Return to Transcripts main page
Your World Today
Bush Speaks on War in Iraq; Interview With White House Adviser Dan Bartlett, Senator Edward Kennedy; Merkel Unveils Blueprint for German Government
Aired November 30, 2005 - 12:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: Live from CNN Center, this is YOUR WORLD TODAY.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will never back down, we will never give in, and we will never accept anything less than complete victory.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Under political fire and on the offensive, the U.S. president maps out his strategy for victory in Iraq.
ROSEMARY CHURCH, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Will these Iraqi forces in training be ready to, in President Bush's words, carry the fight? His critics charge it's just recycled rhetoric.
CLANCY: And setting her feet down a new path. Germany's chancellor calling for change as she finesses a fragile government coalition.
Right now it is noon in Washington, 6:00 p.m. in Berlin. I'm Jim Clancy.
CHURCH: And I'm Rosemary Church.
Welcome to our viewers throughout the world. This is CNN International, and this is YOUR WORLD TODAY.
CLANCY: We are going to begin our report today with the U.S. president, who faces slumping support for the war in Iraq. George W. Bush's speech today launched a verbal counterattack that was directly aimed at his critics.
CHURCH: The president presents the new strategy for victory in a series of speeches and a 35-page document.
Kathleen Koch has more on the president's address at a U.S. Naval base, while senior international correspondent Nic Robertson has the view from Iraq.
Well, we begin with Kathleen Koch at the White House. Kathleen, of course the critics are saying this is just recycled rhetoric. Was there anything new in this speech? KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Rosemary, there were not new details, but the president really felt that with both his approval numbers slumping, as well as support for the war in Iraq, that he had to come out and really persuade Americans -- that was the goal in his speech -- Americans and Congress, that he did have a concrete plan for a victory in Iraq.
And as a matter of fact, the White House this morning released this document to prove its point. And the president described it not as stale or static document, but something that he called flexible and dynamic, really trying to persuade Americans again that they are not just simply reacting to unfolding events in Iraq.
The president elaborated in great detail this morning on one of the most important aspects of the plan, and that's the training of Iraqi troops. He tried to dispel the impression that the troops were unprepared, outlining how their training and readiness has improved, detailing how Iraqi forces are now in control of numerous areas of Iraq. And the president said that it's such conditions on the ground that will determine when U.S. forces can come home.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: As Iraqi forces gain experience and the political process advances, we will be able to decrease our troop levels in Iraq without losing our capability to defeat the terrorists. These decisions about troop levels will be driven by the conditions on the ground in Iraq and the good judgment of our commanders, not by artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KOCH: And of course, that statement a clear shot at Democrat John Murtha, who two weeks ago began calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces in Iraq. The president in his speech this morning said that U.S. troops would stay as long as necessary to complete the mission.
But the president also did try to prepare Americans for the distinct possibility, in fact the likelihood, of further losses of U.S. troops in Iraq saying, "There will be tough days ahead. And the fight will take time and patience".
Rosemary.
CHURCH: Kathleen, when the president says he will accept nothing other than complete victory, it's going to be -- well, he's really painted himself in a corner, has he not? He has to come down to first a definition of what is complete victory. It's going to make it even more difficult, surely, to withdraw troops.
KOCH: Quite so. And that was the impression of many of us listening to the speech, that he really did throw down the gauntlet and say, this is all that I will accept. But we didn't get a clear and fast definition of what he sees as victory. So it will be very interesting to see in the months and -- days and months ahead if the president has to end up eating those words.
Rosemary.
CHURCH: All right. Kathleen Koch at the White House. Thanks for that.
CLANCY: For some perspective from Iraq, let's go now to Baghdad and senior international correspondent Nic Robertson. Nic, this was a message that was largely meant for the American people. But at the same time, Iraqis have questions of their own about the Bush administration. How many believe that a timed schedule for a pullout would not be a bad thing?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Jim, it's very hard to get an exact estimate of how many people believe that now is the time for U.S. troops to go. And we certainly do hear that. And we certainly did hear it today when we talked to people.
I think generally you will find that you'll find a lot of Shias here, Shia Muslims who make up the biggest sector of the population here, would like to see the U.S. troops leave. You'll also find a lot of Sunni Muslims here who don't have a lot of faith in the Shia government, who don't have a lot of faith in the new Iraqi army and Iraqi police. And for that reason, you'll find some of them would like the U.S. troops to stay here a little longer.
But it is mixed. It is uneven. And a lot of people today we talked to, Jim, basically said they just don't believe whatever President Bush says. They are not going to believe it.
Jim.
