Interview on CNN Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer

MR. BLITZER: Mr. Secretary, welcome back to Late Edition. Good to have you today from Baghdad. I doubt a few months ago that you thought you'd be in Baghdad at this point, but we'll get to that in a little while.

Why do you need the United Nations now involved in this postwar reconstruction of Iraq? Why can't the U.S. and its coalition partners get the job done by themselves?

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, first of all, we believe that this should be an international effort. We are in the process of rebuilding a country after almost -- over 30 years rather of dictatorship, and the need is great. And we believe the international community should come together for this purpose, and, in fact, some 30 nations are here providing forces to the Coalition Provisional Authority's activities.

We believe that with one more resolution, one with a broader mandate than 1483 and 1500, the first two postwar resolutions, with that broader political mandate, other countries in the world might find it easier to participate in either military activity or reconstruction activity. And it also is a vote of confidence, frankly, for what the Iraqi people are now doing through their newly selected Governing Council, the new cabinet ministries that have just been formed. People are hard at work over here, Wolf. It's very, very impressive, and I'm very encouraged by what I've seen.

MR. BLITZER: Some of the critics, some of the hardliners, if you will, are saying, "Well, why should France, for example, have a say in what's going to happen in Iraq, since they opposed liberating Iraq, going to war with Iraq against Saddam Hussein and overthrowing his three decades of power?" Why should you now be making concessions to France or Germany or Russia -- countries that didn't want you to do this?

SECRETARY POWELL: I'm not aware of any concessions we've made to France or Germany or Russia. The debate we had earlier this year about going to war or not going to war is over. The international community is coming back together again. Resolution 1483 was unanimous, 1500 was unanimous. And so I think there's an opportunity to, once again, show solid support from the UN.

And this is how resolutions are put together. One country puts down a draft, perhaps sponsored by another country, and then the other members of the Security Council consider it, offer opinions and suggest changes, and we work our way through it till we get a resolution that we hope most people will agree to.

Remember, there are 15 members of the Security Council, not just the United States, not just France, and all we need for a successful resolution is nine votes. And I am confident that with enough work and enough goodwill, we can find a way through this and get a positive vote.

MR. BLITZER: I guess the other critics are suggesting there was a basic miscalculation in the postwar strategy that you had that's resulting in your having now to go back to the UN Security Council, in effect, ask these other nations for help, because you miscalculated what was going to happen.

SECRETARY POWELL: That's not the reason we went back to the UN. We always knew the UN would play a role. Remember, the President, on many occasions, said that he wanted the UN to play a vital role. Why? Because the President believes in the UN, and the UN is the institution that brings the whole world together. And the UN has a number of agencies under it that can help the people of Iraq with their humanitarian needs, with their electoral needs, to help them write a constitution.

That's why we were so encouraged when Kofi Annan sent over Sergio de Mello, who gave his life for the cause of freedom and in the cause of reconstruction of this country, and for the Iraqi people.

And so we always believed the UN had a vital role to play, and this resolution will further shape and define that vital role. It's not a matter of we can't do it without the UN. Without the UN resolution, we have -- without another UN resolution, we already have 30 countries here. But if more can be encouraged to come, more can be encouraged to give, then it seems appropriate. It seems appropriate to give a broader mandate in order to encourage the Iraqi people to move in the direction that they are now starting to move.

MR. BLITZER: There's no doubt that everyone wants to wind up at the same place; namely, that the Iraqis will be in charge of their country, there will be democracy there. But, obviously, there are serious differences, especially between the Bush Administration and the French Government over how to get there. What's the basic big difference that you have to overcome with the Government of France right now in order to get this new resolution?

SECRETARY POWELL: The disagreement we're having with France has to do with the timing of returning full authority and sovereignty to the Iraqi people. For reasons that are understandable, France believes that we ought to do this as quickly as possible, suggesting even, perhaps, within a month.

