Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Saturday Morning News

Reporter's Notebook: Discussion of Current Events

Aired November 16, 2002 - 09:34   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.


NEVILLE: Listen, we want your questions about the weapons inspectors in Iraq. So go ahead and give us a call at 1-800-807-2620.
O'BRIEN: Joining us now, our senior U.N. correspondent, Richard Roth, who's in Paris, CNN's Rym Brahimi from Baghdad, and military analyst Brigadier General David Grange joining us from Chicago.

Let's get right...

NEVILLE: And we already have a -- yes, somebody on the line.

O'BRIEN: Shoot e-mail first.

NEVILLE: Oh, you want to do the e-mail first?

O'BRIEN: Let's do an e-mail first, yes.

NEVILLE: OK, go ahead.

O'BRIEN: Let's do that first, because they've been perhaps a little more patient than the phone callers.

NEVILLE: OK, go ahead.

O'BRIEN: They sent this in in the wee hours.

J. Barnes in Ohio, actually a pair of questions related. We'll start with Rym on this one. "What are the chances that Saddam Hussein will seize the opportunity of using the 100 inspectors as hostages? Are or will the inspectors be in danger of being taken hostage, creating a potentially dangerous situation for not only the inspectors but also giving Hussein that hold if he thinks he's potentially going down anyway?" That from Debbie in Brighton. The issue of potential hostages, Rym.

RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, from what I understand, the resolution that was adopted at the Security Council provides for adequate U.N. security for the inspectors, and I think that was a great concern among members of the Security Council. Actually, one previous suggestion they've had was that foreign troops actually accompany the inspectors during those inspections in order to maybe make them more safe or in order to sort of maybe create some sort of safety ring around them.

Now, that wasn't accepted by all the members, so they downscaled that to adequate proper U.N. security. And I understand that the Iraqi government has agreed to that, since it agrees to the resolution as a whole.

Now, in terms of what are the chances of him trying to use them as hostages, I think right now there is an understanding in Iraq that this is a different ball game, and that Iraq has very, very little choice but to comply with the resolution, with the inspections.

I think a lot of it boils down to the fact that there's been a lot of pressure put on Iraq by the U.S., but also by other members of the Security Council, and also by a lot of Iraq's friends and allies, saying, You have nowhere to go now, the best thing for you to do would be to comply and prove what you've been saying. You've been saying you have no weapons of mass destruction, well, just prove it, and let the inspectors back in to do their job.

Does that answer the question?

NEVILLE: I think it did, Rym...

O'BRIEN: Yes, well done.

NEVILLE: ... in fact. And in fact, what we're going to now is go to Canada, where Dave is standing by. Dave, what's your question, and who would you like to address it to?

CALLER: Anybody that really has a full answer for me. I'm just wondering, should the inspectors go and be denied access, or be denied access and detained or whatever, it doesn't absolutely mean war?

NEVILLE: General Grange, maybe you'll take that one.

BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), U.S. ARMY, CNN MILITARY CORRESPONDENT: There's a -- I wasn't sure about the last part of the question. If they're denied access ...

NEVILLE: Does it mean automatic war?

GRANGE: I would think so.

NEVILLE: OK, well, there's a nice, distinct answer. Thank you, General Grange.

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR UNITED NATIONS CORRESPONDENT: Well, that doesn't mean totally automatic war, if I could jump in here, Arthel. It doesn't mean automatic war, if I understood our Canadian caller, because -- it doesn't mean war immediately, because the Security Council will meet, and then the U.S. could take action.

But it depends what the caller may mean in terms of being stopped or interfered with. There may be one incident, and maybe someone will say, Well, let's try again. A lot of countries want to give the Iraqis as much chance as possible. The Iraqi -- the inspectors want to see a pattern of omissions and problems. Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector, says if we get one flat tire going out on a mission, that's OK. Perhaps it happens to our -- the inspectors' car, to the Iraqi officials' cars. But four flat tires on the way to the mosque that's being searched, that would be a different story.

