Length:
6:13
LARGE (73.0 MB) -----
SMALL (7.3 MB)
CAMPBELL
BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: "Keeping Them Honest" on Iraq,
America's top commander and all three presidential
contenders. We're going to show you what was said
today on Capitol Hill about the war and the troops.
Some of it, you may find stunning.
And then we're going to beyond and look at the facts
on the ground and the "Raw Politics" at home, so you
can decide for yourself.
CNN's David Gergen is here with me. Michael Ware and
Candy Crowley are in Washington. And Nic Robertson is
in Baghdad tonight.
BROWN: And Candy is joining us now, along with CNN's
Michael Ware and Nic Robertson, each of whom has
spent the better part of a career on the ground in
Iraq, and then with me here tonight, CNN senior
political analyst David Gergen in the studio.
Welcome to everybody.
Candy, let me start with you.
The candidates seemed to be indirectly sparring with
each other in the hearings today. How do you think
each of them is going to use today's testimony from
Petraeus and Crocker as they try to move forward in
this campaign?
CROWLEY: Oh, I think, for the Democrats, it will be
definitely a part of the repertoire that they add now
when they talk about the Iraq war.
I can see them saying, well, General Petraeus can't
tell us when this is going to end. He can't give us
any measurement as to what success would be. So,
that's going to be incorporated into their Iraq
speech. I think John McCain, you will see the same
things, for very much the same reasons that Tom
Foreman was talking about. There were things in there
that you could take out and say, there is political
progress being made. The Iraqi troops are beginning
to stand up.
And that was what John McCain needed. So, they all
come away with something from that testimony that
they can use on the campaign trail.
BROWN: And that's kind of my question to you, David.
I want you to follow up on what Candy said, that
General Petraeus made this point, significant
progress, but progress that is fragile and reversible
is the language that he used.
Does that, do you think, benefit McCain, because he
did talk about progress, or any of the other
candidates, in terms of the way that the situation
was defined today?
DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well,
certainly, General Petraeus is much closer to McCain
in his perspective of the war.
But, you know, it was almost as if we were looking at
two different wars today. One side, that McCain is
saying the glass is more than half-full, and the
other side is saying the glass is less than half-full
and leaking. So, McCain comes along and says, success
is within reach. That's interesting.
I mean, it had echoes about "peace is at hand." I
remember that back, way back, in 1972 with Nixon in
Vietnam. It took a long time to get to peace in
Vietnam.
But, yet, there's a lot of ammunition McCain has. On
the other side, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are
very, very close together, both. What I found really
interesting, though, on the Democratic side, even as
they said the glass is less than half-full, there's
no push for timetables in this hearing. There's no
push in this.
BROWN: Yes.
GERGEN: And, indeed, both Barack Obama and Hillary
Clinton were talking about -- Barack saying a
measured withdrawal. Hillary Clinton was saying an
orderly withdrawal.
Both, I think, are now setting themselves up to be
the president, the commander in chief who would push
to get us out, whereas John McCain would leave us in
there as long as it takes, with no real push. And I
think that is beginning to become the battle line
between the two.
BROWN: Everybody trying to strike a balance in their
own way.
GERGEN: A balance, yes.
BROWN: Yes.
GERGEN: But not -- not to be irresponsible, but to
have a stance.
And, clearly, the Democrats want to push, push, push
to get out. But they're no longer saying we have got
to do it in six months. We have got to -- don't have
to do it like that. I think they're being more
sensible in that sense. And I think voters will find
that more appealing.
BROWN: Michael, McCain said calls for a rapid
withdrawal are reckless -- that was his word -- when
Clinton said it was irresponsible to continue the
policy that's not produced results and called for an
orderly process of withdrawing our troops.
You know, based on your time in Iraq, your knowledge
of the area, and the people involved, what do you
think about what you heard today vs., you know, where
things stand right now?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Look, in terms of
the military and diplomatic picture that was painted
by General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, by and
large, subject to, you know, certain detail and
different conclusions, it's a fairly accurate broad
brushstroke.
Are they glossing over a lot of things? Yes. Are they
failing to admit certain glaring realities? Of
course. But this is the nature of warfare. What
struck me, sitting in these hearing rooms today, is,
if -- A, what surprised me was the lack of probing
questions, really, from the members of the panel.
And in terms of the three presidential candidates, as
they stand right now, I mean, obviously, today was
more about their campaigns than actually about the
war itself. Now, I have come almost directly from the
war. I mean, some people are living this thing. It is
not a campaign event.
