Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Interview With Samuel Berger
Aired September 16, 2003 - 07:33 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.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Turning now to the issue of Iraq and an urgent search for a consensus at the U.N. Following up on the weekend meetings in Geneva, the U.S. is said to be considering proposed amendments by Security Council members and is expected to circulate a revised resolution by the end of the week.
So, can a compromise be found?
Joining us this morning, former national security adviser under President Clinton, Samuel Berger.
Nice to see you, Sandy.
SAMUEL BERGER, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Good morning.
O'BRIEN: Thanks for joining us.
This weekend we saw many administration officials taking to the airwaves. We heard Secretary Rumsfeld saying that there have been truly impressive accomplishments, I'm quoting there. Secretary Powell said progress is being made. He said progress that's really not being highlighted by the news media.
Weigh in for me on what you think overall the assessment is of the progress that's being made or not being made in Iraq.
BERGER: I think the operation is untenable as an overwhelmingly American enterprise. It's untenable from the perspective of the American people, who are being asked to pay 90 percent of the cost and the casualties. And it's untenable from an Iraqi perspective where anti-American resentment is increasing.
So we can say it's hunky dory, but it isn't hunky dory. We have no choice but to prevail, to win, to succeed, but that's going to require that we organize ourselves for the long-term.
O'BRIEN: Before we talk about international troops, let's talk a little bit about the money. Is it possible -- I mean you talk about winning, is it possible for Iraq to become this anchor of stability in the Middle East, do you think?
BERGER: Well, stability, perhaps. We originally talked about Iraq being a democracy that would transform the Middle East into democratic stronghold. That's a long-term vision. First, we have to establish stability, security, get basic services up and running.
O'BRIEN: Because there are some people who would argue if it's going to be this stronghold of stability, then it's worth the money, $87 billion plus, plus, plus, plus, whatever it ends up being, because it's obviously such a chaotic area.
BERGER: We're going to have to spend what we have to spend because to fail in Iraq now would be a disaster. It would be a disaster for American credibility. Iraq would descend into chaos or radicalism. So we have no choice but to stay the course.
But we also have to internationalize this by bringing in others and by turning this over more to the Iraqi people.
O'BRIEN: The number of troops that are on the table potentially, is it enough?
BERGER: We're still going to be the overwhelming majority of troops. But we have to be prepared to reorganize this mission so that we can bring in 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 other troops. That means clearly maintaining American command on the military side with that many troops, but turning this over in terms of a U.N. mandate so that the Indians, the Pakistanis, hopefully some of the Europeans, can come in to take some of the burden of it.
O'BRIEN: Many of those people you named are balking at playing a role. So what should be on the table to -- from the U.S.' perspective -- to make a deal?
BERGER: Well, on the military side, we have to maintain control with that many troops there. But on the civilian side, Soledad, we have to be prepared to give up control in order to get burden sharing. We want their troops, we want their money, we want their participation, we're not going to get that unless we are prepared to share responsibility.
It's more than a seat at the table. It's basically saying that the leadership here on the civilian side, I believe, should be turned over to others.
O'BRIEN: Giving contract money, all that?
BERGER: Absolutely.
O'BRIEN: Sandy Berger, it's nice to have you, as always.
Thanks for joining us.
Appreciate your perspective this morning.
BERGER: Nice to be here.
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 16, 2003 - 07:33 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Turning now to the issue of Iraq and an urgent search for a consensus at the U.N. Following up on the weekend meetings in Geneva, the U.S. is said to be considering proposed amendments by Security Council members and is expected to circulate a revised resolution by the end of the week.
So, can a compromise be found?
Joining us this morning, former national security adviser under President Clinton, Samuel Berger.
Nice to see you, Sandy.
SAMUEL BERGER, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Good morning.
O'BRIEN: Thanks for joining us.
This weekend we saw many administration officials taking to the airwaves. We heard Secretary Rumsfeld saying that there have been truly impressive accomplishments, I'm quoting there. Secretary Powell said progress is being made. He said progress that's really not being highlighted by the news media.
Weigh in for me on what you think overall the assessment is of the progress that's being made or not being made in Iraq.
BERGER: I think the operation is untenable as an overwhelmingly American enterprise. It's untenable from the perspective of the American people, who are being asked to pay 90 percent of the cost and the casualties. And it's untenable from an Iraqi perspective where anti-American resentment is increasing.
So we can say it's hunky dory, but it isn't hunky dory. We have no choice but to prevail, to win, to succeed, but that's going to require that we organize ourselves for the long-term.
O'BRIEN: Before we talk about international troops, let's talk a little bit about the money. Is it possible -- I mean you talk about winning, is it possible for Iraq to become this anchor of stability in the Middle East, do you think?
BERGER: Well, stability, perhaps. We originally talked about Iraq being a democracy that would transform the Middle East into democratic stronghold. That's a long-term vision. First, we have to establish stability, security, get basic services up and running.
O'BRIEN: Because there are some people who would argue if it's going to be this stronghold of stability, then it's worth the money, $87 billion plus, plus, plus, plus, whatever it ends up being, because it's obviously such a chaotic area.
BERGER: We're going to have to spend what we have to spend because to fail in Iraq now would be a disaster. It would be a disaster for American credibility. Iraq would descend into chaos or radicalism. So we have no choice but to stay the course.
But we also have to internationalize this by bringing in others and by turning this over more to the Iraqi people.
O'BRIEN: The number of troops that are on the table potentially, is it enough?
BERGER: We're still going to be the overwhelming majority of troops. But we have to be prepared to reorganize this mission so that we can bring in 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 other troops. That means clearly maintaining American command on the military side with that many troops, but turning this over in terms of a U.N. mandate so that the Indians, the Pakistanis, hopefully some of the Europeans, can come in to take some of the burden of it.
O'BRIEN: Many of those people you named are balking at playing a role. So what should be on the table to -- from the U.S.' perspective -- to make a deal?
BERGER: Well, on the military side, we have to maintain control with that many troops there. But on the civilian side, Soledad, we have to be prepared to give up control in order to get burden sharing. We want their troops, we want their money, we want their participation, we're not going to get that unless we are prepared to share responsibility.
It's more than a seat at the table. It's basically saying that the leadership here on the civilian side, I believe, should be turned over to others.
O'BRIEN: Giving contract money, all that?
BERGER: Absolutely.
O'BRIEN: Sandy Berger, it's nice to have you, as always.
Thanks for joining us.
Appreciate your perspective this morning.
BERGER: Nice to be here.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