CLANCY: The president spoke at length, and his real focus this day was the training of Iraqi troops.
At the same time, in recent days we have heard Iraqi officials admit that those troops are abusing some members of the population, the Sunnis, in particular. But there are militias associated, two of them with the Shia Muslims, many others with the Sunnis, calling themselves resistance.
How much fear is there about breaking down into militias?
ROBERTSON: Certainly if you look at the document that supports President Bush's speech today, you can see that the militia issue is an issue that the U.S. -- United States wants to deal with here in Iraq, that they do know that this is an issue. And after all, it was a U.S. general that went to the Iraqi Ministry of Interior bunker where the torture was going on and exposed it. So, the U.S. here certainly knows they need to deal with the issue of torture, abuses, and the militias that are inside the security forces here. And that's something that is accepted by -- certainly by the deputy ministerial level here in Iraq.
What influence these militias have on how ready and how quickly the Iraqi security forces can be ready, obviously if they are with the people that are inside the security forces, that's going to slow down building up the forces.
Jim.
CLANCY: Well, that's the whole point. I mean, there are some people who argue that many of these soldiers that have been trained are actually loyal to religious leaders or political leaders.
ROBERTSON: And that's something that divides the population here in whether or not they support the Iraqi army, whether or not they believe it's secure. I mean, just a week ago in Baghdad, neighbors of a Sunni tribal sheik in Baghdad said they saw 10 army vehicles with people dressed in army uniforms get out of a truck, go into a house, shoot this very important and influential tribal sheik, shoot him dead with three of his sons in the house.
It's images like that that really casts a lot of fear for some people.
Jim.
CLANCY: Well, and the president also trying to stress here in a positive way, saying that the Iraqi military has taken over some areas. They are responsible for security there.
Do the Iraqi people in those areas have faith in them?
ROBERTSON: I think the way that President Bush put forward the figures certainly shows that there has been improvement in the Iraqi security forces, that the numbers have increased, that there has be been an improvement in training of the troops. And he did say that that was uneven. And what we hear is here it's uneven in terms of the readiness of the Iraqi troops because of the leadership elements.
But one thing President Bush mentioned was comparing the Tal Afar offensive with the Fallujah offensive. Tal Afar two months ago, Fallujah last year.
Tal Afar, he said, by far Iraqi troops outnumbering the U.S. troops, by far Iraq troops leading the way. But when you talk to journalists who were there on the ground, U.S. forces planned the mission. It couldn't have been carried out without U.S. heavy armor, without U.S. helicopter and aircraft support. And the journalists on the ground who were present when that offensive went ahead in Tal Afar, say really it was the U.S. troops still leading the way.
Jim.
CLANCY: All right. There will be a lot more questions asked about this -- the president going to press his point home in some other speeches in the coming days.
Nic Robertson, as always, great to have you there in Baghdad with the perspective and the experience there to help us understand the story better.
CHURCH: And of course the U.S. strategy in Iraq is the subject of our "Question of the Day".
CLANCY: And this is the question. Are you convinced the Bush administration has a clear plan for Iraq?
CHURCH: Email us your thoughts at YWT@cnn.com. And don't forget to include your name and, of course, where you are writing us from.
CLANCY: And also, try to keep it brief.
Still ahead right here on YOUR WORLD TODAY, we continue our coverage of President Bush's progress report in Iraq.
CHURCH: We'll talk to representatives from both Republican and Democratic sides. In-depth analysis, that's coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHURCH: Welcome back. This is YOUR WORLD TODAY.
CLANCY: An hour of world news right here on CNN International.
Now we're going to return to our top story, U.S. President George W. Bush's plan for victory in Iraq.
Joining us for their perspectives on Mr. Bush's plan is White House adviser Dan Bartlett. We'll also be joined a little bit later by Democratic Senator from Massachusetts Edward Kennedy.
Mr. Bartlett, let's begin with you right there at the White House. What is -- what is the message the president is trying to get across to the American people today?
DAN BARTLETT, WHITE HOUSE ADVISER: Well, the message is very clear, and that is that we do have a comprehensive strategy for victory in Iraq, and in particular, the president spent time today discussing the progress we're making on training Iraqi security forces. It's a critical element of our overall security plan, because it's critical to defeat the insurgency, to defeat the enemy, for the Iraqi security forces themselves to be able to take up arms and defeat these people, many of whom are their own citizens who lived under the privilege of Saddam Hussein.
So what President Bush discussed today was the progress we made -- where we started in training Iraqi security forces, where we are today, the fact that Iraqi security forces every week are gaining more advantage over the enemy, are controlling more territory, holding more cities. And that's critical to overall success.
