(00:00:08) President Bush says the latest attacks in Iraq are acts of desperation and reaction to the progress being made by US forces. This government is determined (00:00:17) to hear the call from the Iraqi. And the call is they want to society which their children can go to school which they can get good health care in which they're able to live a peaceful life. It's in the National interest of the United States at a peaceful Iraqi merge, and we will stay the course. It's (00:00:36) a boy speaking to reporters at the White House. Former, Washington DC mayor Walter Washington has died from Member station WAMU, James Jones reports Washington was the first African-American to had a major u.s. City. He was tapped by President Lyndon Johnson to lead a capital that had been run by an appointed commission dominated by white Southerners. He emerged as a national leader following riots in 1968 that were sparked by the assassination of dr. Martin Luther King jr. Washington died after a long illness. He was 88 for NPR news. I'm James Jones in Washington on Wall Street at this hour. The Dow is up 39 points at 9621 the NASDAQ up 10 at 1876. This is NPR news support for NPR comes from the Annie E Casey Foundation supporting families and neighborhoods by funding initiatives aimed at helping disadvantaged children on the web at AE skin. F dot org from Minnesota Public Radio, I'm Tim pug Meyer major-general. Larry Shillito is the new head of the Minnesota National Guard shallow. Tell was the only candidate Governor pawlenty interviewed. He has been president of Alexandria Technical College since 1995. The 58 year old is a division Commander with the 34th Infantry Division of the Army National Guard based in Rosemount his term as adjutant general last seven years shallot or replaces Major General Eugene andreotti who stepped down as adjutant General in August andreotti is being investigated for at least two complaints but officials haven't described the nature of the allegations dfl. Congresswoman. Betty. McCollum says, she would like to see the u.s. Reach out for more support in rebuilding Iraq McCullum was in Baghdad as part of a tour of Iraq Jordan and turkey. She says the 13 billion dollars donated by other nations last week is not (00:02:28) enough. We have an Engaged the international Immunity as a partner the dollars that there was put porous our loans their credits. There are over five years. It is a start but it's not as substantial as we could. Hope for (00:02:44) McCallum says Iraq is still a major battle Zone and hostilities are far from over State Lottery officials. Say the apparent winners of a Powerball ticket sold in Minnesota are expected at their office later today. The ticket is worth half of a more than 190 million dollar jackpot. No one immediately step forward today with the other winning ticket, which was sold in Indiana a mixture of rain and snow developing in the west today and then spreading into the east by evening highs in the upper 30s to Middle 40s at last report Duluth 33 Rochester 36 the Twin Cities 37. I'm Tim pug Meyer, Minnesota Public Radio. All right. Thanks Tim. It's six minutes now past 11:00. And good morning. Welcome to midday on Minnesota Public Radio. I'm Gary eichten as you heard on the news a series of coordinated coordinated bombings Rock Baghdad today on this first day of the holy month of Ramadan among the targets was the headquarters of the International Red Cross in all at least 40 people were killed and more than 200 were injured in the attacks. Most of them are a keys. No one has claimed responsibility for the bombings. Although araki's say an aborted car bombing was attempted by A man carrying a Syrian passport the attacks today follow a devastating rocket attack yesterday on a seemingly secure Hotel full of us officials including us Deputy defense secretary Paul wolfowitz, despite the devastation President Bush reaffirmed us commitment to stay in Iraq. He says that the escalating attacks are sign of desperation a sign of just how much progress the u.s. Making and stabilizing Iraq joining us this hour to discuss. The latest on Iraq is Brian Atwood the dean of the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of public affairs and the former head of a ID the US agency for International Development. Ryan Atwood was recently called to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on u.s. Post war strategy in Iraq. As always. We also invite you to join our conversation. If you have a question or a comment about the latest developments in Iraq, give us a call. Our Twin City area number is 6512276 thousand 6512276 thousand our toll free number is 1-800-218-4243 or 1-800 to for to to 828 Ryan Atwood. Thanks so much for joining us this (00:05:12) morning. I'm delighted Gary (00:05:14) President. Bush said the day that the attacks are a sign of desperation by those opposed to a free Iraq that the worst the attacks the greater the desperation. Would you agree with that assessment? (00:05:27) Well, I think this is an indication that the military Victory wasn't quite as sound as we thought it was when we declared our Victory many months ago. It's clear that we hadn't anticipated that many of the supporters of Saddam Hussein, which is blend in with the society and become terrorists as a country that defeated a conventional force ourselves at the beginning of our history. We should understand this a little better. I think it's quite clear that this is a criminal state that existed in Iraq before as Fred Hiatt has written in the Washington Post which was in the Star Tribune this morning and that this is a much bigger problem than the force we have on the ground. I agree with former Ambassador Jim Dobbins who says that it's quite obvious that we did not have a force adequate to deter this kind of attack and Every day were reminded that our own forces are not being adequately protected and we've got a major Challenge on our hands a major security Challenge and I don't think that it's possible really to get as much done as we need to get done to help transform this state without adequate (00:06:46) security. Is it possible that the kinds of attacks carried out again today? We'll turn the Iraqi people the general population against the people who are carrying out at these attacks. Most of the victims are araki's this was conducted, you know and Ramadan began. It doesn't seem like the kind of thing that the average Iraqi would support (00:07:09) they would not they do not support this kind of