UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

Washington File

06 April 2003

Deputy Defense Wolfowitz, General Pace on NBC's Meet the Press

(Chemical and biological weapons, Iraq military/Republican Guard,
armored raid/Baghdad, "jihad" armies, Saddam video, Iraqi TV,
protecting infrastructure/precision targeting,
surrenders/intelligence, free Iraqi forces, dismantling "structures of
fear," new Iraqi government, control of Baghdad, execution of military
plan, reported Russian-Iraqi links, interim Iraqi authority,
State-Defense Department views, prospects for democracy, post-war
coalition forces, Afghanistan security, Arab views, positive change in
Muslim world, effect of war on other nations) (8580)
Following is the transcript of the April 6 appearance of Deputy
Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff Gen. Peter Pace on NBC Meet the Press with Tim Russert:
(begin transcript)
NEWS TRANSCRIPT 
Department of Defense
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
April 6, 2003
(Also participating; Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen.
Peter Pace on NBC "Meet The Press")
MR. RUSSERT: With us now for an update on the situation in Iraq, two
central members of the president's war cabinet, vice chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace; Deputy Secretary of Defense
Paul Wolfowitz. Gentlemen, welcome both.
GEN. PACE: Good morning.
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Thank you.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Wolfowitz, what is the status, the state of Operation
Iraqi Freedom?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Well, we're just barely past the two-week mark. It's
worth remembering that we are in the middle of a difficult war, but we
have made a lot of progress. Some of the big dangers may still lie
ahead of us. So we need to keep a cautious view of the way ahead. But
one thing is certain, and that is that this regime is on its way out.
It's ended.
MR. RUSSERT: What might be the big dangers that lie ahead?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Well, we've been worried all along, we continue to be
concerned about the possible use of chemical or biological weapons. We
have seen the brutality of this regime. We've seen its willingness to
push young men into absolutely hopeless situations. It's a disgrace
actually. And the sooner the Iraqi people understand that there is no
reason any longer to fear this regime, no reason to fight for it, the
better it will be.
MR. RUSSERT: Do we have any evidence yet of chemical or biological
weapons on the ground?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: These young men and women are in the middle of fighting
a very difficult war. I was visiting with some wounded Marines out at
Bethesda, and it impresses you. They have their hands full defeating
the enemy. When that's done we'll have time to look for those weapons
of mass destruction. That's not our main focus right now.
MR. RUSSERT: And you have no doubt that we will find them in
substantial numbers?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I've never seen the intelligence community as unified
and confident in their basic judgment here.
MR. RUSSERT: General Pace, what's left of the Iraqi regime's military
assets?
GEN. PACE: Of the six Republican Guard divisions, which are their main
fighting force, two are assessed to be totally destroyed. The
remaining four are assessed that about one half of their tanks,
artillery, armored personnel carriers have been destroyed.
MR. RUSSERT: How dangerous is that to us? Are they still a fighting
force, or are they more of a police force?
GEN. PACE: It's always dangerous when they're -- folks still have
weapons at their disposal. It's too early to tell whether or not they
will continue to fight. Our hopes obviously are that they will
understand that what we have done so far we will continue to do until
our mission is complete. And we would much prefer as military men that
the soldiers in the Iraqi army would surrender and take the
opportunity to be a part of Iraq's future instead of Iraq's past.
MR. RUSSERT: Can we go in and out of Baghdad at will?
GEN. PACE: The last couple of days we have demonstrated, using a
tactic called an armored raid, that we can drive anywhere in Baghdad
we'd like. But we do not yet have forces throughout the city.
MR. RUSSERT: The jihad armies that have come to Iraq -- from Egypt,
Sudan, Syria -- how significant is that that we are now fighting Arabs
from outside of Iraq?
GEN. PACE: Militarily it's not significant at all. If they join the
fight, they will die.
MR. RUSSERT: And how -- what are their numbers?
GEN. PACE: I don't know. I've heard reports of -- in the hundreds --
but it is not militarily significant.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Wolfowitz, you saw photos, video of Saddam Hussein on
a walking tour. What's your reaction of that?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: It's hard to know what to make of any of these things.
He traditionally has not exposed himself to that kind of close contact
with his people. It's hard to know. But I think what we can know with
certainty is that this regime is on its way out. This evil, brutal man
is on his way out. And the sooner the Iraqi people can be convinced of
that, I think the sooner they will stop fighting for a hopeless and
ignoble cause.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you confident that was Saddam himself?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: No, I don't think we can be confident of anything like
that. I mean, it -- the propaganda apparatus in that country is
extraordinary. It reminds one of some of the worst dictatorships of
the last century.
MR. RUSSERT: Why did we have such a difficult time taking their
television off the air?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Because they put enormous effort into developing that
as one of the instruments of regime control, to convince the people
that they need to fear this man, no matter how bad things may seem to
be. And it runs on fear. They try to keep fear alive, but fear is on
its way out.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe that the coalition forces will be able to
program their own radio and TV programs to the Iraqi people in the
near future?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: We're doing that already, and increasingly. And of
course now that we are on the outskirts of Baghdad we can do it with
much greater power and effectiveness.