But. yes, as our other guest said, that it's probably -- there maybe not be much room before there's military action.

O'BRIEN: All right, and Mr. Blix showing us his Swedish diplomat's sense of humor there, it was actually pretty good.

Kurt Hochstra has this for us. Let's send this over to General Grange. "How are the U.N. weapons inspectors going to find and inspect the underground facilities that General Grange was talking about? And if they find something, what would the next step be?"

GRANGE: Yes, it's going to be to be very difficult to find all these sites. You know, the team has an immense task. It's a small team when you look at the size of the country and the sites that would have to be inspected and the different types of weapons of mass destruction materials that are scattered here and about.

I think there's going to be a lot of denial, a lot of deception, a lot of cat-and-mouse games. So it's going to be difficult. And so I think that they won't find it all. The point's going to be, though, how do you know if you have or have not found it all?

And so the interpretation of the intelligence available and those reports are significant to determine that. And that's going to be where the big friction comes up later on.

NEVILLE: Indeed.

Steve now is calling in from Louisiana. Go ahead, Steve, you're live.

CALLER: Yes, I'd like to ask the general a question.

O'BRIEN: All right.

CALLER: In light of the fact that I understand that we're going to be using the team for intelligence gathering in addition for looking for the weapons of mass destructions, how do we expect the Iraqi government to go along and be cooperative? Because I understand we're going to use the team to gather military intelligence while they're looking for the hardware.

GRANGE: You know, that's a great question, because if you just reverse it and say, we had a team coming into our country to look for a specific item, like, let's say, weapons of mass destruction, there's also many other governmental and national interests, items that we wouldn't really want people to stick their nose into, to include government buildings and things like that.

So if you look at Saddam's palaces and compared to, let's say, the White House, Congress, things like that, though they're a little different scale, it's the same idea, though. Do you let people actually go to all these areas, read all your papers, do all these different things? And to really find and prove that the extent of the weapons of mass destruction, you almost have to do that. So that, that is a tough situation, and it involves more than just what the resolution talks about. It's military installations, it's everything. So it's -- you're right, it's very challenging. And I'm not sure how that'll be sorted out.

O'BRIEN: Well, and I think you'd agree, General Grange, before we get away to a break here, "palace" is a real misnomer. We're talking about huge compounds...

NEVILLE: Exactly.

O'BRIEN: ... building after building, and really they are military installations, aren't they?

GRANGE: Yes, you're right, and, you know, that's where a lot of things, I would suspect, are being hidden now, or they were -- they've been moved out of those locations, so yes, it's very extensive. And the access part, it's going to be very difficult, I would think.

O'BRIEN: All right.

NEVILLE: OK.

O'BRIEN: We'll leave it at that. We're going to take a break. Folks, don't go away. More phone calls, right?

NEVILLE: More phone calls, so keep them going. Where that is number again? It's 1-800-806-0...

O'BRIEN: Eight-oh-seven, 2620...

NEVILLE: There it is, very...

O'BRIEN: ... our team of operators still standing by.

NEVILLE: ... good.

O'BRIEN: Mash those buttons, will you?

NEVILLE: Stay with us. CNN SATURDAY MORNING returns in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O'BRIEN: Reporter's Notebook rolls on.

Joining us, joining us -- listen up, Richard -- Richard Roth in Paris, Rym Brahimi in Baghdad, David Grange, brigadier general, retired, in Chicago.

Let's get an e-mail. This one goes to you, Rym, so listen up. "There seems to be much support of a Saddam by the Iraqi people, mostly because of the trade sanctions against them. Is it a good political move to open up these sanctions, as long as the weapons inspectors are allowed to do their jobs? This might change the sentiment of some and maybe provide the incentive for the people to point out weapons storage points. Just a thought." And I will add, a good thought...

NEVILLE: Yes, it's a very good thought.

O'BRIEN: ... from Fred watts in Delaware, Ohio.

What do you think of that one, Rym?

