Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

President of Middle East Institute Discusses Iraq

Aired October 23, 2002 - 09:18   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 latest U.S. plan to disarm Iraq is getting nowhere, fast in the United Nations. Russia and France have expressed some serious concerns about the revised U.S. draft resolution. In the meantime, President Bush is urging the Security Council to prove that it is more than just a debating society.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My fellow Americans, if they won't act, and if Saddam Hussein won't act, for the sake of peace, for the sake of our security, we will lead a coalition to disarm that man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: So, does diplomacy stand a chance? Joining us now from Washington is Ambassador Ned Walker. He has served as an assistant, that is, secretary of state and was U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Currently, he is president of the Middle East Institute. Welcome. Glad to see you, sir.

EDWARD WALKER JR., FMR. ASST. SECY. OF STATE: Good morning.

ZAHN: So, Mr. Ambassador, what do you make of the president's remarks?

WALKER: Well, I think he's trying to get the message across to the French and the Russians that if you won't help us, we're going to do it anyway, and then you're going to have to pay the consequences in terms of what happens afterwards.

The French and the Russians have done this so many times in the past when it comes to Iraq. They have big, major business interests there, they have loans outstanding, and if they have any sense that Saddam Hussein is going to survive, they're kind of going to try and protect their position. I think it is time for the president to go ahead with our resolution -- it's a good resolution -- in the Security Council and let the chips fall.

ZAHN: Is that more or less calling the Security Council's bluff, if that happens?

WALKER: Well, I've been through the council meeting many times with the French and the Russians, and sometimes you simply have to draw a line in the sand, and say, this is the point where we've got to make a decision. You are either with us or against us. ZAHN: The president, though, in his remarks, seemed to acknowledge that you could possibly disarm Iraq peacefully, and also seemed to redefine maybe what regime change means, Can we listen to that together? Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: We don't believe he is going to change. However, if he were to meet all of the conditions of the United Nations, conditions that I have described very clearly in terms that everybody can understand, that in itself will signal the regime has changed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Is that what the president's saying, regime change doesn't necessarily mean you've got to get rid of Saddam Hussein?

WALKER: Well, he's saying basically the same thing that I think it was Itzhak Rabin said about the PLO, if the PLO changes its tactics and so on, it won't be the PLO anymore. It's a legitimate approach to the problem, and one that holds out some hope that diplomacy can succeed. But he's got at the same time make is very clear that if we don't get this support in the Security Council that we are going to go it alone.

ZAHN: But at the same time, is the president also sending the signal that he would be willing to accept a reformed Saddam?

WALKER: Yes, sure. It's exactly the signal he's saying. Not there's not many people in the administration that believe that Saddam will change spots. And so they anticipate that the United States is going to have to act anyway, but we really could use the support of the international community if we do have to act. And I think that's why they are giving last chance to the Security Council.

ZAHN: And as we watch this plate play out in the Security Council there is a report in the "Washington Post" today, saying that the Pentagon officials have basically acknowledged that they have to adjust their timetable for a military buildup in the Persian Gulf. It said planners were looking at ways of actually slowing down deployment of U.S. troops in the region. Does that make sense to you?

WALKER: Yes, it does makes sense. If Hans Blix goes back, you've got some -- in the Security Council resolution itself, the draft resolution, we put forward, there are certain time lines and you would have to slow the process down and look for a early spring operation so that Blix would have time to do the things he's being asked to do by the Security Council. So, yes, it would call for a slowdown. But the key thing is to get the heavy equipment in, you can move in troops very quickly.

ZAHN: I've only got about ten seconds left. Do you see this thing being solved diplomatically. Or do you think the U.S. ends up in war?

WALKER: I think there's a good chance that if we stand firm and if we go before the Security Council, that they, indeed, will indeed support the United States.

ZAHN: As always, good to have you on the air. Very much appreciate your thoughts and insights. Thanks, Ambassador Ned Walker.

