Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Interview with Nick Lemann, "The New Yorker"

Aired March 25, 2002 - 09:21   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.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: This morning, the Bush administration is reacting cautiously to Iraq's offer to receive a U.S. delegation for discussions about a U.S. pilot shot down during the first hours of the Gulf War. Lieutenant Commander Michael Speicher had been listed as killed in action, but then, amid reports he might still be alive, his status was officially changed to missing in action. Andrea Koppel joins us now from the State Department with the very latest. Good morning, Andrea.

ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula. Well, I can tell you that folks here at the State Department aren't exactly rushing out to book their flights to Baghdad.

While they are not rejecting this potential offer out of hand, they are casting quite a bit of doubt, and they have some speculation as to Iraq's motives right now, and the reason, quite simply, Paula, is that a few months ago, the State Department sent Baghdad what's known in the diplomatic world as an official diplomatic note, asking for more information about the Lieutenant Colonel Speicher. They had no answer to that. They also had a meeting with Iraqi officials in Geneva. They had no word from officials there, any information about Speicher.

But having said that, Vice President Dick Cheney was asked about this yesterday on the Sunday talk shows, remembered he was then the Secretary of Defense during the Gulf War. He said that the U.S. hadn't made up its mind how to respond.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Would we send a delegation if, in fact, they have invited us to do that?

DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I would have to take a look at the report, and probably go back and take a look and see whether or not this is a serious proposition, or whether Saddam Hussein is simply trying to change the subject.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KOPPEL: Now, some experts speculate that the only reason that we're hearing anything now is because Iraq's president is worried that the Bush administration might take military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Remember, Paula that just last week the vice president returned from his swing through the Middle East trying to drum up support for potential military action against Iraq -- Paula.

ZAHN: So, Andrea, what is the latest word on why the administration thinks this pilot might still be alive?

KOPPEL: Well, that's a good question, and a lot of it is based on unnamed quotes from unnamed intelligence officials who say they've gotten new information. Michael Speicher's status was changed. And this was an incredibly unusual move. It had never happened before. From killed in action to missing in action, last year, based on new information. Now the Bush administration is saying, at least, it is saying through unnamed officials that it believes that there is even more information out there that, potentially, Michael Speicher may be alive. The bottom line is that they don't have information, Paula, that proves he was killed, and so they have to keep the door open.

ZAHN: Okay. Andrea Koppel, thanks for the update. Appreciate it.

Overtures aside, Iraq remains a prime target for the president's war on terror, and in the current issue of "New Yorker," writer Nick Lemann examines how the administration's foreign policy, the so-called Bush doctrine, has changed over time.

He writes: "It's only now, six months after the attacks, that we are truly entering the realm of presidential choice, and all indications are that Bush is going to use September 11 as the occasion to launch a new, aggressive American foreign policy that would represent a broad change in direction, rather than a specific war on terrorism."

And Nick Lemann joins us now. Good to see you in person. Welcome.

So, what is the Bush doctrine? As simply as you can describe it to us this morning.

NICK LEMANN, "THE NEW YORKER": Before the election, it looked like the Bush doctrine was going to be -- was the idea that Clinton was trying to do too many things, sort of out the goodness of his heart, around the world, and everything was fuzzy and unfocused, and feel-good foreign policy.

ZAHN: And he was very reactive...

LEMANN: Yes.

ZAHN: ...as opposed to being proactive?

LEMANN: The Bush people were going to be disciplined, great power realists, and they say in foreign policy. That is, they were going to deal primarily with Russia and China, no illusions, no trying to put out fires all around the world. That's really changed since September 11 because the ambition level is much, much higher, particularly in the Middle East, a region that is being remade before our eyes in the way that Europe was remade during and after the Second World War, and the Bush administration people in this article really say that on the record. That, that's -- that's the model they have in mind.

ZAHN: And in your judgment, who is actually running the ship? When it comes to foreign policy, we have heard about the tension between Paul Wolfowitz and Secretary of State Powell, and we've seen Cheney -- Dick Cheney, the vice president, make this whirlwind tour of the Middle East.

LEMANN: I don't remember -- do you remember a time when a vice president of the United States went on a major diplomatic mission to, you know, prepare for a possible war? I don't think Dan Quayle did that in the run up to the Gulf War. So I think that's a sign that -- that Vice President Cheney has an extraordinary amount of influence for a vice president. And the other sort of obvious name is Condoleezza Rice, someone who the president supposedly listens to and completely trusts, so where she is significant and where she is has shifted in the last two years.

ZAHN: There's an interesting point that a political historian has raised. His name Paul Kelly, and he was writing in the "Australian." And he is talking about, in many ways, the U.S. strength and peril (ph) are looked in tandem, and I am going to put up on the screen what he went on to say. He says, "The more the world sees this struggle as a solo American contest, the more anti- Americanism will flourish. In this sense, U.S. military dominance is both the solution and a trap. A solution since it is essential to conquer the enemy, but a trap because it inflates the limits two military power. The U.S. needs not just to punish, but to persuade."

LEMANN: This is the key point. The people in the administration, and particularly people around Vice President Cheney, I think, would disagree with that view, and would say, you can push the needle more away from multilateral toward unilateral. We are the world's one great power. If we show force and resolution, the rest of the world rather than, you know, reacting against us, will sort of fall into line. That seems to me to be the emerging view inside the administration.

ZAHN: You had tremendous access, Nick, as you worked on this piece. What kind of feeling did you get from the key administration officials about what it would take to halt any attack against Iraq, or is it all but inevitable?

LEMANN: I think it is all but inevitable. I think the question is less what it would talk to halt an attack against Iraq, as whether -- I mean, their optimistic view is if we buildup to an attack, there will be an internal revolt in Iraq, and Saddam will topple on his own. But, you know, at the very end of the story, I asked Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, you're seeing this just in the story you just did. He's playing stall ball. He's doing all these things...

ZAHN: Sure.

LEMANN: ...and saying, If you hold off, I will do this, this, this, and this. And I asked Mr. Libby, what could Saddam do that, you know, would assure you that he's really changed and we don't need to do this operation? And he -- I can't remember the exact words, but he basically said, I can't imagine what he would do that would convince me. I think this is going to happen, and it is only -- it is not whether we will do it, it is whether Saddam will topple over the prospect of our doing it, not whether we are going to do it.

ZAHN: Regardless the amount of reaction -- negative reaction the vice president got on his trip.

LEMANN: No inspectors, all that stuff. Negative reaction, that is not going to matter, I don't think. I think it is going to go forward.

ZAHN: Nick Lemann, the piece is fascinating. It is in this month's "New Yorker." Thank you...

LEMANN: Thank you.

ZAHN: ...very much for joining us this morning. Delighted to have you visit us in our studios this morning.

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