CLANCY: Many Americans happy to hear, you know, the progress report, more detail than they've heard before. Also, though they have a question that we hear coming up again and again and again. I'm sure it's been discussed there at the White House. How many years does President Bush think U.S. forces will be remaining in Iraq? They must have an estimation.
BARTLETT: Well, it's -- it is a hard thing to estimate because it is a conditions-based strategy. What is important, though, is that the progress we are making is going to allow for us to change our posture in the coming months and years ahead.
The fact of the matter is, is that we are going to have a presence there for some time to come. The Iraqi government wants us there. We are there at our U.N. mandate right now. It's critical that we be there. And it's critical for the other coalition forces to be there as well to help these Iraqis build a new democracy, one that can be an ally in the war on terror, not a safe haven for terrorists.
The president urged the American people to understand and appreciate the stakes in this fight. We believe that they do understand it.
While the fighting is tough and anxieties are high, because any time you lose -- there's a loss of life, whether it be American lives or Iraqi lives, it's very disheartening. And that's one of the key tactics of the enemy, is to continue to sew violence and try to stop this progress.
But we are going to be there. We are going to fight, and we are going to win. And then our troops will come home with the honor that they've earned.
CLANCY: All right. I'm going to try it again. The American people want to know about how many years. Can you tell us? Eight, 10, 12?
BARTLETT: Well, again, our posture's going to change in the future. It's going to be based on what the commanders say on the ground.
CLANCY: No, we understand. We know that there's going to be a troop draw-down.
BARTLETT: That's right.
CLANCY: We understand that this president was very clear about that, depending on the situation on the ground. But the question that we hear from the American people and from others is how long will American troops be there in force?
We are talking about thousands or tens of thousands in Iraq. How many years? What do you hear in the White House?
BARTLETT: Well, again, it's a valid concern that people want to know how long our troops are going to be there. We are at 160,000 right now. Obviously that number's going to quickly come down after the election on December 15. But further troop reductions are going to be based upon the progress made by the Iraqi security forces. I know you want to get a specific timetable, and the president, in fact...
CLANCY: Well, it's not me, sir. It's not me, sir.
BARTLETT: No, I understand. Absolutely.
CLANCY: It's the American people that want that. And that was not a question -- that was not something that this president was telling the people in that speech. It was very specific.
BARTLETT: Well, that's -- he was very specific in saying that we can't give an artificial timetable. We can't say X amount of troops will be out in 12 months, X more in 24 months. And the fact of the matter is...
CLANCY: I think the people understand that. What's the number that you hear in the White House? Just -- if you don't want to tell me the number, that's fine. But...
BARTLETT: Well there hasn't been a decision on that. The fact that the Pentagon is planning and those numbers are circulating in the media doesn't mean that there have been decisions by commanders or by the president about what our specific force posture will be on the ground.
The Iraqi government themselves will have a key role in that decision. The commanders on the ground will make recommendations to the secretary of Defense and to the president.
Those decisions have not been made yet. But one thing the president did argue is that a precipitous withdrawal or a specific timetable is exactly what the enemy wants. And we are not going to give it.
CLANCY: Well, OK. There are a lot of things. And if you read over "Victory in Iraq," which is the National Security Council's -- if you want to call it the background paper, the basis for many of these speeches by the president, you hear how the reason that you must stay in Iraq is the fact that al Qaeda is there. And a lot of this is about trust, trust of this president, trust of this administration, as far as the American people are concerned.
Do you think that that is enforcing that trust, reinforcing that trust? Because a lot of people don't believe al Qaeda was there before the United States invaded Iraq. They believe that the invasion itself caused that.
BARTLETT: Well, the fact of the matter is that this has a very careful explanation of the nature of the enemy we face. The al Qaeda elements, the Zarqawi elements are the most lethal. They are not the most numerous. They don't have the largest numbers, per se. But they are the most lethal and responsible for the most casualties in Iraq, and it's critical that we defeat them.
The other important point to make is that Zarqawi was there in Iraq getting safe haven before the war started. He was living and operating out of Iraq.
So to suggest that the top al Qaeda lieutenant who has a direct relationship with al-Zawahiri and bin Laden himself was somehow not there before or after...
CLANCY: You are talking about the period of time when he went in for treatment of a leg injury? BARTLETT: He was there before then. He operated out of there. Intelligence showed that he operated and killed a State Department official in Jordan. But he was operating out of Iraq at the time.
CLANCY: Well, that happened -- sir, that happened in the run-up to the war in Iraq.
BARTLETT: That's correct.
