Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Interview with Lord David Hannay
Aired October 07, 2002 - 08:07 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 world will be watching tonight when President Bush takes his case for the war on Iraq to the American people.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We still believe a one resolution solution is the better way to go. The reason we have seen any movement on the Iraqi side in the last three weeks is because of the pressure that's been put upon them. They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but because suddenly they realized they had to come clean. It's pressure. And one resolution keeps that pressure on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: And tonight President Bush speaks to the nation to make that case against Saddam.
What does the rest of the world need to hear from the president? Is a compromise possible?
Lord David Hannay is a former British ambassador to the United Nations.
He joins us from London.
Good to have you on the air, sir. Thanks for your time this morning.
LORD DAVID HANNAY, FORMER U.K. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: Good morning.
ZAHN: What is it that you think the president has to do tonight?
HANNAY: Well, he's obviously talking to the American people principally, and he's the best judge of what to say to them. But as far as the rest of the world is concerned, I think his speech in September to the United Nations General Assembly was enormously effective and it had a very positive influence on the way people saw the Iraq situation and how best to deal with it.
I think what they'll be looking for tonight is to be assured that he's going to go the whole last mile on that road. Of course, none of us can guarantee that that will produce the right outcome and alternatives may have to be looked at. But we're a long way from that now and going the last mile down the U.N. track seems to, I think many people in Europe and elsewhere, the right way. ZAHN: When you talk about going the last mile and doing it the right way, are you referring to the French proposition which is, in fact, trying to get two different resolutions approved?
HANNAY: No, I'm not referring to any of the technicalities of it. I'm not abreast of what exactly is being discussed in the Security Council. These things often twist and turn. I think the fundamentals are, however, the need to give an absolutely clear message to Saddam from the whole Security Council, not just from the United States and Britain, that he's got to disarm and that the inspectors are there to help him disarm. But he's got to cooperate with them, that he's got to let them into every single site, not excluding the so-called presidential sites, and that he's got to cooperate in the sense that he's got to give a full account of what he has, what he's been developing in the last four years since the inspectors left. And that if not, pretty serious consequences will follow.
That's the clear message he's got to get. And I honestly don't think that whether it's in one or two resolutions is absolutely fundamental to that. It's the message that matters and the unity with which it's delivered.
ZAHN: Lord Hannay, do you have any faith personally that Saddam Hussein would ultimately allow for those eight presidential sites to be inspected?
HANNAY: Well, we are only going to find that out when the Security Council united says he's got to do it and when he understands that the alternative to doing as the Security Council demands is the use of force. There I agree 100 percent with those who say we'll get nowhere if he doesn't understand clearly what the alternative is.
If he does understand that and if the Security Council is united, I think there's a very good chance he will, as he often has done in the past, he will flip and he will admit the inspectors and he will give them unfettered access. But let's see.
ZAHN: We'd love to have you weigh in on what's happening domestically here in the United States as Congress gets ready to vote on a war resolution. Clearly there are a whole range of voices who spoke out on the Sunday talk shows, and I wanted to share with you now a little bit of what kind of debate went on.
Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRENT LOTT (R-MS), SENATE MINORITY LEADER: I don't think there's any doubt that the House and then the Senate, in overwhelming votes will pass the resolution giving the president the authority he needs to use force if it is necessary as a last resort.
SEN. TED KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I will not support that resolution. Let me say there is nothing more important that this country does than send its young people to war. (END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Lord Hannay, do you think it hurts the U.S. case aboard when you have members of Congress speaking in such divergent voices?
HANNAY: Well, I think we all have parliamentary assemblies which speak out and we in Britain had a debate 10 days, two weeks ago, and people spoke with many different voices in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. So I think that is just quite natural.
The question is can we all come together behind a particular policy? Well, I think in the British parliament, both in the Lords and the Commons, we, the vast majority came together round the policy of getting the Security Council to demand unfettered access for the inspectors and trying by that way to get a peaceful outcome to this crisis, but one which also brings about the disarming of Saddam Hussein of all these weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.
So Democratic debate is the order of the day in all our countries and we certainly mustn't get into complaining about it. But at the end of the day, there has to be closure and there has to be a clear policy.
ZAHN: I know you talked so much about this last mile the president needs to go. Do you expect at the end of this long road there will be a war?
HANNAY: I don't want to pronounce on that. That depends on Saddam Hussein. I think if it's laid on the line and if it's clear enough what the alternatives are, it is possible that we shall avoid that, and that's why I think this is far the best route to take. But I'm not saying it's a sure thing. He has miscalculated before, he could do it again.
But let's hope this time he gets it right.
ZAHN: We very much appreciate your perspective this morning, sir.
Former British ambassador to the U.N., Lord David Hannay.
Again, appreciate your dropping by our bureau.
Our coverage of the president's speech begins tonight at eight Eastern and then there will be a special edition of "Connie Chung Tonight."