MR. RUSSERT: Radio and television?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Both.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe that Saddam's strategy is to try to create
a humanitarian disaster, turn off the power, turn off the water, have
his own people die, and then say to the world, Stop the United States
invaders?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Not clear that he has a strategy, but it is clear that
he has no respect for human life -- least of all the lives of his own
people -- that they have done all kinds of things to deliberately suck
us into killing Iraqis. On the other hand, we are determined, to the
extent it's possible, with the safety of our own troops in mind, to do
everything possible to protect human life, even of the enemy.
MR. RUSSERT: General Pace, how much is it going to be part of a
military operation to protect the civilian infrastructure, make sure
the power stays on, protect the power grids, make sure the water stays
on, so that the people of Baghdad and Iraq are safe?
GEN. PACE: As this military campaign has unfolded, the targeting
process has been very, very precise, and the weapons that we have used
have been very precise. That's not to say that some have not missed
their targets -- some certainly have. But things like water
purification plants, electrical generation plants and the like you try
to protect for the use of the Iraqi people when this is all over.
MR. RUSSERT: And you are confident we can do that?
GEN. PACE: I'm confident that we have a plan that in fact recognizes
that there are facilities that are needed in the post-Saddam
government. There are certain times when you may want to turn off
electricity for good military reasons. So I am not saying we would not
ever attack and target like electricity, but we know where those
facilities are, we have them targeted with very precise weapons, if we
need to use them.
MR. RUSSERT: A few weeks ago Secretary Rumsfeld was on this program,
and I showed him footage of the defense minister briefing during a
bombing raid, and the secretary remarked, "Well, we missed him" -- you
could hear the bombs outside the briefing room. And yet we have not
struck the Defense Ministry
-- why not?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: We are taking great care to hit targets that we need to
hit, and to avoid hitting those that will kill innocent civilians. And
there are some you would like to take out, but you realize that the
damage to the surrounding area is something to try to avoid.
MR. RUSSERT: Secretary Rumsfeld spoke early on about negotiations,
discussions we were having with high-level Iraqi officials. Are those
ongoing?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I don't think he called them discussions. We continue
to talk to anybody who can surrender, who can bring units over. But
there isn't going to be any deal with this regime. Let's be absolutely
clear about that.
MR. RUSSERT: What is the state of our intelligence gathering in Iraq
right now?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: It improves constantly. And, in fact, as the fear
factor removes -- and we are seeing this in southern cities -- more
and more people come forward to give us information. And it's been
interesting, too, to see that those people we call the Free Iraqi
Forces -- and we trained a number of them -- we would have liked to
have more -- but having Iraqi Americans or Iraqi speakers with our
forces have made it much easier for people to come and give us
information.
MR. RUSSERT: These are forces from the Iraqi National Congress?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: They're from all over, but they are from the community
of Iraqis living abroad, including here in the United States. And
they've --
MR. RUSSERT: Five or six hundred?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: The number initially trained was smaller, but the
number keeps growing daily.
MR. RUSSERT: In terms of intelligence, the Los Angeles Times had an
article yesterday, which I want to show you and our viewers and give
you a chance to talk about it. "Officials said that intelligence out
of Baghdad since the attack had largely dried up, despite expectations
that the enormous military pressure bearing down on Saddam Hussein's
regime would prompt a wave of defection and a flood of information by
this point in the war. One senior Pentagon official struck a blind
pose -- eyes closed, arms extended -- when asked about the quality of
intelligence that war planners were getting. 'Nobody can tell us where
anybody is,' the official said. 'No one can tell us what buildings
they're in so that we can bomb them. I'd call that weak.'"
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I guess you measure this all against expectations. I
think any realistic expectation would have understood that in a
country where literally people's tongues are cut off if they say
things they're not supposed to say, it's hard to get intelligence. It
should have been understood. We call -- we have always called Iraq a
hard target in the intelligence business, but it's softening up.
MR. RUSSERT: How imperative is it that we kill or capture Saddam
Hussein, so that Iraqis know it is safe to come forward and support an
alternative government?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I think it's very important to dismantle this whole
structure of fear. I mean, your point is right on the mark that Iraqis
are afraid, and they have had the experience in the past of thinking
this regime might be on its way out, and it keeps surviving. The
regime needs to be dismantled -- and not just Saddam Hussein, but the
structures of terror.
But I think the way to measure that really is when the fear goes away,
and we'll know that.
MR. RUSSERT: But as long as Saddam is unaccounted for, won't there be
a lingering fear amongst the Iraqi people that he may come back?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: But the best thing would be to know that he's gone. I
think they will develop conviction, and we'll know when they have.
