Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

DATE=10/09/2004

TYPE=ON THE LINE

NUMBER=1-01576

TITLE=Taking on the Terror in Iraq

INTERNET=Yes

EDITOR=OFFICE OF POLICY - 619-0038

CONTENT=This show broadcasts Saturday.

THEME: UP, HOLD UNDER AND FADE

Host: Taking on the terror in Iraq. Next, On the Line.

Host: Security remains the number one issue in Iraq, which is slated to hold its first democratic elections in early 2005. While car-bombing attacks continued, U-S and Iraqi troops launched offensives against insurgent strongholds. Iraqi and U-S officials say that the operations are part of a strategy to take control of areas being used as staging grounds for terrorist attacks.

In an address to the Iraqi interim National Assembly, Prime Minister Ayad Allawi acknowledged that the insurgents are, quote "a challenge to our will...betting on our failure." He said, "I believe that many of the Iraqi people agree with me that we should not let terrorist forces decide our agenda."

President George W. Bush said that the U-S-led coalition would do "whatever it takes" to establish security in Iraq.

[SOT BUSH]

George W. Bush: Our victory requires changing the conditions that produce radicalism and suicide bombers, and finding new democratic allies in a troubled part of the region. America is always more secure when freedom is on the march and freedom is on the march in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere.

[applause]

There will be good days and there will be bad days in the war on terror. But every day we will show our resolve and we will do our duty. This nation is determined: We will stay in the fight until the fight is won.

[END SOT]

Host: Will coalition and Iraqi forces be able to establish the security needed for elections to be held in January? I'll ask my guests: Radek Sikorski, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and by phone from Amman, Jordan: Hassan Fattah, editor of Iraq Today, an Iraqi newspaper. Welcome and thanks for joining us today.

Host: Radek Sikorski, let's just start with the general picture. What is the security situation like in Iraq at this point?

Sikorski: Clearly very bad, not just for Iraqis but the terrorists have what's known in the classical theory of insurgency, liberated areas, meaning areas where they can operate with impunity and where they clearly have factories of bombs. I mean, to be able to detonate several suicide and vehicle bombs per day, that means industrial-style production of these devices. And this simply can not be permitted. The first duty of a government is to establish a monopoly over the use of force on the territory that it controls. And the Iraqi government has to make this effort and we have to help them to do it.

Host: Hassan Fattah, are you there by phone?

Fattah: I certainly am. Thank you for having me.

Host: Thanks for being with us today. Would you agree with Radek that at this point the terrorists or insurgents are acting with impunity in large parts of the country.

Fattah: Well, certainly, I think more than terrorists, criminals of all sorts are acting with impunity and it's become very easy to do what they want to do. In many ways this has been true for the past year and a half of the occupation.

Host: Radek Sikorski, if large areas are now under insurgent control or they have these safe areas to operate out of, what is the strategy? Have we seen it in this last week, a new strategy for trying to deal with that?

Sikorski: It's very difficult. I think we need to study previous [successful] operations. One of the most successful ones was the one that the British pursued in the 1950s in Malaya, the Greek communist insurgence in the 1940s also was defeated. And in Northern Ireland, terrorism has been ended as well. So there are examples of successful operations.

Host: What are the key things in those examples, then, that succeed?

Sikorski: Well, let's take Northern Ireland. I think the key thing was that we isolated the terrorists from safe havens in a foreign country. In other words, the British contained the insurgency within the area where they operated and cut off the supply of weaponry, money and so forth from outside. There were attempts, from Omar Qaddafi, from others, but they were usually intercepted. So the first thing you need to do is to isolate the insurgency from outside. Unfortunately in Iraq we do not control the borders. And don't suspect that either Syria or Iran are being particularly helpful.

Host: Let me ask Hassan Fattah on that question. Is the biggest problem at this point the issue of things coming from outside of Iraq or what's being done within Iraq?

Fattah: Well, I think it's more about what's not being done within Iraq. Fundamentally what's happened is that there is a crime wave and I think that's allowed everything else to fall apart and broken windows rules apply here.

Host: So how do the police, the policing function in Iraq get turned around when we see reports that many of the police who are being targeted by insurgents seem to be rather hunkered down?

Fattah: Well certainly, but there's also good news in that recruits continue to come forward and apply to become policemen. And in many ways that's more good news than anything else. The key is to continue to train better police as quickly as possible and to produce good quality police as well.

Host: And how is that going, Hassan Fattah?

Fattah: So far, it's not necessarily very good. Things are behind schedule. Nonetheless, I think that from what I hear from various government figures, in fact, the quality of recruits that are coming out today are much higher than they used to be before. So that's some good news.

Host: Radek Sikorski, the effort to Iraqify the security rests on both brining up police forces and also getting an Iraqi National Guard instituted. The efforts in Samarra and elsewhere in Iraq to go after the insurgents, in this new strategy, we're seeing Iraqi forces fighting alongside with the coalition forces. Is that a success? How well is that working? How much of the burden is being handled by the Iraqi forces?

