Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

What is Position of France, Germany on Potential War With Iraq?

Aired January 24, 2003 - 07:07   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: Joining us now to help us better understand the position of two key allies of the U.S., from Paris, Christian Mallard, a senior foreign policy analyst with France's TV3, and from Germany's ARD-TV, senior correspondent, Patricia Schlessinger. She joins us from Washington.
Good morning to you both.

PATRICIA SCHLESSINGER, SENIOR CORRESPONDENT, ARD-TV, GERMANY: Good morning.

Christian, I'm going to start with you this morning.

CHRISTIAN MALLARD, SENIOR FOREIGN POLICY ANALYST, TV3, FRANCE: Good morning, Paula.

ZAHN: As you know, there are a number of published reports showing that U.N. inspectors have not been granted access in private to Iraqi scientists, and that will figure prominently, we are told, in Hans Blix' remarks to the U.N. on Monday. So, I want to quickly play for you something that Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz had to say yesterday to reinforce that point -- let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY: Today, we know from multiple sources that Saddam has ordered that any scientist who cooperates during interviews will be killed, as well as their families. Furthermore, we know that scientists are being tutored on what to say to the U.N. inspectors, and that Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as scientists to be interviewed by the inspectors.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Christian, should the international community accept this deceit?

MALLARD: No, I agree with you. The French position, the president -- President Chirac's position is very clear. He says when you (UNINTELLIGIBLE) private of the record, whatever, he says if tomorrow we have the proof through the U.N. inspectors, if my friend, President Bush, did he say, brings me the proof that Saddam Hussein has been cheating the whole of the world, the United States and their allies, there is no doubt we will be siding with the United States and we will go on the ground with the American troops. If we don't have very substantial proof, according to which in this country we have nuclear warheads or other chemical arms, we can (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the public opinions, we think it's too early. We should give more time to the inspectors, because we think until now it was too short for them, too short a period to make a serious job on the ground.

So, the French right now are saying, give more time, a little bit more time, and if after this time we are not sure that Saddam Hussein is really serious, we will have another resolution of the U.N. Security Council and we will decide all together. It's not a refusal of the French to say we don't agree with President Bush, we don't agree with anything he says.

ZAHN: But, Christian...

MALLARD: We want to give a little bit more time. And once are convinced with Germany and the others, we will go.

ZAHN: But what critics of the French position are saying, then you certainly don't understand what was signed at the U.N. earlier in 1441, which very clearly lays out if there is a material breach, and some -- clearly most people are saying today the fact that Iraqi scientists have been denied an audience alone with inspectors that is a material breach. And it's very clear in the languages right here that there will be serious consequences, and the serious consequences would be military action.

MALLARD: I'm sure if we have the proof, as you say, Paula, that we have a material breach, the French will follow. Until now -- yesterday I talked to one of the closest advisors to the French secretary of state, Mr. du Liban, and he told me, we would have liked the U.S. administration to say that we are defending and we are protecting Saddam Hussein. We agree that he is not a reliable man. We agree he's a man we don't deal with. But at the same time, we want to have the proof. If we have the proof there is a breach, I am sure that after this report is handed over to the U.N. Security Council on the 27th, maybe there will be a change in the French position. Everything might happen.

ZAHN: Let's check in with Patricia now. We all know that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder campaigned on an anti-war platform, and there are those who suggest that his unyielding position is based on saving face at home. Is there any truth to that?

SCHLESSINGER: That's very much truth, of course. We shouldn't forget that when this decision in Germany was made, our chancellor, the government's party was really in a terrible elections battle, and they needed this no, this strict no to win this battle, of course. But I think in one part, Germany is very much close to the French position. We want -- the administration wants the missing proof. We want to be convinced why this war, why now, and we want to see how this war -- upcoming war is linked to a war against terrorism.

And secondly, I think the American focus should be more on Jerusalem -- well, first in Jerusalem, and then on Baghdad. That's very much the opinion in Germany. And because this big Middle East conflict should be resolved first, or at least there should be a light at the end of the tunnel, and many people think like that in Germany, and so does our administration.

And the third point very important is that the outcome of this war could be devastating, and that is something that keeps pretty much our minds busy. New waves of terrorism in the United States, as well as in Europe, of course.

And we shouldn't forget, Paula, over 70 percent in our country in Germany are strictly against this war. So, I think that has a lot to do with a totally different perception of war. We have another history on war. I mean, with two world wars started by Germany, lost by Germany, with a devastating outcome. I think we are a lot more reluctant to go into a new war, even if it's not on our very own territory.

ZAHN: Patricia, we've got 10 seconds left. Do you think Germans, though, would change their mind if Hans Blix comes out on Monday, as he is expected to do, say there's a clear non-cooperation going on here, and particularly when it comes to interviews of Iraqi scientists?

SCHLESSINGER: I think that wouldn't change their minds easily. I think it all depends on the U.N. Germany will be within the next couple of days, beginning next month, the chairman of the U.N. Security Council, and if there will be a second resolution, I would predict -- that's my personal opinion -- I would predict there will be no German veto for the war. I think they will abstain (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

ZAHN: All right, you two, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Christian Mallard in Paris, Patricia Schlessinger in Washington, thank you for both of your perspectives this morning.

