Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Sunday Morning

What Is Next in Showdown With Iraq?

Aired February 09, 2003 - 10:32   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.


HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: More tough talk from the Bush White House against Iraq. President Bush says Saddam Hussein must disarm now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have said that if Saddam Hussein does not disarm, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. And I mean it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Mr. Bush is attending a GOP strategy session in rural West Virginia on the GOP domestic agenda. More on that now from CNN's Suzanne Malveaux in the snow at the White House.

Good morning to you, Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi. That's right. President Bush is in West Virginia at a retreat. He's meeting with Republican lawmakers to discuss the domestic agenda. But perhaps in a preemptive move of their own, Bush's top adviser, Secretary of State Colin Powell as well as National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, are making it very clear that any type of Franco-German plan to intensify inspections is a non- starter.

Secretary Powell earlier today saying that the members of the U.N. Security Council must meet the challenge that Saddam Hussein has not disarmed. He says that these intense inspections and these sanctions have not worked in the past. He has no faith that they will work now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I suspect it's a variation of what the French foreign minister discussed at the U.N. on Wednesday and that is increasing the number of inspectors and giving them more robust instructions, but I don't know what that accomplishes. The issue is not more inspectors or more robust inspections. The issue is, will Iraq comply?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Now, of course, this plan as, this Franco-German plan complicates things for the White House. But really the thinking here is that the United States already has the authority that if it decides to use military action against Saddam Hussein, it has the authority through past resolutions that, at that time, if it makes that decision that other countries are going to just have to make that difficult decision whether or not they're going to be onboard -- Heidi.

COLLINS: Suzanne, so it seems like the question would be then what does the U.S. actually think about a second resolution?

MALVEAUX: Well, the administration hopes that it'll push through a second resolution. And it's very interesting what's going to happen in the days to come because they're really a battling over the language of the second resolution. At the very least, the administration wants the U.N. Security Council members to acknowledge that Iraq has not complied, that it's in material breach of past resolutions.

At the very most, it hopes to authorize military action. Of course, that's ideally what the administration would like. But they say, bottom line, they do not need that language. As long as they say that it's in material breach, it gives cover for France as well as Britain and other countries. But at the same time, the administration says look at the other two resolutions. We're authorized to use military force anyway.

COLLINS: All right. Suzanne Malveaux, live from the White House, thank you.

And we are going to head back now to Kuwait where Martin Savidge is standing by.

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Heidi. As the Bush administration makes its case for disarming Saddam Hussein, Americans are sounding off on a possible war with Iraq. There is a new CNN/"Time" poll and Americans were asked is Bush moving too quickly to a war? Fifty-two percent of the respondents say no. Forty-six percent say yes.

When asked about the threat posed by Iraq, 39 percent of the respondents say there is, rather, an immediate threat, while 47 percent say there isn't. And thirteen percent say Iraq poses no threat at all to Americans. This poll comes as the two top U.N. arms inspectors are, of course, in Baghdad for day two of talks. To help try and put all in perspective, Kenneth Pollack. He is CNN's analyst and director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy and he joins us from Washington.

Hello, Ken, good to see you. Let me ask you some of these questions from the poll. Is the president moving too fast?

KENNETH POLLACK, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: Well, yes and no. On the one hand, you can say that the real problem with Saddam Hussein is his development of weapons of mass destruction. At least, that's been my perspective on all of this. I think the ties between Iraq and terrorism; the administration is doing a much better job of making that case. But I'll be honest with you. I'm still not convinced that that's the critical threat from Saddam Hussein. And if the threat from Saddam is more a nuclear threat, that's a little bit longer term, that's a little bit farther out there in the future. That suggests that we could take more time.

That said it is clear that the administration has decided that now is the time to deal with the threat from Saddam Hussein. And in that more tactical sense, no, I think the administration is moving at exactly the right pace. Having made the decision to go to war this year, I think the administration is doing the right thing in saying we gave the inspectors the chance. We have the Blix report. The Blix report indicated that the Iraqis simply don't want to comply. Colin Powell went out there and the bottom line point that Powell tried to make was the same thing. The Iraqis are not complying. They have no intention of complying. They won't comply in the future and therefore, we've got to do this now.

SAVIDGE: Well, in your book, "The Threatening Storm," you outline the case for invading Iraq, but there was some specific prerequisites. And I'm wondering, do you think those have been met?

POLLACK: Well, I give the administration credit for taking aboard a number of the preparations that are necessary to go to war, but there were a number of other things that I would have liked to see the administration put more attention into, put more effort into, before we went to war.

