Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

DATE=08/22/2003

TYPE=ON THE LINE

NUMBER=1-01382

TITLE= Terrorists Strike Baghdad

INTERNET=Yes

EDITOR=OFFICE OF POLICY 619-0038

CONTENT= Transcript for OTL released Friday UTC

THEME: UP, HOLD UNDER AND FADE

Host: Terrorists strike Baghdad. Next, On the Line.

[music]

Host: A suicide bomber detonated a truckload of explosives at the U-N compound in Baghdad Tuesday. The explosion killed some twenty people, including the head of the U-N mission in Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello. The bomb the terrorists used was not homemade, but rather was put together from military munitions, including a Soviet-built five-hundred-pound bomb. U-N Secretary General Kofi Annan said "We will not be intimidated." President George W. Bush said that "these killers will not determine the future of Iraq."

[Bush SOT August 20, 2003]

"The terrorists who struck today have again shown their contempt for the innocent. They showed their fear of progress and their hatred of peace. They are the enemies of the Iraqi people. They are the enemies of every nation that seeks to help the Iraqi people."

Host: How will the U-S-led coalition respond to the terrorist threat in Iraq? I'll ask my guests: Iraqi-American journalist, Haydar Hamdani; Mark Mazzetti, national defense correspondent for U-S News and World Report. And joining us by phone from Indiana, Feisal Istrabadi, trial lawyer and Iraqi activist. Welcome and thanks for joining us today.

Host: Haydar Hamdani, who do you think was behind the terrorist attack on the U-N compound?

Hamdani: Well, I'm very sure it's an Al-Qaida organization Ansar Al-Islam, which is part of Al-Qaida. And they already did a suicide attack in Northern Iraq during the war in March. And they have many operatives who are working inside of Iraq and they are coming from neighboring countries. And I can name the countries: Saudi Arabia and Syria and Iran. And they are inside Iraq, they operate with the help of the former Iraq president Saddam Hussein.

Host: Mark Mazzetti, are these foreign fighters working with Saddam loyalists?

Mazzetti: I think it's still too early to be definitive about who is responsible for the bombing this week. Right now U-S officials sort of suspect everyone. It could be foreign fighters coming over the border affiliated with Al-Qaida. It could be Saddam loyalists. It could be members of Saddam's former intelligence service. They could be working together. The important thing is not only who did it but also the tactics that they're using. There does seem to be a discernable shift in the last couple weeks away from just the attacks on U-S troops toward attacks on so-called softer targets, which is the Jordanian embassy, the U-N compound, the pipelines this past weekend. It does show that as the tactics change and they go to these softer targets, then, really the targets are limitless within Iraq that they could try to hit and create terror among the Iraqi populous.

Host: Feisal Istrabadi are you there by phone?

Istrabadi: Yes.

Host: Is there an unlimited number of targets, these soft targets that the terrorists can go after?

Istrabadi: I'm afraid there is an unlimited number. Also, when you consider that there's a very limited, indeed an under-population of American and British forces attempting to maintain a decent security, or if it can be called attempting to, in any event, there is an insufficient number of people on the ground charged with the legal duty at least of maintaining peace and security. So, I'm afraid that I would have to agree that there is potentially an unlimited number. And, incidentally an unlimited number of opportunities. Every time we fix a pipeline it can be attacked either at the same spot or somewhere else along the pipeline. Every time we fix the electrical grid, there's another discreet act which can occur either at a previous site or a new site which has the same result.

Host: Haydar Hamdani, are more troops the answer then?

Hamdani: Not really. The answer is to give Iraqi people, Iraqi security, Iraqi police a power inside the cities. I think the coalition forces are not the answer. They cannot have more troops inside the city. Because this will probably give us a negative result, because Iraqis are looking to see the Iraqi police take care of the cities and take care of the security. One thing is that we have to have Iraqi police and military forces, from the Kurds, from the Shia and from the Sunni, working together side-by-side inside the city, especially inside Baghdad and also inside Al-Ramadi City, which is west of Baghdad.

Host: Feisal Istrabadi, is the answer more Iraqi troops as opposed to more American and British troops?

Istrabadi: I absolutely agree with Haydar, that the time for having American and British troops provide security has come and gone. Many of us, myself included, supported military intervention somewhat reluctantly because it was the only hope for Iraq to get rid of the tyranny of the Baath regime, had assumed that the Powell doctrine would be used. That is to say that there would be overwhelming force in terms of the number of men. I expected, you know, a half-million men. Obviously that is not the strategy that was adopted by the Pentagon. Now four months on, I think Haydar has said it would be counter-productive to use American or British forces because whatever good will may have existed -- and I think it was scant -- but whatever good will existed upon the entry of American forces into Baghdad has been squandered in my opinion in the last four months. What I call for and what I think must be studied is a recalling and revamping of the conscript army in Iraq. Four-hundred thousand men were dissolved, when in fact I think what we need is to reconstitute an Iraqi emergency national defense force consisting of as many of the Iraqi army as possible, as will heed the call, from the rank of major on down. They [the coalition] can replace the colonels and general officers, they can be American, but I think there has to be a higher profile for Iraqis. And only Iraqis in my judgement can provide the kind of numbers to provide the kind of security that we need. I absolutely think it's time to get the Iraqis involved. And we don't have a year to wait. The plan right now is either to have a forty or fifty-[thousand] man force a year from now, and/or to have a seven-thousand-man civil defense force. Neither one of these solutions is adequate. One, it's going to take too long. We don't have a year. We can't take a year of explosions such as we had this week in Baghdad. And seven-thousand men is going to make an incremental difference at best.

