Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Interview With Martin Indyk
Aired September 23, 2002 - 07:05 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: The White House is urging Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to show restraint with the Palestinians. The last building that remains standing in Yasser Arafat's compound is surrounded by Israeli troops with the Palestinian chairman and 200 others inside.
Joining us now from Washington, Ambassador Martin Indyk, former assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs; now director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
Good morning -- glad to have you back with us, Martin.
MARTIN INDYK, FORMER U.S. ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Good morning, Paula.
ZAHN: Let's talk a little bit about what the U.S. administration has said so far. Yesterday, saying it is not helpful in reducing terrorist violence or promoting Palestinian reforms. What is the U.S. administration saying privately?
INDYK: Well, pretty much the same thing. I think that the two messages that are going to Prime Minister Sharon yesterday were, look, we are focused on Iraq. Saddam is your nemesis as much as ours. Don't do something that's going to shift the focus back to the Palestinian problem, which will make it harder to get Arab support for our common cause against Saddam.
And the second thing is more locally is that progress was being made on the process of political reform. Arafat's Parliament for the first time, a rubber-stamp parliament, had rejected his cabinet and were demanding real reforms, and this seems to have, again, shifted the focus back to Arafat rather than reforms. And the message from Washington is, this is not very helpful either.
ZAHN: Well, now that you mention it, let me bring up something that's in "The New York Times" this morning. It actually cites a report in "Haaretz" newspaper, which says that just before Israel moved in on Arafat's compound, the Central Committee of the PLO was about to meet with Arafat to try to convince him to pick a more moderate prime minister, and that Israelis actually knew about that meeting.
INDYK: Well, I think...
ZAHN: Your reaction to that.
INDYK: Yes, I think you are focusing on this process that I was describing. The Fatah Central Committee is one of the last remaining functioning political institutions on the nationalist side as opposed to the extremist side in the Palestinian community. And the effort there is to try to get Arafat to give up power to a prime minister of the Fatah Central Committee, going to him and trying to persuade him to do that.
There have been a couple of other times. This is not the first time it would have happened. But the difference now is that Arafat's authority is so weakened that they thought they had the opportunity to do it.
I don't think that's going to go away over time, but for the moment, the focus is, of course, on the Muka'ata compound. And it shifts the focus also from the point that the Israelis have been trying to make all along, which is the problem is that terrorism and that Arafat is not stopping the terrorism.
ZAHN: But isn't the implication of this article that the Israelis were just trying to undo this process completely?
INDYK: No, I don't think that may be the implication of the article. I don't think that's their intention. They would like to see a new leadership emerge.
But I think that there is a dynamic that takes place once Israeli citizens are blown up in downtown Tel Aviv that is in some ways a strange one. After all, the terrorists came from Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Their headquarters are in Gaza. But the Israelis focus on Arafat and the Palestinian Authority trying to hold them responsible.
This is partly an effort to do away with the last vestiges of Arafat's rule, partly a frustration with the sense that every time a reform process gets under way, he seems to be able to block it, and a real desire to see him gone in the belief that that would somehow open up the political process on the Palestinian side to a new leadership emerging. But along the way, the tactics have the effect of bolstering Arafat's position and putting him into a situation where he's kind of making his last stand at the Muka'ata.
ZAHN: Last question for you this morning. How much is this all complicated by the fact that the Israelis have made it abundantly clear over the weekend, if there is a war with Iraq and Iraq attacks Israel that they will respond?
INDYK: Well, I think that the important point here is, Paula, that because they didn't respond last time in 1991 when they were attacked by something like 50 SCUDs from Iraq, they want to, in advance of any war, make it clear to Saddam that this time will be different. This is an attempt to deter him from attacking them.
But when push comes to shove and there's actually a war going on, then the calculations become a little different. Israel has a much better ability to defend itself this time, partly because of its own means, partly because of things that we had done to help them.
And the Israelis always in the end will make a decision based on what actually happens. If there are no real casualties as the result of a SCUD attack, and the United States is already bombing Baghdad and going after Saddam, then it seems to be doubtful that they would respond.
But on the other hand, if there is a biological weapons attack on Israel causing a lot of deaths, then I would say for certain they would respond. And in a way, if that happens, such an extreme scenario, I think that even people in the Arab world would understand that Israel had to respond.
ZAHN: We have to leave it there this morning, Ambassador Martin Indyk, and as always, nice to have your perspective -- appreciate it.