In particular, I would have liked to seen the administration make a greater effort to get peace negotiations started between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The violence between the Israelis and the Palestinians has created tremendous amount of tension in the region and a war with Iraq could spillover in some way, shape or form as a result of that.

I also would have preferred to have seen al Qaeda a lot weaker before we went into Iraq because, well, as the administration likes to say, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. My experience in the U.S. government has been that while we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we tend to walk slowly and chew gum slowly when we're trying to do both at the same time.

SAVIDGE: Yesterday, the GCC, the Gulf Cooperation Counsel here, said that they were willing to send forces -- these are Arab Gulf states -- willing to send forces to Kuwait to defend Kuwait, possibly from Iraq. I'm wondering what you make of that and also, is this kind of an indication that these nations may be joining with the United States?

POLLACK: Yes, I would take it as a sign of exactly that, but this is the Arab states indicating some low-level degree of support. In fact it's actually a pretty meaningful statement for them. What they're saying is look we aren't necessarily committing ourselves to actually launch the invasion or I think as the Bush administration would like to put it, the liberation of Iraq, but we are going to demonstrate our military commitment to this effort and we're going to take one step short of going the full distance by sending troops to defend Kuwait against the possible Iraqi counterattack. So there will be Arab troops in Kuwait showing some solidarity with the American effort.

SAVIDGE: Do you think there really is a threat to Kuwait as Iraq has said?

POLLACK: I think that there's very little threat to Kuwait in terms of a conventional Iraqi military thrust. You're going to have over 150,000 American troops in Kuwait in the not too distant future and those will be able to destroy any Iraqi counter offensive against Kuwait. In fact, my guess is they never even get close.

But the Kuwaitis do have to worry about ballistic missiles, the Iraqis launching SCUDs at them and also, terrorist attacks. And there, I think that the symbolic gesture is more important than anything else. Those troops demonstrate an Arab commitment to the entire effort and I think hopefully that will diffuse some would-be terrorists who might be trying to go after the Kuwaitis. As for the ballistic missiles, there it's going to be a matter of the patriot systems that will be in place and the massive SCUD hunt that the U.S. military is going to be engaged in the moment that this war kicks off.

SAVIDGE: Now, it's interesting, the people in Kuwait seem to be afraid of the war. The government seems to be more focused about the fear on terrorism. Ken Pollack, thank you very much for joining us, as always.

Heidi, back to you in Atlanta.

COLLINS: Thank you, Martin.

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 February 9, 2003 - 10:32   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: More tough talk from the Bush White House against Iraq. President Bush says Saddam Hussein must disarm now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have said that if Saddam Hussein does not disarm, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. And I mean it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Mr. Bush is attending a GOP strategy session in rural West Virginia on the GOP domestic agenda. More on that now from CNN's Suzanne Malveaux in the snow at the White House.

Good morning to you, Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi. That's right. President Bush is in West Virginia at a retreat. He's meeting with Republican lawmakers to discuss the domestic agenda. But perhaps in a preemptive move of their own, Bush's top adviser, Secretary of State Colin Powell as well as National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, are making it very clear that any type of Franco-German plan to intensify inspections is a non- starter.

Secretary Powell earlier today saying that the members of the U.N. Security Council must meet the challenge that Saddam Hussein has not disarmed. He says that these intense inspections and these sanctions have not worked in the past. He has no faith that they will work now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I suspect it's a variation of what the French foreign minister discussed at the U.N. on Wednesday and that is increasing the number of inspectors and giving them more robust instructions, but I don't know what that accomplishes. The issue is not more inspectors or more robust inspections. The issue is, will Iraq comply?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Now, of course, this plan as, this Franco-German plan complicates things for the White House. But really the thinking here is that the United States already has the authority that if it decides to use military action against Saddam Hussein, it has the authority through past resolutions that, at that time, if it makes that decision that other countries are going to just have to make that difficult decision whether or not they're going to be onboard -- Heidi.

COLLINS: Suzanne, so it seems like the question would be then what does the U.S. actually think about a second resolution?

MALVEAUX: Well, the administration hopes that it'll push through a second resolution. And it's very interesting what's going to happen in the days to come because they're really a battling over the language of the second resolution. At the very least, the administration wants the U.N. Security Council members to acknowledge that Iraq has not complied, that it's in material breach of past resolutions.

At the very most, it hopes to authorize military action. Of course, that's ideally what the administration would like. But they say, bottom line, they do not need that language. As long as they say that it's in material breach, it gives cover for France as well as Britain and other countries. But at the same time, the administration says look at the other two resolutions. We're authorized to use military force anyway.

COLLINS: All right. Suzanne Malveaux, live from the White House, thank you.

And we are going to head back now to Kuwait where Martin Savidge is standing by.