attack. We've seen focus groups and polling information come out of Iraq. There's no question. They're mostly upset that we haven't been able to put an end to this kind of thing. They're upset about the people who are carrying it out. They know that Associated with Saddam and Saddam is no is certainly not a hero in Iraq. They want an end to the chaos. And the unfortunate part of this though is that they think that as the remaining superpower the United States can do could end this if it wants and so there's this is a lot of conspiracy theorizing going on within the Iraqi people. The rumors are well, the Americans could stop this if they really wanted to what is going on. Are they trying to create chaos so that they can steal our oil or whatever. There's just an awful lot of negative feeling not that they want people to be attacking Americans or creating chaos in the streets. They don't want that but they do believe we would have the power to stop this if we wanted to (00:08:16) what why would the people who launched these attacks Target the Red Cross of all agencies, apparently as I understand it the Red Cross has been operating. Iraq for well over 20 years. Nobody bothered him up till now. What's that all (00:08:33) about? Well, it's more of the propaganda that for 30 years or so Saddam put out there, which is that the International Community is the enemy of the Iraqi people and that's why they attacked the UN now, they've attacked the Red Cross anyone who is in the country ostensibly to help the Iraqi people. They really are the enemy of the Iraqi people. And I mean, it's very rare that the Red Cross is ever attacked in these situations. They've been in the worst possible situations in the middle of the genocide in Rwanda and they were left alone. But I think this is part of saddam's saddam's own policy. I think he's clearly orchestrating this And this is yet another manifestation of the International Community in his (00:09:26) mind. Some Iraqi officials were saying today that this latest series of attacks was probably carried out by Foreign elements would does that square with your thinking on this and with those people then be working for Saddam or what's that connection? (00:09:43) It's a damn has a lot of money and he I think is able to buy some of these the weaponry and the attacks themselves. I think that what has been created here is a really something that didn't exist before when Saddam was in power, which is a very Unholy alliance between Saddam and his forces and other sort of pan arabist terrorists who have come into the country. There's no question a number of them have come into the country. They've made connections with the former baathist leaders under Saddam and it's the worst of all worlds frankly. A lot of us had predicted this and that was why in my mind it was so important to do this, right and to go in through the United Nations give them a more time to see whether or not in fact the threats that were being described by the Bush Administration were real because many people believed that this would be a major distraction in terms of the war on terrorism and that it indeed might make the matter worse. And I think now we're kind of stuck to this problem much like the proverbial Tar baby. We've grabbed ahold of this. I do not see an alternative other than to try to make this work when I testified before the Foreign Relations Committee, I testified in sort of lukewarm support of the 87 billion dollars because it didn't see any other choices, but I said, we have to fundamentally change the approach we've taken we've got to get the International Community involved and I felt the only way to do that would be to drop back. Not insist on American control of the Reconstruction process get the defense department out of that business, which it doesn't know anything about and give it over to civilian agencies that could better work with donors from other parts of the world. Now, we've got a situation where the defense department continues to insist on controlling we did have a donor's conference. It hasn't produced much in my mind and multi-year commitments that I don't think will turn into much tangible in terms of helping us and we put twenty billion dollars on the table for this year alone and the rest of the world puts 13 billion on over a five-year period most of it in loans as opposed to Grants. So I just I don't see us engaging I think on the pro side we've accomplished a lot and now at the UN, we have a new UN resolution calls on the Iraqi Council to come up with a timetable for the Should have power we have s new security Arrangement wherein the security forces that are there will be under the UN flag, but it's really still predominantly American and we haven't been able to use that new that UN resolution to recruit other forces from other countries, and they have set up a trust fund the Development Fund for Iraq, which should make it easier for other donors to come forward, but when France and Germany don't put a dime on the table when the European Union itself puts about 230 million dollars down. There's an indication that they really aren't going to come in and any big way so long as the Americans is insist on having an American administrator and controlling the environment through the Pentagon. That's just not conducive to to (00:13:13) burden-sharing one last question. I want to get to some listener calls here if things were to change tomorrow. Aural, and all of a sudden there was a lot of international cooperation burden-sharing in Iraq you suppose that would stop the attacks against Coalition forces against Iraq. He's who are continue cooperating with with this International effort. (00:13:38) Unfortunately. There's a great deal of synergy between or should be between the security that's provided and the amount of that can be done to develop mentally or reconstruction wise within the country. You can't really operate rebuild roads and power plants and the like unless you have protection and unfortunately, we still do not have adequate numbers of forces on the ground. If you compare the number of forces on the ground per capita and per the square miles of territory with Bosnia and Kosovo, we don't have anywhere near I think we've got about one third the troops on the ground. If you look at it in those terms that we do that we do in Bosnia and in Possible, but unfortunately, our troops are just spread too thin around the world right now. We're in Afghanistan. We're everywhere and we did we don't have enough