Sikorski: Well, being on the ground, I can not judge. But in Najaf, things seem to have quieted down as well. And I just spoke yesterday to the commander until July of the multi-national division, central-south, in the Shia areas, who told me on this issue of the Iraqi police morale, that Iraqi police feel under threat from the terrorists and they want to avenge themselves on these terrorists. So, his impression was that the more the terrorists are killing Iraqi policemen, the more the Iraqi policemen wanted to go after them. Well that would be a good dynamic, wouldn't it?

Host: Hassan Fattah, what's your sense of the role that Iraqi troops are having in the new offensives against the insurgent-held areas?

Fattah: We seem to have lost Hassan Fattah. We hope we'll be able to get him back in.

Host: The U-S Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said that what has gone on in Samarra in this last week is part of a new strategy that needs to happen all over in the country. How is this strategy going to work? Are there the troops, U-S and Iraqi together needed to clear out these insurgent strongholds and then hold them after a given operation is finished?

Sikorski: I hope so, because we certainly need the presence on the ground in those troubled areas. Apart from anything else, what presence on the ground gives you is the ability to develop a human network intelligence. Because, let's face it. We can kill anybody we want in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's knowing where they are in any particular moment that's the difficulty. If we knew where Osama was, or Mr. Zarqawi was, we could have dealt with them. So, you need those intelligence networks and you can't have them remotely. You have to be easily accessible on the ground for the local population to give you the information that you need. And for that, you need, of course, heavy weapons and aerial help, but of course, the best thing would be to have proper Iraqi special forces.

Host: Let me ask Hassan Fattah about that. Are you back Hassan?

Fattah: Hello.

Host: Yes. One of the things that was expected as part of the effort to Iraqify the security was that when you had an Iraqi interim government, you had Iraqi police and forces, that regular civilians would be more willing to come forward with the kind of intelligence information that would allow the rooting out of the insurgents and the terrorists. Has that panned out at all?

Fattah: Well, I think it's beginning to pan out. To be fair to the new government, to the interim government in fact, they are managing to produce much better intelligence than the coalition had before. That's a good new story and you've begun to see some of the effects of that both in Samarra and other operations. There is some indication that in fact, in the attacks and the hits on Fallujah, they have actually managed to hit many of their targets. That's very important and that points to better intelligence.

Host: Hassan Fattah, what's your sense of the role that the Iraqi forces are actually playing on the ground in Samarra and Fallujah?

Fattah: I think that they're going to be playing much more of an intelligence role. Let's face it. Only an Iraqi knows the difference between somebody who's a tribal leader and somebody who's a criminal. And only an Iraqi is able to differentiate between those two figures and perhaps differentiate between someone who is a foreigner and is a foreign fighter and somebody who is actually just a farmer in his field. It's very important to differentiate and it's very important to be able to tell that difference.

Host: Radek Sikorski, what's your sense of, in this struggle, the role of the Iraqi interim government. Are they gaining credibility? Are they losing credibility? What's the sense among Iraqis?

Sikorski: I don't know. I think Iraqis are in a better position to say that. But I will say this, that is, in the way that we managed to diffuse the crisis in Najaf, the politics of it, the fact that it was an Iraqi political leader who was able to diffuse the situation, I think shows the way forward. It's their country. They should take the lead and we should do our utmost to give them the kind of credibility, this government and the government that's going to be formed after the election to have the credibility to convince the majority of Iraqis to cooperate with it.

Host: Hassan Fattah, do you think the interim government is gaining the credibility that will be needed to do the kinds of negotiations that can resolve these stalemates in the insurgent-controlled cities?

Fattah: I think very often it's one step forward, one step back. And that's been the difficult part for this government. I think the results of Najaf underscore one most important thing, which is the best solution ultimately is a political solution, not a military one. And I think that's why it turned out as well as it did. And certainly it underscored that there is nascent leadership out there that is able to control the streets and that those are the people that you want to kind of bring out.

Host: What's the difference in the political solution that was applied in Najaf and that which was applied in Fallujah, which have had very different outcomes?

Fattah: Certainly very different outcomes and that underscores the general quagmire in Fallujah and the inability to essentially solve the problem. Admittedly Fallujah's a very intractable problem and is going to continue to be for some time. But I think that until there is a standing leadership that you can deal with, I don't think you're going to be able to find much of a solution.

Host: Well Radek Sikorski, a lot of people have argued that when you look at a place like Fallujah you see the Sunni Muslim population that was the backbone of the Baathist party and that if you have democracy coming in, a majority Shiite population is not going to leave much room for power for the old guard, so that they're not going to have much incentive to do anything other than get in the way. Is there a political solution in places like Fallujah where you can make large parts of the population want to be part of the future of Iraq as opposed to just trying to play a spoiling role?

Host: Well, unfortunately Ambassador [Paul] Bremer signed, in the last week of his vice-royalty a proportional representation system for Iraq, which means that all of Iraq is one single constituency, which means that parties in Iraq will vie for votes on a national level instead of the local level. Under the system that obtains in Britain and the United States that I would prefer, there are single-member constituencies and members of Parliament with strong local roots. It would for example mean that for a place like Fallujah, that they would very likely have a few members in Parliament. Well, that gives you some kind of stake in the system that would have been better, I think.

