Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Saturday Morning News
Bush Prepares Major Speech on Iraq
Aired October 05, 2002 - 08:13 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.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: President Bush preparing a major speech Monday about the threat imposed by the Iraqi regime. This comes the same week Congress is expected to take up a resolution demanding Saddam Hussein disarm or face military action.
CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux traveling with the president. She joins us from Kennebunkport, Maine -- hello, Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Miles.
The president's going to be spending the weekend here at Kennebunkport, but he is later this morning going to New Hampshire. He's going to be doing some fund-raising and some campaigning for Republican Senatorial Candidate John Sununu. He's also going to spend a good deal of the weekend working on that speech. It's going to be a 20 minute speech delivered in prime time on Monday to the American people, making the case against Saddam Hussein.
It was just yesterday that there was a significant breakthrough for the administration when the chief of U.N. weapons inspectors, Hans Blix, announced that, yes, he believes there should be a new resolution before those inspectors go back inside of Iraq. This after conversations he had with Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HANS BLIX, CHIEF U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: We hope that the path will not be very long to a new resolution and the convergence that we began to see yesterday, I think, is a hopeful one. But I also explained to everybody that it would be somewhat awkward for us to go in and then find that a new resolution was coming there which would call for us, ask us to do something more or different, which would require other practical arrangements.
So we look forward to a speedy negotiation of a resolution and for us to come in very shortly thereafter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Now, still at issue, however, is whether or not that U.N. resolution would also authorize using military force, whether or not there'd be one or two resolutions, one getting those inspectors back in, two, enforcing those resolutions, perhaps with military action if Saddam Hussein does not comply. While state officials and sources are telling CNN there is still some wiggle room, perhaps the United States willing to compromise on that issue, yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell saying that the U.S. policy, still the position would be for a single resolution with teeth.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We still believe a one resolution solution is the better way to go. The reason we have seen any movement on the Iraqi side in the last three weeks is because of the pressure that's been put upon them. They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts or because suddenly they realized they had to come clean. It's pressure. And one resolution keeps that pressure on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And also the president will be putting a little bit of pressure on Congress when he makes that address to the American people. This is going to be on the eve of some votes both in the House and the Senate on their own resolution authorizing the president to use military force against Saddam Hussein if necessary -- Miles.
O'BRIEN: All right, thank you very much.
CNN's Suzanne Malveaux with the president in Kennebunkport -- Catherine.
CATHERINE CALLAWAY, CNN ANCHOR: So what are the military options if American forces go to war against Iraq?
For some insight, we're joined by former NATO supreme commander and CNN military analyst General Wesley Clark.
General, thanks for being with us this morning. I'm all choked up.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST, FORMER NATO SUPREME COMMANDER: Good to be with you, Catherine.
CALLAWAY: Nice to have you.
Let's talk about how the approach would be taken on this war. Certainly a different approach than was taken in the Gulf War?
CLARK: I think so because, for two reasons, really. The objectives are different and our capabilities are different and the Iraqi forces are different. So it's both the objective and the forces.
Now, let's look at the objective. What we're going to want to do, I think, is go as directly as possible after the weapons of mass destruction sites. We don't want him to be able to use those weapons against us, against Israel or against his own people. So we'll go against them with air, we'll go against them with ground forces and probably as rapidly as possible. That means we're going to go into Iraq as deeply as we need to, as rapidly as we can.
So I think you're going to see a very different operation.
CALLAWAY: But how much do you think the military knows at this point about where those targets are that you just mentioned? Is this something that would be done after inspections?
CLARK: Any information we get would be useful, obviously. I don't think we have a hundred percent knowledge. But on the other hand we've got pretty good visibility over Iraq. We've shifted all of the information for years. We've struck at many of these sites before.
CALLAWAY: Right.
CLARK: We've certainly been interested in them for years and so we probably have quite good intelligence, maybe 80 percent, 70 percent. But whatever we have we'll use.
CALLAWAY: Has this war really ended, though? I mean there have been repeated encounters in the no fly zones.
CLARK: There have been repeated encounters. But it's different than a continuous operation in the sense that particular in the northern no fly zone, we've been operating on a more or less tit for tat basis. We didn't strike unless they provoked us to do something. The idea was we would only strike back in the north and south as they struck at us or impeded our flights. And so if we got radar indicators, we'd strike back.
But we've never been able to go throughout the length and depth of the country inside the fly zone, so to speak, and really take out his integrated air defense system. And that'll, of course, be one of the objectives when we go to war.
CALLAWAY: Yes, so as you said, it would begin with a very heavy air attack then.
CLARK: It has to. I mean this is the conventional way to do it. What will be different in this case is probably that we'll be able to do the job much more rapidly than we did in the Gulf War or even in Afghanistan and Kosovo. And so what we'll do is we will move to a more simultaneous nature of operations, that is to say we'll put ground forces in there as rapidly as possible, I believe.
