." It is the latest project from the prolific filmmaker Michael Kirk, and it airs tonight on the PBS series "Frontline".
The producer, writer, and director is in Boston to talk about it -- hi, Michael.
MICHAEL KIRK, DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER: Hi, Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well, first of all, tell me how you came up with this idea. How did you get to where we are now?
KIRK: Well, a lot of people I know have been asking me the question which is, I think, on everybody's mind right now, which is, Why does the president of the United States seem so determined to go to war?
So I set out to try to find the answer to that question.
PHILLIPS: All right. Well, let's talk about some of the questions that you answer in this documentary. We just aired a clip talking about Paul Wolfowitz. Big thinker, big character, let's talk about the assistant defense secretary and why he plays such a big part in your documentary.
KIRK: Well, one of the things that we discovered, Kyra, was that there are basically two groups that have been at war behind closed doors in the Oval office and in the secret councils of power around the president of the United States, essentially since September 11.
One side, a group of people who go all the way back to the Reagan administration, call themselves the neo-Reaganites, neo-conservatives, hawks, and that is Paul Wolfowitz, who is arguably the brains of the outfit. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, William Crystal (ph), who used to be the chief of staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, and many others who have have found themselves at the Defense Department arguing for a new kind of American posture in the world based on the notion of preemption.
The other side, led by Colin Powell, who we all know used to be the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, worked for the president's father, represents a group of Republicans called the realists, who are very much in favor of the idea of containment, that is that we could contain Saddam Hussein, that we could contain our enemies around the world. These two forces have been at war with each other behind closed doors basically since the end of the Gulf War last time.
PHILLIPS: All right. Let's talk about -- you brought up Colin Powell and the realists, as you put it. He's kind of caused a lot of confusion. He came out talking about containment, but then when he had his big speech a couple of weeks ago, he was showing evidence of why the U.S. should invade Iraq. What happened here? How did this change occur?
KIRK: I think it's one of the most confusing and one of the most interesting things that have happened in the last few months as we charted what happened in this war behind closed doors. Very much Colin Powell's argument is that he could -- that Saddam Hussein could be contained. Certainly that the United States should not go to war without a coalition of partners, much like the president's father, who they all call "41" did.
To be sure, "41" wanted to go to war, but he wanted to go to war with a coalition. His son has not until just recently. Colin Powell argued very hard for that. I think near the end, what we've witnessed and what we certainly show in our program tonight is the way that Colin Powell has been, if not marginalized, at least put into a position where he's serving the ends of the hawks in this particular moment.
Powell goes to the United Nations because -- he kind of won a small tactical argument with the president to get him to go in September. I think Bush expected it to all go pretty quickly when it got to the United Nations. It took eight weeks for the resolution, it took weeks more to get the inspectors there.
I do believe that the president has lost patience, and has all but signaled to Powell who was, after all, a soldier, and does, after all, salute the commander in chief, signaled that he should go to the United Nations and resolve this in the United States' favor, and that's why Powell went a week and a half ago.
PHILLIPS: All right, Michael. Let's roll a clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Containing Saddam would prove to be a big job, creating no-fly zones, economic sanctions, U.N. inspections. There were attempts to overthrow him, and later even kill him. Nevertheless, Saddam would survive and was always challenging containment. Right after the Gulf War, Paul Wolfowitz began to work on a new policy.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIPS: So -- we're sort of setting up the clip, or we sort of set up the clip here, Michael. Let's talk a little bit more. What do you think is probably the biggest argument -- do you think you disproved something, or proved something strongly in this documentary, or you think you're just sort of laying out the overall debate of containment versus war?
KIRK: I think what people who watch the program will walk away with is not only a very good understanding of why the president -- when the president decided to go to war and why. The answer is he decided to go to war right after September 11, within that first week. Why? Because I think the argument was made very strongly that we're in a new world, and that world is not the world of the Cold War. That world is the world of rogue states. That is the world of a demonstration that we should exercise American power to protect American values. That is a world that appeals to George W. Bush. It is a world of dichotomies, good versus evil, justice versus repression. Those are the themes George Bush sounded in the axis of evil speech, the State of the Union speech a year ago in January, and that is what started us on the course to war.
So the program tonight demonstrates why the president of the United States seems so determined to go to war, who the winners, who the losers were in that war behind closed doors, and in a funny way -- or I think in an interesting way, sets the tone for the kind of foreign policy America will face in the next 10, 20, 30 and 40 years.
PHILLIPS: That is no doubt going to change forever, I think. Michael Kirk, "The War Behind Closed Doors." It's a "Frontline" special. It airs tonight at 9:00 p.m. Eastern time on your local public television station.
Thanks so much for being with us.
KIRK: Thank you, Kyra.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