MALLARD: 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.





Iraq?>


Aired January 24, 2003 - 07:07   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Joining us now to help us better understand the position of two key allies of the U.S., from Paris, Christian Mallard, a senior foreign policy analyst with France's TV3, and from Germany's ARD-TV, senior correspondent, Patricia Schlessinger. She joins us from Washington.
Good morning to you both.

PATRICIA SCHLESSINGER, SENIOR CORRESPONDENT, ARD-TV, GERMANY: Good morning.

Christian, I'm going to start with you this morning.

CHRISTIAN MALLARD, SENIOR FOREIGN POLICY ANALYST, TV3, FRANCE: Good morning, Paula.

ZAHN: As you know, there are a number of published reports showing that U.N. inspectors have not been granted access in private to Iraqi scientists, and that will figure prominently, we are told, in Hans Blix' remarks to the U.N. on Monday. So, I want to quickly play for you something that Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz had to say yesterday to reinforce that point -- let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY: Today, we know from multiple sources that Saddam has ordered that any scientist who cooperates during interviews will be killed, as well as their families. Furthermore, we know that scientists are being tutored on what to say to the U.N. inspectors, and that Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as scientists to be interviewed by the inspectors.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Christian, should the international community accept this deceit?

MALLARD: No, I agree with you. The French position, the president -- President Chirac's position is very clear. He says when you (UNINTELLIGIBLE) private of the record, whatever, he says if tomorrow we have the proof through the U.N. inspectors, if my friend, President Bush, did he say, brings me the proof that Saddam Hussein has been cheating the whole of the world, the United States and their allies, there is no doubt we will be siding with the United States and we will go on the ground with the American troops. If we don't have very substantial proof, according to which in this country we have nuclear warheads or other chemical arms, we can (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the public opinions, we think it's too early. We should give more time to the inspectors, because we think until now it was too short for them, too short a period to make a serious job on the ground.

So, the French right now are saying, give more time, a little bit more time, and if after this time we are not sure that Saddam Hussein is really serious, we will have another resolution of the U.N. Security Council and we will decide all together. It's not a refusal of the French to say we don't agree with President Bush, we don't agree with anything he says.

ZAHN: But, Christian...

MALLARD: We want to give a little bit more time. And once are convinced with Germany and the others, we will go.

ZAHN: But what critics of the French position are saying, then you certainly don't understand what was signed at the U.N. earlier in 1441, which very clearly lays out if there is a material breach, and some -- clearly most people are saying today the fact that Iraqi scientists have been denied an audience alone with inspectors that is a material breach. And it's very clear in the languages right here that there will be serious consequences, and the serious consequences would be military action.

MALLARD: I'm sure if we have the proof, as you say, Paula, that we have a material breach, the French will follow. Until now -- yesterday I talked to one of the closest advisors to the French secretary of state, Mr. du Liban, and he told me, we would have liked the U.S. administration to say that we are defending and we are protecting Saddam Hussein. We agree that he is not a reliable man. We agree he's a man we don't deal with. But at the same time, we want to have the proof. If we have the proof there is a breach, I am sure that after this report is handed over to the U.N. Security Council on the 27th, maybe there will be a change in the French position. Everything might happen.

ZAHN: Let's check in with Patricia now. We all know that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder campaigned on an anti-war platform, and there are those who suggest that his unyielding position is based on saving face at home. Is there any truth to that?

SCHLESSINGER: That's very much truth, of course. We shouldn't forget that when this decision in Germany was made, our chancellor, the government's party was really in a terrible elections battle, and they needed this no, this strict no to win this battle, of course. But I think in one part, Germany is very much close to the French position. We want -- the administration wants the missing proof. We want to be convinced why this war, why now, and we want to see how this war -- upcoming war is linked to a war against terrorism.

And secondly, I think the American focus should be more on Jerusalem -- well, first in Jerusalem, and then on Baghdad. That's very much the opinion in Germany. And because this big Middle East conflict should be resolved first, or at least there should be a light at the end of the tunnel, and many people think like that in Germany, and so does our administration.

And the third point very important is that the outcome of this war could be devastating, and that is something that keeps pretty much our minds busy. New waves of terrorism in the United States, as well as in Europe, of course.

And we shouldn't forget, Paula, over 70 percent in our country in Germany are strictly against this war. So, I think that has a lot to do with a totally different perception of war. We have another history on war. I mean, with two world wars started by Germany, lost by Germany, with a devastating outcome. I think we are a lot more reluctant to go into a new war, even if it's not on our very own territory.

ZAHN: Patricia, we've got 10 seconds left. Do you think Germans, though, would change their mind if Hans Blix comes out on Monday, as he is expected to do, say there's a clear non-cooperation going on here, and particularly when it comes to interviews of Iraqi scientists?

SCHLESSINGER: I think that wouldn't change their minds easily. I think it all depends on the U.N. Germany will be within the next couple of days, beginning next month, the chairman of the U.N. Security Council, and if there will be a second resolution, I would predict -- that's my personal opinion -- I would predict there will be no German veto for the war. I think they will abstain (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

ZAHN: All right, you two, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Christian Mallard in Paris, Patricia Schlessinger in Washington, thank you for both of your perspectives this morning.

MALLARD: 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.





Iraq?>