BRAHIMI: Well, it's an interesting question. Indeed, a lot of people, in some countries, I think even Russia was one of them, had argued that it would definitely help to lift the sanctions, and also it would maybe ease the tensions between Iraq and the Security Council to tell Iraq, Well, why don't you -- we suspend the sanctions if you let the inspectors back in?

Now, that was one argument. Because of course the question here was, well, what have the sanctions achieved in all of these years? And definitely they have not only maybe brought the people closer to their leader but they've also strengthened him in the view of many people.

So that's an argument that a lot of people have indeed supported saying, Well, the sanctions -- lifting the sanctions would probably lead to opening up the country for the people, because this is what the declared goal of the Security Council, previous Security Council resolutions, had been initially.

O'BRIEN: It's kind of a similar line of logic that you hear in the debate over Castro and Cuba. You know, if you loosen things up, maybe that will change people's sentiment.

All right, let's get on to...

NEVILLE: Exactly.

O'BRIEN: ... a phone call, shall we?

NEVILLE: Yes, good points there.

Listen, Dan in Ohio is standing by. Dan, good morning.

CALLER: Good morning. I'd like to ask the panelists if the United States do go to war with Iraq, which would be probably an all- out blitzkrieg, knowing Iraq, knowing this, would they use their biological and chemical warfare on Israel, with possibly the United States? And if so, would we respond back with a nuclear weapon? And would they have time to dig up their weapons to use them, if supposedly they are all buried?

NEVILLE: OK, let's let General Grange answer that one.

GRANGE: Yes, I think there's two parts to the question. One, what will he do? I believe that Saddam this time will use some type of weapon if he has the opportunity, probably chemical, just because of the nature of how he could employ it.

I think he will try to drag Israel into the conflict, through whether it be Scud missiles or agents on the ground. The United States will not, however, respond with chemical, biological agents at all, that just will not happen.

Would there be a chance to use some type of a small nuclear device? Possibly, but I don't think it would be necessary, because America has the overwhelming force to do it without that.

O'BRIEN: Ominous side.

All right, this one is from Van Giragosi, and we'll send it to you, Richard, because there's a lot of discussion about the makeup of this team. His question is, "Does the inspection team include any Egyptians, Algerians, or members from the Arab League? Hans Blix addressed this issue of Arab participation a few moments ago, didn't he?

NEVILLE: Yes, he said that they were asked but not many were nominated to be inspectors.

ROTH: That's right. There are inspectors and people who are doing the investigations from 48 different countries, but Hans Blix has said that only Jordan offered to send inspectors, and an appeal was put out to the various missions and embassies that are attached to the U.N., and no other Arab country came forward. He hoped that this would now change.

He took some criticism from the Arab world that it was not a wide representation of the inspector colony. The U.S. has the most, more than 30, Russia and France, probably two and three.

NEVILLE: OK, let's go to the phones again. California, Joan is standing by. Go ahead, Joan.

CALLER: Good morning. I'm interested to know if the inspectors, after a time, don't find anything significant in Iraq, and the United States starts its attack, how would that affect the rather fragile alliance that we've put together?

NEVILLE: Good question. Joan. OK, General Grange, again, I would like you to answer that one.

GRANGE: Yes, the problem's going to be, you know, the onus is not on the inspectors to actually prove that he has the stuff, it's for Saddam to reveal that he has the stuff. Other sources have shown that he does have some of these items. And so if it comes to the point where we don't -- they don't find anything, then what?

That -- I mean, that's a great question. And I think other means will prove that he has it, and then he did violate the resolution.

O'BRIEN: All right, let's get an e-mail in for Rym. This comes from Frank in D.C. "What is the legal basis, international or otherwise, of the Iraqi flyovers, the no-fly zones? Are they U.N sanctioned?" That -- we sort of assume people know the history on that. It's worth recounting that, Rym.

BRAHIMI: Yes, in fact, they are not specifically mentioned in any resolution. This is actually an interpretation by the United States and Britain, saying that one of the previous resolutions on Iraq said that the coalition should protect the Shia minority in the south of the country and the Kurdish minority in the north of the country.