MR. RUSSERT: Could we set up an alternative government, even though he
hasn't been killed or captured?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: That -- if I could put this in context, the goal isn't
to immediately set up an alternative government. The goal is though to
move as rapidly as possible after the regime is gone to a government
that genuinely represents the Iraqi people. And we have spoken with
the Iraqis inside and outside the country about this notion of an
interim authority that would be a bridge from our initial
administration to an eventual government that represents the Iraqi
people. Now, that's going to take some time to get to that end point,
but when we would set up an interim authority is something we are
going to have to see as things develop on the ground.
MR. RUSSERT: When will we know when the regime is gone?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I think when the fear stops, when people realize that
they no longer have to worry about being executed or being -- having
their family tortured. We'll know that, they'll know that, and the
evidence will be clear.
MR. RUSSERT: The tipping point where their fear about losing their
loved ones overcomes their fear of Saddam Hussein?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: That's what we are hoping for, and a regime that is
this deeply rooted in, and that has terrorized people for so many
years -- obviously they've thought about that tipping point as well,
and they put a lot of buttresses. But they're going. They're on their
way out.
MR. RUSSERT: General Pace, without violating any national security, or
jeopardizing our troops on the ground, talk as freely as you can about
what our plans are now. There had been discussion of a wholesale
invasion of Baghdad. That seems now to have been set aside or
dismissed by an awful lot of people, and rather an attempt to section
off the city part by part. Can you talk about that a bit?
GEN. PACE: I think what you'll see on a macro scale, Tim, is a
continuation of a combination of air strikes to destroy known enemy
targets, and maneuvering on the ground, to both close with an destroy
the remaining enemy targets, and also to get them to move so that they
become better targets for the air. So it's very much an orchestrated
event. On the open battlefield it is much more fluid. As you get
towards the city, it becomes a much more compressed event. We'll not
talk about the tactics, techniques and procedures in the city, but I
can tell you that our soldiers and our Marines, if called on to do
that, will do that as efficiently as they have done the rest of this
war.
MR. RUSSERT: In order to mount though a street-by-street takeover of
Baghdad we would need more troops -- the 4th Infantry Division is on
its way -- it would take some time to put that force in place?
GEN. PACE: No, I wouldn't put it that way. I think that the forces
that are available right now to the commanders on the ground is
sufficient to do the job. And I truly believe that the Iraqi main
elements in the Republican Guard understand how badly they are being
defeated on the battlefield. And they still have free will. Their
commanders still have the opportunity to do the right thing as
leaders, to stop supporting a regime that does not deserve their
loyalty, to surrender, to become part of the future free Iraq, so they
can help rebuild their country in a way that the Iraqi people would
like it to be built.
MR. RUSSERT: In your professional judgment, do you think it will come
to buckle-to-buckle fighting, mano-a-mano in the streets of Baghdad?
GEN. PACE: No way to be prescient on that. I can simply tell you that
the U.S. forces and coalition forces who are there are very well
trained, and they will be as efficient in the city as they have been
in the countryside.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Wolfowitz, there are reports last night that Chemical
Ali, Saddam Hussein's cousin who was allegedly responsible for gassing
his own people, was killed in a bombing by the United States. Can you
confirm that?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: No, I can't. It would be a very good thing if it had
happened, but we don't know.
MR. RUSSERT: How about his bodyguards?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Don't know that either.
MR. RUSSERT: Reports still coming in?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: You get a lot of battlefield reports, and some of them
turn out to be true and some false. But, once again, I mean, the
message that I hope is being conveyed to the Iraqi people, to these --
unfortunately, Iraqi soldiers are still fighting for a lost cause, as
it is a lost cause, and it's time, as General Pace said, to do the
honorable thing and surrender.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me talk about the way we are being treated, and refer
you back to a comment back in November that you mentioned, in 2002.
"It is entirely possible that in Iraq you have the most pro-American
population that can be found anywhere in the Arab world. If you are
looking for historical analogy, it's probably closer to
post-liberation France after World War II." Do you still believe the
Iraqis have welcomed us similar to the way the French welcomed us?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Remember, those victory parades in France were after
the Nazis were gone, after Vichy was gone. These Iraqi people are
still living with death squads in their neighborhoods and threats of
death to them and their families.
I think we see more and more as parts of the southern cities are being
freed, as senior Iraqi religious leaders are coming forward and urging
people to support the coalition, that more and more that's happening.
It's a little too early to say, but I think that will be the final
result.
MR. RUSSERT: But there has been significant resistance and some
ferocious fighting that was not expected?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Oh, there's ferocious fighting -- and let's not
diminish -- I mean, these incredible young American men and women who
are fighting a very fierce and vicious fight -- the country is proud
of them. I think the country needs to be grateful to them. They are
helping to free us from an enormous threat. And that is why we are
doing it. But I think in the process also we are going to free the
Iraqi people. And the fact that people are fighting with guns to their
back -- I remember reading once that Stalin told Churchill that it's
more dangerous in the Soviet army to retreat than to advance. That's
what Saddam has created. But they are on their way out.