The only problem with that is that there is not yet a functioning government that you could turn authority over to, and the last thing we want to do is to set up the Iraqis to fail. They need time to bring their ministries up to speed, to man them, to start functioning. They need time to write a constitution. They need time after that constitution is written and ratified to hold elections.

We want to turn the government over from us to the Iraqi people, but with an Iraqi leadership that has been elected by the people, not just a group of individuals who have been appointed. And I think that's the flaw in the French plan, and we have had open discussions with our French colleagues about it.

Let me also remind you it is not the U.S. versus France. There are, once again, 15 nations on the Security Council. And France has been most outspoken with respect to this issue, and I hope we'll find a way to bridge the difference between us and France.

Where we all agree, all 15 nations, that as soon as it is possible, we want authority to go back to the Iraqi people totally. The United States and its coalition partners do not want to stay here one day longer.

And, Wolf, I've just met for an hour and a half with the new Governing Council. They've got ideas. They've got economic ideas. They've got political ideas. They just met before that with the new Foreign Minister, who succeeded in persuading the Arab League to see him as representing Iraq. They have declared within the last few days that they will have an independent judiciary. After this interview is over, I'm going to meet with the Baghdad City Council, a representative of city councils all across this country.

And so there is political life returning here on a democratic basis. The Iraqi people are being presented a future so totally different from the horrible past from which they have just come out. And while people argue and debate, which is the right thing to do in a democratic system, about the difficulties that lie ahead, don't forget the achievements that we have obtained and don't forget Saddam Hussein is gone, that awful regime is gone, that threat to the region is gone, and a new democratic Iraq will arise from this. Even though it will take a lot of work, a lot of money and a lot of goodwill, it will happen.

MR. BLITZER: You mentioned Saddam Hussein. Where is he, as far as you know?

SECRETARY POWELL: I have no idea, and I don't -- it would be good if we knew and could assure the Iraqi people that he is gone, but the one thing everybody knows is he is not in power and his regime, that terrible regime, is gone.

MR. BLITZER: As you know, the debate here in the United States is intensifying. Your critics are speaking out in ever more forceful words criticizing the policy, especially the postwar policy. I want you to listen to what the Democratic Senator from Iowa, Tom Harkin, said earlier this week: "This may not be Vietnam. Boy, it sure smells like it. And every time I see these bills coming down for the money, it's costing like Vietnam, too."

Mr. Secretary, you served in Vietnam. This is a sensitive subject, obviously, for you and for a lot of Americans. Is this another Vietnam?

SECRETARY POWELL: No. And, you know, we ought to stop with these rather bizarre historical allusions back to something that happened 25, 30 years ago. Let's deal with the facts on the ground and where we are now. We have removed a dictatorial regime. There will be no more mass graves. These people will no longer be oppressed. We are restoring the basic services that the society needs -- electricity, water, sewage. Everybody is eating. Everybody now has access to health care. The universities are open. The schools are being opened. Security is slowly being reestablished.

Yes, it's a little unstable in the central part of the country. We are taking casualties. We regret each and every one. But we knew it would be difficult, and we are encouraging more and more people to contribute to our work here. And from what I have seen here over the last several hours, just in the last several hours, listening to Ambassador Bremer and his people, General Abizaid, General Shinseki and their staff, but, more importantly, speaking to Iraqis, the Governing Council -- new ministers have been appointed -- and other Iraqis I have spoken to and look forward to speaking to this afternoon, there's a sense of hope here, even in this time of difficulty.

And those who are so critical of the Administration might want to hold their fire a bit. They may also resemble those who were so critical of the way the war was being fought the first few days of the war.

MR. BLITZER: Secretary Powell, you mentioned General Shinseki. I just want to make sure that I'm not mishearing you, or maybe you misspoke. I don't think you met General Shinseki, did you?

SECRETARY POWELL: I did, I think, yes. I'm sorry. No, I met General Rick Sanchez.

