Return to Transcripts main page

Your World Today

Interview With William Cohen

Aired February 10, 2004 - 12:30   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.


JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: We're now joined by former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen for a weekly discussion of the events in the news. He now heads the Cohen Group, a business consulting firm.
Certainly, one of the issues this week has been (UNINTELLIGIBLE), and that is weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Cohen, when we discuss this situation, the most controversial area of it were the Iraqi National Congress defectors, or defectors handled by them that brought with them evidence. Is it normal that the Pentagon would have -- and we see that Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, both of these men at the Defense Department, were handling these Iraqis when the CIA didn't want to do it. You were there at the Pentagon. What is the normal procedure?

WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER DEFENSE SECRETARY: Well, normally, one would defer to the CIA, the Central Intelligence Agency, or the DIA, which is the Defense Intelligence Agency, and to a degree the State Intelligence and Research Division as such, and so it's a combination of those three, the so-called intelligence community, along with the NSA, responsible for intercepts, but the total intelligence take, so to speak. And it's one of the most important challenges for policy makers, namely the question that would be asked, what did the president know and how did he know it? From what sources did the information come?

Usually, the intelligence community is very reluctant to take sole source reporting, reporting from one source, unless they are satisfied that the source is so credible, so convincing and so persuasive, based upon past performance, so they can come to a judgment based upon that sole source of information. But ordinarily, what one does is to have a matrix of information, sift through and weigh (ph) it off against the other to see if there's really a common bond of intelligence that can be reasonably verified. Normally, that's the process which we certainly went through and I would expect the current administration also went through.

CLANCY: The defectors provided reams of data, civil engineers showed detailed maps of where weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons were hidden under presidential palaces or hospitals. When Hans Blix and the U.N. inspectors went in there, they found nothing. And yet the Defense Department continued to tell people they had absolute evidence the weapons were there, the stockpiles were there. I mean, do you think the evidence was politicized?

COHEN: I don't know this, and certainly this is a thing that the commission that is going to have to thoroughly investigate. Again, where did the information come from, how did it get into the analysis, what did the analysts -- how did they come to their conclusion or recommendation, such as the policy makers, what do the policy makers taken (UNINTELLIGIBLE). The special commission, the blue ribbon commission that's just been formed -- and I don't want to prejudge it at this point, but certainly it's an issue that will have to be taken up by the commission.

CLANCY: All right, you don't want to prejudge the commission, but after all, the president appoints the people on the commission, and the commission is not going to report until after the November elections, well after, not until 2005. And the question is, you know, you talk about politicizing the evidence of weapons of mass destruction, is (UNINTELLIGIBLE) depoliticizing all of the investigation?

COHEN: Well, one would hope that a commission, that is composed of the members that the president has selected, would certainly take their responsibilities very seriously and depoliticize their inquiry and investigation. I hope that will be the case. There's broad spectrum of individuals, Republicans and Democrats, people that I know and have confidence in. And it's not something that's going to be politicized by the commission. I think there are too many members on that commission, and their staff would be the first to blow the whistle should there be any attempt to politicize it.

An interesting question will come about when the commission seeks certain information, and whether the administration will then invoke, quote, "executive privilege." If that becomes an issue, then politics will start to creep back into this. So I think that the administration has got to be very forthcoming during this next period, they're going to keep the politics out of it. (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

CLANCY: Conventional weapons, conventional commitments, U.S. taxpayers long complaining that a lot of the peacekeeping missions that the Defense Department, the government gets involved in, Bosnia, drain the country and they become, you know, endless missions for nation-building, such as the case in Bosnia today. You were just in Munich, talking with defense ministers in Europe. What were some of the ideas being espoused there?

COHEN: Well, based on my conversations with the ministers, whom I spoke with directly, I believe the administration will find a way by this summer to end its interest (ph) in the Bosnia peacekeeping mission and turn that over to you. We have a very small role to play right now. It has been diminishing ever since Bosnia began. But because of the success that has been achieved, I believe that the administration will have come to the conclusion that the United States can, in fact, reduce its force structure or forces there, and apply them elsewhere if necessary. But I think that the EU will be in a position of taking that responsibility over, at the beginning -- or early in the summer.

CLANCY: Is Bush war record fair game for Senator Kerry? Senator Kerry has all these medals he got in Vietnam. George Bush went to the Air National Guard down in Florida, and he was apparently AWOL for some time.

COHEN: Well, I think the AWOL issue is something that is debatable, and that is something that obviously will be fleshed out in the course of the next several months, but (UNINTELLIGIBLE) involved, but I think that Senator Kerry, to the extent he's going to be the nominee, in all likelihood will (UNINTELLIGIBLE). It's an old doctrine that lawyers like to invoke, called res ipsa loquitur, the thing speaks for itself. He is a decorated war hero who became an activist against the war upon his return to the United States. The president served in the National Guard. I think everybody understands that now, to the extent that that becomes a focal point and issue, I think it would not be a positive issue. I think everybody understands exactly the nature of the two candidates here, including Senator Kerry, who will be the Democratic nominee.

CLANCY: All right, is that a yes or a no? Is it fair game or not?

COHEN: Oh, it's fair game. But I don't think it will become an issue that Senator Kerry will get at directly. Again, I think it's one of those things where a shot has been fired across the bow, if this is going to be about the war, then he has the status of a warrior, certainly based on his past record, just as much as the president is a, quote, "war president."

CLANCY: William Cohen, as always, our thanks to you, and hope to see you again next week for another discussion of what's going on in the headlines.