MR. RUSSERT: But our soldiers have encountered something much more
than a "cakewalk" that Ken Adelman, who is on the Pentagon Defense
Review Board, had suggested it would be.
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I have always disliked that term, and no one in the
senior leadership in this administration, either civilian or military,
and certainly not the president, has ever thought that war is anything
other than a very dangerous thing. The president would not have put
young men and women at risk of their lives, young Americans at risk of
their lives, if he didn't think that there's something very important
here in terms of our security and security of our friends and allies.
GEN. PACE: And it really is important to point out just how
magnificent the lieutenants, the captains, the sergeants, the
corporals -- they are making battlefield decisions that just have made
this incredibly successful, and we should be very proud of those young
American, and the Brit, Australian and Pole counterparts who are out
there doing what we have asked them to do.
MR. RUSSERT: There did seem to be a disconnect for a while from the
commanders on the ground saying we didn't game plan for this war -- we
need some help, we need the support to reinforce these supply lines --
what we are hearing from the ground commanders and what we are hearing
from the Pentagon?
GEN. PACE: No. I think the disconnect was how things were being
reported. And in fact I understand that the New York Times, for
example, has printed a correction of the quote that they had from the
very, very capable corps commander who we have out there. So this plan
had been worked on for many, many months. It had been contributed to
by the ground, air, Navy, special operations commanders -- General
Franks brought it back and forth to Washington many, many times. All
of us in the leadership positions knew it was the right plan. It is
the right plan. It is being executed exceptionally well. A battle plan
will always have to be adjusted. For example, when it appeared that we
were going to potentially lose the southern oil fields to being
destroyed by the regime, rather than wait for air strikes, General
Franks decided to go in on the ground right away. That kind of
flexibility was in the plan. It's part of a plan to be flexible, and I
think what he's done with the flexibility has been incredibly good.
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Tim, a very important part of General Franks's plan was
to achieve surprise in circumstances where I think most people would
have said surprise is impossible. But what he worked on was this
expectation that the American way of war is to bomb for six weeks
before we do anything on the ground. And he flipped that around
completely. And I think the net result has been very positive.
MR. RUSSERT: But why is it that we had 600,000 troops for the Persian
Gulf War to remove Saddam from Kuwait, when we only have 300,000 to
take over all of Iraq?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: It's a long and complicated answer, but I think the
simplest part of it is what I have just said. If we had waited to put
600,000 troops in place, we would have lost all elements of surprise.
GEN. PACE: And the fact is the force that's available to General
Franks both at the beginning and en train is sufficient to get that
job done.
MR. RUSSERT: In a very unusual move, your fellow Marine Colonel Joe
Dowdy was relieved of his duties as a commander on the field. Why did
that happen?
GEN. PACE: It would be inappropriate for me to sit here in Washington
and make judgment on that. That was a command, chain-of-command
decision made in the field, and I would leave it at that.
MR. RUSSERT: Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said something Thursday
that caught my attention, Mr. Secretary Wolfowitz. Let me put it on
the screen and show you both: "There is no question but that some
governments are discussing way cutting a deal. And the inevitable
effect of it, let there be no doubt, is to give hope and comfort to
the Saddam Hussein regime, and give them ammunition that they can try
to use to retain the loyalty of their forces." Governments? Who are
they that are giving hope and comfort to Saddam Hussein?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Look, it doesn't matter. I think I can even finish that
quote for you. I think the secretary said there's not going to be a
deal. It doesn't matter who proposes it, there is not going to be one.
That's the bottom line.
MR. RUSSERT: But are the French encouraging Saddam?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I don't think so.
MR. RUSSERT: The Germans?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: In fact, you know, I noticed that Chancellor Schroeder
just the other day finally came around and decided it was time for
regime change in Baghdad. So that's a good sign.
MR. RUSSERT: But who is then?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: What we do know is that the Saddam Hussein propaganda
ministry, the so-called Ministry of Information -- I mean, one of the
things they want to do to keep fear alive among their people is to
keep alive the idea that somehow this is going to stop before the
regime ends. It's not going to stop until the regime is finished.
MR. RUSSERT: General Pace, let me show you a n article from Knight
Ridder on Friday. "Two former Soviet Army generals have been so deeply
involved in helping to prepare the Iraqi military for a rematch with
the Americans, that on the eve of this war, Saddam ordered them
decorated with high honors in Baghdad. General Vladimir Achalov, a
former Soviet deputy defense minister and Mr. General Igor" -- as you
can see -- "Maltsev, a leading expert in air defense systems, left
Baghdad only six days before the war began." What is that all about?
GEN. PACE: I have not heard that before. I don't know. All I can tell
you is, whatever leadership is being applied on the Iraqi side has
been failing miserably.
MR. RUSSERT: Did President Bush, or will President Bush, say to
President Putin of Russia, "What is this all about?"