So, to hear people and see the way people are
actually using this, it really does create discomfort
in me. And I don't know how the ambassador and the
general feel. I mean, this is the reality of war. War
is an extension of politics by any other means. But
it still hits home.
BROWN: Yes.
Nic, let me go to you and ask you about Iran, which
was the other big issue today. You had Obama arguing
for diplomatic talks with Iran, Petraeus citing Iran
is playing a destructive role. Are diplomatic talks
realistic?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL
CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Iraqis say they are.
I asked Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki this over the
weekend. I said, look, what are you doing about the
Iranians that are arming and training and equipping
these sort of special militia groups that are firing
rockets into the Green Zone, by the way, which is
where the prime minister lives in Baghdad? So, he's
just as vulnerable as well.
And he said, look, we recognize that Iran and the
United States have historic differences. He also
said, don't think that just because they're targeting
some of these weapon systems against the U.S. troops
here, that Iraqi troops aren't being killed as well.
They are. He said, look, what Iraq is willing to do
is -- is sort of try and get the United States and
Iran and bring them together, because Iran has
expressed -- and he says that Iran does have a role
in Iraq's future. It is a neighbor.
And he sees Iraq as being able to bring Iran and the
U.S. together over this issue. So, for him, it's a
keenly felt issue. His troops are dying. His house is
under attack, along with other houses in the Green
Zone. But he sees Iraq as sort of more of a moderator
in this fight, if you will.
BROWN: All right, Nic, Candy, David, and, Michael,
everybody stick around.
Length:
7:23
LARGE (86.5 MB) -----
SMALL (8.8 MB)
(BEGIN
VIDEO CLIP)
PETRAEUS: We haven't turned any corners. We haven't
seen any lights at the end of the tunnel. The
champagne bottle has been pushed to the back of the
refrigerator. And the progress, while real, is
fragile and is reversible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: And that is the sound bite of the day from
General David Petraeus, fragile and reversible and
complicated. On the one hand, fewer insurgent
attacks, but on the other hand, on the streets of
Basra and Sadr City, an out-and-out war.
More to talk about from our panel tonight, CNN's
Candy Crowley, Michael Ware, Nic Robertson, and David
Gergen.
And let me start with you, Michael. And you touched
on this a little early earlier, and I want you to
expand on it. Having been at the hearing today --
because it's not a place where you normally are. You
are in Baghdad -- it was -- you had a different sort
of perspective than, I think, many of us. What did
you think of it? Were you surprised by anything you
heard or really didn't hear?
WARE: Oh, enormously. I mean, in any ways, I found it
a galling experience, to see the war so dismembered
and -- and so sterilized.
I mean, but, obviously, that's something that one has
to deal with, and that's something that 1.6 million
of your troops have to deal with when they eventually
come home. That's how many have passed through Iraq
and Afghanistan.
And a lot of the big issues weren't touched upon, or
weren't touched upon in depth. And there's a lot of
focus on side issues. I was surprised, though,
pleasantly, to the degree to which Iran was
discussed. But there's still a lot of things that
aren't accepted. I mean, there's lots of gloss over
the nature of the relationship with this Iraqi
government.
The way you're hearing people talk about Maliki,
that's not the reality on the ground and the nature
of the American and Maliki relationship. There's all
sorts of things that were jarring for me. And it's
just difficult to separate the perspective of being
on the ground with what you're seeing. But the
grandstanding and the politics is what really hit
home most. I mean, essentially, General Petraeus and
Ambassador Crocker are right. For or against this
war, whether you liked it from the beginning or not,
that's irrelevant, folks. This is the war you have
got, and you have to take responsibility for this,
either out of self- interest or out of some moral
responsibility, and you have got to get on with this.
He's right. Put the champagne at the back of the
fridge. You're in for the long haul. Otherwise, it's
disaster for the Iraqis, who will die, and the
Americans, who eventually will -- their strategic
interests will suffer.
BROWN: Nic, General Petraeus brought a lot of charts,
a lot of graphs with him today.
And let's take a look at one that was pretty
striking, I thought. This is showing how much of Iraq
is being controlled by Iraqi forces now vs. one year
ago. Some senators, though, pointed to those recent
battles in Basra as proof that the government there
doesn't have it under control, despite what these
charts are suggesting.
Let's listen to what Senator Carl Levin had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CARL LEVIN (D-MI), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
CHAIRMAN: In your judgment, was the Iraqi government
operation in Basra properly and carefully planned and
were the preparations adequate? Could you give me a
direct answer?