COHEN: Looking forward to it, Jim.

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com



Aired February 10, 2004 - 12:30:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: We're now joined by former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen for a weekly discussion of the events in the news. He now heads the Cohen Group, a business consulting firm.
Certainly, one of the issues this week has been (UNINTELLIGIBLE), and that is weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Cohen, when we discuss this situation, the most controversial area of it were the Iraqi National Congress defectors, or defectors handled by them that brought with them evidence. Is it normal that the Pentagon would have -- and we see that Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, both of these men at the Defense Department, were handling these Iraqis when the CIA didn't want to do it. You were there at the Pentagon. What is the normal procedure?

WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER DEFENSE SECRETARY: Well, normally, one would defer to the CIA, the Central Intelligence Agency, or the DIA, which is the Defense Intelligence Agency, and to a degree the State Intelligence and Research Division as such, and so it's a combination of those three, the so-called intelligence community, along with the NSA, responsible for intercepts, but the total intelligence take, so to speak. And it's one of the most important challenges for policy makers, namely the question that would be asked, what did the president know and how did he know it? From what sources did the information come?

Usually, the intelligence community is very reluctant to take sole source reporting, reporting from one source, unless they are satisfied that the source is so credible, so convincing and so persuasive, based upon past performance, so they can come to a judgment based upon that sole source of information. But ordinarily, what one does is to have a matrix of information, sift through and weigh (ph) it off against the other to see if there's really a common bond of intelligence that can be reasonably verified. Normally, that's the process which we certainly went through and I would expect the current administration also went through.

CLANCY: The defectors provided reams of data, civil engineers showed detailed maps of where weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons were hidden under presidential palaces or hospitals. When Hans Blix and the U.N. inspectors went in there, they found nothing. And yet the Defense Department continued to tell people they had absolute evidence the weapons were there, the stockpiles were there. I mean, do you think the evidence was politicized?

COHEN: I don't know this, and certainly this is a thing that the commission that is going to have to thoroughly investigate. Again, where did the information come from, how did it get into the analysis, what did the analysts -- how did they come to their conclusion or recommendation, such as the policy makers, what do the policy makers taken (UNINTELLIGIBLE). The special commission, the blue ribbon commission that's just been formed -- and I don't want to prejudge it at this point, but certainly it's an issue that will have to be taken up by the commission.

CLANCY: All right, you don't want to prejudge the commission, but after all, the president appoints the people on the commission, and the commission is not going to report until after the November elections, well after, not until 2005. And the question is, you know, you talk about politicizing the evidence of weapons of mass destruction, is (UNINTELLIGIBLE) depoliticizing all of the investigation?

COHEN: Well, one would hope that a commission, that is composed of the members that the president has selected, would certainly take their responsibilities very seriously and depoliticize their inquiry and investigation. I hope that will be the case. There's broad spectrum of individuals, Republicans and Democrats, people that I know and have confidence in. And it's not something that's going to be politicized by the commission. I think there are too many members on that commission, and their staff would be the first to blow the whistle should there be any attempt to politicize it.

An interesting question will come about when the commission seeks certain information, and whether the administration will then invoke, quote, "executive privilege." If that becomes an issue, then politics will start to creep back into this. So I think that the administration has got to be very forthcoming during this next period, they're going to keep the politics out of it. (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

CLANCY: Conventional weapons, conventional commitments, U.S. taxpayers long complaining that a lot of the peacekeeping missions that the Defense Department, the government gets involved in, Bosnia, drain the country and they become, you know, endless missions for nation-building, such as the case in Bosnia today. You were just in Munich, talking with defense ministers in Europe. What were some of the ideas being espoused there?

COHEN: Well, based on my conversations with the ministers, whom I spoke with directly, I believe the administration will find a way by this summer to end its interest (ph) in the Bosnia peacekeeping mission and turn that over to you. We have a very small role to play right now. It has been diminishing ever since Bosnia began. But because of the success that has been achieved, I believe that the administration will have come to the conclusion that the United States can, in fact, reduce its force structure or forces there, and apply them elsewhere if necessary. But I think that the EU will be in a position of taking that responsibility over, at the beginning -- or early in the summer.

CLANCY: Is Bush war record fair game for Senator Kerry? Senator Kerry has all these medals he got in Vietnam. George Bush went to the Air National Guard down in Florida, and he was apparently AWOL for some time.

COHEN: Well, I think the AWOL issue is something that is debatable, and that is something that obviously will be fleshed out in the course of the next several months, but (UNINTELLIGIBLE) involved, but I think that Senator Kerry, to the extent he's going to be the nominee, in all likelihood will (UNINTELLIGIBLE). It's an old doctrine that lawyers like to invoke, called res ipsa loquitur, the thing speaks for itself. He is a decorated war hero who became an activist against the war upon his return to the United States. The president served in the National Guard. I think everybody understands that now, to the extent that that becomes a focal point and issue, I think it would not be a positive issue. I think everybody understands exactly the nature of the two candidates here, including Senator Kerry, who will be the Democratic nominee.

CLANCY: All right, is that a yes or a no? Is it fair game or not?

COHEN: Oh, it's fair game. But I don't think it will become an issue that Senator Kerry will get at directly. Again, I think it's one of those things where a shot has been fired across the bow, if this is going to be about the war, then he has the status of a warrior, certainly based on his past record, just as much as the president is a, quote, "war president."

CLANCY: William Cohen, as always, our thanks to you, and hope to see you again next week for another discussion of what's going on in the headlines.

COHEN: Looking forward to it, Jim.

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com