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Heidi. As the Bush administration makes its case for disarming Saddam Hussein, Americans are sounding off on a possible war with Iraq. There is a new CNN/"Time" poll and Americans were asked is Bush moving too quickly to a war? Fifty-two percent of the respondents say no. Forty-six percent say yes.

When asked about the threat posed by Iraq, 39 percent of the respondents say there is, rather, an immediate threat, while 47 percent say there isn't. And thirteen percent say Iraq poses no threat at all to Americans. This poll comes as the two top U.N. arms inspectors are, of course, in Baghdad for day two of talks. To help try and put all in perspective, Kenneth Pollack. He is CNN's analyst and director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy and he joins us from Washington.

Hello, Ken, good to see you. Let me ask you some of these questions from the poll. Is the president moving too fast?

KENNETH POLLACK, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: Well, yes and no. On the one hand, you can say that the real problem with Saddam Hussein is his development of weapons of mass destruction. At least, that's been my perspective on all of this. I think the ties between Iraq and terrorism; the administration is doing a much better job of making that case. But I'll be honest with you. I'm still not convinced that that's the critical threat from Saddam Hussein. And if the threat from Saddam is more a nuclear threat, that's a little bit longer term, that's a little bit farther out there in the future. That suggests that we could take more time.

That said it is clear that the administration has decided that now is the time to deal with the threat from Saddam Hussein. And in that more tactical sense, no, I think the administration is moving at exactly the right pace. Having made the decision to go to war this year, I think the administration is doing the right thing in saying we gave the inspectors the chance. We have the Blix report. The Blix report indicated that the Iraqis simply don't want to comply. Colin Powell went out there and the bottom line point that Powell tried to make was the same thing. The Iraqis are not complying. They have no intention of complying. They won't comply in the future and therefore, we've got to do this now.

SAVIDGE: Well, in your book, "The Threatening Storm," you outline the case for invading Iraq, but there was some specific prerequisites. And I'm wondering, do you think those have been met?

POLLACK: Well, I give the administration credit for taking aboard a number of the preparations that are necessary to go to war, but there were a number of other things that I would have liked to see the administration put more attention into, put more effort into, before we went to war.

In particular, I would have liked to seen the administration make a greater effort to get peace negotiations started between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The violence between the Israelis and the Palestinians has created tremendous amount of tension in the region and a war with Iraq could spillover in some way, shape or form as a result of that.

I also would have preferred to have seen al Qaeda a lot weaker before we went into Iraq because, well, as the administration likes to say, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. My experience in the U.S. government has been that while we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we tend to walk slowly and chew gum slowly when we're trying to do both at the same time.

SAVIDGE: Yesterday, the GCC, the Gulf Cooperation Counsel here, said that they were willing to send forces -- these are Arab Gulf states -- willing to send forces to Kuwait to defend Kuwait, possibly from Iraq. I'm wondering what you make of that and also, is this kind of an indication that these nations may be joining with the United States?

POLLACK: Yes, I would take it as a sign of exactly that, but this is the Arab states indicating some low-level degree of support. In fact it's actually a pretty meaningful statement for them. What they're saying is look we aren't necessarily committing ourselves to actually launch the invasion or I think as the Bush administration would like to put it, the liberation of Iraq, but we are going to demonstrate our military commitment to this effort and we're going to take one step short of going the full distance by sending troops to defend Kuwait against the possible Iraqi counterattack. So there will be Arab troops in Kuwait showing some solidarity with the American effort.

SAVIDGE: Do you think there really is a threat to Kuwait as Iraq has said?

POLLACK: I think that there's very little threat to Kuwait in terms of a conventional Iraqi military thrust. You're going to have over 150,000 American troops in Kuwait in the not too distant future and those will be able to destroy any Iraqi counter offensive against Kuwait. In fact, my guess is they never even get close.

But the Kuwaitis do have to worry about ballistic missiles, the Iraqis launching SCUDs at them and also, terrorist attacks. And there, I think that the symbolic gesture is more important than anything else. Those troops demonstrate an Arab commitment to the entire effort and I think hopefully that will diffuse some would-be terrorists who might be trying to go after the Kuwaitis. As for the ballistic missiles, there it's going to be a matter of the patriot systems that will be in place and the massive SCUD hunt that the U.S. military is going to be engaged in the moment that this war kicks off.

SAVIDGE: Now, it's interesting, the people in Kuwait seem to be afraid of the war. The government seems to be more focused about the fear on terrorism. Ken Pollack, thank you very much for joining us, as always.

Heidi, back to you in Atlanta.

COLLINS: Thank you, Martin.

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