Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Sunday

Interview With George Packer

Aired March 02, 2003 - 18:44   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.


FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: If there is a war with Iraq and President Saddam Hussein is removed from power, what happens next? Could it become a true democracy? That's the focus of a new article in the "New York Times Magazine." George Packer wrote the story and is a frequent contributor to the magazine and he joins us from New York, good to see you George.
GEORGE PACKER, "THE MORNING AFTER": Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: All right, in a nutshell do you see that it would be control or chaos post Saddam?

PACKER: Well, I have to hedge a bit because Iraq is under such a tight lid that no one knows what kind of political reality we're going to find once that lid is lifted but there are a lot of reasons to worry. Some of them have to do with Iraq's history, which has never been democratic.

Some have to do with its ethnic mix which is quite diverse and can be fractious, and I think some have to do with the fact that the administration hasn't made its plans very clear and in some ways has antagonized some of the very forces that it will need to work with after the fall of Saddam if there is a war in order to begin to democratize that country.

WHITFIELD: In fact, let's talk about I guess those conflicts that are rooted in the cultural and the political differences there in that country and the complexities. The majority there is Shiite.

PACKER: Yes.

WHITFIELD: But Saddam Hussein was a -- is of the Ba'ath Party and since 1986 -- or '68 rather, people have been very loyal to the Ba'ath Party and to his leadership.

PACKER: Well, they've had to be.

WHITFIELD: Yes, they've had to be so if he were not there, if he were somehow deposed or removed from power, might those loyalists still insist that another Ba'ath Party leader be in charge?

PACKER: Well, I think in a way it's going to be up to the Americans. There's a tendency in the administration to want to work with known quantities and that tends to find itself more in the State Department and the Sunnis who dominate the Ba'ath Party are the known quantity in Iraq. They fill the bureaucracy. They're the technocrats and it may well be, in fact the administration has revealed certain plans that they will work with lower level Ba'ath Party officials in a post war scenario.

WHITFIELD: Well, in fact, you talk about the American influence but already we've heard from the United Arab Emirates. We've now heard from Bahrain as well and even Kuwait who all say that Saddam Hussein needs to step down, but it's the United Arab Emirates who would say that they would rather help facilitate some kind of transition. So might it be a mistake if anyone but an Arab nation were to help in that transition? Does the United States really have a role to keep that -- keep some sort of stability there?

PACKER: Well, if the United States goes to war, it will have to have that role. If somehow war is averted and Saddam Hussein is removed without a war, which frankly it seems unlikely to me, then there's all sorts of scenarios that could play themselves out. The Arab League has talked about having an Arab League administration run the country in the interim.

But this is actually not going to be good news for a lot of Iraqis who actually don't trust their Arab neighbors and who think that rather than bringing democracy to Iraq, the other Arab countries are simply going to be looking after their own interest. So, every outside power is going to come under suspicion including the United States that its own interests are what are driving its policies.

WHITFIELD: Well, George, let me just borrow a little passage from your article and you're almost or perhaps forecasting to be somewhat prophetic here. "When Saddam suddenly ordered the release of tens of thousands of prisoners from the (unintelligible) prison last fall, the surge of inmates from within the walls and family members from without overwhelmed prison guards and crushed a number of people to death at the very moment of freedom.

Reporters who ventured into the bowels of the prison were struck by the appalling odors of long human confinement when a seal on Iraq has broken, the surge will be just as intense and the smell of decades of repression just as rank." So, are you seeing that this is likely, the price for freedom, the price of freedom might be a new hell, is that what you're saying?

PACKER: I think there's a lot of reason to fear civil anarchy. After the Gulf War, there were uprisings in the north and south that were quite bloody and the score settling was extreme.

And again, it depends on how the war goes and what kind of U.S. administration is in place and whether it's capable of policing a country in which perhaps battles are still being fought, weapons depots are still being sought out, remnants of the special Republican Guard are still fighting back. Perhaps in Baghdad there's urban conflict and all around the country this lid has been lifted and I don't see how it could not be chaotic.

WHITFIELD: All right, George Packer thank you very much in today's "New York Times Magazine, The Morning After."

PACKER: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: Thanks very much for joining us, appreciate it.

