14 June 2004
International Community on Path Forward in Iraq, Powell Says
Timetable for security presence will be up to interim government
The U.N. Security Council's unanimous approval of a U.S.-British sponsored resolution endorsing the transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi interim government at the end of June has reunited the international community in a common effort to democratize Iraq, says Secretary of State Colin Powell.
"The real significance of the UN resolution on Iraq is that it really does pull the international community together again," Powell said in an interview with Australian Television on June 9. "It's endorsing and encouraging other nations to provide support to the effort, of all kinds, and it essentially says we are all together now on the path forward."
The resolution also authorizes the presence of a U.S.-led multinational force to maintain security. Powell said the United States has established a timetable with guidelines under which Iraq will move toward full representative government, but has not determined how
long the security presence will remain.
He noted that the Iraqi interim government will have authority to ask the multinational force to leave "whenever it chooses."
"I think we will leave when it is clear that the Iraqis have built up their forces sufficiently that they can handle whatever security challenges remain," Powell said. "But while we are there, we're going to work with the Iraqis to defeat these insurgents, defeat these terrorists, and defeat these former regime elements that are causing so much trouble."
In light of the renewed consensus, Powell said, it would be a "political disaster" if a change of government in Australia resulted in the withdrawal of Australian forces from the multinational coalition.
"I think it is so important that the Australian people have made a commitment now to stay with us and not start looking for an exit door," he said. "It shows political determination, especially now that this resolution holds the international community together."
"We have dealt with the disagreement of the last year" with France, Germany and some other nations that opposed the use of force in Iraq, Powell said. "[W]e did use military force, and a regime that was tyrannical, that was despotic, is gone. Saddam Hussein is gone. Let's not forget that that's a major achievement."
Following is a State Department transcript of the secretary's interview:
(begin transcript)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
June 9, 2004
INTERVIEW
SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN L. POWELL ON AUSTRALIAN TV BY BARRIE CASSIDY
June 9, 2004
Marshall Room
Washington, D.C.
(12:05 p.m. EDT)
MR. CASSIDY: Well, thank you for joining the program. We really appreciate it.
SECRETARY POWELL: My pleasure, Barrie.
MR. CASSIDY: Sir, there has been an extraordinary outpouring of emotion this week with the death of Ronald Reagan. And I wonder if you could put it into context from Australian points and for our region, what did Ronald Reagan mean to America?
SECRETARY POWELL: He put a sense of confidence and optimism back into America after the period of the early '70s, when we were still going through some tough times: the resignation of Richard Nixon, and our Vice President coming out of the Vietnam War; and then in 1981, here came this eternal optimist, Ronald Reagan, seeing the shining city on the hill.
Whether it was there or not, almost didn't matter. He believed that it was there and he brought this sense of optimism, and look what we can do, look what we can do, not just for ourselves, but for the world. And he had some very clear, simple and direct principles that he followed religiously for eight years and the world changed as a result of his vision and of his principles. And he pulled a democratic world together and he said, let's help the Soviets get out of the problem they have with their system.
He didn't say, let's attack them. He didn't say, let's destroy them. He said, let's help them. And that's what did. And he was met by a man by the name of Gorbachev, and they changed history together. And it wasn't just the Cold War, he did important things for all of our allies and alliances. And he's a great friend of Australia.
MR. CASSIDY: And you worked with him, and you were comfortable with him?
SECRETARY POWELL: Yes, I was his National Security Advisor, Deputy National Security Advisor and National Security Advisor, for the last two years of his administration, when we really made some significant achievements, with respect to our own issues with the Soviet Union.
MR. CASSIDY: Now yesterday, of course, was a big day, or I should say, this week was a big week for you with the successful passing of the resolution in the United Nations. What's the real significance of that from your point of view?
SECRETARY POWELL: The real significance of the UN resolution on Iraq is that it really does pull the international community together again. By a vote of 15 to zero, unanimous vote, the Security Council is endorsing the transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi interim government on the 1st of July. It is endorsing the presence of a multinational force. It's giving the endorsement to the 138, 150,000-almost troops that will be there from the United States -- Australia and other coalition countries.
It's endorsing and encouraging other nations to provide support to the effort, of all kinds, and it essentially says we are all together now on the path forward. And it endorses the path forward which includes: elections by the end of this year, a new transitional government over the next year, and then a new constitution. So we're together again in our efforts to make sure that Iraq becomes a democratic country that rests on the foundation of freedom and the rule of law and the rights of the individual.
MR. CASSIDY: And does that mean now that you can start talking about timetables or a prospect of setting a timetable?
SECRETARY POWELL: We do have a timetable, with respect to how Iraq will reach full representative government. It doesn't yet give us a timetable as to how long our military or security presence will be there. As you know, the Iraqi government, now that it's sovereign, can ask us to leave whenever it chooses because it thinks it can handle the security situation itself.