divisions within the Army to do this job. And it seems the administration doesn't isn't willing really to to ask for more consequences were using National Guard and Reserve troops. Unlike any other time in our history that's hurting hurting a lot of families and our country and hurting a lot of States economies as well because these are productive people that have taken out of regular jobs and sent overseas (00:15:01) Ryan Atwood is with us. He is the dean of the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of public affairs and a former head of the US agency for International Development. He's joined us this hour to talk about the current situation in Iraq, especially in light of the series of bombings that rock Baghdad today dozens were killed hundreds were injured. Today's attacks one of the targets being the headquarters of the International Red Cross. If you'd like to join our conversation, give us a call six five one two, two seven six thousand 6512276 thousand or toll free number is 1-800-218-4243 on go ahead please (00:15:40) yes. Hi, I was troubled by simply. I think it's too easy to refer to the people who are doing these these acts to refer to them as terrorists. I think that because they targeted a civilian Target this morning may make this difficult point to make but I think that that that they might be more accurately characterized as resistance Fighters and I would expect that if we had a foreign power occupying our country our armed citizenry would Would engage in Acts of resistance that would certainly Target military folks and it wouldn't be you know, face-to-face open combat in a in a big broad field would be this kind of Guerrilla warfare and and sabotage and so on but it would also be targeting things that were suspected of being complicit in the in the occupation. I was just wondering how can we get away from this idea that we're talking about a war on terror and get to the truth of where it's a war on the Saddam Hussein regime. I certainly take the point that we are seen by many as an occupying Force now and not not a Liberation Force, although I think frankly if you were to ask most of the Iraqi people they were very pleased that Saddam was deposed. I mean at now that we're uncovering a lot of information about how bad that totalitarian state was under Saddam, but I think you also have to look at the Dividuals, these are not for the most part and normal the Iraqi citizens who don't like the United States being there. Although many if you were to put that to a vote most would vote that we should leave. Unfortunately if we were to leave and this is why I use the Tar-Baby analogy. I think if we were to leave tomorrow Saddam and his forces or some other more radical group would come back into power and you would have basically a base for international terrorism in Iraq. These are some of the reasons why I was very troubled by going in in the first place. But if you look at the people whether they're baathist party loyalists of Saddam and or people coming in from other countries that really are part of the Al Qaeda Network or similar networks. I don't think you can get away too far from the word terrace anybody who bombs innocent people at a Red Cross facility and or The UN facility and or in the Shiite area and the South innocent people in a mosque, you have to call those people terrorist II granted the people that are knocking off are targeting our military. They're the same people that are doing these other acts against civilians. And so I don't have any trouble using the word terrorist both but I do take the point and understand that when you were an occupying Force there are going to be people that do not want you there. (00:18:54) How long is it reasonable to expect the u.s. To hang on before the United States could essentially turn over most Operations Security operations in the rest to the Iraqis themselves a stated goal of the US Administration. (00:19:11) Well, they claim that there are now 40 thousand Iraqi police in the streets. I think people who have witnessed that don't believe that those people are very well trained. And in fact, there's some danger in putting people giving people weapons and putting them in the streets and giving them a law enforcement responsibilities before they're well-trained. I think it'll take at least a year before we can stand up police force that can have some impact on the criminal activity that's going on in the country. And by the way, there is a great deal of just plain old criminal activity that's going on not just bombings and attacks on American soldiers and it will take another year or more to get a in Iraqi military. That's well trained and is loyal to whatever Iraqi government that that emerges I think only when those two things happen police force and a military will we begin I think to will we be able to move some of our troops out of the country and And or enable those forces to protect a rocky institutions, which is what most of our forces are doing. Now, most of our forces are static. They're in there protecting institutions and or they're hiding behind walls because or not hiding but they're basically and secure locations. It's only when we move within the country are we attacked and we're trying to move within the Sunni triangle in the north to go after the people that are doing this but we've got a dilemma on our hands to the extent that we really break into people's homes at night trying to find some of these people we're going to get the regular population against us as well. So it it seems to me the only answer to it is a much more pervasive presence to deter attacks. Then we're able to put on the ground now, so as it as it stands we have to make Choices every day do we go into someone's home which will which in Flames usually entire neighborhoods against us or do we sit back and just be attacked? I mean that's not the right kind of choice. And only if we have a more pervasive presence of an international force. Can we do this job, right? And unfortunately since we don't have American forces to put on the ground, we've got to depend on the UN, we haven't been willing to make the concessions necessary to make that happen (00:21:45) Diana your question, please (00:21:47) good morning and thank you for taking my call. My question for mr. Atwood is two or three months ago. We were told that we were quite literally within hours of possibly capturing Saddam Hussein that we had recently captured many of his high-ranking officers and that we were very