PACKER: 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 March 2, 2003 - 18:44   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: If there is a war with Iraq and President Saddam Hussein is removed from power, what happens next? Could it become a true democracy? That's the focus of a new article in the "New York Times Magazine." George Packer wrote the story and is a frequent contributor to the magazine and he joins us from New York, good to see you George.
GEORGE PACKER, "THE MORNING AFTER": Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: All right, in a nutshell do you see that it would be control or chaos post Saddam?

PACKER: Well, I have to hedge a bit because Iraq is under such a tight lid that no one knows what kind of political reality we're going to find once that lid is lifted but there are a lot of reasons to worry. Some of them have to do with Iraq's history, which has never been democratic.

Some have to do with its ethnic mix which is quite diverse and can be fractious, and I think some have to do with the fact that the administration hasn't made its plans very clear and in some ways has antagonized some of the very forces that it will need to work with after the fall of Saddam if there is a war in order to begin to democratize that country.

WHITFIELD: In fact, let's talk about I guess those conflicts that are rooted in the cultural and the political differences there in that country and the complexities. The majority there is Shiite.

PACKER: Yes.

WHITFIELD: But Saddam Hussein was a -- is of the Ba'ath Party and since 1986 -- or '68 rather, people have been very loyal to the Ba'ath Party and to his leadership.

PACKER: Well, they've had to be.

WHITFIELD: Yes, they've had to be so if he were not there, if he were somehow deposed or removed from power, might those loyalists still insist that another Ba'ath Party leader be in charge?

PACKER: Well, I think in a way it's going to be up to the Americans. There's a tendency in the administration to want to work with known quantities and that tends to find itself more in the State Department and the Sunnis who dominate the Ba'ath Party are the known quantity in Iraq. They fill the bureaucracy. They're the technocrats and it may well be, in fact the administration has revealed certain plans that they will work with lower level Ba'ath Party officials in a post war scenario.

WHITFIELD: Well, in fact, you talk about the American influence but already we've heard from the United Arab Emirates. We've now heard from Bahrain as well and even Kuwait who all say that Saddam Hussein needs to step down, but it's the United Arab Emirates who would say that they would rather help facilitate some kind of transition. So might it be a mistake if anyone but an Arab nation were to help in that transition? Does the United States really have a role to keep that -- keep some sort of stability there?

PACKER: Well, if the United States goes to war, it will have to have that role. If somehow war is averted and Saddam Hussein is removed without a war, which frankly it seems unlikely to me, then there's all sorts of scenarios that could play themselves out. The Arab League has talked about having an Arab League administration run the country in the interim.

But this is actually not going to be good news for a lot of Iraqis who actually don't trust their Arab neighbors and who think that rather than bringing democracy to Iraq, the other Arab countries are simply going to be looking after their own interest. So, every outside power is going to come under suspicion including the United States that its own interests are what are driving its policies.

WHITFIELD: Well, George, let me just borrow a little passage from your article and you're almost or perhaps forecasting to be somewhat prophetic here. "When Saddam suddenly ordered the release of tens of thousands of prisoners from the (unintelligible) prison last fall, the surge of inmates from within the walls and family members from without overwhelmed prison guards and crushed a number of people to death at the very moment of freedom.

Reporters who ventured into the bowels of the prison were struck by the appalling odors of long human confinement when a seal on Iraq has broken, the surge will be just as intense and the smell of decades of repression just as rank." So, are you seeing that this is likely, the price for freedom, the price of freedom might be a new hell, is that what you're saying?

PACKER: I think there's a lot of reason to fear civil anarchy. After the Gulf War, there were uprisings in the north and south that were quite bloody and the score settling was extreme.

And again, it depends on how the war goes and what kind of U.S. administration is in place and whether it's capable of policing a country in which perhaps battles are still being fought, weapons depots are still being sought out, remnants of the special Republican Guard are still fighting back. Perhaps in Baghdad there's urban conflict and all around the country this lid has been lifted and I don't see how it could not be chaotic.

WHITFIELD: All right, George Packer thank you very much in today's "New York Times Magazine, The Morning After."

PACKER: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: Thanks very much for joining us, appreciate it.

PACKER: 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