Host: Hassan Fattah, what's your sense of how people who may not be in the majority feel about their chance of having representation in a democratic Iraq?

Fattah: Well I think there's one bit of good news in all that discussion and that's that a lot of - there is a growing rumble amongst Fallujah's tribal leaders and religious leaders that they want to take part.

Host: I'm afraid we just lost Hassan Fattah. But he was saying that there may be more interest in being sure to be part of the election. That brings up the issue of how elections can be held with the security situation as it has been. What are going to be the chances of having an election that will have enough participation in a security situation as unsettled as it is at this point?

Fattah: It's very tough. It's even tougher than in say, Afghanistan today, where there are sporadic attacks but not a single province that is completely outside of control of central authority like we seem to have in Iraq. So, for the election to be credible, we have to establish control before the election, which is why I think it's right that the Iraqi government and the U-S authorities are getting tough with the insurgents right now. This is what needs to be done, because the election can be the beginning of a new reality, a new more credible government and therefore more cooperation from Iraqis, therefore less support from the terrorists. And of course the terrorists know it. And that's why they are going to do everything to try to stop it.

Host: Hassan Fattah, do we have you back on the phone?

Fattah: You certainly do.

Host: Good. Glad to have you back. What's your sense of what expectations are among Iraqis now among now for elections in January?

Fattah: Well I think Iraqis are -- Hello?

Host: Yes, we have you there. Yes, we can hear you Hassan.

Fattah: Oh, I'm sorry. Iraqis are fundamentally are looking for a representation and I think that's the good news about the elections. I think overwhelmingly Iraqis do want the elections. Despite the uncertainties that they bring in. So, ultimately, the question is, how bad the violence, if it does happen during the election, which many people expect will happen, the question is how bad it will be.

Host: And do you see strategies that are coming out now that may have an impact on that kind of violence? Is there an expectation that there's going to be any success in getting a handle on the violence before the elections?

Fattah: I think there's certainly a lot of uncertainty about whether the elections themselves are going to occur despite the continued reassurances that they will actually occur. The question is whether, in the first place, whether the elections can happen. And from there how you'll be able to secure them. There's various strategies for doing that. For instance, you might not want to have a nationwide election all at one time perhaps. There's various other ways of doing that.

Host: Radek Sikorski, what's your sense of strategies at this point for making an election come off as well as possible?

Sikorski: Well, in Afghanistan, it's costing at least a hundred million dollars. In some places the electoral boxes will have to be transported by helicopter. Security has been beefed up. Extra American troops have been brought in. NATO has promised extra troops for Afghanistan, it would be very helpful to do the same in Iraq, to cow the terrorists in that period of the election so that at least the election may be credible. I really can not emphasize this more. It could be the beginning of the end of the Shia suspicion, for example, that they will some how be cheated. I think in the Kurdish areas, where there is basically peace, the Kurds will be brought in to the Iraqi mainstream. Well, that's one big part of the country. And then as Mr. Fattah has said, well maybe a few seats should be kept open for a particular province, for elections to be held later, if the election is not feasible now. But I think the sooner we get a legitimate Iraqi government in place, the better.

Host: Hassan Fattah.

Fattah: The key to emphasize, just to add to that, is the fact that all provinces, all regions of the country must have a voice, including the more difficult regions such as Fallujah and others. Because otherwise you will certainly not have a representative election and I think you will have no legitimacy to the government, you essentially, you mentioned the issue's right there.

Host: Hassan Fattah, just a general question, we're getting close to running out of time. What should the U-S be doing and the coalition at this point that it isn't doing?

Fattah: Fundamentally the U-S should be emphasizing -- that's what's not happening now. Too many people are talking about civil war. Too many people are talking about divisions, when in fact these are the critical moments when you want to talk about unity, when Iraqis need to be thinking of themselves as Iraqis first, [not just in terms of] sex and ethnicities. If you manage to push that and if you manage to slowly but surely emphasize that, I think you will get past critical stages to come.

Host: Radek Sikorski, what's your sense of what's not being done at this point that needs to be done?

Sikorski: Well, in one sense, I wouldn't start where we are, because I think some major mistakes were made in the way that the post-war occupation period was defined and also in the way that the politics of it was handled. I am very struck by the fact that when you talk to ordinary Afghans in Afghanistan, they will all tell you: Oh, well we accept the foreign presence because of the Bahn agreement, because of the international legitimacy, whereas in Iraq it was handled differently. And I think there's a lesson in that. And I think also, if we had imposed marshal law, a curfew and shot looters on site from day one, the criminals and the terrorists would have gotten a message early on that we're serious.

Host: I'm afraid that's going to have to be the last word for today. We're out of time, but I'd like to thank my guests: Radek Sikorski, of the American Enterprise Institute, and joining us by phone from Amman, Jordan, was Hassan Fattah of the newspaper: Iraq Today. We welcome your questions and comments. You can send them to us at w-w-w-dot-v-o-a-news-dot-com-slash-ontheline. For On the Line, I'm Eric Felten.