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Well, I don't know. I mean, I noticed you mentioned one
of them is an expert on air defense. They haven't done very well on
the air defense business.
MR. RUSSERT: But should the Russians be involving themselves in this
way?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Obviously not, but we don't -- we don't know whether
the people you just mentioned are officially involved or not. I hope
that when this over the whole international community will come
together and understand that there is an enormously important project
here to help a liberated Iraq build a country that can be an
inspiration for the entire Arab world. And I think when they see that
opportunity a lot of people are going to look forward instead of back.
MR. RUSSERT: We are going to take a quick break and come back and talk
about just that: What will a post-Saddam Iraq look like? Who will be
involved? A lot more of our discussion with Secretary of Defense --
Assistant Sec -- Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and
General Peter Pace, right after this.
(Announcements.)
MR. RUSSERT: And we are back with our conversation with General Peter
Pace and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Let me show you a
memo that was reported on in U.S. News & World Report, and read it to
you: "Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is urging President Bush to
install an interim Iraqi government immediately, even as the war
continues. The new authority would be made up of Iraqi opposition
groups in exile, including the Iraqi National Congress led by Ahmad
Chalabi. Rumsfeld suggested that this step would be a way to turn
international perceptions in the United States' favor. Rumsfeld's
request was outlined in two memos to the president this week." Is that
accurate?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Not really. I think -- let's put this in context. The
-- what we are trying to accomplish in the post-Saddam era, and we are
thinking about that already -- is to balance two things. On the one
hand, there has got to be an effective administration from day one.
People need water and food and medicine, and the sewers have to work,
the electricity has to work. And that's a coalition responsibility. We
have to make sure it gets done. But our goal is to have a legitimate
Iraqi government that represents the Iraqi people. And this interim
authority, which we've discussed and agreed upon in our government
with our coalition partners, and with important elements of the Iraqi
opposition, is a bridge to that legitimate government. But the goal is
not to install some particular group as the new leaders of Iraq. That
absolutely contradicts the whole notion of democracy.
MR. RUSSERT: Will it be set up soon?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I think the key to when it can be set up is when people
have a feeling -- and it's going to be Iraqis, not Americans to make
this judgment -- that the people who have been free to express their
views now for many years can be joined by enough of the people who are
still under the control of the regime to be able to have something
that represents a first step toward really expressing the will of the
Iraqi people.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you a photograph of Ahmad Chalabi. He left
Iraq originally in 1958. There are reports this morning that he is
going back to Iraq as we speak.
MR. WOLFOWITZ: You know, there are a lot of -- he's been back in Iraq,
as a matter of fact, in northern Iraq --
MR. RUSSERT: Is he in Iraq now?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I believe he is. But I think something people need to
understand...for the last 12 years, northern Iraq has been more or
less free territory -- free from the Saddam Hussein regime. The people
of northern Iraq, who are predominantly Kurdish, have established some
institutions that are a significant rudimentary step toward a
representative democratic government. There's a lot to build on here,
but the goal is not to have any one particular group or any one
particular leader be the favored choice of the Americans. Our goal is
a democratic goal, and that requires the Iraqis being free to speak.
Millions of them are not yet -- and forming an agreement on the method
by which they'll pick their leaders.
MR. RUSSERT: So Mr. Chalabi would not be the leader of the new Iraq?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I can't say.  That's for Iraqis to decide.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you something that was in USA Today on
Friday: "Congress waded into the feud between the Defense Department
and the State Department on Thursday with a strong vote of confidence
for Secretary of State Colin Powell. A war spending bill that is
headed for enactment next week contains unusually blunt language that
gives Powell, and explicitly not Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, control
over $2.5 billion to be spent on postwar reconstruction in Iraq. Key
members of Congress suspect that Rumsfeld is trying to elbow Powell
out of what is traditionally diplomatic territory: postwar
reconstruction." Who will oversee postwar reconstruction, the State
Department or Defense Department?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: It's a team effort. There's agreement between Secretary
Powell and Secretary Rumsfeld. In fact, it's a decision of the
president. Jay Garner, who has had by the way some extraordinary
experience in northern Iraq 12 years ago, will be in charge of this
initial coalition administration, but it's going to include people
from State Department, from Defense Department, from coalition
partners. And what we want to make sure is that Jay Garner and the
people who work for him have the money they need on a flexible basis
to operate quickly.
But, you know, I look forward to the day when we can read stories
about divisions in the Iraqi cabinet and there's a free press in Iraq.
It's a very healthy thing. But we are in this in a unified way. I
think that's really important.
MR. RUSSERT: Who will be the lead department, State or Defense?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Jay Garner, who is no department -- he is going to
initially at least be reporting to General Franks -- is going to have
an interagency team that includes all department together. His
instructions will come from the president through the secretary of
Defense, through General Franks. But bear in mind this is the part of
the administration that is focused on getting things functioning and
running. It is not the ultimate government of Iraq. That has to be a
choice of the Iraqi people.
