Capital Report

And would bringing in more international troops to Iraq be a workable solution? Joining us now for our Capital Debate: Cliff May, president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and Charles Kupchan, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and former member of the National Security Council under President Clinton.

Thanks to both of you for being with me on CAP REPORT.

Mr. CHARLES KUPCHAN (Council on Foreign Relations; Former Clinton NSC Official): Sure.

BORGER: You heard what David Gregory said. It’s clear that this administration has decided it cannot go it alone any longer in Iraq. Is this a good idea?

Mr. KUPCHAN: I think it’s not only a good idea, I don’t think we have any choice, and that’s because Iraq is holding together by the thinnest of threads. We’ve got about six peacekeepers there per thousand. In Bosnia or Kosovo we had about 20. We’re taking about 12 attacks per day on American soldiers. So the bottom line is we need more troops. The US doesn’t seem to want to put its own troops on the ground. We have to go to the UN to get a bigger coalition, otherwise this thing could turn into a real disaster.

BORGER: You’re chomping at the bit.

Mr. CLIFFORD MAY (Foundation for Defense of Democracies): Gloria, I disagree with almost everything I’ve heard. Look, the administration would love to have international support. But if the price of that support is that the US has to give up authority in Iraq, it cannot do that. You cannot have the United States general there, General Abizaid, going to a general from Fiji and saying, ‘Well, let’s discuss what we should do with the latest suicide bombing.’ The UN has no capability to fight terrorists.

BORGER: But they’re not really talking about doing that, are they?

Mr. KUPCHAN: No. That’s a red herring.

BORGER: They’re talking about an American commander, correct?

Mr. MAY: Look, if it’s under an American commander, if there’s no authority to be ceded, the US would be glad to have troops, and they’ve asked for troops from other countries. There are troops from other countries. But there has been this–what the UN has been saying and what the French have been saying is, ‘We want control. We want this to be a UN operation, not an American operation.’

BORGER: Well…

Mr. MAY: Look, to have UN troops there, blue helmets, guarding hospitals, guarding museums, that’s fine. Nobody in this administration objects to it. But what’s the price you have to pay for it? And those who have responsibility for this exercise must maintain authority for it.

BORGER: Charles Kupchan, though, aren’t they looking for a kind of middle ground here, is what David Gregory seemed to be saying, right? I mean…

Mr. KUPCHAN: That’s exactly right. I mean, Cliff is portraying what is the worst-case scenario. I wouldn’t say let’s go for that. But let’s look at a model like Afghanistan or like Kosovo where the UN comes in and it gives a broad blessing and it gives legitimacy to the operation, but there is still unity of command. There is…

BORGER: What about Somalia, Somalia in the 1990s?

Mr. KUPCHAN: Well, actually that…

Mr. MAY: Somalia. That was a problem. It led to the Black Hawk down incident. And part of the problem is the US did not have…

BORGER: That was a political problem, but administratively, people are saying.

Mr. KUPCHAN: But actually the US was in command of its own troops. That was not a problem of the UN.

The real place that we don’t want to commit the same error is Bosnia in the early 1990s, where every time anybody did anything they had to call back to the UN in New York. We can’t have that. But if we have a UN authorization with the US in control of the military forces, it seems to me we get what we need.

BORGER: I want to show both of you a poll from USA Today, which showed that the American public opinion seems to be shifting slightly on this matter: 36 percent say keep the same number; 32 percent, withdraw some; 15 percent, send more; and 14 percent, withdraw all the troops.

It’s clear that Americans are saying we’ve got to start rotating troops in and out there. It’s been a long time. And take a breather.

Mr. MAY: But let me also argue that the conventional wisdom has it that the whole problem is more boots on the ground. I don’t accept that that’s necessarily the case; neither, by the way, does Secretary Rumsfeld. More boots on the ground, more uniforms means more targets. You can be patrolling the streets and not know what’s going on in the various houses. We need more intelligence. UN can’t provide that. And we need to be able to–we need various ways to take down the terrorists as they are plotting. That doesn’t necessarily mean more boots on the ground.

BORGER: Yeah. But why would any country commit itself to sending its soldiers under UN authority into Iraq if they had no control at all over the fate of those soldiers and it was all ceded to the…

Mr. MAY: Somebody…

BORGER: …I mean, politically how could–I’ll ask Charles that question.

Mr. KUPCHAN: But that’s why we need to give some ground. Right? We don’t need to give the house away. But we need to say to the French, the Russians and others who have expertise, who have troops, ‘We are willing to share some of the governance issues. We’re not going to compromise the unity of command, but we want to have the UN have more say.’

BORGER: Well–and that…

Mr. KUPCHAN: And that will give more legitimacy as well to the whole occupation, which we desperately need in the Middle East.

Mr. MAY: Well, when you talk about sharing it, yes, if what you mean is OK, ‘You guys, you can guard the oil pipeline or you guys, you take care of Basra’–as we’re doing very well with the British, for example, down in the south–‘but you cannot have Iraq.’ A war against terrorism and nation building–that can’t be done by committee.

BORGER: Well, we’re going to have to leave it there. Thank you both very much. Charles Kupchan, and Cliff May, thanks so much for being with us.

Mr. KUPCHAN: My pleasure.

Mr. MAY: Thanks, Gloria.

BORGER: And up next, should Arnold Schwarzenegger be worried about his more conservative competitors in the California recall race? Two players in the campaign weigh in.

And later, Tony Blair gives defiant testimony on the so-called dodgy dossier, and the death of a British scientist, but his popularity is still suffering. We’ll have a report from London.

You’re watching CAPITAL REPORT on CNBC.