Length: 6:11
LARGE (72.5 MB)
-----
SMALL (7.3 MB)
ANDERSON COOPER: Last
week President Bush promised what he called complete
victory over the Iraqi insurgency. But when we talk
about the insurgency, what exactly do we mean?
Joining me now to talk about how it's evolving is
Michael Ware of "Time Magazine."
Michael, good to see you again. You wrote there's a
struggle within the insurgency in Iraq. Talk about
the possible shifts of leadership.
MICHAEL WARE, "TIME MAGAZINE": It's been strange
bedfellows from the beginning, Anderson, out there in
the insurgency, as we've seen a number of groups
coming together in a rough alliance to fight a common
enemy; that being U.S. soldiers here in Iraq. One of
the leading divisions within the insurgency has been
the secularists, the nationalists, who see themselves
fighting a war of liberation. They consider
themselves freedom fighters. Here they are going out
there on operations with Zarqawi's fighters. These
are people who are using the extreme form of tactics,
who are hoping to bring about a holy war that will
deliver an Islamic state. There is great friction
between these groups.
Now a year ago, Zarqawi's people very much -- through
money and through the momentum of this fight -- had
the leading hand. We're now seeing that shift. More
and more, as Zarqawi's people, mostly foreigners,
were killed or captured or disbursed, they've been
replaced by Iraqis. And these Iraqis have a much
greater connection to their old comrades, still
fighting for the Baathists or the nationalist
insurgency. So we're seeing a recalibration within
the insurgency right now.
COOPER: You've been reporting from Baghdad for a long
time, taking a lot of risks. I want to read you
something that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
said today about the media and how they are
portraying what is happening in Iraq. He said, and I
quote, "One of the reasons that views of Iraq are so
divergent is that we may be looking at Iraq through
different prisms of experience or expectation. For
starters, it must be jarring for reporters to leave
the United States, arrive in a country that is so
different, where they have to worry about their
personal safety and then being rushed to a scene of a
bomb, car bomb or a shooting and have little
opportunity to see the rest of the country." The
implication being, we in America are not getting the
full picture because of what you and everyone else
who is reporting there are only showing us the bombs.
WARE: Well, I'd personally like to invite Secretary
Rumsfeld to come and spend some time here on the
ground in Baghdad in what he would refer to as the
Red Zone. Whenever Secretary Rumsfeld himself has
visited Iraq, it's been well within the embrace of
the U.S. military. He has been encased in the Green
Zone. Let him come out and taste what life is like
for the ordinary Iraqis. For the ordinary Iraqi, a
few soccer balls, a painted school means nothing.
When you cannot have confidence in sending your
children to elementary school and that they won't be
blown up, that government-sponsored death squads
won't kick in your door at night, that you won't be
caught in the crossfire of some awful battle. Let
Secretary Rumsfeld come and live that life for a day
and then let him talk about the positives that are
being unreported. It would be an insult to the Iraqi
experience to have it any other way.
COOPER: Because in your mind, security is the number
one concern you hear from Iraqis on a daily basis?
WARE: It's not in my mind. This is their life.
Security right now is all that matters to them. I
mean, it's got to the point where security is well
and truly above democracy or deliverable justice.
These people just want to be safe. They just want the
war to stop. And I have to say I've got a growing
sensation that this is a feeling in which they are in
accord with the American people. The American people,
as the polling is showing, are caring less and less
about indoctrinating the Middle East with democracy
and they're caring more and more with just seeing the
place stable, seeing it stop producing more and more
Al Qaeda terrorists, instead of creating fewer.
COOPER: Of course, the question then is what to do.
There has, of course, been talk in the United States
of a pullout. Secretary Rumsfeld today said, quote,
"In my view, quitting is not a strategy. Quitting is
an invitation to more attacks and more terrorist
violence here at home. This is not just a hypothesis.
The U.S. withdrawal from Somalia emboldened Osama bin
Laden in the 1990s. We know this: He said so." Do you
think a U.S. pullout or setting a timetable for a
pullout would be a victory for insurgents?
WARE: Well, a pullout right now is simply impossible,
Anderson. There's no way that U.S. forces can
withdraw. They've gone too far. The implosion that
would happen in this country would have regional
consequences and would erode American power. So
what's the alternative? U.S. military intelligence
tells me that there's been a long and painful
evolution in their thinking. They realize that
militarily, they cannot win this war in the time
available, in the time that American public opinion
will give them. So they're looking for a political
solution, which is always the answer to an
insurgency. What are they doing? America is looking
to bring back the Baath party, the old Baath party --
not of Saddam, but the Baath party of Iraq. These are
the former allies in the 1980s. They share America's
concerns about Al Qaeda and Islamic extremism. The
Baaths never had Al Qaeda here and they also share
America's concerns about Iran. So Ambassador
Khalilzad has said, "let's roll back the
Baathification. It's gone too far. Let's bring back
the army. Let's talk to these insurgents, these
nationalists, and get them in the political process
and back into government."
COOPER: Michael Ware, always good to talk to you.
Thank you, Michael.
WARE: Thanks, Anderson.