And so they said, well, their interpretation is, well, protection means we should have no-fly zones and fly over them regularly. So that's where it stems from.

That said, a lot of countries, and France used to be part of that coalition and pulled out, a lot of countries now say, Well, that's not part of the coalition. So in some sense, when the Iraqis say, Well, this is not legal, and they're sort of struggling to fight it, there is a legal basis for their argument as well.

O'BRIEN: All right. We really are out of time. But I've got to ask this one question, I don't know who wants to take it, but this is the most provocative question of the morning, in my opinion. "Would it not save a lot of bloodshed if asylum was offered to Saddam?"

NEVILLE: He wouldn't take it.

O'BRIEN: Richard? Or Rym, I don't -- Richard, why don't you go first, and (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?

ROTH: Well, there's a story on the wires...

BRAHIMI: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

ROTH: ... that Libya...

BRAHIMI: ... (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

ROTH: ... Libya is ready...

BRAHIMI: ... (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

ROTH: ... to offer asylum to Saddam Hussein.

O'BRIEN: All right. Rym?

BRAHIMI: Yes, I was going to ask, Who would offer asylum to Saddam Hussein? That was my question, but...

NEVILLE: But really, Rym, would he take it? I mean, this is all about pride for him. He's not going to leave his country.

BRAHIMI: Well, this is -- I think we're dealing with a president who's actually spent many, many years holding onto power and of doing so no matter what. So I think it would be very difficult, as pride, as you say, a lot of things involved, I think it would be very difficult for him to go anywhere else.

O'BRIEN: However, if there's a country listening right now that would like to offer asylum, I guess they'll entertain the offer.

All right, thank you very much, our Richard Roth, Rym Brahimi, General David Grange, excellent work. We appreciate you taking those questions from our viewers, and we appreciate your questions. Many more questions than we could get on, and we un -- hope -- well, I hope you understand, we try to get on as many as we can. Thank you.

NEVILLE: I think they understand.

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 November 16, 2002 - 09:34   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
NEVILLE: Listen, we want your questions about the weapons inspectors in Iraq. So go ahead and give us a call at 1-800-807-2620.
O'BRIEN: Joining us now, our senior U.N. correspondent, Richard Roth, who's in Paris, CNN's Rym Brahimi from Baghdad, and military analyst Brigadier General David Grange joining us from Chicago.

Let's get right...

NEVILLE: And we already have a -- yes, somebody on the line.

O'BRIEN: Shoot e-mail first.

NEVILLE: Oh, you want to do the e-mail first?

O'BRIEN: Let's do an e-mail first, yes.

NEVILLE: OK, go ahead.

O'BRIEN: Let's do that first, because they've been perhaps a little more patient than the phone callers.

NEVILLE: OK, go ahead.

O'BRIEN: They sent this in in the wee hours.

J. Barnes in Ohio, actually a pair of questions related. We'll start with Rym on this one. "What are the chances that Saddam Hussein will seize the opportunity of using the 100 inspectors as hostages? Are or will the inspectors be in danger of being taken hostage, creating a potentially dangerous situation for not only the inspectors but also giving Hussein that hold if he thinks he's potentially going down anyway?" That from Debbie in Brighton. The issue of potential hostages, Rym.

RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, from what I understand, the resolution that was adopted at the Security Council provides for adequate U.N. security for the inspectors, and I think that was a great concern among members of the Security Council. Actually, one previous suggestion they've had was that foreign troops actually accompany the inspectors during those inspections in order to maybe make them more safe or in order to sort of maybe create some sort of safety ring around them.

Now, that wasn't accepted by all the members, so they downscaled that to adequate proper U.N. security. And I understand that the Iraqi government has agreed to that, since it agrees to the resolution as a whole.

Now, in terms of what are the chances of him trying to use them as hostages, I think right now there is an understanding in Iraq that this is a different ball game, and that Iraq has very, very little choice but to comply with the resolution, with the inspections.

