General Wesley Clark on Fox News
February 5, 2006
Transcription by Melange

Eric Shawn: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reportedly saying that the US has not ruled out military action against Iran and if a military response becomes the only option, what kind of weapons would we use and do we have enough? Joining me now to talk about this is Fox News analyst and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark. Good morning General, good to see you.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Good morning, Eric. Good to see you.

Eric Shawn: Sir, what type of military options do we have? We've talked about this throughout the hour…or is this just an untenable situation?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, there are military options at least in terms of setting back Iran's nuclear program. Whether you can completely end it the way the Israelis did at Osiraq in 1981, I don't really think so because it's not concentrated in a single place. It's spread out but we know where most of those places are, we can get at those places. We can use stealth bombers, we can use earth-penetrating munitions, we can use um, tomahawk land-attack missiles, we can put special forces in. We can do a lot of different things and the Iranians can't be at all confident that we can't set this program back by a dozen years.

Eric Shawn: Now, you say “setting it back by a dozen years,” that still means, though, that they could still pursue it and no matter what we do they could still be on that track to try to get a nuke bomb.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well that's the problem with the military option, Eric. It's that once we take action, Ahmedinejad probably becomes stronger domestically. There's no assurance that you can get regime change and the historical record of countries that have been bombed suggests that when you bomb a country, normally people rally around the leader. In this case, it would be most unfortunate, but it could happen. And after we had set back their nuclear program by taking out a number of sites, there's no reason to think that AQ Khan in Pakistan and his cohort couldn't provide them the additional information, that some other nation might not have an incentive to smuggle in highly enriched uranium. They could be back where we started much sooner than if they rebuilt the program entirely on their own. So that's the risk of the military option - leaving an embittered, angered Iran which is determined to seek revenge and get it.

Eric Shawn: Well, you also have an embittered Iran, or could, that may have us over a barrel - talking about oil barrels. Uh, what is the likelihood of them retaliating and skyrocketing the price of oil to try and cripple western economies?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I think it's possible but I don't think it's… I don't think it's the…I think you're going to see a spike because everybody's going to fear this, but my guess is that oil's going to continue to flow. They've got to keep their government rolling and they've got to keep trade rolling with the rest of the world and there are many other ways to get back at us.

Eric Shawn: Finally, without the prospect of sanctions coming from the Security Council because I don't think that…serious sanctions. What do you think the resolution of this will be, if there can be a resolution?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well I think the best resolution right now would be for the United States talk directly to the Iranians. If, as Mike Hayden has said, they are absolutely determined to get a nuclear weapon, then there's no alternative to a showdown. And, um, that's something that our leadership needs to determine in face-to-face discussions. And, the Iranians need to hear it from the United States in face-to-face discussions - not through the Security Council, not through the IAEA, not through the press, but face-to-face.

Eric Shawn: Alright, maybe getting there before we know it considering what happens at the Security Council. General Clark, thanks for being with us. Good to see you.