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 October 7, 2002 - 08:07 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: The world will be watching tonight when President Bush takes his case for the war on Iraq to the American people.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We still believe a one resolution solution is the better way to go. The reason we have seen any movement on the Iraqi side in the last three weeks is because of the pressure that's been put upon them. They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but because suddenly they realized they had to come clean. It's pressure. And one resolution keeps that pressure on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: And tonight President Bush speaks to the nation to make that case against Saddam.
What does the rest of the world need to hear from the president? Is a compromise possible?
Lord David Hannay is a former British ambassador to the United Nations.
He joins us from London.
Good to have you on the air, sir. Thanks for your time this morning.
LORD DAVID HANNAY, FORMER U.K. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: Good morning.
ZAHN: What is it that you think the president has to do tonight?
HANNAY: Well, he's obviously talking to the American people principally, and he's the best judge of what to say to them. But as far as the rest of the world is concerned, I think his speech in September to the United Nations General Assembly was enormously effective and it had a very positive influence on the way people saw the Iraq situation and how best to deal with it.
I think what they'll be looking for tonight is to be assured that he's going to go the whole last mile on that road. Of course, none of us can guarantee that that will produce the right outcome and alternatives may have to be looked at. But we're a long way from that now and going the last mile down the U.N. track seems to, I think many people in Europe and elsewhere, the right way. ZAHN: When you talk about going the last mile and doing it the right way, are you referring to the French proposition which is, in fact, trying to get two different resolutions approved?
HANNAY: No, I'm not referring to any of the technicalities of it. I'm not abreast of what exactly is being discussed in the Security Council. These things often twist and turn. I think the fundamentals are, however, the need to give an absolutely clear message to Saddam from the whole Security Council, not just from the United States and Britain, that he's got to disarm and that the inspectors are there to help him disarm. But he's got to cooperate with them, that he's got to let them into every single site, not excluding the so-called presidential sites, and that he's got to cooperate in the sense that he's got to give a full account of what he has, what he's been developing in the last four years since the inspectors left. And that if not, pretty serious consequences will follow.
That's the clear message he's got to get. And I honestly don't think that whether it's in one or two resolutions is absolutely fundamental to that. It's the message that matters and the unity with which it's delivered.
ZAHN: Lord Hannay, do you have any faith personally that Saddam Hussein would ultimately allow for those eight presidential sites to be inspected?
HANNAY: Well, we are only going to find that out when the Security Council united says he's got to do it and when he understands that the alternative to doing as the Security Council demands is the use of force. There I agree 100 percent with those who say we'll get nowhere if he doesn't understand clearly what the alternative is.
If he does understand that and if the Security Council is united, I think there's a very good chance he will, as he often has done in the past, he will flip and he will admit the inspectors and he will give them unfettered access. But let's see.
ZAHN: We'd love to have you weigh in on what's happening domestically here in the United States as Congress gets ready to vote on a war resolution. Clearly there are a whole range of voices who spoke out on the Sunday talk shows, and I wanted to share with you now a little bit of what kind of debate went on.
Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRENT LOTT (R-MS), SENATE MINORITY LEADER: I don't think there's any doubt that the House and then the Senate, in overwhelming votes will pass the resolution giving the president the authority he needs to use force if it is necessary as a last resort.
SEN. TED KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I will not support that resolution. Let me say there is nothing more important that this country does than send its young people to war. (END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Lord Hannay, do you think it hurts the U.S. case aboard when you have members of Congress speaking in such divergent voices?
HANNAY: Well, I think we all have parliamentary assemblies which speak out and we in Britain had a debate 10 days, two weeks ago, and people spoke with many different voices in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. So I think that is just quite natural.
The question is can we all come together behind a particular policy? Well, I think in the British parliament, both in the Lords and the Commons, we, the vast majority came together round the policy of getting the Security Council to demand unfettered access for the inspectors and trying by that way to get a peaceful outcome to this crisis, but one which also brings about the disarming of Saddam Hussein of all these weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.
So Democratic debate is the order of the day in all our countries and we certainly mustn't get into complaining about it. But at the end of the day, there has to be closure and there has to be a clear policy.
ZAHN: I know you talked so much about this last mile the president needs to go. Do you expect at the end of this long road there will be a war?
HANNAY: I don't want to pronounce on that. That depends on Saddam Hussein. I think if it's laid on the line and if it's clear enough what the alternatives are, it is possible that we shall avoid that, and that's why I think this is far the best route to take. But I'm not saying it's a sure thing. He has miscalculated before, he could do it again.
But let's hope this time he gets it right.
ZAHN: We very much appreciate your perspective this morning, sir.
Former British ambassador to the U.N., Lord David Hannay.
Again, appreciate your dropping by our bureau.
Our coverage of the president's speech begins tonight at eight Eastern and then there will be a special edition of "Connie Chung Tonight."
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