I think a lot of it boils down to the fact that there's been a lot of pressure put on Iraq by the U.S., but also by other members of the Security Council, and also by a lot of Iraq's friends and allies, saying, You have nowhere to go now, the best thing for you to do would be to comply and prove what you've been saying. You've been saying you have no weapons of mass destruction, well, just prove it, and let the inspectors back in to do their job.

Does that answer the question?

NEVILLE: I think it did, Rym...

O'BRIEN: Yes, well done.

NEVILLE: ... in fact. And in fact, what we're going to now is go to Canada, where Dave is standing by. Dave, what's your question, and who would you like to address it to?

CALLER: Anybody that really has a full answer for me. I'm just wondering, should the inspectors go and be denied access, or be denied access and detained or whatever, it doesn't absolutely mean war?

NEVILLE: General Grange, maybe you'll take that one.

BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), U.S. ARMY, CNN MILITARY CORRESPONDENT: There's a -- I wasn't sure about the last part of the question. If they're denied access ...

NEVILLE: Does it mean automatic war?

GRANGE: I would think so.

NEVILLE: OK, well, there's a nice, distinct answer. Thank you, General Grange.

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR UNITED NATIONS CORRESPONDENT: Well, that doesn't mean totally automatic war, if I could jump in here, Arthel. It doesn't mean automatic war, if I understood our Canadian caller, because -- it doesn't mean war immediately, because the Security Council will meet, and then the U.S. could take action.

But it depends what the caller may mean in terms of being stopped or interfered with. There may be one incident, and maybe someone will say, Well, let's try again. A lot of countries want to give the Iraqis as much chance as possible. The Iraqi -- the inspectors want to see a pattern of omissions and problems. Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector, says if we get one flat tire going out on a mission, that's OK. Perhaps it happens to our -- the inspectors' car, to the Iraqi officials' cars. But four flat tires on the way to the mosque that's being searched, that would be a different story.

But. yes, as our other guest said, that it's probably -- there maybe not be much room before there's military action.

O'BRIEN: All right, and Mr. Blix showing us his Swedish diplomat's sense of humor there, it was actually pretty good.

Kurt Hochstra has this for us. Let's send this over to General Grange. "How are the U.N. weapons inspectors going to find and inspect the underground facilities that General Grange was talking about? And if they find something, what would the next step be?"

GRANGE: Yes, it's going to be to be very difficult to find all these sites. You know, the team has an immense task. It's a small team when you look at the size of the country and the sites that would have to be inspected and the different types of weapons of mass destruction materials that are scattered here and about.

I think there's going to be a lot of denial, a lot of deception, a lot of cat-and-mouse games. So it's going to be difficult. And so I think that they won't find it all. The point's going to be, though, how do you know if you have or have not found it all?

And so the interpretation of the intelligence available and those reports are significant to determine that. And that's going to be where the big friction comes up later on.

NEVILLE: Indeed.

Steve now is calling in from Louisiana. Go ahead, Steve, you're live.

CALLER: Yes, I'd like to ask the general a question.

O'BRIEN: All right.

CALLER: In light of the fact that I understand that we're going to be using the team for intelligence gathering in addition for looking for the weapons of mass destructions, how do we expect the Iraqi government to go along and be cooperative? Because I understand we're going to use the team to gather military intelligence while they're looking for the hardware.

GRANGE: You know, that's a great question, because if you just reverse it and say, we had a team coming into our country to look for a specific item, like, let's say, weapons of mass destruction, there's also many other governmental and national interests, items that we wouldn't really want people to stick their nose into, to include government buildings and things like that.

So if you look at Saddam's palaces and compared to, let's say, the White House, Congress, things like that, though they're a little different scale, it's the same idea, though. Do you let people actually go to all these areas, read all your papers, do all these different things? And to really find and prove that the extent of the weapons of mass destruction, you almost have to do that. So that, that is a tough situation, and it involves more than just what the resolution talks about. It's military installations, it's everything. So it's -- you're right, it's very challenging. And I'm not sure how that'll be sorted out.

