• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

04 April 2003

Powell Discusses Future Roles of U.N., Coalition on German TV

(April 3 Brussels interview with ZDF-TV) (2580)
"The U.N. will have a major role to play" in Iraq, Secretary of State
Colin Powell told Germany's ZDF-TV in an interview April 3.
Powell, in Brussels to consult with EU and NATO colleagues, said the
precise role of the U.N. remains to be decided and "will ultimately be
determined by the Security Council resolutions that are passed
authorizing the role."
He reiterated, however, that the coalition that has put its young men
and women at risk in Iraq and lost lives is "committed to making sure
that that sacrifice and that investment is not lost. We believe we
have to play a very significant, perhaps a leading role, in order to
make sure that what replaces this corrupt, rotten regime is a
democratic system that is responsive to the needs of its people and
will reflect all of the people of Iraq, and will use the treasure of
Iraq, its oil, to invest in the people and not invest in weapons of
mass destruction."
Powell dismissed as "absurd" the notion that the U.N. role would be -
in the interviewer's words - "to clean up the mess" while the United
States goes on to its next war.
"Our history is not one of getting involved in conflicts just for the
sake of it," he said. "We get involved in conflicts because there are
major issues at stake that have to be resolved, unfortunately, by
force of arms. But when you look at our history for the last sixty
years, every time we found ourselves in this position, we did not just
get up and walk away. We did everything we could to put in place a
better system, a better society, than that which we had to go in and
fight. And we will do it again this time."
Powell predicted that the "transatlantic alliance, the transatlantic
family will come together again in the rebuilding process."
The Secretary of State also expressed optimism about the relationship
between the United States and Germany: "We are friends and will remain
friends. This has been a difficult period for both of us, but I'm sure
we will work our way through it."
Following is the State Department transcript:
(begin transcript)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
April 4, 2003
INTERVIEW
SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN L. POWELL
ON ZDF-TV OF GERMANY
April 3, 2003
Brussels, Belgium
(Approximately 5:10 p.m. Local Time in Brussels)
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, welcome to Old Europe, as we now say. The
place has changed a bit, politically speaking. This is how the term
'Old Europe' came up. Do you feel that in your conversations the
ambience is not quite the same as it used to be before the big
conflict?
SECRETARY POWELL: It is for me. I have known all the ministers that I
met today for quite a bit of time now. Especially, Joschka Fischer, my
German colleague. We've been working together for two years now. We've
done many things together, whether it was Afghanistan, expansion of
the Alliance. We've had some disagreements recently, especially over
Iraq. But an Alliance as strong as ours, as resilient as ours, can
deal with disagreements and move on. So, as we move on with this issue
of Iraq and get beyond the conflict and into the reconstruction and
the creation of a democratic Iraq that is serving its people, and not
building weapons of mass destruction, whether you call it 'Old Europe'
or 'New Europe,' the transatlantic alliance, the transatlantic family
will come together again in the rebuilding process.
QUESTION: There is now the big question about the U.N.'s role in the
future of Iraq. We have heard the word about the 'emerging consensus.'
That sounds very nice. But Germany and others clearly want to have the
U.N. in the driver's seat, in control, in the leading the role. This
is not what you intend, or is it?
SECRETARY POWELL: We don't know what the role exactly will be of the
U.N. yet, and it is premature to start describing it as being a
central role, or in the driver's seat, not in the driver's seat,
because it suggests you are excluding someone else when you say it
that way. The U.N. must be a partner in this effort. The U.N. will
have a major role to play. And we will be working with our colleagues
in the coalition, and our colleagues within NATO, within the European
Union and especially with the Secretary General, who will have
something to say about this, with respect with the exact role to be
played by the U.N. The role of the U.N. will ultimately be determined
by the Security Council resolutions that are passed authorizing the
role. So there will be discussions and no doubt there will be debate
in New York as to what authorities are required and what the role of
the U.N. should be. So this is the beginning of a dialogue -- not the
beginning of a fight, the beginning of a dialogue -- to determine what
the appropriate role is.