CLANCY: I mean, that was...
BARTLETT: That's correct. The whole suggestion here is that if we had not gone into Iraq we would be safe from al Qaeda. That is not the case.
The fact of the matter is we did nothing to spur on al Qaeda to attack us on 9/11, yet they attacked us. This whole notion that it's based upon the actions of America, that that somehow is inciting al Qaeda, is wrong.
The fact of the matter has been the weakness of the world standing up to these terrorists, the fact that we have run from fights that has caused them to embolden themselves. And that's why withdrawing from Iraq right now would only embolden the terrorists more. So I don't buy the premise that, for example...
CLANCY: All right. No, go ahead. Well, let me ask you this. Just very briefly, do you think this speech today as everybody looked on is going to make the president more credible in terms of telling the American people there is a plan, that there is a strategy here for dealing with Iraq and it's in their interest to support the president in this?
BARTLETT: Well, it's definitely one of a series of speeches. No one speech does that. And that's why the president's committed to giving more than one speech on this.
But those who read carefully the document we put out, as well as listen to what the president says, I think there's a lot of evidence there to demonstrate that what we are doing is succeeding.
Yes, the fighting has been difficult. Yes, there has been loss of life. There always is when you go to war. But the fact of the matter is the stakes are high. This enemy we face is determined, and it's critical that we win. And we believe, and the commanders on the ground, and others involved in this fight believe we have a successful strategy for victory. And it's important that the American people and others listen and read and understand that strategy, because it is going to be one that's going to ultimately prevail.
CLANCY: All right. Dan Bartlett, I want to thank you very much for joining us here on YOUR WORLD TODAY and laying out some of the strategy behind the White House move.
The president's speech this day talking about victory and the path to victory in Iraq. Let's get some Democratic reaction now from Washington. Let's turn to a United States senator who has been a member of the Armed Services Committee for more than 20 years. Senator Edward Kennedy joins us now from Washington.
Senator Kennedy, you have been speaking out against going to war in Iraq early and often. How did you hear the president's speech today when he appealed to the American people for support in staying the course and winning the war on terror?
SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D-MA), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Well, regrettably, I think this is a continuation of a sort of a political campaign to try to put some undergirdings under the president's failed policy Iraq. And it really started on Veterans Day on November 11. It's been continued by the president and also by the vice president.
I think it really failed to respond what the American people want, and which they deserve, particularly because we have seen the extraordinary courage of our fighting men and women. And to honor the fighting men and women, we need a policy that is going to be one that will establish some goals to be achieved in Iraq, a way of measuring whether we are achieving those goals, a timeframe to understand when those goals are going to be achieved, and understanding about what the American commitment in terms of troops are going to be necessary to carry forward those goals.
And then the cost of those goals. And then also a realistic program so that we can see a substantial reduction of American servicemen after the elections in this December, continuing through the year 2006.
I think that's really what the American people wanted to see. I think they saw sort of lipstick put on to the old administration's plan. It really wasn't anything really new -- same kind of rhetoric.
And I'm hopeful we can have a real debate on this issue, because it's at the core of what Americans are deeply concerned about.
CLANCY: Well, Americans are deeply concerned. But, I mean, it is politics being played on both sides, of course -- a continuation of the campaign, if you want to say that, on both sides. And Americans have something of an idea.
I tried to get Dan Bartlett to tell us how many years you would have combat troops still active in Iraq. He couldn't give us a number, but I think it's clear it's going to be years, and it's going to cost the American tax payers billions of dollars a month.
KENNEDY: Well, that's certainly the open-ended commitment that the president talked about today. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, we've listened to General Casey, General Abizaid, the American ambassador, all who have stated very clearly that the presence of large numbers of American troops only intensifies the insurgency rather than quelling the insurgency. And when you look at the recent studies that -- among Iraqis themselves, these recent statements among a variety of different Iraqi leaders, about 80 percent of them now are talking about having the Americans withdraw from over there.
This is moving very rapidly both among the Iraqis and in terms of the military situation. And what we need is a real program. We need a real plan.
That's what the Americans want, and then to be able to measure it. That is really what the Senate of the United States said just a week ago.
CLANCY: Senator Kennedy, then, you and the Democratic Party are not saying cut and run?
KENNEDY: I haven't heard any of the members say that. What they need, this is -- this is sort of a McCarthyism technique which is use surround the Senate from time, and that is to state incorrectly the other person's position and then differ with it strongly.
You know, we are used to that. It doesn't advance the dialogue or debate or discussion.
CLANCY: All right. We have to leave it there, Senator Kennedy.