Host: Mark Mazzetti, what's the thinking in the Pentagon about how to step up the security?

Mazzetti: Well, I think that the Bush administration would agree with both of you that right now the answer is not more U-S troops. And they're resisting calls for more U-S troops. They are talking about having this Iraqi defense force. And the hope is that more Iraqis will be out patrolling and bringing security to Iraq. And the question is when will they be ready? This could be months away. In the meantime, as we've seen, the attacks continue. There's no question that the conscript army would need to be stood up and the defense force would need to be stood up, but in the meantime, there is the question of whether there are just enough capable troops on the ground to bring security and that may mean U-S. The other thing the Pentagon is looking for and hoping for is more coalition forces to replace the troops currently in Iraq. And what they're especially hoping for is Islamic, from those Islamic nations that can provide some of the security. The trouble is that many of these countries are resisting sending troops until there is a U-N resolution on this matter. And right now there are negotiations about a U-N resolution, but right now, they are not going to get more troops, namely from India, from Pakistan -- although India is certainly not Islamic -- but India, Pakistan, some of the Gulf nations are not going to provide troops until the U-N has some say in it. So that's one of the sticking points right now.

Host: Haydar Hamdani, does the attack on the U-N compound make it easier for the U-S to get a resolution from the U-N or does it complicate the effort?

Hamdani: This makes it easy for the U-S to get a resolution because there are terrorists who are working inside of Iraq. And I think the other nations will work with the United States to get the resolutions from the United Nations. But, to get to your point, the remark about Islamic states bringing key forces into Iraq. I don't think this is a good point. And many Iraqis are not in a good relation especially with Turkish troops or Egypt or Saudi Arabia. And they don't want to see those military forces inside Iraqi cities. I believe, and I'm going to say it again, Iraqis, there are so many Iraqis who used to be in the Iraqi army. More than four-hundred-[thousand] Iraqis used to be in the army. We can use these people. We can give them back their jobs. Now they are unemployed and they don't know what to do. We can give these people back their jobs.

Host: Feisal Istrabadi, in the effort to step up the Iraqi army, how complicated is it to weed out the Saddam loyalists and those Baath party loyalists who might undermine the effort?

Istrabadi: Well, in the State Department "Future of Iraq" project, I had advocated removing officers with the rank of major and above. Ambassador Bremmer announced that the ranks of Colonel and above were removed. I'll accept that. I'll accept that. That's close enough for me. We have presumptively majors on down are not subject to de-Baathification as such. What I propose, and this idea is not original with me, it has been proposed by others, but I agree with it. What I propose is an assessment by the Iraqi governing council, unit by unit of the Iraqi army. What unit you want to use is another story. But unit by unit of whether or not this particular unit has participated in Baathist activity and Baathist criminal activity.

Host: How long would you expect that to take?

Istrabadi: Oh, I think it should be done immediately and the process absolutely expedited. I mean, we have lost three months since Ambassador Bremmer dissolved the Iraqi army, which to me was inexplicable at the time. But, it is something, it is a process that I believe must be begun immediately. I think a call has to go out and within thirty days we ought to start seeing some Iraqis patrolling their own cities and their own towns. This is a conscript army. I'm obviously not talking about the Republican guard and Special Republican guard, which are the Iraqi equivalent of the [Nazi German] S-S. I'm obviously not talking about them. This is a conscript army. They come from the country. They ought to serve particularly, I mean they're not needed inside the former no-fly zones in Iraqi Kurdistan where they're not having these kinds of problems. They're not needed there. I don't think they ought to serve there. But I agree with Haydar, it ought to be a fully integrated Iraqi National Force. These are people that come from the country. I think they obviously will have much better relations with the citizens of Iraq. And I'd like to see this process begun immediately within thirty days. At least, let's start getting some numbers on the board.

Host: Mark Mazzetti, how likely do you think it is that there would be this effort to move toward an Iraqi force and also, in an effort to get more U-N troops or international troops, does the attack on the U-N compound complicate that?

Mazzetti: On the first point, there's no question that they would like to move toward standing up this army. Everyone is really in agreement on that. And the top Pentagon officials say the starting point is this Iraqi defense force of seven or eight thousand that could patrol Baghdad, basically, putting Iraqis out in front, in charge of their own security, sort of put an Iraqi face on the occupation. And so, I think that is a good idea. Nobody has any illusions that seven thousand troops are going to solve the security problem in Iraq. It would take much more than that and some of the suggestions here today move in that direction. On the question of the U-N, it remains to be seen what the fallout from the bombing is from U-N nations. There is one train of thought that this brings people closer to the U-S side and that they believe that they will actually contribute troops now, because it's been attacked directly on the U-N and the U-N would get involved, it might be easier. There are others who are saying, if anything, these countries are going to be less willing to send their troops into harm's way in Iraq. It's clearly still a war zone. So, the fallout really hasn't come to settle yet and so we'll have to see where it goes. So, I mean, I think there is no question that the Bush administration is going to search far and wide for foreign troops to come in and take over from the U-S troops who are pretty tired and pretty burned-out right now.