MR. RUSSERT: There was a lot of discussion about your role in all of
this. Let me show you the New York Times on Thursday: "Along a
promenade of beachside villas, several hundred American government
officials from well-worn former generals to fresh young aid workers
are working at their laptops, inventing flow charts and examining maps
of Iraq in what has become Potomac on the Persian Gulf. This is the
nucleus of the Bush administration's new Iraqi government. One of the
faraway masters, in the minds of many here, is someone known fondly,
or not so fondly, depending on one's political orientation, as
Wolfowitz of Arabia."
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Well, it's amusing, but not very accurate. I mean, I
noticed even that story suggested that one of the people I had
actually nominated, former Ambassador Tim Carney, who is one of the
people I was supposedly stopping. It's -- but the most important error
in what you just read is the idea that this is the future government
of Iraq. It is not. It is the provisional administration to provide
basic services to the Iraqi people, and to help General Franks provide
the secure environment in which the Iraqi people can pick an Iraqi
government that represents them, that treats them decently, and that
can run the country.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you concerned that if the Iraqis in fact do develop a
democracy that it could be controlled by the Shiva, the dominant sect
of Islam in Iraq, which is also the dominant sect in Iran, and we
could very well have a democratically-elected fundamentalist Islamic
country? We saw in Turkey a modern democratic state, which in fact
blocked the United States from conducting military missions in the
north. Are you concerned we may be creating something we may regret?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Tim, democracies are democracies, and they have their
own judgments. We supported a democratic transition of the
Philippines, and that democratic government then kicked us out of the
bases in the Philippines. It was still a good thing to have that
democratic transition. We're much healthier -- we are much better off
with a healthy democratic government in that country. We have had our
differences with Turkey, but I'm glad that Turkey is a democracy. I
think we are going to work out those differences.
And certainly people shouldn't conjure up the notion that the Shia of
Iraq is like the horrible ayatollahs that brutalized the Iranian
people. Iraq, I believe, has one of the most educated populations in
the Arab world. There are many talented Iraqis in this country, and in
England and elsewhere, who want to go back and help build a new kind
of country. And I think Iraq can be an inspiration to the Muslim world
and the Arab world that Arabs and Muslims can create a democratic
country. And that will be positive.
MR. RUSSERT: An inspiration. Do you think that a democratic Iraq could
create a domino effect throughout the Middle East?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: It's not something mechanical. I mean, dominoes applies
to one hits another. It's the effect of a good example, and we have
seen the effect of good examples in Asia, over a long period of time
-- it doesn't happen overnight. But it's very important for people to
understand this idea that Arabs are not capable of democracy is
nonsense. I remember hearing that Koreans weren't capable of
democracy, and that was a myth you heard for a long time. The Koreans
have demonstrated they can do it. Many people have done it in the
latter part of the 20th century. It's time for the Arabs to do it now.
MR. RUSSERT: General Pace, let me show you an article from Reuters a
short time ago. This is the Army's top general -- repeated his
estimate that a postwar occupying force in Iraq could be as large as
several hundred thousand troops -- a number disputed by Defense
Secretary Rumsfeld. Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki told a House
Subcommittee on Defense Appropriations the military could only
estimate what forces might be needed after any invasion of Iraq. It
could be as high as several hundred thousand. He's consistent.
GEN. PACE: Well, I think what he is -- the main phrase there was
"could only estimate." And we don't know what the postwar Iraq is
going to look like. It will be the conditions at that time that will
describe how many forces, how many coalition forces are needed. The
bottom line is that after we defeat the armed forces of Iraq that we
will want to and need to provide stability throughout that country. It
will take a certain size force. We don't know what size force. But it
will be those forces that will stabilize the environment, allow the
government to begin to rebuild, and allow the Iraqi people to select
the kind of government that they want.
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Tim, the important message to the Iraqis and to
everybody in that region is that we do not come as a new colonial
power, we do not come as an army of occupation. We come as an army of
liberation, and we want to see the Iraqis running their own affairs as
soon as they can.
MR. RUSSERT: But it is a nation of 23 million people. And if General
Shinseki believes it's going to take a force of 200,000 American
troops, he should keep on saying that, shouldn't he?
GEN. PACE: All of our leaders should give our best military advice
whenever we are asked it. But you have, for example, in Afghanistan, a
country that is larger, has maybe three or four million more people
than are currently in Iraq, and the U.S. coalition force there is
around 10,000. So to try to equate millions of people on the ground
with how many forces are needed truly is not the right exercise. What
you need to determine is what missions need to be accomplished, and
then how many forces do you need to do that to give the Iraqi people a
chance to rebuild their own army, get their own police force up, get
their own government working, so we in fact can leave as quickly as
possible.