KENNEDY: Good. Thank you very much.
CLANCY: Thank you very much, joining us there from the U.S. Capitol.
This is YOUR WORLD TODAY.
CHURCH: And a look at what's topping the news in the United States is next for our viewers in the United States.
CLANCY: Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Daryn Kagan at CNN Center in Atlanta. More of YOUR WORLD TODAY in just a few minutes. First, though, let's check on stories making headlines here in the U.S.
A mysterious and irritating odor on Capitol Hill, that has prompted the evacuation of the Jefferson Building at the Library of Congress. The library is a complex of large buildings across the street from the Capitol. HazMat experts arrived on the scene about two hours ago to investigate. We'll keep you updated as more information becomes available.
The emotional and divisive issue of abortion rights is before the Supreme Court today for the first time since John Roberts took over as chief justice. There are two different cases. Both are going to be watched very closely.
Let's go to Joe Johns now for details. Joe?
JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Daryn. The first abortion case of the John Roberts' court came here a bit anticlimactic, I can tell you. This, of course, is a case we've heard a lot about, a parental notification case arising out of the state of New Hampshire, a law passed by the legislature around 2003. The question is whether the legislature should have included some type of a health exception for a young teenager, for example, who gets pregnant and has to notify her parents under that law.
Justice Stephen Breyer asked the New Hampshire attorney general about a hypothetical, if you will. What would happen in the event a young woman went into a doctor's office in New Hampshire needing an abortion and also with a health emergency?
Here's part of an exchange from the audio tape of today's hearing before the court.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
JUSTICE STEPHEN BREYER, U.S. SUPREME COURT: There are people in good faith on both sides of this argument. And so, how -- how do we know that the New Hampshire statute is going to do, not the statute that you're competing arms defense is going to do for this particular woman? What a health exception would do?
KELLY AYOTTE, N.H. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Justice Breyer, because the harm that is being weighed here is the harm of urgently providing care to this minor who needs it as opposed to the harm that the act is trying to get at, which is notification to parents. It's not whether or not the minor can have an abortion. The minor can always go forward and have an abortion under these circumstances.
So people aren't weighing the right of the fetus in this instance to the right of the mother's health. So the weighing is quite easy.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
JOHNS: Of course, there is a swirl about this case, of course, because, number one, it is the first abortion case to be heard with John Roberts as chief justice. Also, because the United States Supreme Court is in transition right now. Samuel Alito, as you know, has yet to be confirmed by the United States Senate.
There are of course questions now as to what were to happen with this case in the event Justice O'Connor has to leave and Alito comes on about the time that the court's trying to decide it.
Daryn, back to you.
KAGAN: All right. Joe Johns live at the Supreme Court. Thank you so much. Also ahead here on CNN, you're going to hear much more about President Bush's Iraq strategy. That's coming up on CNN LIVE FROM at the top of the hour.
Meanwhile, YOUR WORLD TODAY continues after a quick break.
I'm Daryn Kagan.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CHURCH: Welcome back to YOUR WORLD TODAY on CNN International. I'm Rosemary Church.
CLANCY: I'm Jim Clancy, and these are some of the stories that are making headlines around the world.
The U.S. military says U.S. troops and Iraqi army soldiers have launched Operation Iron Hammer in western Iraq, near Hit. They say their objection -- objective -- is to clear out suspected insurgents ahead of next month's elections. Meantime, Iraqi police report gunmen opened fire on a minibus northeast of Baquba. They killed eight Shia Muslim construction workers.
U.S. President George W. Bush laid out his plan for victory in Iraq in the first in a series of speeches designed to bolster sagging support for the U.S.-led war. Mr. Bush said improvements in Iraqi security forces may clear the way for a reduction in troops. But he rejected what he called artificial timetables for withdrawal of U.S. troops.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your commander in chief.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHURCH: Well, for more on President Bush's plan, let's check in with our senior political analyst Bill Schneider. He joins us from the city of Boston, Massachusetts, with more.
Well, Bill, the critics are saying this is recycled rhetoric. Is that what it is, or was there something new in this?
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think there was a portrait of the success that the president claims the Americans are -- the coalition forces are having in Iraq. He's -- he really gave a progress report on the training of the Iraqi security forces, encouraging Americans in the view that they are being trained, they'll be able to take over responsibility for their security. And most important, the end is in sight. There's a light at the end of the tunnel and if all of this goes the way the president has described, American forces could begin to withdraw. That's what -- he was trying to encourage Americans.
CHURCH: Well, Democrat Senator Edward Kennedy said, just on our program a short time ago, that it failed to respond to what American people want to hear. Did it?