O'BRIEN: Well, and I think you'd agree, General Grange, before we get away to a break here, "palace" is a real misnomer. We're talking about huge compounds...

NEVILLE: Exactly.

O'BRIEN: ... building after building, and really they are military installations, aren't they?

GRANGE: Yes, you're right, and, you know, that's where a lot of things, I would suspect, are being hidden now, or they were -- they've been moved out of those locations, so yes, it's very extensive. And the access part, it's going to be very difficult, I would think.

O'BRIEN: All right.

NEVILLE: OK.

O'BRIEN: We'll leave it at that. We're going to take a break. Folks, don't go away. More phone calls, right?

NEVILLE: More phone calls, so keep them going. Where that is number again? It's 1-800-806-0...

O'BRIEN: Eight-oh-seven, 2620...

NEVILLE: There it is, very...

O'BRIEN: ... our team of operators still standing by.

NEVILLE: ... good.

O'BRIEN: Mash those buttons, will you?

NEVILLE: Stay with us. CNN SATURDAY MORNING returns in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O'BRIEN: Reporter's Notebook rolls on.

Joining us, joining us -- listen up, Richard -- Richard Roth in Paris, Rym Brahimi in Baghdad, David Grange, brigadier general, retired, in Chicago.

Let's get an e-mail. This one goes to you, Rym, so listen up. "There seems to be much support of a Saddam by the Iraqi people, mostly because of the trade sanctions against them. Is it a good political move to open up these sanctions, as long as the weapons inspectors are allowed to do their jobs? This might change the sentiment of some and maybe provide the incentive for the people to point out weapons storage points. Just a thought." And I will add, a good thought...

NEVILLE: Yes, it's a very good thought.

O'BRIEN: ... from Fred watts in Delaware, Ohio.

What do you think of that one, Rym?

BRAHIMI: Well, it's an interesting question. Indeed, a lot of people, in some countries, I think even Russia was one of them, had argued that it would definitely help to lift the sanctions, and also it would maybe ease the tensions between Iraq and the Security Council to tell Iraq, Well, why don't you -- we suspend the sanctions if you let the inspectors back in?

Now, that was one argument. Because of course the question here was, well, what have the sanctions achieved in all of these years? And definitely they have not only maybe brought the people closer to their leader but they've also strengthened him in the view of many people.

So that's an argument that a lot of people have indeed supported saying, Well, the sanctions -- lifting the sanctions would probably lead to opening up the country for the people, because this is what the declared goal of the Security Council, previous Security Council resolutions, had been initially.

O'BRIEN: It's kind of a similar line of logic that you hear in the debate over Castro and Cuba. You know, if you loosen things up, maybe that will change people's sentiment.

All right, let's get on to...

NEVILLE: Exactly.

O'BRIEN: ... a phone call, shall we?

NEVILLE: Yes, good points there.

Listen, Dan in Ohio is standing by. Dan, good morning.

CALLER: Good morning. I'd like to ask the panelists if the United States do go to war with Iraq, which would be probably an all- out blitzkrieg, knowing Iraq, knowing this, would they use their biological and chemical warfare on Israel, with possibly the United States? And if so, would we respond back with a nuclear weapon? And would they have time to dig up their weapons to use them, if supposedly they are all buried?

NEVILLE: OK, let's let General Grange answer that one.

GRANGE: Yes, I think there's two parts to the question. One, what will he do? I believe that Saddam this time will use some type of weapon if he has the opportunity, probably chemical, just because of the nature of how he could employ it.

I think he will try to drag Israel into the conflict, through whether it be Scud missiles or agents on the ground. The United States will not, however, respond with chemical, biological agents at all, that just will not happen.

Would there be a chance to use some type of a small nuclear device? Possibly, but I don't think it would be necessary, because America has the overwhelming force to do it without that.

O'BRIEN: Ominous side.

