Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Interview with Richard Holbrooke

Aired September 12, 2002 - 08:09   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: As the president gets ready to make his case against Iraq at the United Nations, let's find out what he may be facing from someone who knows the territory, Richard Holbrooke, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N., who joins us here in New York.
Good to see you again. Welcome back, Richard.

AMB. RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: Paula, great to be back.

ZAHN: What do you think is the best the president can hope for from the U.N.?

HOLBROOKE: I think there are two things we ought to listen for today. One is tone and style and the other is substance.

On the substantive point, I think John King laid it out very clearly, how explicitly is the president going to say he wants the U.N. Security Council -- and I stress we're talking only about the Security Council. We ought to stop talking about the U.N., which is 190 nations, which meet in all sorts of different places. We're talking about the 15 countries in the Security Council, the most important body of its sort in the world.

What are they going to do? Is the president going to ask for Security Council approval or is he going to simply put the U.N. on notice?

Secondly, style. The administration had a disorganized and undisciplined summer in which they lost control of the debate and weakened their very legitimate case against Saddam Hussein. I support it. I think he is the most dangerous person in the world and he needs to be removed.

But the administration ceded the high ground to its adversaries in the United States, around the world. And today he speaks not just to the nation, as he did so eloquently yesterday, but he speaks to the world. And it is tone that will matter here.

ZAHN: Let's talk about the two scenarios we're not sure of because we don't have a copy of the president's speech.

HOLBROOKE: Yes, right.

ZAHN: If he just puts the U.N. on notice, what are the ramifications of that? HOLBROOKE: Well, I think he would be unduly provocative if he just put the U.N. on notice. The U.N. was founded by President Roosevelt and President Truman and the great leaders of WWII precisely to create international legitimacy for this sort of crisis. That is -- the U.N. is here to deal with a monstrous, dangerous man like Saddam Hussein. And the president should first try, with Tony Blair assisting, as John King just told you, the president should try first to get the Security Council to authorize a no notice, anytime, anywhere, airtight inspection regime and the authorization to use whatever military means are necessary to enforce it if Saddam refuses.

If the Security Council refuses -- and, by the way, Paula, the key to this is Russia. If Russia goes along, the U.S. can get this resolution. But if Russia says no, we won't get it. And if the Russians say no and the famous Bush-Putin relationship isn't worth as much as people thought, then the U.S. and the British can move for a concerted, collective action outside the Security Council.

This is exactly what happened three and a half years ago for Kosovo. We never got U.N. permission to bomb Kosovo when I was the envoy negotiating with Milosevic. We tried. The Russians said to us hey, we're going to veto anything you send to the Security Council. When the Europeans, who originally wanted U.N. support, saw they couldn't get it, they came along and supported us.

So I think we have a very good model from the very recent past.

ZAHN: Well, let me ask you this. Do you expect the Russians to say no if this resolution is asked for?

HOLBROOKE: Well, next time Putin is your guest, just ask him that directly.

ZAHN: I'd love to.

HOLBROOKE: Because nobody knows what the Russians are going to do. They haven't said flatly they'll veto, as they did with Kosovo three and a half years ago, and they haven't said flatly they'll go along, as they did 12 years ago when President Bush, Sr. did exactly what we're talking about.

And I want to point out that President Bush, Sr., who was himself ambassador to the U.N. in the '70s and really understood the U.N., used the U.N. perfectly. He got the resolution you and I are talking about now 12 years ago. He got international support and he went to Congress and got their support.

So you have the two precedents, Bush, Sr. getting U.N. support in 1991 for Operation Desert Storm and President Clinton trying the U.N. route, not being able to do it, doing the kind of non-U.N. actions through NATO against Milosevic.

But the important thing, and this is critical, is that the president's speech today show respect for the international community and its process.

ZAHN: You have no doubt in your mind that that's what the speech will do, right?

HOLBROOKE: I have no -- I haven't seen the speech. We, I've read a lot of speculation in the newspapers this morning, leaks, the reluctant sheriff phrase that you used earlier, which is, of course, a phrase from a senior administration official, Richard Haas (ph), who wrote a book called "The Reluctant Sheriff." But let's see the speech.

Tone, delivery, substance all matter. And this is the beginning of the long delayed process which I hope, I hope will end a summer of drift, disarray and lack of discipline, which really hurt our national effort, our essential national effort to deal with Saddam Hussein, who is a truly dangerous man.

ZAHN: Other than Russia being a big question mark at this point if a resolution is asked for...

HOLBROOKE: The key in the U.N....

ZAHN: ... what other country, in your estimation, could potentially give the administration a headache if the Bush administration says we want this resolution and we want it soon?

HOLBROOKE: Russia is the key. If the Russians go along, I can guarantee you that President Chirac will not be the blocker in France. In fact, his interview with Elaine Sciolino in the "New York Times" made that very clear. It won't be the Chinese, who will never veto a resolution others stand for. So the key to the Security Council action lies with Vladimir Putin.

ZAHN: We will end on that note, Richard.

And I think that CNN...

HOLBROOKE: But I want to, I must stress if the Russians veto, that doesn't mean the end of the game. It is important to show the world that we go through the U.N. process. If it doesn't work, the president of the United States always retains the use, the right to use unilateral action, as President Clinton did three and a half years ago in Serbia.

ZAHN: Well, you made a powerful argument for that precedent having been set up, set before.

Richard Holbrooke, thanks.

Appreciate your perspective 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