SCHNEIDER: Well, American people want to hear that Americans will come home. And the president essentially said, look, the most important commitment is we've got to win. We can't leave until we win. But, the president added, we're winning, we're doing well. The war is going well. And that means we'll be able -- our troops will be able to come home soon. So that's the way he kind of squared that dilemma.
CHURCH: Has he created a problem for himself, though, by saying that he won't accept anything except complete victory?
SCHNEIDER: Well, it depends on how you define victory. Interestingly, both Democrats and Republicans seem to define victory the same way -- that Iraq cannot become a haven for terrorists who would threaten the United States and other countries in Europe and Southeast Asia and elsewhere. It cannot become a nest of terrorists the way Afghanistan became after the Soviets withdrew in the 1980s, in the end of the 1980s. That is victory. Security is victory. And the Iraqis have to be capable of controlling their own defense. Everyone seems to agree on at least that definition.
CHURCH: All right. This is just one of a series of speeches, as we've said. What are we likely to hear in the speeches that come after this?
SCHNEIDER: Well, this concentrated on the training of Iraqi security forces and the progress, the president argues, is being made there.
In the future, he's likely to talk about the political progress being made in Iraq, the election that's coming up on December 15, the progress towards creating a consensus among the various competing constituencies there. And I think he's going to direct some attention to their economic progress. They have a lot of oil resources. What progress is being made towards becoming a country that can really stand on their own two feet economically? We'll hear from those -- on those matters as well.
CHURCH: All right. Senior political analyst Bill Schneider talking to us from Boston. Thank you so much.
Well, the U.S. strategy in Iraq is the subject of our "Question of the Day". We're asking, are you convinced the Bush administration has a clear plan for Iraq? Just email us your thoughts at YWT@CNN.com. And don't forget to include your name and, of course, where you are writing us from. And we will read out some of your responses at the end of the program.
CLANCY: Let's turn our attention now to terrorism and to Europe this time. Authorities in Belgium say now they have detained 14 suspects who sent volunteers to Iraq, including a female suicide bomber who struck in Baghdad just three weeks ago. Police carrying out raids at the homes of several people who they suspect helped the woman. The suspects detained were Belgian, Moroccan and Tunisian. Meantime, police in France arrested a suspected Islamic radical believed to have contacts with the Belgian cell.
CHURCH: Well, new developments on the Israeli political scene. Israeli vice prime minister and former leader of the Labor party, Shimon Peres, is expected to clear a 60-year relationship with his party to support Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. While Peres is not expected to join Mr. Sharon's new Kadima party, Peres was replaced by Amir Peretz as the leader of Labor earlier this month.
CLANCY: In Germany, the new chancellor, Angela Merkel, unveiled a blueprint for her fledgling government, the wide-ranging and ambitious plan laid out in her first major policy speech as the chancellor.
For details, let's go to European political editor Robin Oakley. He joins us from London. Robin, what was the message she wanted to get across and did it work?
ROBIN OAKLEY, CNN EUROPEAN POLITICAL EDITOR: Well, this was the big one for Angela Merkel, Jim. She needed to demonstrate in her first major address to the Bundestag, the lower house of the German Parliament, that she's got authority over this coalition government, that she's got a coherent program, and that she's got some of the style which many people found missing in her election campaign.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
OAKLEY (voice-over): Six months ago, Angela Merkel and her Christian Democrats had expected to sweep to a convincing election victory, enabling her to implement a bold program of reform. Instead, they squeaked through so narrowly they've had to agree to govern and coalition with their arch rivals, the social Democrats.
Task number one: putting a brave face on the resulting compromises.
ANGELA MERKEL, CHANCELLOR OF GERMANY (through translator): Who would have thought that the SPD and the CDSU would find so much in common?
OAKLEY: Task number two: cheering up the German people, who now face belt-tightening reforms.
MERKEL (through translator): Germany built the first car. Germany made the first computer. Germany invented Aspirin.
OAKLEY: Swallow the medicine, and we can be great again, was the message. In the interest of future cooperation and to remind people there's little alternative to reform, with five million unemployed, praise for her predecessor.
MERKEL (through translator): I should like to personally thank Mr. Schroeder that he opened up a door for reform, and that he brought through these reforms, despite resistance and opposition.
OAKLEY: For the rest of Europe, the main reaction was one of relief, that Germany is moving out of paralysis.
RICHARD WHITMAN, ROYAL INST. OF INTL. AFFAIRS: Well, obviously, a lot of European governments had expected a Merkel win, and a clear Merkel win. And what they got was a mess.