PETRAEUS: Sir, the answer is, again, it could have
been much better planned. It was not adequately
planned or prepared.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: Nic, what's your takeaway from this? Does
Petraeus have confidence in the Iraqi government
forces to do what they need to do?
ROBERTSON: I think he has a much more realistic
assessment of what the Iraqi security forces can do
than Iraq's prime minister right now. Iraq's prime
minister, by General Petraeus' testimony, even by
what the prime minister himself has said, has really
rushed into the situation in Basra.
He told me over the weekend that he didn't expect the
militias there to be so strong. He had come to the
conclusion that he had to do something there, because
the militias were controlling the ports. He was
losing control of the city. When the British pulled
out a few months ago, they essentially ceded the city
of Basra to the militias, who got stronger and
stronger.
The prime minister freely admits now that he didn't
know how strong they had become. So, I think General
Petraeus is very deeply and keenly aware of what
Iraq's security forces can do here in Baghdad. He
knows his troops have to back them up and encourage
them to get into the fight.
And he also knows the fact of the matter on the
ground in Basra right now is, Iraqi security forces,
whatever the prime minister says, certainly do not
really control the whole city, because the militias
are still there, living in houses, with their weapons
under their beds or in cupboards. And, hey, nobody
knows who is a militiaman and who isn't. But if
they're called out on the streets, they will be
there, and they will be facing off government troops
who are not able to take them down.
BROWN: Candy, anything said today by the candidates
that you think is going to significantly change
policy on Iraq immediately? We know what their goals
are, but that is a -- that -- you know, to what
extent, I guess, are their hands tied?
CROWLEY: Well, their hands are tied because they're
not in charge. I mean, that's the bottom line. They
understand that.
I mean, you came away with two things politically
from these hearings today. One is that, in fact,
David Petraeus did see his next commander in chief in
one of those three people. And they saw that one of
them is going to be the person responsible for
bringing all the troops home that were there to begin
with.
Most of them do not believe there will be, beyond
pulling back the surge troops, there will be any
withdrawals, and, if so, they will be minimal. So,
they know, when they walk in, in January -- and I
think this goes to David's point -- that you are now
beginning to hear not a moderating of a position, but
now they are beginning to talk more about the fact
that Barack Obama used to say, we need to get out as
carefully as we were careless getting in.
You're hearing much more emphasis on that now, as
they move toward when this just might get real for
one of them.
BROWN: And that was a big point today, David, that
Ambassador Crocker made, saying, essentially -- by
saying, we're not giving you a timetable for when
we're going to get out of there, we need to work out
a long-term agreement with Iraq in terms of our
presence there, this is all landing in the lap of the
next president, whoever that may be.
GERGEN: Absolutely.
One had the sense, Campbell, that, as opposed to the
last set of hearings about six months ago, when there
was a great deal of drama and there was -- Democrats
still felt they could stop this, they could force --
as they had promised in the elections of 2006 -- to
get out of Iraq. And there was this drama, could they
do it or not do it? And, then, of course, it didn't
work, and the surge went forward. And the surge then
seemed to work better than anybody expected.
Today, there's very little sense of drama.
BROWN: They're all getting a reality check, aren't
they?
GERGEN: There's a reality check and a real sense, you
know, the next president that is going to come into
office, there are going to be at least 100,000 troops
still there...
BROWN: Yes.
GERGEN: ... probably closer to 130,000, 140,000. And
the next president is going to -- especially if
you're a Democrat, is going to face a dilemma,
because you have promised the voters you want to get
out. But, yet, as you look at it, you see, you know,
if I get out too quickly, this whole thing could cave
in, and you could be the president who lost Iraq.
BROWN: Right.
GERGEN: And then your presidency could come
unraveled.
On the other hand, if you don't get out, then you
have -- you have misled your voters...
BROWN: Right.
GERGEN: So, it's a bait-and-switch situation.
So, I think that reality is setting in. And I think
that's why both of the Democrats, to go back to
Candy's point, were echoing each other, I think, did
modulate -- I'm not saying moderate -- but they did
modulate their tone, and they are not promising six
months, eight months, or anything like that. There
are no timetables in this. And there's also a sense
in the country, you know, we're really pretty stuck
here right now, aren't we?
BROWN: Yes.
All right, David Gergen, tonight, along with Candy
Crowley, Michael Ware, and Nic Robertson, our thanks
to everybody.