MR. RUSSERT: But in Afghanistan the only secure place is actually
Kabul. The rest of the country is being treated in a very chaotic
fashion. Are you concerned that unless we have a significantly large
American presence in Iraq we could be creating another Afghanistan,
which would be a haven for terrorists to come to Iraq rather than
Afghanistan to kill Americans?
GEN. PACE: Actually, in Afghanistan the only part that is really
insecure is the part in the southeast border area. Most of the rest of
Afghanistan is fairly well secure, and is in fact rebuilding. I am
very proud of what we have been able to do in Afghanistan as a
coalition, and I am very proud of the progress that is being made in
Afghanistan. In Iraq, as I've said, we will need whatever size force
is required to help them establish a stability to rebuild their
institutions, so we can turn over to the Iraqi people their own
country, let them build their own government, and let them become a
partner in the world community.
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Tim  -- 
MR. RUSSERT: Are you comfortable with the military being used for
nation building or nation-rebuilding?
GEN. PACE: The military's role in that would be to provide a stable
environment, and providing stability after a war is an important thing
to do.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Wolfowitz, let me bring you into this discussion,
because it really is important that there is a feeling in the Arab
street that is definitely anti-American. Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, an
ally, said the other day that he is concerned we have created a
hundred new bin Ladens. How concerned are you that the war in Iraq has
created more animosity towards America, and that those jihad fighters
will try to focus on Iraq and the American troops there in years to
come?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: You know, when you are in the middle of a war people
have one set of reactions. And when, as we saw in Afghanistan, women
started taking off their burkhas, and the Afghans greeted us as
liberators, a lot of that sentiment changed. So I think it's too early
to say what the effect is going to be.
I think most of the Arab world understands that Saddam Hussein is a
horrible dictator, and will breathe a great sigh of relief when he's
gone. The challenge then is going to be for us to demonstrate that we
are not occupiers, we are not colonizers. And it's worth then -- if we
are going to talk about examples, it's worth mentioning environment
northern Iraq. We helped the people of northern Iraq get rid of the
Iraqi army in 1991. We left six months later. And they've done a
fairly decent job without any international peacekeepers. I'm not
saying we'll achieve that. But our goal really is as quickly as
possible, but not faster than is possible to help the Iraqis stand on
their own feet. And I think that's going to change a lot of minds.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me refer to you some comments made by former CIA
Director James Woolsey the other day which raised some eyebrows. And
I'll put them on the screen. He told students in Los Angeles the
United States is now engaged in World War IV. Woolsey described the
Cold War as the Third World War, and said this Fourth World War would
last us some time. He said the new war is actually against three
enemies: "the religious rulers of Iran, the fascists of Iraq and
Syria, and Islamic extremists like Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda
network." Do you concur with that?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I think it's too much of an emphasis on all the people
we are against. The truth of the matter is, I think, one of our real
goals here has to be to convince the world's billion Muslims that we
stand for positive change in the Muslim world, that we are on the side
of Muslims that are fighting for democracy, for freedom, for a better
future for their people. I was the American ambassador to Indonesia
for three years. That's actually the largest Muslim population of any
country in the world. They have a struggling effort to build a new
democracy. We need to be out supporting our friends. That's as
important as any focus on enemies.
MR. RUSSERT: Is Mr. Woolsey being considered for a position in Iraq?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: First of all, positions in Iraq belong to the Iraqis.
If you mean positions within this provisional administration, we are
looking at a wide range of Americans both inside and outside of
government.
MR. RUSSERT: Including him?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Anybody who is willing to serve is a candidate.
MR. RUSSERT: The concern that people gave to those comments -- because
it reinforced some other things that had been written -- this was in
the New York Times at the end of March: "'This is just the beginning,'
an administration official said. 'I would not rule out the same
sequence of events for Iran and North Korea as for Iraq. But
circumstances do not compel you end up in the same place.'" And Bill
Kristol, someone you know well over the year -- his book concludes
this way: "The mission begins in Baghdad, but does not end there. Duly
armed, the United States can act to secure its safety and to advance
the cause of liberty in Baghdad and beyond."
What should the American people be prepared for vis-a-vis Iran, North
Korea, Syria?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: I think every one of these cases is different, and you
can't approach it based on a doctrine or some philosophical
predisposition. We arrived at the position we did on Iraq based on
facts, and facts had changed over time. Iraq is a unique case. I mean,
there is no other country that has defied the will of the
international community as consistently and as deliberately and as
long as Saddam Hussein. There is no other leader that I know of who
glorified the events of September 11th and who actively supports
terrorism the way he does.
And the circumstances are different. We'd like to see change in a lot
of places, but it's going to come about by different means in
different places. I think it's important in putting together and
sustaining this coalition that's made extraordinary strides in
fighting global terrorism that we make it clear that the military is
not the only instrument -- it isn't even necessarily the main
instrument. And we use political means, we use intelligence, we use
law enforcement. There's a lot of work to do.