close to actually being able to capture him and then all of a sudden Sudden, all of that news went away. We haven't heard another word about it. And I was just wondering if you could say what what if anything you think that effect of him still being at large is having on these continuing attacks, which seemed to be very well organized and thought through the reasons questions about our intelligence capacity within the country. I do think we need Iraq. He's on our side that can help us here. Clearly. We did we did find Saddam sons was an accomplishment. But Saddam is well-protected. He's got a lot of money and there were many many people that have a stake in I parently an imprint in protecting him and I'm not sure that our intelligence is is good enough to locate him. Although frankly. I wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow you had a report that in fact, he was captured. I'm not sure that would end it I think Saddam is probably made provisions. To do to expand the leadership of his organization. So an oath in the case of Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda and in the case of Saddam Hussein, I don't think capturing them would end this confrontation with (00:23:29) us Janet. Tell your question, please (00:23:32) I was wondering if are you suggesting that President Bush must agree to the you concessions in order to get more troops on the ground or is there any alternative does he have to call up a draft to make sure or does he we have the troops or does he have to call these the troops out for behind the secure locations what reminder to my preferred solution would be to offer the concessions. I did recommend this the Foreign Relations Committee. I thought that was a good deal of agreement even chairman little girl as a republican Senator Hagel the Democrats on the committee Senator Biden, but the frustration was that That there doesn't seem to be any desire within the administration for moving in this direction. I think that's a shame. I think part of the reason is that some of the people in the defense department want to control this reconstruction so that they can not only create a democratic Iraq, but they can create a democratic Iraq that supports American policy that's bit unlikely in the Middle East right now and I think that relates to the other problem in the Middle East which is the palestinian-israeli problem which we seem to be ignoring at this stage. But the only answer in my mind was that we agree that the UN would would put in a secretary General's representative a un representative to run the reconstruction with the Americans strongly behind that individual, but that we not have Ambassador Brenner Bremer. And we certainly don't have the defense department running the operation rather. We have a ID and the state department, which is the normal way of doing it. Now, they're very active. But everyone is under the control of the defense defense department. You can't expect expect either the British International Development agency the French one or any of the others even the Japanese coming into a country and working under the Aegis of the American Pentagon. It just doesn't make any (00:25:37) sense. Why not (00:25:39) what difference would it make because these are basically Aid workers who are used to working with a non-governmental organizations within their span of control and they're not used to working with military. Even the civilian part of a military operation. (00:26:00) How is it that the Pentagon ended up in charge of post-war Iraq? It's understandable that they would be in charge. You're conducting the war but how is it that they ended up overseeing post-war (00:26:12) Iraq? Well, it's because they want another War they not only won the war against Saddam but they won the war in Washington with the state department if Rumsfeld and Cheney have basically prevailed and I mean, you know when I two days after I testified in Washington saying the defense department ought to get out and by the way, I was supported on that panel by the former deputy secretary of defense John hamre and by former State Department Ambassador Jim Dobbins who's worked on a lot of these of these transitional situations indeed. It's just written a book for Rand Corporation talking about post-conflict reconstruction from Germany to Iraq is the name of the book both of them supported my position on that. And and in fact, there was a big article in the Washington Post saying experts say DOD should get out of the Reconstruction effort will two days later Rumsfeld has An article in the Washington Post basically saying just wait we're going to be successful in doing this people were skeptical about our military operation plan, but we prevailed there and we're going to Prevail Prevail here. They just they want to maintain control. They don't want to give up control. They're afraid that you if you internationalize it too much and if you bring in too many nongovernmental organizations that will encourage araki democracy, but it may not turn out the way we want it and these all part of the war that was won by Rumsfeld in Washington, but he seems to be beginning to lose ground and there are many people now even calling for his resignation (00:27:53) president recently named Condoleezza Rice to kind of oversee Iraq policy. Does that indicate that in fact control is moving away from the Pentagon? What was that all (00:28:03) about? Yes, it seems so I mean they she basically as for committees that look at different aspects of the Reconstruction that I think goes to the problem the problem being that so long as the defense department was running everything State and a ID and other agencies just basically throw up their hands and they don't really contribute much the White House. I think perceive that and decided to pull some of this back into the White House, but the basic chain of command still goes from Bremer to Rumsfeld not from Bremer to Condoleezza Rice Condoleezza, Rice's and warning and a coordination role or I'm so was very upset about that. He made it very clear that he didn't like that change, but I think it was necessary and I think even more changes necessary. (00:28:53) Obviously one last question before we break for news Brian Atwood from the pentagon's perspective or from the nation's perspective. How could you settle for anything less than a democratic Iraq? That is a me Noble to us interests having gone this far with this. How could we end up with a country government in Iraq that basically hates the