All right, this one is from Van Giragosi, and we'll send it to you, Richard, because there's a lot of discussion about the makeup of this team. His question is, "Does the inspection team include any Egyptians, Algerians, or members from the Arab League? Hans Blix addressed this issue of Arab participation a few moments ago, didn't he?

NEVILLE: Yes, he said that they were asked but not many were nominated to be inspectors.

ROTH: That's right. There are inspectors and people who are doing the investigations from 48 different countries, but Hans Blix has said that only Jordan offered to send inspectors, and an appeal was put out to the various missions and embassies that are attached to the U.N., and no other Arab country came forward. He hoped that this would now change.

He took some criticism from the Arab world that it was not a wide representation of the inspector colony. The U.S. has the most, more than 30, Russia and France, probably two and three.

NEVILLE: OK, let's go to the phones again. California, Joan is standing by. Go ahead, Joan.

CALLER: Good morning. I'm interested to know if the inspectors, after a time, don't find anything significant in Iraq, and the United States starts its attack, how would that affect the rather fragile alliance that we've put together?

NEVILLE: Good question. Joan. OK, General Grange, again, I would like you to answer that one.

GRANGE: Yes, the problem's going to be, you know, the onus is not on the inspectors to actually prove that he has the stuff, it's for Saddam to reveal that he has the stuff. Other sources have shown that he does have some of these items. And so if it comes to the point where we don't -- they don't find anything, then what?

That -- I mean, that's a great question. And I think other means will prove that he has it, and then he did violate the resolution.

O'BRIEN: All right, let's get an e-mail in for Rym. This comes from Frank in D.C. "What is the legal basis, international or otherwise, of the Iraqi flyovers, the no-fly zones? Are they U.N sanctioned?" That -- we sort of assume people know the history on that. It's worth recounting that, Rym.

BRAHIMI: Yes, in fact, they are not specifically mentioned in any resolution. This is actually an interpretation by the United States and Britain, saying that one of the previous resolutions on Iraq said that the coalition should protect the Shia minority in the south of the country and the Kurdish minority in the north of the country.

And so they said, well, their interpretation is, well, protection means we should have no-fly zones and fly over them regularly. So that's where it stems from.

That said, a lot of countries, and France used to be part of that coalition and pulled out, a lot of countries now say, Well, that's not part of the coalition. So in some sense, when the Iraqis say, Well, this is not legal, and they're sort of struggling to fight it, there is a legal basis for their argument as well.

O'BRIEN: All right. We really are out of time. But I've got to ask this one question, I don't know who wants to take it, but this is the most provocative question of the morning, in my opinion. "Would it not save a lot of bloodshed if asylum was offered to Saddam?"

NEVILLE: He wouldn't take it.

O'BRIEN: Richard? Or Rym, I don't -- Richard, why don't you go first, and (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?

ROTH: Well, there's a story on the wires...

BRAHIMI: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

ROTH: ... that Libya...

BRAHIMI: ... (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

ROTH: ... Libya is ready...

BRAHIMI: ... (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

ROTH: ... to offer asylum to Saddam Hussein.

O'BRIEN: All right. Rym?

BRAHIMI: Yes, I was going to ask, Who would offer asylum to Saddam Hussein? That was my question, but...

NEVILLE: But really, Rym, would he take it? I mean, this is all about pride for him. He's not going to leave his country.

BRAHIMI: Well, this is -- I think we're dealing with a president who's actually spent many, many years holding onto power and of doing so no matter what. So I think it would be very difficult, as pride, as you say, a lot of things involved, I think it would be very difficult for him to go anywhere else.

O'BRIEN: However, if there's a country listening right now that would like to offer asylum, I guess they'll entertain the offer.

All right, thank you very much, our Richard Roth, Rym Brahimi, General David Grange, excellent work. We appreciate you taking those questions from our viewers, and we appreciate your questions. Many more questions than we could get on, and we un -- hope -- well, I hope you understand, we try to get on as many as we can. Thank you.

NEVILLE: I think they understand.

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