But as I said, and I've said this several times, the coalition that
went in, that was willing to put at risk its young men and women, and
lost lives, paid a great amount of money to conduct this campaign and
also paid a political price for this campaign as well. We are
committed to making sure that that sacrifice and that investment is
not lost. We believe we have to play a very significant, perhaps a
leading role, in order to make sure what replaces this corrupt, rotten
regime is a democratic system that is responsive to the needs of its
people and will reflect all of the people of Iraq, and will use the
treasure of Iraq, its oil, to invest in the people and not invest in
weapons of mass destruction.
QUESTION:I hear what you are saying. What many people in Europe will
hear, through your words, is this is how the new partition of labor
will be: America is looking for its Allies, is going its course with
or without Allies, any number that's available, and be it zero. And
then the U.N.'s role is to go in as a good Samaritan and clean up the
mess. That's all they can do. America is already looking at its next
destination.
SECRETARY POWELL: That's absurd. It's an absurd, simplistic, shorthand
response to what people think we're doing. In fact, we went to the
U.N. in the first place with respect to this problem. It was a problem
that belonged to the U.N. for twelve years -- this terrible regime
that tortures its people, that developed weapons of mass destruction,
that used them against its own people and then invaded its neighbors
on two occasions. And we finally said to the United Nations, "If you
would be relevant, if the international community would be relevant,
we must deal with this."
This is not a regime that will simply roll over and play dead. It will
fight back. It will try to avoid consequences. So we got a very strong
resolution passed. Unanimously. Fifteen to zero. And when it became
clear to a number of members of the Security Council that it was time
to apply those serious consequences, we took it back to the U.N. And
the U.N. said, "Well, can't agree on this."
But 1441 made it clear -- it was more than sufficient authority. Now
there were some members of the Council who said, "We'll veto
anything." And there were others of us who felt we must move forward.
We must remove this danger to the world. Especially this regime that
developed weapons of mass destruction and might actually allow some of
these weapons to fall in the hands of terrorists. We will not
apologize for this. We believe that we did what is right and we
recognize that there is a great deal of opinion, especially in Europe,
that thinks this was not the right approach. But I hope we will change
this opinion, when everybody sees that after this conflict we're not
leaving it to be swept up by the United Nations. We are going to work
with the United Nations and work with the international community. And
guess who will be the major contributor, who will pay the most money
to help the Iraqi people to get back on their feet. It will be the
United States, as always. Europeans --
QUESTION:So you are paying the most money?  Then that's a promise?
SECRETARY POWELL:Europeans, especially Germans, should recognize the
American record, our history. Our history is not one of getting
involved in conflicts just for the sake of it. We get involved in
conflicts because there are major issues at stake that have to be
resolved, unfortunately, by force of arms. But when you look at our
history for the last sixty years, every time we found ourselves in
this position, we did not just get up and walk away. We did everything
we could to put in place a better system, a better society, than that
which we had to go in and fight. And we will do it again this time.
In Kuwait, we fought to save a Muslim people that had been invaded by
another Muslim people, Iraq, and we gave Kuwait back to its --
QUESTION:Rulers?
SECRETARY POWELL: -- rightful rulers. Its rightful rulers. Are you
defending what Iraq did by invading Kuwait.
QUESTION:No.
SECRETARY POWELL: But the way you just posed that question, they were
the rulers. The people of Kuwait were happy with their rulers. Iraq
said we don't care, we're invading. We restored Kuwait to its rulers -
its rightful rulers -- and let them find their transition into a
democratic form of government, as their people choose.
We went to Kosovo, another very controversial war, in order to save
Muslims, in order to protect Muslims. And we went to Afghanistan in
order to deal with the terrorist threat that had caused such
destruction in the Untied States on 9/11.