US and his aunt, you know is opposed to us interests. (00:29:22) No, I certainly see the point. I do think that if we can achieve a democratic Iraq, it'll be a little send the right signals in the Middle East the real issues relate to whether or not it will be a religious or secular State. There are many in the Shiite majority who really hope it will be a religious country. But they also I think are somewhat influenced by negatively by what's happened in Iran. They don't want clerics in power they but they don't want a state that is so divorced from their concept of religion that it is in and they interpret the word secular to mean atheist. They don't want an atheistic State. Well, I think we've got to give on some of those issues. Otherwise, we're not going to have a true democracy if we can create a true democracy in Iraq. I To put the potential is there for us to have great influence over the direction of that country, but you can't this is like social engineering you cannot both engineer a democracy, which is hard enough in a place like Iraq and also engineer a country that's going to go down the line with you on policy. For example, how Democratic would Iraq be and how plausible would it be for the Iraqis today to support the policies we've adopted on the israeli-palestinian conflict. I don't think that's realistic at all for an Islamic State not to take sides and support the Palestinians. I hope they wouldn't support suicide bombers, but they can't support Sharone on the settlements and building walls and attacking as he has and yet our Administration seems to be supporting Sharone in those things, even though they do voice criticism from time to (00:31:11) time talking about As policy in Iraq this hour, especially in light of the suicide bombings that occurred the string of bombings today. One of the buildings targeted the headquarters of the International Red Cross Our Guest. This hour is Brian Atwood dean of the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of public affairs former head of the US agency for International Development. He was recently called to testify on US policy in Iraq called to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. If you'd like to join our conversation, six, five, one two, two seven six thousand or one eight hundred two, four two two eight two eight will get to more of your questions in a couple of minutes. (00:31:50) in this world where people are (00:31:56) fighting over next fresh air the return of soul singer Howard Tate. He recorded several Seoul hits in the 60s including get it while you can which was covered by Janis Joplin join us for the next fresh air. Eight o'clock tonight here on Minnesota Public Radio time now for some headlines. Here's Tim pug Meyer Tim. Thanks, Gary. President. Bush says us progress in Iraq is making insurgents more desperate and spurring the attacks like the ones this morning in Baghdad Bush says Those Who continue to engage in violence can't stand the thought of a free society today series of attacks in Baghdad killed about 40 people and injured more than 200 the dead include a US Soldier car bomber struck the International Red Cross headquarters in Baghdad along with three police stations fires continue to burn in Southern California devouring entire neighborhoods and choking the sky with smoke and Ash so far 13 people have died in the state's deadliest outbreak of fire and more than a decade. Some relief is expected tomorrow on the Santa Ana winds that are fueling the Flames are expected to calm. The Monday Night Football game between the San Diego Chargers and Miami Dolphins has been moved to Arizona because of the California wildfires NFL commissioner Paul tagliabue says the city of San Diego advised the league. It could not play the game there because of the Thick Smoke and Ash. The crime rate still isn't as high as it was a decade ago. The FBI reports the number of serious crimes in the u.s. Rose slightly in 2002, but it's still well below the levels seen in 1993. Governor pawlenty has named Major General Larry shallot 02 lead the Minnesota National Guard shallot. Oh was the only candidate interviewed. He's been president of Alexandria Technical College since 1995. The apparent winners of the Powerball ticket sold in Minnesota have contacted State Lottery officials because of work obligations. The group is expected to arrive at Lottery headquarters late this afternoon. The ticket for Saturday's drawing is one of two that match all the numbers toward a jackpot worth one hundred ninety point nine million dollars the state forecast today a mixture of rain and snow developing in the west and spreading into the east by evening highs in the upper 30s to mid 40s at last report Duluth 34, Sioux Falls 37, St. Cloud 38 the Twin Cities 39. I'm Tim pug Meyer, Minnesota Public Radio. All right. Thanks to him 23 minutes before twelve. This is midday on Minnesota Public Radio over the noon hour today to voices of Minnesota interviews. Two very influential Minnesota women reatha Clark King and Joan grow that's coming up over the noon hour. This hour we're talking about us policy in Iraq. Our Guest is Brian Atwood, who is the dean of the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of public affairs Pam your question Place. (00:34:48) Hi. Yes. Gee, I have more questions now that I've listened a little bit longer while I was waiting but he was my main question or a comment first, you know, I remember as I remember it Bush and the administration really said that the there would be a short war but a long aftermath and I guess when I turn on, you know, even this program today or the television and I hear so many people on one side of the aisle saying Bush lied to us, he lied to us. He said it was going to be a short war and not a I mean I that's my language not long after math. I'm wondering why certain, you know of those in opposition. I heard that one way and I heard it another way. I heard the administration Administration saying this is going to be very difficult. It's going to be a long aftermath and just quickly, you know, it seems to me like Americans turned everything into a McDonald's ation. And which that would mean even that you know, we expect a drive-thru War we expect a war to be won in you know fought and won in three days and that I just don't understand that. I don't understand why I'm hearing that from the one side. (00:36:09) Okay. Well, let's get a comment there Ryan Atwood fundamental question. I think that Pam raises here are the