MR. BLITZER: Right. I just wanted to make sure that General Shinseki, the former Army Chief of Staff --

SECRETARY POWELL: S’s come easy to me to be among Army generals.

MR. BLITZER: Right. You're one of those now retired Army generals.

SECRETARY POWELL: Forgive me. It's your hot light, Wolf.

MR. BLITZER: All right, I just wanted to clarify that. I didn't want to get people at the Pentagon nervous when you're talking about General Shinseki, the former Army Chief of Staff, who obviously predicted, suggested, that there would be a lot more -- a need for many more U.S. troops than many of the civilian leaders at the Pentagon thought at the time.

Speaking of those civilian leaders, the Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, one week into the war, at the end of March of this year, told the U.S. Congress this, and I want you to listen precisely to what Secretary Wolfowitz said: "We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."

He was obviously wrong on that specific point that the Iraqis could finance their own reconstruction, and do it soon.

SECRETARY POWELL: The oil revenues of the Iraqi people will be used to operate the government, but the infrastructure was so broken once we got in here and had a chance to see it, as a result of 30 years of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, that the need is far greater than we thought. And now we have to respond to that need, and it will be a combination of the contribution of the American people, other nations around the world participating in financing the reconstruction, and, yes, the revenues that will be generated by the Iraqi people through the sale of their oil.

And my deep apologies to my good buddy Rick Sanchez, who I spent the morning with.

MR. BLITZER: Right. We get that. But Wolfowitz was clearly wrong when he thought that the Iraqis could finance this reconstruction on their own largely, and do that relatively soon. That was way overly optimistic.

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, in light of what we have found out, it wasn't an accurate statement at the time, and I think Paul would agree to that.

MR. BLITZER: Let's talk about some other world hotspots. Afghanistan, not far from where you are right now. Let me read to you from an editorial in today's Los Angeles Times. It says this: "Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, a year ago, told nations willing to donate to rebuild Afghanistan that, without sustained assistance, the Afghans 'will surely fail' to build a better future. Several months ago, a distinguish panel concluded that the Afghan situation was getting worse. Washington's lackadaisical approach threatens to transform Afghanistan again, at best, into a battleground for warlords backed by outside nations and, at worst, into a base for terrorists."

How bad has the situation deteriorated in recent months in Afghanistan, if you believe that it has?

SECRETARY POWELL: The Karzai government is functioning. International contributions are continuing. We are going to accelerate our contribution and increase our contribution to Afghan reconstruction. We are slowly rebuilding the infrastructure. Paved roads are going in. There is a serious security problem in the southern and southeastern part of that country, from Taliban remnants and perhaps some al-Qaida, but I think mostly Taliban.

We are very pleased that NATO is now playing a role in Afghanistan and will help with the security, and is looking, perhaps, for ways to expand their activities there.

So Afghanistan is a case of considerable success when you think of where that country was just a couple of years ago under the rule of the Taliban. President Karzai has shown great leadership, great courage. He has made some changes recently, which extends his control into outer provinces of the country.

And so we've got our work cut out for us there, too, but critics would be wrong to say that we took our eye off the ball or it is a basket case. It's the easiest charge to make without looking at all aspects of the problem and all aspects of the progress that we have achieved over the last couple of years.

MR. BLITZER: On the Israeli-Palestinian front, you don't want the Israelis to expel Yasser Arafat. They're threatening to do so, as you well know. What would happen if they took that step?

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, I hope they don't take that step, and we have cautioned them against it. We do not think it would be helpful for the roadmap. We think it would create a great deal of difficulty in the region, and you're just putting him on another stage somewhere else. So I don't know what would be achieved by exiling him, and it is for that reason that we have recommended against it.

What we really need to see is for the new prime minister, as he considers assuming the office, to make sure he gets the political authority he needs from the PLC and from Mr. Arafat, and that all security forces of the Palestinian Authority are put under that individual's control. Only then can he go after the terrorist organizations that are killing innocent people and destroying the dreams of the Palestinian people. And I hope that's what we will see happen.