And what have we done? Have we decided to make Afghanistan an American
colony? No. We spent a huge amount of money and we are putting our
young men and women on the line, every day, to put in place a form of
government that was decided upon by the Afghan people. And we are
helping them to rebuild and reconstruct their society. That pattern is
the American pattern. We're very proud of it. It's been repeated many
times over, and it will be repeated again in Iraq.
QUESTION:From you and from your colleague, Secretary Rumsfeld, came
very strong warnings the last couple of days, vis-à-vis Iran and
Syria, not to interfere, stay out of Iraq and stop their business of
dealing with terrorists and the Iraqi regime. Are they the next ones
on the list for --
SECRETARY POWELL: No, there is no list. There is this common
perception in Europe that there is this list of enemies and we are
going to go down one-by-one and invade them all in some predetermined
order. This is not the case. The President is not looking for places
to go invade. The President has made it clear that he has many ways of
dealing with regimes that, we believe, are not following international
standards. So, sometimes political actions are appropriate, economic
actions, use of our intelligence assets. Sometimes military force is
appropriate. But we are not looking for wars to get into.
It's fascinating that we are now trying in a multilateral setting to
deal with the problem of North Korea and here we are criticized for
not acting bilaterally or doing something directly.
And so we have many tools available to us but it does not mean the
United States has been constantly looking for places to go to war. But
is there something wrong with telling a nation such as Syria, or a
nation such as Iran, that we know they are developing weapons of mass
destruction, that we have evidence against Iran with respect to
nuclear weapons. And these are nations that we know -- we know,
everyone knows -- they are supporting terrorist activities. Is it
inappropriate for us to call this to their attention and tell these
nations they should stop engaging in these kinds of activities? Or
should we just put our hands over our eyes and pretend they are not
doing such things and not hold them to any kind of account? I think we
should speak out when we find nations that are supporting terrorist
activities.
QUESTION:Watching the clock, we have to get to the actual scene today
in Iraq. We have heard that American troops have entered the so-called
"red zone." Your General Brooks has said there are intelligence
information that Iraqi forces may be authorized to use chemical
weapons, once that stage of the war is reached. Should that happen,
what will be America's response?
SECRETARY POWELL: Oh, I don't know that these will be used. These are
reports. I don't know if these reports are accurate or not.
QUESTION:But if they are?
SECRETARY POWELL: No chemical weapons have been used. The United
States is well on the way to achieving success in this command. I am
sure that our commanders will keep right on pursuing the campaign the
way they are currently planning it. We have trained our soldiers for
many years how to fight in such environments and I'm sure that we will
be able to fight in that environment if it occurs.
QUESTION:So that will not be a violent response, using all weapons in
the arsenal, as has been said?
SECRETARY POWELL: You're taking me down a logic train that appeals to
some people, that the United States will use weapons of mass
destruction in return. We, in two weeks, have penetrated deep within
Iraq. We're on the outskirts of Baghdad. We are about to bring this
regime down in the not-too-distant future and we will do it with the
forces and the measures that you see in the battlefield now.
We never take any option off the table, but I cannot imagine we would
prosecute this war in any way but the way we see it being prosecuted
now. And the so-called "red zone" is nothing but intelligence
reporting. I don't know if it's true or even if it exists.
QUESTION:Do you foresee a time when relations between Germany and
America will be as deep, as warm, as heartfelt as, let's say, two
years ago to be safe?
SECRETARY POWELL:Oh. I'm sure. We understand that Germany has been a
friend of the United States for the past half century. We have shared
values and shared history. We're doing many things together in many
parts of the world right now. Afghanistan, the expansion of NATO, the
assistance given in moving our troops to the Iraqi theater, the
support you're giving us to protect our facilities.
We are friends and will remain friends. This has been a difficult
period for both of us, but I'm sure we will work our way through it.
QUESTION:Thank you very much.
SECRETARY POWELL:Thank you.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)