perceptions of what was supposed to happen. (00:36:20) Well, I think this is where our system failed us to some extent. I don't doubt that. What what Pam said is true. The president did probably say this was going to be a long aftermath. I think the problem we have is that when this issue came to the Senate of the United States to the Congress of the United States. It was a rush to get this resolution passed supporting the war because an election was coming up. It was really the wrong time. I think to put something before members of Congress when they have their elections staring their elections in the eye but these tough questions weren't asked mean there were a few people that pointed out that they were going to be much many more difficulties than the administration was talking about at the time. They were even some people all wellstone one of them questioning whether or not in fact, we had our facts straight with respect to weapons of mass destruction in the like the but the fact of the matter is that the Congress let us down. They have War Powers. They have the ability equal with the president to decide when the nation goes to war. And the fact of the matter is that for a variety of reasons some of them feeling that well we needed to strengthen the president's hand vis-à-vis the UN Security Council at the time others. Just wanting to support the president and believing as he did that this was a part of the war against terrorism. But whatever happened we didn't ask these tough questions. We never did ask the administration to tell us how much it would cost. I generally support with strong caveats that money that's being requested. Now, I don't understand how someone could vote frankly for the war for that resolution and vote against the 87 billion dollars. I mean, they got us into this and we ought to be now prepared to pay the bill. I wish that we could have more burden sharing and that we Take an entirely different approach to this. It's quite obvious that the criticism the more valid criticism is that the administration really did not plan well nor understand the challenge of the post-conflict Reconstruction period here that's a much more valid criticism than saying well the president was right when he said it would take a long time initially. So those are my thoughts I think that we will let down by both parties in this I'd I think the United Nations system didn't work very well. We tried to intimidate the United Nations. I think countries like France really were more interested in being negative on all of this and still continue to take that posture their their position today that we should be rushing to turn over power to the Iraqis is really disingenuous and it won't work. They need time to understand the choices that are before them and they can't make those choices today about what kind of a constitution there want and what kind of leadership there one in the future. So there are a lot of people that really haven't performed a very positive role in all of this. I would blame both parties in our country the I blame the Congress and I certainly do blame the Bush Administration for I think taking a step that had very little to do with terrorism and Oh, perhaps creating a bigger problem for us. (00:39:44) What in terms of France and Germany you were talking earlier mention this donors conference that just concluded neither of those two Nations as I understand it as prepared to make any kind of meaningful contribution here to help Rican rebuild Iraq. Why not? I mean obviously well why not? It's (00:40:10) politics in their own country. There are so many there's so much opposition to what we did that it's difficult for democratically elected governments now having to some extent influence the politics but now to go back to their people and say we've got to help the bailout the United States after it's done something we were strongly opposed to doing I think politics is the main reason but it's also a Irresponsible leadership. I might say as well because the French government in particular both both countries are going to suffer if this doesn't turn out well because terrorism will be will be strengthened the and frankly the Middle East is a lot closer to Europe and it is to the United States. So it's in their interest sometimes politics blinds Democratic leaders, and I think that's what's happening in those two (00:41:02) countries President Bush again today reiterated his firm intent to veto any measure that passes the Congress in terms of providing reconstruction Aid to Iraq if that Aid comes in the form of a loan to Iraq rather than a grant arguing that Iraq is already got enough debt to worry about good solid position for the president to take on that issue. (00:41:28) I think probably he could be a little more reasonable on that issue given how difficult this is. My my own feeling is that I wouldn't mind voting for Grants. If I were a member of Congress representing taxpayers, if I could assure the Congress that the rest of the world was going to be contributing adequately to this effort, but here we have the rest of the world coming forward with mostly grants and mostly loans at this donor conference. And we insisting it all has to be grants and I think the president's position is right in the sense that Iraq already owes a hundred and twenty billion dollars in its in debt to that extent. I just don't think it makes any sense to add to that debt burden if you really what you really care about is is creating a new Iraq. So the president's right in that sense, but he's politically on very thin ice when he insists on grants. When we're not getting any burden sharing from the rest of the (00:42:30) world Jenny, I your question, please (00:42:33) yes, thank you. I totally agree with you sir on everything you've said and just one quick comment. It seems to me that the Iraqis have billions of dollars of resources of their own in their oil and why can't that be used for these rebuilding efforts? My other question is is it wise or would it be wise to send in some gorilla type forces that are used to dealing with Guerrilla attacks, you know such as the Green Beret that we had in the Vietnam War or are they already there? Thank you. (00:43:05) Okay. Different Forest composition as opposed to just more troops different kinds of troops. (00:43:13) Well, I think we do have some of those kinds of Special Forces troops and even CIA operatives that are working in Iraq. The problem is if you don't have good intelligence you you can't