Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Secretary of State Powell: A Voice of Moderation in U.S. Foreign Policy?

Aired May 14, 2001 - 10:22   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.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We've just had that exclusive interview, Andrea Koppel's sit-down one-on-one interview with Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Let's get some reaction now to what the secretary of state just said. Joining us to lend some perspective, our roundtable is back. Our Washington bureau chief Frank Sesno, standing by in London, Joshua Cooper Ramo, "Time" magazine's assistant managing editor and world section editor. Also in London, our chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour. Thanks for staying with us.

Joshua, we're going to start with you. You made a bold statement going into that interview saying that not only has U.S. international policy changed since the Clinton administration with the Bush administration, but you've observed it to change during the Bush administration. I'm wondering as you listened to the secretary of state did you hear any nuances of change yet again?

JOSHUA COOPER RAMO, "TIME": Well, I think a few key takeaways from this, Daryn. One of them is that traditional areas of U.S. engagement are obviously no longer as operative for this administration as they were for the Clinton administration and Secretary Powell was very clear about talking about Israel, about talking about Iraq, talking about Russia. You did not hear any sign there that there's going to be major new policy initiatives.

His reaction to the violence in Israel wasn't to say we're trying to figure out how to get involved, we're trying to look for a solution. Instead, it was to observe the same kind of tone of moderation and distance that he's had all along. So one of the key takeaways from this interview is that they are not looking to get aggressively involved in the Mideast.

A second important takeaway, I think, is the fact that Powell remains very much a voice of moderation. All of his rhetoric was about downplaying the international significance of some of the things that they've done, trying to sound cooperative, trying to sound like they were listening. But at the same time, he's clearly a man who fights for his belief inside the administration.

He described at one point North Korea, saying I got a little far forward on my skis. I think a lot of people from the outside felt that this looked like, not like a guy who was far forward on his skis, but like a guy who was getting knifed by the hard-liners inside the administration. And so he's obviously fighting very hard for his beliefs. Whether or not he wins at the end of the day, that's a separate question.

KAGAN: Christiane, let's bring you in, and talking about the Middle East, it did seem in that interview like the secretary of state was kind of stepping back on those skis a little bit on the Middle East, going to the terms of excessive and disproportionate. Brought them up again in talking about the Israelis. Yet today his comments seemed to go more toward we're talking to both sides, we both want, want both sides to have moderate restraint -- to have restraint and moderate language.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think to follow-up on what Joshua said that there seemed to be no new initiatives on some of the key policy areas that the United States is traditionally the diplomatic leader on. And key amongst those is the Middle East. Andrea asked him, you know, point blank do you condemn and he pretty much sidestepped that issue because they have not condemned the unilateral incursion by Israeli forces into Palestinian controlled areas apart from that first time nor, by the way, has any other Western government.

They are condemning terrorism by the Palestinians and they do want to see "the cycle of violence" stop. However, no concrete proposals, now new initiatives, no idea that there'll be any high level U.S. diplomatic effort on the Middle East. And, indeed, what Secretary of State Powell said on several issues was that our reviews are not yet complete.

So much of this interview sounded quite a lot like early administration words on foreign policy and, indeed, campaign words on foreign policy. It didn't seem like a whole lot had moved forward, at least not enough for them to be able to say publicly whether they have any new initiatives on some of the very key issues.

He confirmed on North Korea "that they are not ready to engage yet," they have not completed their review on North Korea. But then again he talked about verification of previous agreements that North Korea had undertaken with the Clinton administration, implying, as President Bush has implied, that these have been seen to be broken by North Korea.

However, most experts say that those agreements that the North Koreans did enter in with the Clinton administration have, in fact, been verified and the North Koreans have kept them and also, as you know, North Korea has said that it will maintain a unilateral moratorium on missiles until the year 2003. So that's interesting.

Also, on the key issue of selling the missile defense program, the secretary of state saying that it was not a surprising response from the allies we went to consult and they heard our team -- slightly less positive language coming out of the countries which have been visited by the U.S. teams -- south Korea, for instance, a key ally, not giving any pro forma, even, commitment to missile defense, not even expressing the word understanding for the U.S. position -- France saying we expressed our doubts, we have our doubts and this was a forum in which to express them -- and London, U.K., the U.S.' closest ally, saying basically behind-the-scenes that we heard nothing new, no details, nothing more than we heard during the public speech on May 1 that President Bush gave outlining commitment to missile defense.

So the basic complaint, I think, coming out of European capitals is still a great deal of skepticism. They haven't heard any details on how it will happen, on a timetable, on what it'll mean for strategic relations with the Russians and the Chinese. So still a lot of questions.

On the humble side, if you like, Secretary Powell did acknowledge the United States did lose that vote in the United Nations. He said that instead of getting mad what we have to do is find a way to regain our seat back onto the United Nations and that we can't act like an arrogant superpower. So a little bit of sort of humble pie on that issue. But not very much in terms of a strategic vision on all of the other key issues that we've been talking about.

KAGAN: Well, Frank, let's get you in here and talking about what happened with the U.S. in the Human Rights Commission. It did sound like the secretary of state, to borrow Christine -- Christiane's term, was some humble pie. But it sounded like he was trying to serve up that humble pie to Congress with the message, yeah, it ticked me off, too, that we were kicked off of that commission, but it doesn't mean that you withhold funds.

FRANK SESNO, CNN WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Well, what we saw here today is why the secretary of state is the nation's chief diplomat. He was diplomatic across-the-board, whether it's discussing the internal politics of this administration or discussing something like the recent developments on the United Nations Human Rights Commission. What he said was, in contrast to some in the Congress, who have said what the United States should do in response is withhold dues and essentially threatened that that's not a productive way for a great power, as he put it, to approach these things. He said the United States is going to continue to be tough on human rights and "we'll be back," his quote.

So what he's trying to suggest here is that there's still a way for the United States to be out forward on human rights. But what struck me here, Daryn, was that on issue after issue, as we've heard from Joshua and from Christiane, the secretary of state either ducked the tough issue or said a review is underway.

Nonetheless, that doesn't get him or the United States off the hook either overseas or here at home where analysts and observers are very harsh in regard to, for example, the Middle East or the United Nations issue or China or any of these other things. The pressures are intense and while these reviews are underway and while the secretary of state is seeking diplomatic language, it doesn't make the debate any less virulent.

On the Middle East, if I may, for just one very quick second, tell you that a top analyst I spoke with just this morning, a former senior administration official in the Clinton administration, said flat out that the problem here is that there is no high profile presence and even if the U.S. can't be doing something, it's not engaging as the honest broker intermediary that it has in the past and that risks sending the signal that it's not very involved and that this conflict could spread.

KAGAN: The discussion will continue. Frank Sesno in Washington, thank you so much. Also, our thanks going out to Christiane Amanpour and Joshua Cooper Ramo of "Time" magazine in London. Thank you to our panel and to the secretary of state granting his time as well.

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