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 23, 2002 - 09:18   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: The latest U.S. plan to disarm Iraq is getting nowhere, fast in the United Nations. Russia and France have expressed some serious concerns about the revised U.S. draft resolution. In the meantime, President Bush is urging the Security Council to prove that it is more than just a debating society.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My fellow Americans, if they won't act, and if Saddam Hussein won't act, for the sake of peace, for the sake of our security, we will lead a coalition to disarm that man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: So, does diplomacy stand a chance? Joining us now from Washington is Ambassador Ned Walker. He has served as an assistant, that is, secretary of state and was U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Currently, he is president of the Middle East Institute. Welcome. Glad to see you, sir.

EDWARD WALKER JR., FMR. ASST. SECY. OF STATE: Good morning.

ZAHN: So, Mr. Ambassador, what do you make of the president's remarks?

WALKER: Well, I think he's trying to get the message across to the French and the Russians that if you won't help us, we're going to do it anyway, and then you're going to have to pay the consequences in terms of what happens afterwards.

The French and the Russians have done this so many times in the past when it comes to Iraq. They have big, major business interests there, they have loans outstanding, and if they have any sense that Saddam Hussein is going to survive, they're kind of going to try and protect their position. I think it is time for the president to go ahead with our resolution -- it's a good resolution -- in the Security Council and let the chips fall.

ZAHN: Is that more or less calling the Security Council's bluff, if that happens?

WALKER: Well, I've been through the council meeting many times with the French and the Russians, and sometimes you simply have to draw a line in the sand, and say, this is the point where we've got to make a decision. You are either with us or against us. ZAHN: The president, though, in his remarks, seemed to acknowledge that you could possibly disarm Iraq peacefully, and also seemed to redefine maybe what regime change means, Can we listen to that together? Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: We don't believe he is going to change. However, if he were to meet all of the conditions of the United Nations, conditions that I have described very clearly in terms that everybody can understand, that in itself will signal the regime has changed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Is that what the president's saying, regime change doesn't necessarily mean you've got to get rid of Saddam Hussein?

WALKER: Well, he's saying basically the same thing that I think it was Itzhak Rabin said about the PLO, if the PLO changes its tactics and so on, it won't be the PLO anymore. It's a legitimate approach to the problem, and one that holds out some hope that diplomacy can succeed. But he's got at the same time make is very clear that if we don't get this support in the Security Council that we are going to go it alone.

ZAHN: But at the same time, is the president also sending the signal that he would be willing to accept a reformed Saddam?

WALKER: Yes, sure. It's exactly the signal he's saying. Not there's not many people in the administration that believe that Saddam will change spots. And so they anticipate that the United States is going to have to act anyway, but we really could use the support of the international community if we do have to act. And I think that's why they are giving last chance to the Security Council.

ZAHN: And as we watch this plate play out in the Security Council there is a report in the "Washington Post" today, saying that the Pentagon officials have basically acknowledged that they have to adjust their timetable for a military buildup in the Persian Gulf. It said planners were looking at ways of actually slowing down deployment of U.S. troops in the region. Does that make sense to you?

WALKER: Yes, it does makes sense. If Hans Blix goes back, you've got some -- in the Security Council resolution itself, the draft resolution, we put forward, there are certain time lines and you would have to slow the process down and look for a early spring operation so that Blix would have time to do the things he's being asked to do by the Security Council. So, yes, it would call for a slowdown. But the key thing is to get the heavy equipment in, you can move in troops very quickly.

ZAHN: I've only got about ten seconds left. Do you see this thing being solved diplomatically. Or do you think the U.S. ends up in war?

WALKER: I think there's a good chance that if we stand firm and if we go before the Security Council, that they, indeed, will indeed support the United States.

ZAHN: As always, good to have you on the air. Very much appreciate your thoughts and insights. Thanks, Ambassador Ned Walker.

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