Host: Haydar Hamdani, let's turn and talk a little bit about how Iraqis are experiencing life in Baghdad and life in the rest of Iraq as well. And there's not only this attack on the U-N compound, but also an attack on the water supply for Baghdad. How do Iraqis feel about the security situation at this point.

Hamdani: Iraqis don't feel safe right now and we know that and this is true since the fall of Saddam Hussein. But they appreciate the fall of Saddam Hussein and the help of the United States. But also, they are thinking about their life and where it's going to go. And they don't feel safe in the streets. They don't feel safe in their home. And you go to some neighborhoods -- you see guns in the hands of people. And when you ask them, they say: "We are trying to protect ourselves." They need security and they condemn the attack on the water pipelines and oil pipelines and they say this is a terrorist act. And it's clearly a terrorist act. This is the story right here. But I want to mention something. I think the United States needs to take a forward action and try to tell the Saudi Arabian government and Syria and Iran and other neighboring countries: "Close your border." This is the thing. Close your borders, don't allow people to cross to Iraq, especially from the Western side of Iraqi cities. And this is the main issue. I mean, I've seen a lot of statements on the Web sites of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries. They are congratulating people who go to Iraq and commit suicide, by killing the Iraqis or killing the Americans. So this is a serious issue, a very serious issue that I think the United States needs to take a look at.

Host: Feisal Istrabadi, is the closing of the borders key?

Istrabadi: Yes, definitely. I think to return to the question with which you began, I think that the, if it appears, and as I understand it, now it does appear that this was a suicide attack. And if it is in fact a suicide attack, I think we can pretty much eliminate the possibility that the Baathists are responsible for this. I would not expect a Baathist to sort of die for the cause voluntarily in this sort of a way. This begins -- as Haydar said earlier at the beginning of the interview -- this begins to look like another Al-Qaida-type attack. And so, the fact of the matter is that the Iraqis are well aware that there is an infiltration of a lot of foreigners into Iraq. And I might say, these people are absolutely detested in Iraq, but that is an important key.

Host: How do the foreigners operate in Iraq if the people of Iraq detest them?

Istrabadi: Well, I can not say to you that there is not one single Iraqi who is not supporting them. But I think that, for instance, you do have Ansar Al-Islam, who have been operating in Northeastern Iraq in the Kurdish region. And they have established a base there. And frankly, the rumors are -- the truth of the matter remains to be seen but the rumors are that for instance, Iran makes many things possible for Ansar Al-Islam in Iraq. And if that particular pipeline could be shut down, some of these acts of terrorism would not occur. So, it is indeed a complicated picture. But, generally speaking, the people of Iraq want to have peace and security. They want to have a better future for themselves. They want to have their country rebuilt. And I believe they have the grim determination to rebuild their country. I will also tell you this, returning to the question you asked Haydar last. How do the Iraqis perceive the situation? They look around and they wonder why there's been a lot of Iraqis killed. Iraqi civilians killed, since the time that the President of the United States announced that major hostilities were over. And they wonder, why is it that these people are not getting the same kind of press as when an American soldier is tragically killed? So, there is a sense that they have that, once again, the sort of the Iraqi lives are being discounted. And far more Iraqi civilians have been killed than foreign nationals in Iraq. And that includes the events at the United Nations. There were a lot of Iraqis that were killed there. And, so, what you're faced with, what you're facing is, that since I was last there in June, a cycle of deterioration in Iraq. The people of Iraq sense that things are deteriorating and not improving. This is very dangerous from the perspective of the United States. We want the people of Iraq, we should want the people of Iraq, immediately to have a sense, upon our entry that things are improving. Instead, day after day, things are getting worse in Iraq. That is why these problems must be dealt with.

Host: We have less than a minute, Mark Mazzetti, is there a way of turning this around and improving the situation as life is experienced by the average Iraqi on the ground?

Mazzetti: Yes. I mean, I think in the end it all just comes back to security. I mean, security is the number one prerequisite for anything to move forward in the reconstruction effort. The Bush administration realizes that. And there are many good news stories to come out of Iraq in the last four months, but they do tend to take a back-burner to the security issue. And, until people feel like they can walk in the street, that they're not going to be under attack -- that's both Iraqi citizens, U-S troops, coalition forces -- they really can't move forward and stand up the new Iraqi government, which is the ultimate goal.

Host: I'm afraid that's going to have to be the last word for today. We're out of time. I'd like to thank my guests: Iraqi-American journalist Haydar Hamdani; Mark Mazzetti of U-S News and World Report, and joining us by phone, Feisal Istrabadi, trial lawyer and Iraqi activist. Before we go, I'd like to invite you to send us your questions and comments. You can e-mail them to Ontheline@ibb.gov For On the Line, I'm Eric Felten.