December 6, 2005
Transcription by Melange
We encourage you to listen to the clip.
Diane Rehm: We’re joined now by fountain from Little Rock, Arkansas by General Wesley Clark. He’s former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. Good morning to you, sir. Thanks for joining us.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Good morning, Diane. Good to be with you.
Diane Rehm: You have written in this morning’s New York Times on the op-ed page that Iran is emerging as the big winner of the American invasion. You say both President Bush’s new strategy and the Democratic responses to it dangerously miss the point. What do you mean?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I mean that what’s happening on the ground in Iraq is that under the cover of the democratization movement and as the US and Iraqi forces are fighting the Sunni insurgents, the Iranians are taking control through their Shi’a fellow sectarians. And people in the Middle East know this, it’s a source of great concern and great discomfort and the only thing that will happen if we have a timeline and pullout quicker is that the violence will be higher and the Iranians will take control sooner. We have to change the strategy if we’re going to really succeed in producing a democracy that reflects the will of all the people in Iraq and promotes peace in the region. The way we’re going is not going to do that. What we’re doing is going to end up creating an Iranian-dominated buffer state in Iraq that helps Iran project its power into the Persian Gulf and beyond.
Diane Rehm: So then would you agree with Senator John McCain who says we need more troops in Iraq not less?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: No, I don’t necessarily agree with that. I think we need a change in policy. I heard a lot of the things that Jim Steinberg said earlier and I agree with Jim in many respects on this because what we really need to do is first change the constitution. Get rid of the ability of the provinces, especially the Shi’as in the south to control those oil revenues. Those should belong to the Iraqi government as a whole. And secondly, we need to reduce the power of the Shi’a group in the south to set up its own mini-state down there. We need a unified Iraq. That’ll help form the foundation under which we can bring the Sunnis back into participation in the government. We need to then go out to the insurgents – they need to be brought back in – they’ve got a chance to participate in a new Iraq. We should be encouraging that. Military pressure is part of that but you can’t kill everybody that opposes you; and in the Middle East traditionally what’s happened is that you do better if you bring your insurgents and your opponents inside the government than if you try and kill them because in trying to kill them all you just make more enemies.
Diane Rehm: Now here’s an e-mail from Frank in Oklahoma City who says if Bush’s plan succeeds, the American public needs to know that democracy in Iraq will mean control by the Shi’a majority who will doubtlessly ally themselves with Shi’a-controlled Iran. We will be left with a far worse situation than we had when Hussein ruled and Bush is guaranteed to go down in history as the greatest blunderer to occupy the White House.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, that’s precisely my fear. That’s why I’m writing this article that I am because I think that we need to alert the American people to this. We can’t stay the course, we have to change the course before it’s too late.
Diane Rehm: So, what lessons do you draw from the conflict in Yugoslavia to the current situation in Iraq?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, first of all you have to really bring in other nations. You have to use diplomacy. There...th..These conflicts aren’t won by military power alone. Military power is just part of a package that you deploy. And, in this case, from the beginning, the Bush administration’s had a tunnel vision focus only on the military and only on what’s happening inside Iraq. We should be talking to Syria and Iran and we should be bringing – and should have from the beginning – brought our allies on board fully in support. The neighbors of Iraq are part of the problem and unless we find ways to make them part of the solution, we’re not going to really solve what’s going on.
Diane Rehm: But, do you think that that is truly possible – making Syria and Iran part of the solution?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, certainly I think it’s possible or I wouldn’t
Diane Rehm: But, do you think some of that diplomacy may be going on behind the scenes?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Some of that diplomacy is going on behind the scenes but it needs to be transparent for two reasons. First of all, because people in the region don’t understand and don’t respect what the United States is doing. People in the region know that there is a dialogue, a small dialogue, going on with Iran but it’s not transparent and because these people in the region don’t trust Iran, they’re mistrustful of that dialogue with the United States. But secondly, it needs to be a more transparent dialogue because it won’t be effective until the publics in democratic countries can understand and support it. I can’t understand why this administration doesn’t take credit for America’s power through diplomacy and instead wants to use and emphasize only the use of the military. It’s absolutely wrong.
Diane Rehm: What evidence do you actually have that there are behind the scenes discussions going on with say Syria and Iran?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: My evidence is I’m not in government, I’m not reading the classified reports, I’m just hearing people tell me about this. Um, but we know that there have been some discussions, they’re episodic discussions, they’re not sustained, they’re not broad and essentially the US government hasn’t made up its mind whether it’s going to try to work against Asad or take advantage of his weakness. I’m saying take advantage of this moment of opportunity to support a democratic transformation in Syria with Asad still in place.
Diane Rehm: You know what’s interesting, on this point of the voting and the like, we have an e-mail from Jennifer who says “why not simply put the issue of when US troops depart to a vote of the Iraqi people? Allow several options, that is - leave in 2 months, 6 months, one year, two years, or when the Iraqi government requests it.” What do you think of that?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well I think if the Iraqi government requests for the US to leave that we’re going to end up having to leave because otherwise we’d be there really as an invader um, under a new Iraqi government. So any time the Iraqi government really wants to leave, I think we’re going to have to leave. I don’t see how you can sustain a presence against the wishes of the government. On the other hand, just doing a vote in Iraq for something that’s a very complicated set of issues – it’s asking a lot for people to try to understand those issues. The opinion polls say that many of the Iraqi people don’t support the American presence there but on the other hand, the government thusfar has because they understand what we’re trying to do there so I think this is the kind of question that has to be resolved by representatives of the people, it’s not the kind of question that’s necessarily best resolved in Iraq by a direct democratic process.