CALLAWAY: Right. That sounds a little bit like Afghanistan.
CLARK: I think you'll see some of those measures employed. I think you'll see special forces in there very quickly. But I think it'll be more than that. I think you'll also see the conventional forces, the marines, the light infantry forces of the army, maybe even heavy armored forces moving much more rapidly than, say, the 40 days or 44 days they waited during the Gulf War.
CALLAWAY: In the Afghanistan situation, the goal was to remove Osama bin Laden. As we all know, the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden are still unknown. If the goal is to remove Saddam Hussein, could we not be in the similar situation? CLARK: I think it'll be different in this case because, remember, it's not just Saddam Hussein, but it's the regime and the weapons of mass destruction that we would be after. And so even if we never find Saddam Hussein, it can still be a success if we change the government of Iraq and go after the disarmament and achieve the disarmament of those weapons programs. So we will want to get a complete accountability for all the weapons of mass destruction, the knowledge behind them, the scientists, the people who've participated, the sources. And that's really more important than finding Saddam Hussein.
CALLAWAY: And General, keeping in mind that you're a former NATO supreme commander, what is going to be the biggest obstacle?
CLARK: Well, I think the biggest obstacle here is that first, in any military operation there are going to be uncertainties and we're not totally clear on how Saddam might use his weapons of mass destruction, the chem and bio capabilities that he has, or whether he'll be able to. But in addition, after the operation, if this government, if this is a quick operation, which we have reason to believe it probably will be, there will be a lot of Iraqi forces surrendering. There will be a collapse of authority throughout large regions of the country. And then there'll be chaos. There'll be revenge seeking. There'll be humanitarian catastrophe in many regions.
And so the real question is how will we be able to deal with that and still continue to fight against the remnants of the Iraqi forces and Saddam Hussein's hard-liners that are in there? And that'll be the big challenge for us.
CALLAWAY: General, I know I have a lot more questions for you and so does everyone else out there. And you will be among those taking our questions this morning in our reporter's notebook. That's coming up with Jane Arraf reporting from Baghdad. And we'll also have historian Doug Brinkley to round out the panel. And so everyone can go ahead and e-mail us. Our address, wam@cnn.com.
General, we'll see you back here in just a little bit to help answer those questions.
CLARK: All right.
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 5, 2002 - 08:13 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: President Bush preparing a major speech Monday about the threat imposed by the Iraqi regime. This comes the same week Congress is expected to take up a resolution demanding Saddam Hussein disarm or face military action.
CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux traveling with the president. She joins us from Kennebunkport, Maine -- hello, Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Miles.
The president's going to be spending the weekend here at Kennebunkport, but he is later this morning going to New Hampshire. He's going to be doing some fund-raising and some campaigning for Republican Senatorial Candidate John Sununu. He's also going to spend a good deal of the weekend working on that speech. It's going to be a 20 minute speech delivered in prime time on Monday to the American people, making the case against Saddam Hussein.
It was just yesterday that there was a significant breakthrough for the administration when the chief of U.N. weapons inspectors, Hans Blix, announced that, yes, he believes there should be a new resolution before those inspectors go back inside of Iraq. This after conversations he had with Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HANS BLIX, CHIEF U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: We hope that the path will not be very long to a new resolution and the convergence that we began to see yesterday, I think, is a hopeful one. But I also explained to everybody that it would be somewhat awkward for us to go in and then find that a new resolution was coming there which would call for us, ask us to do something more or different, which would require other practical arrangements.
So we look forward to a speedy negotiation of a resolution and for us to come in very shortly thereafter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Now, still at issue, however, is whether or not that U.N. resolution would also authorize using military force, whether or not there'd be one or two resolutions, one getting those inspectors back in, two, enforcing those resolutions, perhaps with military action if Saddam Hussein does not comply. While state officials and sources are telling CNN there is still some wiggle room, perhaps the United States willing to compromise on that issue, yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell saying that the U.S. policy, still the position would be for a single resolution with teeth.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We still believe a one resolution solution is the better way to go. The reason we have seen any movement on the Iraqi side in the last three weeks is because of the pressure that's been put upon them. They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts or because suddenly they realized they had to come clean. It's pressure. And one resolution keeps that pressure on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And also the president will be putting a little bit of pressure on Congress when he makes that address to the American people. This is going to be on the eve of some votes both in the House and the Senate on their own resolution authorizing the president to use military force against Saddam Hussein if necessary -- Miles.
O'BRIEN: All right, thank you very much.
CNN's Suzanne Malveaux with the president in Kennebunkport -- Catherine.