direct those troops in the right way, but clearly what we need in Iraq to be successful or a rocky allies that will lead us in the right direction within their very complicated country. (00:43:40) Now, there is the oil business that Iraq has plenty of oil and I notice the letter to the editor one of the papers the other day somebody suggested why the heck don't we just buy 20 billion dollars worth of Iraqi Oil. We're going to need it anyway, and that way they get the money and we get what we want and kind of bypass this whole issue of loans and grants and the rest (00:44:02) it's going to take several years for the Iraqis to get to the point where they can actually take advantage of the oil that's in the ground. They do have reserves that are larger than any other. True except Saudi Arabia at least known reserves. The problem is that their oil industry has been destroyed. It was destroyed even before the war but it's not it hasn't nothing has really been done to really put money into getting the oil fields up and running. They weren't even able to feed their own people under the UN food boil for food program, which existed in there before they were still several thousands of starving children in the country because the oil that they could get out of the ground wasn't adequate to pay for the food. Some of it was being diverted but most people feel it will cost and one estimate I saw was a seven billion dollars to get the oil fields up and running and modernized and of course the way in which we go about doing that is also a question, you know, do we bring in American oil companies to do it and the Rockies really should decide these questions. But it's many years out before they will have be able to take advantage of the oil and we can't afford in the interim to wait for that to happen. Once that oil comes online then fine. It's possible that they could repay some of this but it would be a lot better if that those resources were devoted to strengthening the economy and the political system of Iraq (00:45:36) Janine your question, please yes. My question for (00:45:39) Brian is where in the world did you serve when you were with a ID and I asked that question because my father worked for a ID I did not but when I was growing up overseas, I consider that I'd learned a lot about different parts of the world and I cannot imagine how ignorant this Administration is of just understanding the Middle East both the Muslim and the Arab world and I think that that has a lot to do with where we are today. Not just in Iraq, but you know with the Palestinian Israel crisis and I just don't understand how someone like you. Can I think be informed and intelligent about the Middle East and yet our Administration has this complete lack of understanding. Part of it is not being willing to acknowledge what you don't know one of the I was course the administrator of the entire agency. I wasn't I had been in the Foreign Service and Africa and in Spain, but but I mainly I was in Washington and I think one of the most difficult things for people who come to the decision-making table in Washington is for people to tell the leaders of the country what they don't know about a country that would have been the first step that I would take in Iraq and one of the things that happened in Iraq was that we had Exiles that had operated outside of Iraq for as many as 40 years Ahmed chalabi the leader of the Iraqi council at one point in still in the Iraqi Council was a source of information about Iraq. Will he had he hadn't been there for 40 years. He didn't know what was going on on the ground and yet we depended on people like this and we came to the conclusion as the Fred Hiatt piece this morning said that this was just another one of those totality. In States in at the apparatus has of the state would still be in place and we'd be able to use those institutions to run the country after Saddam left those institutions had already been eroded away. It had become basically a criminal state that was supporting Saddam and his operations in his family. And once we got there, we realized that we had nothing really on which to fall back and so we've got to create it from scratch and that's a much more difficult reconstruction effort. So I guess the biggest thing that Americans can do would be to admit what they don't know and to depend more on the International Community. The United Nations had been involved we would have perhaps had a representative of the secretary-general who was arabic speaking that would have been helpful someone that we could work with entrust someone like lakhdar brahimi. Who is the head of the Afghanistan un operation. But as it stands we were over there with Jerry Bremer Paul Bremer. He's known as Jerry in the state department is a fine competent State Department Officer and he's one of our best but he just he's not really served in the Middle East. He doesn't really understand eat can't speak Arabic. So we're solely dependent on people like chalabi and others who have their own horse to ride which is their own interest in gaining political power in a country like that. And that's not going to that's not going to be what the Iraqi people in the end will want (00:49:03) what do you make of criticism though that the UN is basically bureaucrat bureaucratic bungling characterizes much of what the UN does and selfish self interest that the member states are all trying to get a piece of whatever. In is involved. And that may be the worst thing you could do is to have an agency like that trying to rebuild a country like Iraq. (00:49:34) Well, the UN is is not really an agency. It is made up of many agencies some of which are very effective the UN High Commission on refugees office out of Geneva. That's they usually they know what they're doing. They've got professionals that know how to handle Refugee problems. UNICEF does a very good job on children's issues and the like undp there are many agencies within the UN. The biggest problem is that each time. There is a post-conflict situation. They have to go to sort of reconstruct the UN, I believe that the UN is us. I mean, if in fact we had a un secretary General's representative with resources at their disposal and Americans to help them get the job done then then we've got the best of all worlds in very rarely has that happened. A good job in Timor because the Australians were strongly behind them and because they had a good fellow by the name of Sergio Vieira de Mello who was killed in Iraq, unfortunately