Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Sunday
Interview With General George Harrison
Aired February 09, 2003 - 18:13 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.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN ANCHOR: Well, if the U.S. does bring about regime change in Iraq, what then? Are we in for years of nation building in that country? General George Harrison is former commander of the U.S. Air Force Warfare Center and former deputy chief of staff for the Air Force in Europe, and at that post, he directed all Air Force operations in Europe and Africa.
General Harrison, thank you very much for being with us. Let me start you off by asking about this issue of nation building. What exactly will the role be? We've talked a lot about what it will be in war, but what comes afterwards?
GEN. GEORGE HARRISON, U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.): Well, what comes afterwards for the U.S. military, of course, is to participate as a part of a coalition, providing stability so that the political factors can come to bear.
Much as we did in Afghanistan, where there was an interim government, then there were free elections and we proceeded to move on from that point with the development of a more viable political entity.
Now the nature of the regime change will have a significant effect on the role of the military as we go through this process. If it's a violent regime change, that is if we go to war and Saddam Hussein is overthrown that way, then there will be a longer period of stability operations, clearly, whereas if there is some -- by some happenstance, a movement of Hussein out of the country, then, of course, we'll have to work with the existing -- we'll have to work and we'll want to work with the existing political parties and provide an environment that ensures, again, free and democratic elections and a change in that regime to a more liberal, open kind of an operation.
SAVIDGE: Well, how many troops do you think would be involved? And would the same troops that take part in the battle take part in keeping the peace?
HARRISON: Well, more than likely, the troops that are involved in the battle will come back home, and the kinds of troops that will be involved in keeping the peace will be more in the nature of peacekeeping forces, rather than combat forces. That will be more of a policeman stability kind of an operation, as opposed to a direct combat maneuvering operation. Much as we changed the forces in Japan in 1945, after that regime changed, as we changed out the forces in Germany in 1945, and certainly as we worked to provide stability in South Korea in 1953. SAVIDGE: Well, you mentioned Afghanistan. I mean, Afghanistan is perhaps not an ideal model. There is still a lot of discontent, a lot of fighting that still goes on there. How do we try to prevent that scenario playing out in Iraq?
HARRISON: Well, I think we -- we'll be dealing with a more organized military establishment in Iraq and I think that it will be, in some sense, be a simpler, less complex task. As you know, Afghanistan is governed by a group of warlords -- or not by a group of warlords, but by a variety of warlords in various environments, and each of those has to be negotiated with as we try to establish a stable regime and a stable government. Whereas in Iraq, we're dealing with an established government -- however much we like it or don't like it, it's an established government with a well established chain of command in the military and in the civil sector.
SAVIDGE: One thing Afghanistan didn't have, obviously, was a trained military. Iraq certainly does. If the regime change comes about, could you ever foresee a time where that military, meaning Iraqi, could be called upon to help preserve the peace with American forces?
HARRISON: Well, it depends on their attitude, their leadership and it depends on how well or how rapidly and quickly they embrace a change in government. We have indications, of course, that large portions of the Iraqi military are somewhat disenchanted with both their leadership and the roles they're called upon to perform as they work through the problems in Iraq.
So if they maintain their cohesive nature and accept the fact that their form of government has changed to a more democratic form, that the Ba'ath Party is no longer in control and no longer operating their nation, I think there's a chance that that military, which is not inherently evil, by the way, that that military can be used as a force for stability.
However, there certainly will be some discussion about people who may have committed war crimes, who may have done a variety of evil kinds of things. Those people will not be accepted, obviously, in any kind of new stability environment.
SAVIDGE: Well, it's an interesting conversation. We thank you very much for joining us, General George Harrison, for your insights.
HARRISON: Always a pleasure. 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
Aired February 9, 2003 - 18:13 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN ANCHOR: Well, if the U.S. does bring about regime change in Iraq, what then? Are we in for years of nation building in that country? General George Harrison is former commander of the U.S. Air Force Warfare Center and former deputy chief of staff for the Air Force in Europe, and at that post, he directed all Air Force operations in Europe and Africa.
General Harrison, thank you very much for being with us. Let me start you off by asking about this issue of nation building. What exactly will the role be? We've talked a lot about what it will be in war, but what comes afterwards?
GEN. GEORGE HARRISON, U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.): Well, what comes afterwards for the U.S. military, of course, is to participate as a part of a coalition, providing stability so that the political factors can come to bear.
Much as we did in Afghanistan, where there was an interim government, then there were free elections and we proceeded to move on from that point with the development of a more viable political entity.
Now the nature of the regime change will have a significant effect on the role of the military as we go through this process. If it's a violent regime change, that is if we go to war and Saddam Hussein is overthrown that way, then there will be a longer period of stability operations, clearly, whereas if there is some -- by some happenstance, a movement of Hussein out of the country, then, of course, we'll have to work with the existing -- we'll have to work and we'll want to work with the existing political parties and provide an environment that ensures, again, free and democratic elections and a change in that regime to a more liberal, open kind of an operation.
SAVIDGE: Well, how many troops do you think would be involved? And would the same troops that take part in the battle take part in keeping the peace?
HARRISON: Well, more than likely, the troops that are involved in the battle will come back home, and the kinds of troops that will be involved in keeping the peace will be more in the nature of peacekeeping forces, rather than combat forces. That will be more of a policeman stability kind of an operation, as opposed to a direct combat maneuvering operation. Much as we changed the forces in Japan in 1945, after that regime changed, as we changed out the forces in Germany in 1945, and certainly as we worked to provide stability in South Korea in 1953. SAVIDGE: Well, you mentioned Afghanistan. I mean, Afghanistan is perhaps not an ideal model. There is still a lot of discontent, a lot of fighting that still goes on there. How do we try to prevent that scenario playing out in Iraq?
HARRISON: Well, I think we -- we'll be dealing with a more organized military establishment in Iraq and I think that it will be, in some sense, be a simpler, less complex task. As you know, Afghanistan is governed by a group of warlords -- or not by a group of warlords, but by a variety of warlords in various environments, and each of those has to be negotiated with as we try to establish a stable regime and a stable government. Whereas in Iraq, we're dealing with an established government -- however much we like it or don't like it, it's an established government with a well established chain of command in the military and in the civil sector.
SAVIDGE: One thing Afghanistan didn't have, obviously, was a trained military. Iraq certainly does. If the regime change comes about, could you ever foresee a time where that military, meaning Iraqi, could be called upon to help preserve the peace with American forces?
HARRISON: Well, it depends on their attitude, their leadership and it depends on how well or how rapidly and quickly they embrace a change in government. We have indications, of course, that large portions of the Iraqi military are somewhat disenchanted with both their leadership and the roles they're called upon to perform as they work through the problems in Iraq.
So if they maintain their cohesive nature and accept the fact that their form of government has changed to a more democratic form, that the Ba'ath Party is no longer in control and no longer operating their nation, I think there's a chance that that military, which is not inherently evil, by the way, that that military can be used as a force for stability.
However, there certainly will be some discussion about people who may have committed war crimes, who may have done a variety of evil kinds of things. Those people will not be accepted, obviously, in any kind of new stability environment.
SAVIDGE: Well, it's an interesting conversation. We thank you very much for joining us, General George Harrison, for your insights.
HARRISON: Always a pleasure. 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