MR. RUSSERT: But you take something like North Korea -- this is what
their government said -- North Korea signaled it is learning a lesson
from the war in Iraq, though not the one the Bush administration had
wanted. The government's official party newspaper said Iraq's
experience proves that North Korea must not submit to international
nuclear inspections or agree to disarm. North Korea would have already
met the same miserable fate of Iraq had it compromised and accepted
the demand raised by the imperialists and its followers for nuclear
inspection and disarmament. The irony that we went in to disarm Saddam
Hussein and now the North Koreans are saying, "We are going to keep
our nuclear bombs -- because you'll invade us if we don't."
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Well, they've obviously stood logic on its head once
again. I mean, it's clear that if Saddam Hussein had accepted the
conditions -- had lived up to the conditions he accepted 12 years ago
-- we wouldn't be at war now. He would still -- who knows who would be
in charge -- but certainly there would not be a war in Iraq, and his
country and his people could have benefited from the enormous support
and revenues that were available. That's the choice the North Koreans
face. They can either continue taking their country further and
further down this economic disaster that they have created, or the can
become respectable members of the international community, live up to
their obligations to give up nuclear weapons. Then they could look
forward actually to a great deal of international help to rebuild and
build a better country. That's not what that leadership so far seems
to be focused on. But that's what they need to do.
MR. RUSSERT: Will we allow North Korea and Iran to develop nuclear
weapons?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Well, unfortunately, we think that North Korea probably
already has some. But it is clear that that possession of those
weapons by countries that support terrorism is a danger to the United
States and a danger to the world. And it's a danger that has to be
addressed. I think in each case you address it differently. The
circumstances in North Korea are very, very different from the
circumstances in Iraq. In even Iran, which is a next-door neighbor,
the circumstances are different. The problem has similar dimensions,
but I think the strategy for dealing with each one has to be tailored
to each individual case.
MR. RUSSERT: How about Syria, who is sending night goggles to the
Iraqi fighters?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: They are doing some things they shouldn't be doing, and
the sooner they stop the better it will be for them.
MR. RUSSERT: How do we stop them?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Right now we are focused on winning the war. I think
the Syrians need to know though that what they do now will be --
they'll be held accountable for.
MR. RUSSERT: Meaning?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Meaning that it's going to be more difficult for them
to have the kind of relationships they are going to need to have in
the aftermath. And there's got to be change in Syria as well. But I
think the -- I think a lot of countries, including Syria, will
eventually get the message from this that it's much better to come to
terms peacefully with the international community, to not acquire
these weapons of mass destruction, to not use terrorism as an
instrument of national policy, and to take care of your own people.
And the truth is that it really is striking that the countries that
terrorize their own people, mistreat their own people, also support
terrorism. That kind of policy needs to change.
MR. RUSSERT: General Pace, you're a military man, highly decorated,
when you read comments like this -- and this is Dana Priest's book,
"The Mission," quoting a former chief of staff, Hugh Shelton,
"Rumsfeld relegated then Joint Chiefs of Staff Hugh Shelton and his
staff to the status of second-rate citizens. Everything the military
had to say was second-guessed at every turn. Norman Schwarzkopf, who
led the Persian Gulf War: 'Candidly, I have gotten somewhat nervous at
some of the pronouncements Secretary Rumsfeld has made. When he makes
his comments, it appears he disregards the Army. He gives the
perception when he's on TV that he's the guy driving the train, and
everybody else better fall in line behind him or else.' That
dismissive posture bothers Schwarzkopf because he thinks Rumsfeld and
the people around him lack the background to make sound military
judgments by themselves." How do you respond to those comments by your
fellow military men?
GEN. PACE: I've had the great pleasure of being the vice chairman
since 1 October of 2001. Daily, at least 30 minutes -- more recently
as much as six and seven hours a day -- I spent time with the
secretary of Defense, the deputy secretary of Defense, General Myers
and myself and others -- hours and hours of discussions and
deliberations. I mean, every single part of our military planning has
had the benefit of input from the commanders in the field, from the
Joint Chiefs themselves. If any of us feels that there is something
that should be being done differently, we have had numerous
opportunities in the past, and still retain the absolute obligation
today, to look our bosses in the eye and tell them what our best
military advice is. I can tell you categorically that every single day
I personally have the opportunity to look the secretary of Defense in
the eye and give him my best military advice. Many, many commanders
have that opportunity, and certainly those of us who have the
privilege of sitting on the Joint Chiefs of Staff get that opportunity
every day.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Wolfowitz, we just have about 30 seconds. Do you
believe the American people will be safer after the regime in Iraq is
gone?
MR. WOLFOWITZ: Absolutely. And that's why -- that's the only reason
the president decided to risk American lives, to get rid of this
regime. It was a danger to us. It doesn't mean we are going to be 100
percent safe afterwards, but it was a choice of what was the less
dangerous course. And I am absolutely sure we will be safer.
MR. RUSSERT: Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Vice Chair of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace, thank you very much for
a very interesting discussion that you shared with the American
viewers today.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list