running the operation so it depends it depends. It's unfortunately the UN isn't a single entity. It's almost does things on an ad hoc. Basis was one of the recommendations we made in the secretary General's panel on peace operations of which I was a member that we need to do institutionalize the capability of the UN to handle these post-conflict situations the peacebuilding side of the UN and that hasn't been done because the United States wasn't willing to pay the bill. We said it would go only cost about 40 million dollars where we're spending about. How much are we spending a day about a hundred and fifty million a day in Iraq? So it's up to us as one of the rich countries of the world to helps strengthen the United Nations capacity to do this kind of work (00:51:24) Tom my your question. Ryan Atwood (00:51:26) place my question had to do with how to redevelop the Iraqi oil and statement was made that, you know, we'll have to wait until the government of Iraq comes into Power concerning the fact it will take seven billion to rebuild that industry and it's up to the Iraqis to decide what I've seen around the world is when the country becomes bankrupt and this one's bankrupt as you say to the tune of them hundred twenty billion dollars much like a bankrupt company. It's a creditors who decide and at that point they have no Capital within their country to rebuild this the oil industry was all government. So what it's only likely then that the solution will come from the multinational oil companies who will be brought in much like a bankruptcy court judge would allow the creditors to solve the situation. I guess. I was waiting for your opinion on that. Yes there when I said the Iraqi people should decide I'd let me Define it this way. There is a board that's been set up. I believe there is at least one American maybe two and there's an Iraqi on that board. And and so they are taking the steps that you suggest should be taken to find, you know, the companies that can come in and and to to work on that problem. The problem is of course, there's a great deal of suspicion that this was all about oil in the first place and we've got to be careful. I think that when we make decisions about Competitive bidding process as to which company should get the contract come in to do this that it's something that can be sustained with the Iraqi people over time. There are a number of questions that have been raised by that particular board that's been set up thinking that there's too much American influence on that board or whatever may or may not be true. And I know we've got to get on with the business. But if we gave a contract tomorrow to Exxon Mobil to come in to do this or Halliburton would be even more controversial with given the connection with the vice president. I think we would have a hard time sustaining the activity because once the political system starts to take root in Iraq, maybe one of the first things that would be thrown out would be that contract. I don't know. I mean, I think it has to be done carefully. I do think you're right. We got to start moving on this. We can't wait for an Iraqi democracy to take to take form. But we also have to be very careful and and do Us again, this is why the UN comes in handy if it's done under un auspices there is less ability to charge one country or the other of taking advantage of the (00:54:22) situation Tom quick question here before I (00:54:25) wrap up. Just a comment. I hope (00:54:33) well, I'm sorry Tom week at your phone is breaking up. We can't receive your your comments. So we're going to have to move along here. Very briefly, Brian Atwood. What are the stakes? I mean if we if we if the u.s. Succeeds in bringing some measure of Freedom stability to Iraq. What does that mean? (00:54:55) Well, it goes back to what the president said when we got into this in the first place that this was part of the war against terrorism. Unfortunately, I believe that we've been distracted from that War. I don't believe that Saddam really had a connection with the al-Qaeda terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 and nobody else believes that either in the president's now admitted that So the problem is have we made the matter worse and I think we have for the time being but we've now got to follow through if this becomes a failed state it will become a safe harbor for terrorists and a launching pad for more terrorism. So I think we've got to do everything we can and as in as enlightened away as we can meaning involving the International Community and even some of the other Arab countries in this reconstruction, if we don't do it, we will have made matters worse for ourselves and for the world (00:55:50) Donald Rumsfeld in that famous memo that was leaked last week said we're looking at a long slog in Afghanistan and Iraq. Would you agree (00:56:00) I would agree. There are people who think maybe I've been a little too critical of the administration. I'm delighted to learn that Dom runs Rumsfeld and I agree at least on something (00:56:12) Brian had with thank you so much for joining us today. Thank you Ryan Atwood. Who is the dean of the University of Minnesota? Humphrey Institute, he is a former head of the US agency for International Development. He was called to Washington recently to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on u.s. Post war strategy in Iraq as well. Again, if you tuned in late, it has been a bad day in Iraq series of car bombs went off dozens of people were killed hundreds were injured among the targets today the International Red Cross headquarters in Baghdad. Of course, we'll keep you posted on that story through the day right now. We're going to take a break for some news headlines and when we come back, we're going to hear from two very influential and interesting Minnesota women reatha Clark King and Joan grow will get to bed right after the news programming is supported by Frankie and fiorella a consultancy specializing in brand identity and design Frankie fiorella.com and the Valspar Corporation paintin related coding since X right after 9/11 the Patriot Act One overwhelming support from Congress and the American public two years later. There is fierce debate over its future. I'm Neal Conan (00:57:36) is the Patriot Act and (00:57:37) essential tool in the war against terrorism or an excessive infringement on civil liberties next Talk of the (00:57:43) Nation from NPR news (00:57:45) one o'clock this afternoon here on Minnesota Public Radio.