Diane Rehm: All right. Let’s open the phones. We’ll go to Mary who’s in
Caller: Good morning, um, I like a lot of the things that you have said but I really feel that we need to set up a peacekeeping force in Iraq, what is the so called Iraq today and then to um….but the peacekeeping force is not the UN peacekeeping force but a force that’s made up of people that every segment of the Iraqi population would agree to and also that they would then, ah, figure out a way to divide the country up into independent parts.
Diane Rehm: Hmm. General Clark, what’s your reaction?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I do agree that we’d like to have some broader participation in the coalition force that’s on the ground. I don’t favor the division of Iraq because having been through the process in the Balkans, looking at the history of India and Pakistan, I think what you’ll have is more conflict if you try to divide the country. People will be forced out of their homes, there’ll be fighting as a result and Iraq’s neighbors will get involved so I think it’s a recipe for broader conflict in the region.
Diane Rehm: And speaking of Iraq’s neighbors, here’s Nico from San Diego, California. Good morning to you.
Caller: Ah good morning. I just wanted to say that I’m very happy to be on the show. Um, a couple of things – um, mister general Clark, um, I don’t necessarily agree that changing the constitution would be eh, would be a great help and ah, because there is a…being an Iranian and living in Middle East and understanding our cultures, also have a lot of people friends in Iraq. I think the major problem in this region is religion and I think if we increase the number of troops in Iraq and ah, if we bring a halt to any religious activity for at least one or two years, that at least on itself will decrease the number of Iraqi people supporting the insurgents or the terrorists. Er, that’s one. Second, ah, as being an Iranian, I think the United States needs to focus more on the Iranians and instead of negotiating with them which I think it’s against our policy negotiating with terrorists, ah, I think we have to support the Iranians who live in United States and we have over dozens of television satellite stations who are trying to change the Iranian government from here.
Diane Rehm: All right, Nico, thanks for your call. General Clark, that question about religion seems to me that’s pretty difficult.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well I don’t think you can keep people from practicing their religion and I don’t think you want to. I think what you have to have is people have to have a certain degree of tolerance. I think the danger in Iraq right now is that the Iranian government, the hard-liners are exerting power and will continue to do so over Iraq’s Shi’a majority and shape the policies of that state in such a way that it causes a rise in tensions in the Gulf and serves Iran’s interests and so I think that we’ve got to provide a better climate of security and a reduction in the sectarian sentiment inside Iraq. In my article I’ve outlined some ways to do that.
Diane Rehm: Here is an e-mail from Donna who says “Could General Clark please give us a total number of troops that he foresees as necessary and for how long?”
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I think you can take probably 20,000 troops out after the elections because we won’t have to be securing polling places and that’ll leave us back around where we were, around 130,000. I think we need six to eight brigades to be prepared to go and support the Iraqi government in disarming the militias. I think you need four to six brigades worth of troops to handle the continuing struggle against the insurgents as you try to bring the insurgency under control and get these insurgent leaders re-inserted, re-assimilated into Iraqi society. And I think you need three or four brigades worth of troops on the borders, then you need some other troops to provide the aircraft support, the logistics, the maintenance and the security for the troops that are there and so forth so it comes out to about 130,000. As you accomplish these three major tasks, you can pull those troops out but it’s not on a timeline - the work has to get done first.
Diane Rehm: At 7 minutes before the hour, you’re listening to the Diane Rehm show.
Let’s go now to Dallas, Texas. Hi there, Jeff.
Caller: Good morning, Diane.
Diane Rehm: Morning, sir.
Caller: and good morning General Clark.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Morning, Jeff.
Caller: if I may, please tell your wife, Alma, that I supported her for First Lady
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well thanks, but my wife’s name is Gert.
Caller: Gert, I’m sorry, I apologize.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Alma’s General Powell’s wife, she’s wonderful too and she’d be a great First Lady too.
Caller: Yeah, but I’ve met Gert and she’s running
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I know, thanks
Caller: In any event, here’s my problem. I think we need to back up a little bit. The problem is that George Bush has succeeded in dividing the country by absolutely refusing to admit any mistakes and changing course. You know, we would be speaking German today if General Patton had said “this is my plan and I’m going to stick to it no matter what the results are” and this is what we have. So, what I want to know is: what is it that George Bush could do to open up the dialogue, get some different advisers or whatever is needed to demonstrate to the American people that he really does want to do something constructive and then proceed to do it. In other words, what is the political dynamic the he needs to change and how would he do that?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, you know, the problem, Jeff, is that President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld – they’ve been locked into this course. They’ve got blinders on right now. They just don’t see; they think they have answers to every issue but the answers aren’t there and as I’m suggesting in my opinion piece today in the New York Times, there are a lot of things that we need to be doing that we aren’t. We need a dialogue in the region diplomatically. We need to be encouraging the Shi’as to get rid of those militias. We need to prepare our troops to do it. We need our troops to have more language support in the region. And, this is a matter of an administration which has attempted to make political hay out of the War of Iraq, closing ranks and trying to make a political last stand here. The American people can sense that they’re on a losing course in Iraq but the administration doesn’t want to listen.
Diane Rehm: But what is the political gain for the President by staying the course?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I think what the President has said all along is that the people who quarrel with him and rejected his policy are unpatriotic and that’s been the attack from the beginning. It was the attack on Max Cleland in Georgia in 2002, it’s what has, it was the undercurrent through the entire 2004 election – it’s still there. Now
Diane Rehm: But General Clark, finally, don’t you think that Democrats are going to have to come together with some kind of focused solution to present to the American people?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I hope we will. I hope Democrats will come together. I think it’s absolutely imperative that we do so, Diane.
Diane Rehm: General Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. He joined us from Little Rock, Arkansas. Thank you so much, General, good to talk with you.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Thank you, Diane, good to be with you.