What they've now got of course is an expectation that they can get on with business.
OAKLEY: As for the outside world, there were two strong messages. Mrs. Merkel insists disputes with the U.S. are strictly in the past.
MERKEL (through translator): When we look to the future, we have to realize that the federal government will do all it can to bring about a close and trusting relationship in its trans-Atlantic partnership.
OAKLEY: And there was a commitment to Israel.
MERKEL (through translator): This is the 50th anniversary of the German-Israeli relations, and I should like to take this opportunity to underline Israel's right to exist and the right of its citizens to exist in secure borders, free from terror.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
OAKLEY: It will take more than a single speech to -- for Angela Merkel to establish her authority, and to demonstrate that her coalition has the coherence to hang together, but at least the show is now on the road, and with a direction set.
Jim.
CLANCY: All right, political editor Robin Oakley there with the latest on Germany, of course the engine of economics there in Europe, important trading partner to the United States. Thank you so much.
CHURCH: Well, the hurricane season officially ends today in the Atlantic.
CLANCY: It's not really over yet. The next one only seven months away.
Up next, we're going to a closer look at what lessons we have learned and how authorities are getting ready for next time.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CLANCY: Welcome back, everyone. This is YOUR WORLD TODAY.
CHURCH: An hour of world news on CNN International.
Well, it's been three months since Hurricane Katrina stormed ashore. And today there is renewed outrage in New Orleans. The coroner there is angrily reacting to what's been described as a government failure that has prevented the identification of some 200 victims. Apparently the process of using DNA testing has not begun, because the state of Louisiana has not yet signed a contract with a firm that would do the testing. Family members of those still unidentified say the lack of closure is prolonging their agony.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Day after day my brother's body in this condition, it is getting more fragile. And if I gave DNA and I specifically said, if money stands between my brother's body's recovery, just tell me how much. I will pay for it.
RAY NAGIN (D), NEW ORLEANS MAYOR: Well, I mean...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And no one calls me back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHURCH: Frustrations also boiled over at a town hall meeting with city officials. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, who's seeking reelection, heard from angry residents who feel they've been forgotten.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I am a New Orleans citizen, OK? We have a vested interest in the recovery of New Orleans. It is a hard thing to believe that the United States of America is spending nearly $1 billion per week in Iraq, and here in New Orleans, United States, we are being neglected.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHURCH: On a related note, the White House's top adviser on hurricane relief says he has not decided whether the federal government should pay to make New Orleans levees stronger than they were before Katrina. Donald Powell won't say when he'll make that decision.
CLANCY: Well, a lot of people looking on wondering about that.
CHURCH: That's extraordinary.
CLANCY: They wonder, too -- you know, everybody is debating is it weather change, climate change that's causing all of this. Why are the hurricanes getting worse? Well, they actually go in cycles. But I mean, there's a whole debate on the future of preparedness now concerning these hurricanes.
CHURCH: Presumably a lesson learned. That was a strong hurricane.
CLANCY: All right. John Zarrella gives us now an update on how people and authorities are really readying themselves for next season.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on camera): This is some of the debris left behind from Hurricane Wilma more than a month ago. Right here on the corner of First Street, the water was said to be four to six feet deep. Many of the people here lost just about everything. You can see refrigerators, washers and dryers.
With hurricane season now coming to an end, emergency managers from Florida to Texas are already working on how to be better prepared for year.
(voice-over): Less than 24 hours after Wilma struck, thousands lined up for water and ice. Gas stations with generators couldn't pump it fast enough. More than 100,000 people, like Regina Douglas, waited in lines for emergency food stamps.
REGINA DOUGLAS, BROWARD COUNTY RESIDENT: I've never had to come to the government for assistance, but it's here, and it's nice. It's nice to have it.
ZARRELLA: Floridians were thought to be better prepared.
TONY CARPER, BROWARD CO. EMERGENCY MGR.: I think we need to do a better job in giving them the information and the how to in their preparations.
ZARRELLA: In the Florida Keys, mandatory tourist evacuations were called for on three separate occasions. It was the worst impact on Key West in 50 years. Widespread flooding from Wilma alone ruined 10,000 cars in the Keys.
The catastrophic effects of Dennis, Katrina, Rita and Wilma have government and emergency officials from Florida to Texas already working on preparedness plans for next year.
In Texas, there are two big issues -- how to smoothly and safely evacuate millions of people, and finding housing for the tens of thousands who relocated here from Louisiana.
BILL WHITE, HOUSTON MAYOR: We're having 500 or so folks a day move from hotels to apartments. It's going to be tight.