CATHERINE CALLAWAY, CNN ANCHOR: So what are the military options if American forces go to war against Iraq?
For some insight, we're joined by former NATO supreme commander and CNN military analyst General Wesley Clark.
General, thanks for being with us this morning. I'm all choked up.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST, FORMER NATO SUPREME COMMANDER: Good to be with you, Catherine.
CALLAWAY: Nice to have you.
Let's talk about how the approach would be taken on this war. Certainly a different approach than was taken in the Gulf War?
CLARK: I think so because, for two reasons, really. The objectives are different and our capabilities are different and the Iraqi forces are different. So it's both the objective and the forces.
Now, let's look at the objective. What we're going to want to do, I think, is go as directly as possible after the weapons of mass destruction sites. We don't want him to be able to use those weapons against us, against Israel or against his own people. So we'll go against them with air, we'll go against them with ground forces and probably as rapidly as possible. That means we're going to go into Iraq as deeply as we need to, as rapidly as we can.
So I think you're going to see a very different operation.
CALLAWAY: But how much do you think the military knows at this point about where those targets are that you just mentioned? Is this something that would be done after inspections?
CLARK: Any information we get would be useful, obviously. I don't think we have a hundred percent knowledge. But on the other hand we've got pretty good visibility over Iraq. We've shifted all of the information for years. We've struck at many of these sites before.
CALLAWAY: Right.
CLARK: We've certainly been interested in them for years and so we probably have quite good intelligence, maybe 80 percent, 70 percent. But whatever we have we'll use.
CALLAWAY: Has this war really ended, though? I mean there have been repeated encounters in the no fly zones.
CLARK: There have been repeated encounters. But it's different than a continuous operation in the sense that particular in the northern no fly zone, we've been operating on a more or less tit for tat basis. We didn't strike unless they provoked us to do something. The idea was we would only strike back in the north and south as they struck at us or impeded our flights. And so if we got radar indicators, we'd strike back.
But we've never been able to go throughout the length and depth of the country inside the fly zone, so to speak, and really take out his integrated air defense system. And that'll, of course, be one of the objectives when we go to war.
CALLAWAY: Yes, so as you said, it would begin with a very heavy air attack then.
CLARK: It has to. I mean this is the conventional way to do it. What will be different in this case is probably that we'll be able to do the job much more rapidly than we did in the Gulf War or even in Afghanistan and Kosovo. And so what we'll do is we will move to a more simultaneous nature of operations, that is to say we'll put ground forces in there as rapidly as possible, I believe.
CALLAWAY: Right. That sounds a little bit like Afghanistan.
CLARK: I think you'll see some of those measures employed. I think you'll see special forces in there very quickly. But I think it'll be more than that. I think you'll also see the conventional forces, the marines, the light infantry forces of the army, maybe even heavy armored forces moving much more rapidly than, say, the 40 days or 44 days they waited during the Gulf War.
CALLAWAY: In the Afghanistan situation, the goal was to remove Osama bin Laden. As we all know, the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden are still unknown. If the goal is to remove Saddam Hussein, could we not be in the similar situation? CLARK: I think it'll be different in this case because, remember, it's not just Saddam Hussein, but it's the regime and the weapons of mass destruction that we would be after. And so even if we never find Saddam Hussein, it can still be a success if we change the government of Iraq and go after the disarmament and achieve the disarmament of those weapons programs. So we will want to get a complete accountability for all the weapons of mass destruction, the knowledge behind them, the scientists, the people who've participated, the sources. And that's really more important than finding Saddam Hussein.
CALLAWAY: And General, keeping in mind that you're a former NATO supreme commander, what is going to be the biggest obstacle?
CLARK: Well, I think the biggest obstacle here is that first, in any military operation there are going to be uncertainties and we're not totally clear on how Saddam might use his weapons of mass destruction, the chem and bio capabilities that he has, or whether he'll be able to. But in addition, after the operation, if this government, if this is a quick operation, which we have reason to believe it probably will be, there will be a lot of Iraqi forces surrendering. There will be a collapse of authority throughout large regions of the country. And then there'll be chaos. There'll be revenge seeking. There'll be humanitarian catastrophe in many regions.
And so the real question is how will we be able to deal with that and still continue to fight against the remnants of the Iraqi forces and Saddam Hussein's hard-liners that are in there? And that'll be the big challenge for us.
CALLAWAY: General, I know I have a lot more questions for you and so does everyone else out there. And you will be among those taking our questions this morning in our reporter's notebook. That's coming up with Jane Arraf reporting from Baghdad. And we'll also have historian Doug Brinkley to round out the panel. And so everyone can go ahead and e-mail us. Our address, wam@cnn.com.
General, we'll see you back here in just a little bit to help answer those questions.
CLARK: All right.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