I think we will leave when it is clear that the Iraqis have built up their forces sufficiently that they can handle whatever security challenges remain. But while we are there, we're going to work with the Iraqis to defeat these insurgents, defeat these terrorists, and defeat these former regime elements that are causing so much trouble.
MR. CASSIDY: But in terms of a withdrawal of the troops, is it desirable that Australia stay committed for that duration, that they pretty much lock themselves into your timetable?
SECRETARY POWELL: Obviously, the Australian Government will lock itself into its own timetable. It's a sovereign nation. But I think it is so important that the Australian people have made a commitment now to stay with us and not start looking for an exit door. It shows political determination, especially now that this resolution holds the international community together.
I think, as the President said, it would be disastrous for Australia to say, well, yeah, we see this international consensus, we see this new resolution, but we're going to head for the door. I don't think that's the Australia that I have known and respected for so many decades.
QUESTION: Can you understand, though, when the President said that, when he said that it would be disastrous, that there were pockets of resentment in Australia and some people interpreted that as political interference in an election year?
SECRETARY POWELL: I think the President was speaking candidly. He didn't intend to insert himself into your campaign. He responded very directly because Australia is such an important country, not only in terms of the military contribution it has made to this effort, but the political statement that comes from Australia is always viewed with a great deal of regard throughout the world. So it is your political commitment as well as your military commitment that is important. And I think it would be a disaster if, in light of this unanimous resolution, Australia would suddenly say, well, you know, never mind, let's move away right now.
We have dealt with the disagreement of last year, I think. The French and Germans and others will always say you shouldn't have used military force. But we did use military force, and a regime that was tyrannical, that was despotic, is gone. Saddam Hussein is gone. Let's not forget that that's a major achievement. Now the challenge is to help the Iraqi people build a sound, democratic nation. And I cannot imagine that Australia would not want to continue to be part of that effort.
QUESTION: Would you like an opportunity, if Mark Latham was to be elected in Australia, an opportunity to try and talk to him about it?
SECRETARY POWELL: We will always have discussions with whoever the prime minister of Australia is and will always respect the decision of the Australian people as to how they will be led or what policies their leader would pursue. But I am not going to get into the details of what I might or might not have to say to a new Australia foreign minister or what the President might say to the Australian prime minister. We'll just deal with one government at a time, if we may.
QUESTION: Well, some of these concerns are quite deep-seated. He says, for example, that Iraq has caused the coalition to divert resources away from the real war on terror. Now, you, of course, (inaudible), on your initial approach, and you are quoted in Bob Woodward's book as saying that it's really, if you are to get involved in Iraq, it's sucking the oxygen out of everything else. That's almost saying the same thing in a different way, isn't it?
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, I knew that if we went into Iraq it would take an enormous investment of time, money, energy, political energy, as well as troops. But the premise of the question is that what we are doing in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terrorism, and we don't accept that premise. We believe that Iraq is a place where terrorists are being attracted to and there was a nexus with terrorism in the very first instance. Saddam Hussein was a terrorist regime leader. And so I don't think it is right to say that this has nothing to do with the war on terror.
I would also add that we continue to pursue every avenue in the war on terror. We are active in Afghanistan. We are involved in intelligence and law enforcement exchanges with nations around the world. We are pursuing terrorists. We have taken down a good part of the leadership of al-Qaida. We are helping other nations in the world go after their terrorist organizations. And I don't think we have, in any way, neglected the war on terror, but Iraq is part of the overall campaign against terrorism.
QUESTION: Well, I suppose a key question is: if Labor was to be elected and Australian troops were taken out of Iraq, would that put the alliance on the line?
SECRETARY POWELL: I would say just what the President said the other day, that if Australian troops were removed from the campaign effort we have underway now in Iraq, I think it would be a disaster, a political disaster. And that's what we believe.
QUESTION: And that implies consequences for Australia in terms of the alliance?
SECRETARY POWELL: I would never put it that way. Australia will always be a close friend of the United States. And we are participating in so many ways with Australia, in so many different areas -- a free trade agreement that we are now working with our Congress on, our security relationship.
We have fought together in every conflict that has come along for the last century, and we value the friendship that we enjoy with Australian leaders and with the Australian people. But, in valuing that relationship, we also understand that the Australian people are sovereign, proud people who will determine who their leaders should be to take them through troubled times.
QUESTION: And just, finally, on your future, there's some speculation, of course, as to whether you will seek a second term as Secretary of State. What's your current thinking?
SECRETARY POWELL: Yeah, that speculation has gone on since my first week as the Secretary of State.
QUESTION: Tends to happen in politics.
SECRETARY POWELL: And the answer is the same, three-plus years later, as it was in the beginning: I serve at the pleasure of the President, and I am honored to have this opportunity to serve this President and my nation.
QUESTION: There is a lot at stake, of course, in Iraq. You want to see that through?
SECRETARY POWELL: I serve at the pleasure of the President.
QUESTION: It's been our pleasure to have you on the program. Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you very much.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
This page printed from: http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2004&m=June&x=20040614183650ASesuarK0.4332086&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
