Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Tough Day at the U.N.
Aired October 29, 2002 - 08:16 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: A tough day at the U.N., though. A lot of work to get done there. And that's what we're going to talk about right now. There is word this morning that the United Nations debate on disarming Iraq might drag into next week. The White House had been hoping to see U.N. action this week on its resolution to crack down on Saddam Hussein. And President Bush says time is running short.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Either the United Nations will do its duty to disarm Saddam Hussein or Saddam Hussein will disarm himself. In either case, if they refuse to act, in the name of peace, in the name of a secure tomorrow, in the name of freedom, the United States will lead a coalition and disarm Saddam Hussein.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Should the U.S. move on or keep waiting for the U.N. to act?
Joining us now from Washington is Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy.
Good to see you again, sir.
Welcome back.
FRANK GAFFNEY, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY: Good morning, Paula.
Thank you.
ZAHN: So President Bush says Saddam Hussein has made the U.N. look foolish. Do you agree?
GAFFNEY: Well, I think certainly over the past 11 years or so, as Saddam has increasingly obstructed and then completely defied the United Nations, there's very little other description for it than to suggest that the United Nations is, if not foolish, at least feckless. And that's a very dangerous thing if we are supposed to rely on them, as people keep telling us we must, to maintain international security.
ZAHN: Well, the president has made it very clear he's growing increasingly impatient with the U.N. He had hoped to get the Security Council vote out by the end of the week. No one's too sure that's going to happen. Can he force a vote? GAFFNEY: Actually, I think the president has been extraordinarily patient. You will recall that back on September 12, he indicated that really the U.N. had to put up or shut up, it had to participate in solving a problem that it had allowed with, it has to be said, the acquiesce of the United States for many years, the resolution of this problem by the disarmament of Iraq. And, you know, six weeks or so have gone by. There is still not a definitive action taken by the United Nations and it's unclear, even today, whether it'll happen next week, let alone this week.
ZAHN: Do you see the president breaking from this track at the U.N. and just getting completely fed up and saying OK, you're not going to do anything? I mean the president pretty much said that yesterday, we're going to go it alone.
GAFFNEY: He's made it very clear, and I think correctly so, that we have no choice but to act if the United Nations won't. And not simply act in a manner that perpetuates this fecklessness, but act in a manner that actually produces the disarmament of Saddam Hussein's regime.
That is something that I think he is correct in saying. We cannot afford inaction. We must move forward with a coalition of the willing if the United Nations is not prepared to do its job. And I think his patience has been exhausted and properly so. My own was exhausted some years ago, to be honest with you.
But I think his effort to defer to the United Nations, to give it a chance to do its work, to accede to the insistence of many in Congress and in the public and around the world that the United Nations has to take the lead here has now run its course and it really is put up or shut up time for the U.N.
ZAHN: You're saying it's run its course. Are you also saying the president wasted his time?
GAFFNEY: I'm worried that he's wasted his time. I have been concerned from the beginning that the United Nations would do pretty much what it's done now, particularly the French, the Russians, the Chinese, who have seen Saddam for many years as a client, a man that they'd like to see continue in power. In fact, they've wanted to get rid of sanctions so that he could buy more weapons, among other things, from them.
So this has been a situation that has been fraught with peril from the beginning and I'm concerned that if the president gets a mandate from the United Nations, perhaps even a mandate along the lines that he's seeking, it may simply translate into a new opportunity for Saddam Hussein to diddle the United Nations again, acquire the nuclear weapons we know he's seeking and transform himself into an even greater threat than he is today.
ZAHN: If he doesn't get that mandate, what would be the consequences of going it alone in the world community, particularly as he has to fight this broad war on terror? GAFFNEY: Paula, I think a lot is going to depend on how it turns out, you know the old line about success has many fathers, particularly if, as I think will happen, the Iraqi people rise up in response to our effort to liberate them and support us. I think that it will change dramatically the perception around the world that we're doing something heinous or objectionable, even.
We're enabling them both to liberate themselves from a man who is a danger to them and to us, and in the process do the one thing that I think really will ensure that his weapons of mass destruction program is put out of business.
ZAHN: So you're essentially saying even without the support of Western Europe and the Arab states, the United States could pull this off?
GAFFNEY: I think we can if we have some support, and I think we will have at least some support. The president talks about a coalition of the willing and I think there will be such a coalition. But a lot will depend, again, on do we have the support of people who will probably most determine the outcome here, namely the Iraqi people. I think we will, especially if we make clear what we're doing here is not simply trying to perpetuate Saddam Hussein's tyranny, although with fewer arms, but to actually bring about its downfall.
Regime change is very much in the people of Iraq's interests, as well as the people of the region more generally, and certainly the American people's interests.
ZAHN: Well, Frank Gaffney, as always, it's good to have you on the air. Appreciate your perspective. And we're going to keep all of you out there posted on what is going on at the U.N. Richard Roth reporting those meetings get under way again today, some time around five o'clock.