ZARRELLA: In South Florida, it's how to stockpile emergency supplies that have a limited shelf life.
CARPER: The thing we will be looking for is production. Can we produce our own ice and package it in a timeframe that would make sense in getting it out?
ZARRELLA: In New Orleans, the issues are more critical: housing, jobs, and...
NAGIN: I need levees. I need my levees.
ZARRELLA: And the sooner the better. The outlook for the future isn't good.
MAX MAYFIELD, DIR., NATL. HURRICANE CENTER: You bet I'm worried about next year and several years after that, just because everyone agrees that we are in this active multi-decadal period that's going to last another 10 or 20 more years.
ZARRELLA: The big lesson from this year, experts say, is that too many people weren't prepared before the storms hit, and they expected too much too soon from the government after the storms passed.
(on camera): Adding insult to injury, as hurricane season ends, a cold front moved through South Florida yesterday, and many people whose roofs were compromised by Hurricane Wilma ended up losing those roofs yesterday and are today looking for someplace to live.
John Zarrella, CNN, Key West, Florida.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHURCH: Still ahead, different uniforms, the same goal.
CLANCY: We are going to tell you what a football match in Spain had to do with peace in the Middle East. You don't want to miss this story.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHURCH: Welcome back, everyone. Well, what does a football game in Spain have to do with peace in the Middle East, you may very well ask?
CLANCY: Well, you may. Yes, indeed. For one recent game, it actually was quite a lot, Rosemary. Al Goodman tells us the story of the players, the goals, and the goal of the game itself, of course.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AL GOODMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Actor Sean Connery takes to a very different stage, the former James Bond stepping onto the turf at Barcelona's Camp Nou Stadium to raise the curtain on a very unlikely match, for a very elusive cause: peace in the Middle East.
The Peace Team in white, brought together for the first time the top footballers from Israel and the best Palestinian players from the occupied West Bank, defending as one, passing to each other -- Jews and Arabs wearing the same color as they take on the might of Spanish League leaders Barcelona.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres was at the game. His Peres Center for Peace helped organize it.
SHIMON PERES, FORMER PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL: It's really an indication that we can live together in a world of differences. And football was a great contributor to the peace process, as movies are, as music is and song and so forth. And I think all of us are coming with one message, and that is peace as the future, and the future must be made of peace.
GOODMAN: The only shots this night, shots on goal. The Peace Team's goal came, perhaps appropriately, from an Aba Suan (ph), an Israeli Arab who has become a star of Israel's national team. Peace Team partisans showed up with flags and banners rarely seen in Barcelona. The crowd totaled 31,000 and the match raised $120,000 in proceeds for sports programs for Israeli and Palestinian children.
Sean Connery said the effort was worth it.
SEAN CONNERY, ACTOR: I've always been and played soccer myself. Very much a great supporter of Shimon and what he's been trying to do since way back in Oslo.
GOODMAN: But it wasn't an entirely happy evening for the men in white. They were forced into the defensive by the international stars of Barcelona, including Brazil's Ronaldinho, just named European Footballer of the Year.
In the end, Barcelona edged the Peace Team by two goals to one. But that wasn't really the point. On this night in Spain, at least for 90 minutes, sport became the ambassador for peace.
Al Goodman, CNN, Madrid.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CLANCY: Looked like a good a game -- 2 to 1, that's a pretty good game.
Well, we have got to open our inbox right now. We are focusing on the U.S. strategy in Iraq.
CHURCH: And our question to you was, are you convinced the Bush administration has a clear plan for Iraq?
Well Bill Carr writes from the United States: "Sure the Bush administration has a strategy for Iraq: obfuscate, cast blame on their critics and ignore the reality on the ground there."
CLANCY: A viewer wrote in from Denmark says this: "Yes of course the Bush administration has a plan, but it is not an easy task for anyone to make a successful plan under these extremely difficult circumstances."
CHURCH: Well, Bruce in New Zealand writes: "Bush apparently has no clear plan because he finds it impossible to articulate one. One can't put into words what one cannot comprehend."
CLANCY: Getting a little personal there.
CHURCH: Very.
CLANCY: Well, finally, Jeff turns it around, saying this: "The president's plan is clear enough for me. For those of us who do not understand the requirements of war, perhaps they should have stayed awake during their history class. I'm not happy about the war, but there's so much to gain from this. I'm frightened of those who say go, and then say wait a minute, in the next breath."
Well, those are the opinions from the U.S. and around the world. This is the is news from U.S. and around the world.
For now, I'm Jim Clancy.
CHURCH: And I'm Rosemary Church. Thanks for being with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