INDYK: Thank 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.
Aired September 23, 2002 - 07:05 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: The White House is urging Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to show restraint with the Palestinians. The last building that remains standing in Yasser Arafat's compound is surrounded by Israeli troops with the Palestinian chairman and 200 others inside.
Joining us now from Washington, Ambassador Martin Indyk, former assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs; now director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
Good morning -- glad to have you back with us, Martin.
MARTIN INDYK, FORMER U.S. ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Good morning, Paula.
ZAHN: Let's talk a little bit about what the U.S. administration has said so far. Yesterday, saying it is not helpful in reducing terrorist violence or promoting Palestinian reforms. What is the U.S. administration saying privately?
INDYK: Well, pretty much the same thing. I think that the two messages that are going to Prime Minister Sharon yesterday were, look, we are focused on Iraq. Saddam is your nemesis as much as ours. Don't do something that's going to shift the focus back to the Palestinian problem, which will make it harder to get Arab support for our common cause against Saddam.
And the second thing is more locally is that progress was being made on the process of political reform. Arafat's Parliament for the first time, a rubber-stamp parliament, had rejected his cabinet and were demanding real reforms, and this seems to have, again, shifted the focus back to Arafat rather than reforms. And the message from Washington is, this is not very helpful either.
ZAHN: Well, now that you mention it, let me bring up something that's in "The New York Times" this morning. It actually cites a report in "Haaretz" newspaper, which says that just before Israel moved in on Arafat's compound, the Central Committee of the PLO was about to meet with Arafat to try to convince him to pick a more moderate prime minister, and that Israelis actually knew about that meeting.
INDYK: Well, I think...
ZAHN: Your reaction to that.
INDYK: Yes, I think you are focusing on this process that I was describing. The Fatah Central Committee is one of the last remaining functioning political institutions on the nationalist side as opposed to the extremist side in the Palestinian community. And the effort there is to try to get Arafat to give up power to a prime minister of the Fatah Central Committee, going to him and trying to persuade him to do that.
There have been a couple of other times. This is not the first time it would have happened. But the difference now is that Arafat's authority is so weakened that they thought they had the opportunity to do it.
I don't think that's going to go away over time, but for the moment, the focus is, of course, on the Muka'ata compound. And it shifts the focus also from the point that the Israelis have been trying to make all along, which is the problem is that terrorism and that Arafat is not stopping the terrorism.
ZAHN: But isn't the implication of this article that the Israelis were just trying to undo this process completely?
INDYK: No, I don't think that may be the implication of the article. I don't think that's their intention. They would like to see a new leadership emerge.
But I think that there is a dynamic that takes place once Israeli citizens are blown up in downtown Tel Aviv that is in some ways a strange one. After all, the terrorists came from Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Their headquarters are in Gaza. But the Israelis focus on Arafat and the Palestinian Authority trying to hold them responsible.
This is partly an effort to do away with the last vestiges of Arafat's rule, partly a frustration with the sense that every time a reform process gets under way, he seems to be able to block it, and a real desire to see him gone in the belief that that would somehow open up the political process on the Palestinian side to a new leadership emerging. But along the way, the tactics have the effect of bolstering Arafat's position and putting him into a situation where he's kind of making his last stand at the Muka'ata.
ZAHN: Last question for you this morning. How much is this all complicated by the fact that the Israelis have made it abundantly clear over the weekend, if there is a war with Iraq and Iraq attacks Israel that they will respond?
INDYK: Well, I think that the important point here is, Paula, that because they didn't respond last time in 1991 when they were attacked by something like 50 SCUDs from Iraq, they want to, in advance of any war, make it clear to Saddam that this time will be different. This is an attempt to deter him from attacking them.
But when push comes to shove and there's actually a war going on, then the calculations become a little different. Israel has a much better ability to defend itself this time, partly because of its own means, partly because of things that we had done to help them.
And the Israelis always in the end will make a decision based on what actually happens. If there are no real casualties as the result of a SCUD attack, and the United States is already bombing Baghdad and going after Saddam, then it seems to be doubtful that they would respond.
But on the other hand, if there is a biological weapons attack on Israel causing a lot of deaths, then I would say for certain they would respond. And in a way, if that happens, such an extreme scenario, I think that even people in the Arab world would understand that Israel had to respond.
ZAHN: We have to leave it there this morning, Ambassador Martin Indyk, and as always, nice to have your perspective -- appreciate it.
INDYK: Thank 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.