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 29, 2002 - 08:16 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: A tough day at the U.N., though. A lot of work to get done there. And that's what we're going to talk about right now. There is word this morning that the United Nations debate on disarming Iraq might drag into next week. The White House had been hoping to see U.N. action this week on its resolution to crack down on Saddam Hussein. And President Bush says time is running short.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Either the United Nations will do its duty to disarm Saddam Hussein or Saddam Hussein will disarm himself. In either case, if they refuse to act, in the name of peace, in the name of a secure tomorrow, in the name of freedom, the United States will lead a coalition and disarm Saddam Hussein.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Should the U.S. move on or keep waiting for the U.N. to act?
Joining us now from Washington is Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy.
Good to see you again, sir.
Welcome back.
FRANK GAFFNEY, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY: Good morning, Paula.
Thank you.
ZAHN: So President Bush says Saddam Hussein has made the U.N. look foolish. Do you agree?
GAFFNEY: Well, I think certainly over the past 11 years or so, as Saddam has increasingly obstructed and then completely defied the United Nations, there's very little other description for it than to suggest that the United Nations is, if not foolish, at least feckless. And that's a very dangerous thing if we are supposed to rely on them, as people keep telling us we must, to maintain international security.
ZAHN: Well, the president has made it very clear he's growing increasingly impatient with the U.N. He had hoped to get the Security Council vote out by the end of the week. No one's too sure that's going to happen. Can he force a vote? GAFFNEY: Actually, I think the president has been extraordinarily patient. You will recall that back on September 12, he indicated that really the U.N. had to put up or shut up, it had to participate in solving a problem that it had allowed with, it has to be said, the acquiesce of the United States for many years, the resolution of this problem by the disarmament of Iraq. And, you know, six weeks or so have gone by. There is still not a definitive action taken by the United Nations and it's unclear, even today, whether it'll happen next week, let alone this week.
ZAHN: Do you see the president breaking from this track at the U.N. and just getting completely fed up and saying OK, you're not going to do anything? I mean the president pretty much said that yesterday, we're going to go it alone.
GAFFNEY: He's made it very clear, and I think correctly so, that we have no choice but to act if the United Nations won't. And not simply act in a manner that perpetuates this fecklessness, but act in a manner that actually produces the disarmament of Saddam Hussein's regime.
That is something that I think he is correct in saying. We cannot afford inaction. We must move forward with a coalition of the willing if the United Nations is not prepared to do its job. And I think his patience has been exhausted and properly so. My own was exhausted some years ago, to be honest with you.
But I think his effort to defer to the United Nations, to give it a chance to do its work, to accede to the insistence of many in Congress and in the public and around the world that the United Nations has to take the lead here has now run its course and it really is put up or shut up time for the U.N.
ZAHN: You're saying it's run its course. Are you also saying the president wasted his time?
GAFFNEY: I'm worried that he's wasted his time. I have been concerned from the beginning that the United Nations would do pretty much what it's done now, particularly the French, the Russians, the Chinese, who have seen Saddam for many years as a client, a man that they'd like to see continue in power. In fact, they've wanted to get rid of sanctions so that he could buy more weapons, among other things, from them.
So this has been a situation that has been fraught with peril from the beginning and I'm concerned that if the president gets a mandate from the United Nations, perhaps even a mandate along the lines that he's seeking, it may simply translate into a new opportunity for Saddam Hussein to diddle the United Nations again, acquire the nuclear weapons we know he's seeking and transform himself into an even greater threat than he is today.
ZAHN: If he doesn't get that mandate, what would be the consequences of going it alone in the world community, particularly as he has to fight this broad war on terror? GAFFNEY: Paula, I think a lot is going to depend on how it turns out, you know the old line about success has many fathers, particularly if, as I think will happen, the Iraqi people rise up in response to our effort to liberate them and support us. I think that it will change dramatically the perception around the world that we're doing something heinous or objectionable, even.
We're enabling them both to liberate themselves from a man who is a danger to them and to us, and in the process do the one thing that I think really will ensure that his weapons of mass destruction program is put out of business.
ZAHN: So you're essentially saying even without the support of Western Europe and the Arab states, the United States could pull this off?
GAFFNEY: I think we can if we have some support, and I think we will have at least some support. The president talks about a coalition of the willing and I think there will be such a coalition. But a lot will depend, again, on do we have the support of people who will probably most determine the outcome here, namely the Iraqi people. I think we will, especially if we make clear what we're doing here is not simply trying to perpetuate Saddam Hussein's tyranny, although with fewer arms, but to actually bring about its downfall.
Regime change is very much in the people of Iraq's interests, as well as the people of the region more generally, and certainly the American people's interests.
ZAHN: Well, Frank Gaffney, as always, it's good to have you on the air. Appreciate your perspective. And we're going to keep all of you out there posted on what is going on at the U.N. Richard Roth reporting those meetings get under way again today, some time around five o'clock.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
