Peter Cook: This weekend saw two major milestones in Iraq: first the former dictator Saddam Hussein executed in Baghdad, and then it was confirmed the Iraq war has now claimed the lives of 3,000 US service members. The news, of course, comes as President Bush prepares to address the nation, possibly within days, on his new strategy for winning the war in Iraq. Retired General Wesley Clark was one of the war's earliest critics. The former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, of course, ran for President himself as a Democrat in 2004. He's also contemplating a second run for the top job. General Clark joins me now from Little Rock, Arkansas to discuss the situation in Iraq and the way forward. General Clark, thank you for the time.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Good to be with you, Peter.

Peter Cook: Let me ask you, first of all, your reaction to what transpired over the weekend with regard to Saddam Hussein - his execution, and the fact that a video tape of that execution has now been out on the internet, and at least the latest word from Iraq, causing more unrest in that country. Your reaction?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I think his execution was inevitable, but I think the manner in which it was done - the haste, the lack of control of the execution site, the taunting and so forth - were provocative. I think they were designed to be provocative, that they were designed to, by, by the people who did it, to, to demonstrate their power. They knew it would provoke a Sunni reaction, and the way it works in societies is one form of extremism promotes the extremism of the other side. And there are those who are profiting from the division of Iraq, and they want to see it continue.

Peter Cook: Do you think his death, in the long run, will help in any way to stabilize the situation in Iraq?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I, I think if you flipped the question, the answer would be that if he were, let's say alive and available to be brought back to the streets, that wouldn't stabilize the situation. That would destabilize it. Having Saddam gone, in a way it clears the decks, but the manner in which it was done was provocative and generates more violence. It, it shows Shi'ite power. It was designed to, it was designed to undercut further the Sunni appeal to make them feel the inevitability of the Shi'ite takeover, but when it does that, it promotes Sunni action in, in response.

Peter Cook: As we noted at the top, the 3,000th U.S. service member to die in Iraq over the weekend, your take right now on what you think this President should be doing to change course in Iraq. We're waiting any day now, perhaps for the President to outline whatever new strategy he may have. What should he be doing?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, what I'm afraid we're going to see, Peter, is 'stay the course more' by simply reinforcing the U.S. troop presence. What has to be done is to change the regional dynamic. It's not a matter of going over and seeking tit-for-tat trades with the Syrians and the Iranians, but we do have to have a dialog with people in the region. Because from the time we went into Iraq, the other nations in the region, particularly Iran and Syria, understood that a U.S. success in Iraq meant that they were next up on the U.S. hit list. Essentially, we've declared that we're out to get those two regimes. So, they're certainly not interested in being cooperative with us, and as we surge troops in, which it appears the President's going to do, if we don't deal with these countries, what they will do is they will push in more training, more sophisticated equipment, more resistance, the techniques. The war will deepen in its intensity. We'll have more casualties, maybe a slight drop initially when the U.S soldiers get there. But then it'll, it'll take off again, and it will continue as long as these countries can profit from it.

Peter Cook: As you know, there are some prominent members up on Capitol Hill who favor putting more troops in, the most notable being Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, member of the Armed Services Committee. Is there any circumstance under which you could see more U.S. troops being added to Iraq that actually would make sense, would be helpful to the situation.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, there might, it might be. I wouldn't rule out the possibility of an increase in U.S. troops. If we were to pursue the kind of diplomatic dialog in the region that I'm talking about, you'd need a whole bag of carrots and sticks. You might have an accelerated withdrawal. You might have a, a surge of troops as part of the kit bag. You wouldn't disclose it before you went through the talking process, the drawing out what people are interested in, trying to figure out a way forward that brings people's common interests together in some way. This administration seems to be ignoring that, and in ignoring it, what they're assuming is that you can put more troops on the ground and mechanically somehow that will generate greater security. But this is a, a war amongst the people, and it's being fed by a number of different sources, and 20,000, 30,000, even 50,000 is not a significant number in respect to the overall size and population of the country. So, considering the fact that our troops are not fluent in Arabic, the can't lounge in the, in, in squad cars and case the neighborhoods and so forth. The really only do four things over there. They, they snipe, shoot at people carrying weapons on the streets. They go into homes and arrest people, sometimes breaking down the doors and so forth as they have to, and when they do it of course, it's very tense, it's very confrontational. They do roadblocks, and they patrol. And those four activities, you're going to get more of them, but will they fundamentally change the dynamic of conflict? Seems unlikely, not with the numbers we're talking about.

Peter Cook: From a li- military standpoint right now, we've heard a lot about the U.S. Army, the Marines being at a- really stretched right now in terms of resources, in terms of manpower. Is it possible for the U.S. military right now to send a significant number of additional troops into Iraq?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, if the numbers we're hearing - 20, 30,000 - yes, for a period of time, yes, that can be done. And does it inflict a lot of hardship on the Armed Forces? Certainly, and especially on the members of the Guard and Reserve who are going to be called up on short notice, relatively short notice, ripped out of their families and communities and jobs and asked to go abroad once again. This is a hardship that's borne by a very small portion of the U.S. population. So, when President Bush calls for sacrifice, these are volunteers who are sacrificing, and I think there is a limit to how far this can go. I think the, the Army's been pushed pretty hard, and we can always do more. This is the United States of America. We're a great power. We've got wonderful people in the Armed Forces, wonderful families behind them. But the President needs to consider this very, very carefully, because he's certainly mortgaging the future of the volunteer force, and he's certainly crippled our ability to respond to the unexpected in other places.

Peter Cook: If the President speaks to the nation a few days and, and essentially outlines 'stay the course more' as, as you have, have pointed out here, what should Democrats do on Capitol Hill in response? What should they be prepared to do in terms of calling the President's bluff and trying to force change in Iraq?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think, first of all, I, the, the responsible course of action, which the Democratic Party I believe will take, is to investigate the assumptions and the premises on which the President's made his decision. This is a Congress that now has the opposition party in charge, and it has the power of the subpoena. So, I think the American people have, have asked for this. Thats what the election was about. The American people don't want to see the United States fail. They want to see the United States succeed, but what they realize is the President is not, he's not operating on the right premises and assumptions to succeed. It's going to be up to the Democrats in Congress to point this out, to look for the implications of that, and to help the administration adjust its policy. One problem the administration does have is that so many members of the military chain of command seem to say that they don't favor this surge in troops strength, and they're going to be called on to testify, and the, the, the military opinion's going to be thrown against the Commander-in-Chief's opinion. Of course, he's the Commander-in-Chief, but what is it that President Bush knows that the Commanders on the ground don't know. That's what the Congress is going to try to understand. They're going to illuminate it for the American people, and we're going to find out whether there really are assumptions that our military leaders on the ground have, have ignored or misunderstood. Maybe they've been overly hesitant to stress the Armed Forces to the full extent that the Commander-in-Chief's willing to stress them. Or maybe it's the President and his team who are unwilling to consider the regional implications and the political dynamics that have fueled the conflict.

Peter Cook: Alright. General Wesley Clark, got to leave it there. Have plenty more things to ask you about, but we'll leave it for another time. Thanks very much-

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Thank you.

Peter Cook: -for your time today-
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Thank you, Peter.

Peter Cook: -discussing the situation in Iraq.