MR. BLITZER: The Israelis -- I was going to say the Israelis insist Yasser Arafat is a terrorist. There is no difference, they say, between him and Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Do you see it different?

SECRETARY POWELL: We are fully aware of what the Israeli opinion has been for a long time, but right now, in order to keep the roadmap process moving forward, we believe that they should not take action to harm Mr. Arafat or exile Mr. Arafat. And my information from the Israeli Government is notwithstanding the decision they made to remove this obstacle, as they say, in principle, they have no plans to do so at the moment.

MR. BLITZER: I want you to clarify, Mr. Secretary, if you don't mind, some comments you made a few weeks ago that some interpreted as undermining the former Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. This is what you said when you were with Kofi Annan at the UN. Listen to this: "…call on Chairman Arafat to work with Prime Minister Abbas and to make available to Prime Minister Abbas those security elements that are under his control so that they can allow progress to be made on the roadmap."

The criticism was that by reaching out to Arafat, whom you had put on the sidelines, if you will, together with the Israelis in the year earlier, you were, in effect, elevating him and undermining his Prime Minister. What do you say to those critics?

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, I disagree. I was charging Mr. Arafat to get off the stick and do what was right, and unfortunately he didn't do it. He was being told this by every individual who has an interest in this problem -- the Europeans, who do keep in touch with him -- but I never picked up a phone and in no other way communicated with Mr. Arafat. It was a statement of what had to be done in order to make sure that Mr. Abbas could do the job that he needed to do.

MR. BLITZER: And there's no change you envisage towards Arafat, U.S. policy in the next weeks, months, or any time in the foreseeable future? You'll continue to ignore him, if that's your policy?

SECRETARY POWELL: No change in policy.

MR. BLITZER: Finally, I know you have to run and we have a limited amount of time, but this week we did see that dramatic videotape of Usama bin Laden and his top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri. We don't know when it was made. We don't know how authentic it really is. But what is your assessment of the threat from Usama bin Laden right now and the remnants of al-Qaida, especially in the aftermath of that Worldwide Caution the State Department released on the second anniversary of 9/11?

SECRETARY POWELL: We released the caution because we had seen enough to suggest that it was our responsibility to alert travelers to the potential threat. He's still there. I don't know when the tape was made. Many of his lieutenants are no longer there. Large parts of the infrastructure that he used to conduct terror has been eliminated.

That is not to say, of course, the threat has been eliminated. They will try to recoup. They will try to regrow. And what we have to do is to make sure we continue to work with the international community to chase them down wherever they may try to hide. And we're getting better at it with the exchange of intelligence, with centralized databases on terrorism -- on terrorists, and with respect to law enforcement activities. And we will continue to hunt them down. My greater concern in Afghanistan is the Taliban, as opposed to al-Qaida.

MR. BLITZER: You know, given your history, Mr. Secretary, we'll wrap it up with this thought. Thirty years of Saddam Hussein ruling Iraq. You are now in Baghdad. Did you, only a few months ago, envisage that you, Colin Powell, who led Operation Desert Storm, 13, 12-13 years ago in 1990-91, that you would show up in Baghdad, that there would be no Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party regime at this time?

I guess the question is: How do you feel being in Iraq right now?

SECRETARY POWELL: I'm very moved. To get to the first part of your question, once we knew that military action was required, and the President made that decision, I knew that I would be sitting in Baghdad in the not too distant future. I had no doubt about the military operation.

And I am pleased to be here now with the regime gone and to play my role as Secretary of State, working with all of my other colleagues in government, to help the Iraqi people put together a government that they can be proud of, a government that will never again be called a dictatorship, but rather a government that can be a model for this region and the rest of the world.

MR. BLITZER: Secretary of State Colin Powell, joining us from Baghdad. Good luck to you. Be safe over there. We'll see you back in Washington.

SECRETARY POWELL: Thanks, Wolf.