Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
America's New War: What Role Should U.N. Play in the War Against Terror?
Aired October 01, 2001 - 10:56 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.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: What role should the U.N. play in the war against terror? Let's talk about it with James Steinberg, former deputy national security adviser to President Clinton, currently at the Brookings Institute, and a CNN national security analyst. Also with us, Toby Gati, a former assistant secretary of state, for intelligence and research.
Good morning to both of you. That was an amazing speech we heard from the mayor the last hour here in New York City. Mr. Steinberg, to you first, on the military approach, you say no activity whatsoever should involve the U.N. at this point. Why so firm on that position, sir?
JAMES STEINBERG, FMR. DEP. NATL. SECURITY ADVISER: Well, I think operation of the U.N. is not qualified or set up to handle this kind of contingency. We're talking about a very sensitive intelligence operation. It will rely on very sensitive sources, will require quick action, very stealthy and clandestine. This is the kind of thing that the United States has a right to do by itself, under the U.N. charter as matter of self-defense. And if we are going to be effective, that's the right way to go.
HEMMER: Toby Gati, do you agree with that point?
TOBY GATI, FMR. ASST. SECY. OF STATE: I agree that the U.N. isn't qualified to conduct offensive operations in a country like Afghanistan. But I think we'd be foolish if we discarded the U.N. as tool to help us in gaining support for whatever unilateral action we take and also for building coalitions.
Countries are much more comfortable following U.N. resolutions, which the Security Council passed a very strong one last week, then they are just following the U.S. blindly, when we frankly don't have a clear entry or exit strategy yet.
HEMMER: Mrs. Gati, take it a step forward, what's the best way to utilize the U.N. as you mentioned this tool of sorts. How do you do it?
GATI: Well, the first is a legitimizing function. The security council resolutions recognize this horrible act. Its ostracized terrorists. It's said, freeze their assets, don't give them sanctuary. Security Council resolutions do have much more force than General Assembly resolutions. I think it provides glue to a coalition.
Don't forget, there are 60 countries that lost nationals in this World Trade Center bombing. All those people are going to go down to the World Trade Center, and most of them will go back and say, we have to support this, because this can happen in our country, too.
HEMMER: Mr. Steinberg, over the weekend, and again today, China is courting several countries around the world, trying to get the U.N. to be at the forefront of any military action. We've heard similar calls last week from the country of Iran as well.
What's the catch here, when you know that there are competing interests about who leaves the potential for military response?
STEINBERG: Well, I think, again, the key is to separate the two functions, that there's a diplomatic responsibility that can take place at the U.N. We can use the U.N. to help cutoff the funds to a terrorist, to make clear that there is universal disapproval of what took place here.
But this is matter that really is a matter of our national security and national defense. We need to work with the Chinese and others to explain to them what we are doing and why we are doing it. We want as many allies as we can, and having the moral support of the U.N. important. But there's an operational requirement here to protect our citizens and our safety, and I think take that as a primary responsibility.
HEMMER: And overall, sir, then in an international sense, do you see a bit of reluctance or possible friction as the U.S. and say Great Britain go forward in some aspects of this? Is there a friction and a hesitation by some members of the U.N. that may hold the U.S. back?
STEINBERG: I don't think this will hold the U.S. back. But I think that the administration has to make maximum reference to explain what it's doing and why it's doing it, so that countries will understand what's at stake here. I think if we do that carefully, if we continue to consult, as the administration has done so well, then I think broadly, we will get support for our actions.
HEMMER: Toby Gati, about 15 seconds left. Final thought.
GATI: I think we have gotten U.N. support for individual action. We are also going to need it for collective action, and shouldn't rule out using the U.N. as a tool.
HEMMER: Toby Gati, James Steinberg, thanks for talking with us. We'll watch it throughout the week here in New York City. Many thanks to both of you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
