Text 4993, 324 rader
Skriven 2007-07-13 23:31:00 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0707136) for Fri, 2007 Jul 13
====================================================

===========================================================================
Interview of the National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley, by NPR
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary July 13, 2007

Interview of the National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley, by NPR West
Wing Office

˙˙White House News


11:25 A.M. EDT

Q Mr. Hadley, thank you so much for having us in your office to sit down
and talk to you.

MR. HADLEY: Nice to see you.

Q I'd like to begin, if I could, with the benchmarks that the President
discussed yesterday; the assertion that there has been some progress made
on eight of those 18 benchmarks. A number of respected analysts, including
former members of the military, have looked at that, and said, they're not
so sure about that; they question whether any progress has been made on any
of the benchmarks. What do you say to that?

MR. HADLEY: Well, what we've published yesterday is a 23-page report that
goes through, in great detail, each of the benchmarks. And what it says,
it's not a sort of one-sentence conclusion. It, on each of the benchmarks,
indicates what progress we see and what progress remains. On balance, some
of it seems to be satisfactory progress, some of them seems to be not. I
think it's all there. It was pulled together with participation from not
only people in Washington, but also our commanders, ambassadors in the
field.

So I think, in the end of the day, if people look at it, it's a pretty
balanced snapshot of where we are. It's not where we would like to be, but
it's also, I think, not a fair statement to say nothing has been done,
particularly on the security side.

You may remember when this new strategy was rolled out in January,
February, March, there were questions would the Iraqi forces show up --
three brigades were asked to come, they did come. Would they appoint a
commander? Would they deploy the joint operations centers in Baghdad that
are required in order to provide security to the local population? Would
they start spending their own resources? As you know, they've identified
about $10 billion for reconstruction, and they are starting to spend that
through the central agencies, and also through the provinces.

So I think the fact that there has been some progress is really undeniable.
Is it all we would like to be? No. These were benchmarks established by the
Congress. Congress asked for a report, an interim report on July 15th what
the progress has been, and we've tried to give a pretty balanced
assessment, as asked by the Congress.

Q Undeniable though -- again, people who were in the military, former
military --

MR. HADLEY: I don't hear that. In fact, it's, of course, people who are
current military, on the ground, our commanders, who are giving -- who have
looked at this report. As the report says, there are over 30 of the joint
coordinating centers who are up and running. And we have the addresses, and
you can go see them. In terms of the expenditures of funds, we have people
in the embassy over there who can provide information on the extent to
which funds have been chopped to agencies and provincial governments.

So all I can say is that we've tried to be careful; we've tried to be
detailed. And I think, on balance, if you go benchmark by benchmark, I
think people will assess that it's a pretty good statement of where we are.
But I think the point that people have to make is -- and judge, is step
back, and say, is it where we would like it to be? No. Is it all the
progress we'd hoped for? Certainly not. Is there more to be done? Of course
there is.

And that's why it is important for us, of course, to return to the subject
again in September, which is really, if you look at the legislation, what
the Congress asked us to do. July 15th was always to be an interim
snapshot. What the Congress provided in the legislation was in September a
series of reports, both from the government and from people outside, and of
course General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker coming back, reporting to
the President, reporting to the Congress. And that's, obviously, going to
be an important time.

As the President said yesterday, he is going to receive the recommendations
from Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus, he's going to consult with
Secretary Rice, Secretary Gates, the Joint Chiefs. He said, very
importantly, he's going to talk to members of Congress, consult with
Congress, Republicans and Democrats, and then come forward with what he
believes is the next step, in terms of Iraq. So what Congress has mandated
is really a process in September. The President signed that legislation;
thinks it's the right process. And as he made very clear yesterday, that
really is the way forward, in terms of considering where we go on Iraq.

Q There is great anticipation about the official assessment in September,
particularly the assessment that will come from General David Petraeus. In
recent interviews, he has talked about the current insurgency, and he's
said that it could be an up to 10-year insurgency. How should Americans
interpret that? Is it possible that even with the potential draw down of
troops that there might be tens of thousands of American troops in Iraq
over the long-run, a decade from now?

MR. HADLEY: I think what General Petraeus was saying is that there is going
to be a level of violence in this society for a long time, and we know that
societies that have gotten to the point of this level of violence, that it
takes a long time for it to get out of the system.

One of the things the President has said is, our objective has to be to
help the Iraqis get a government that can provide security, that can
provide services, and can be an ally in the war on terror, both for their
good and for our good, because as we've said, one of the risks in Iraq is
that it becomes a safe haven for al Qaeda planning against the United
States, as well as disrupting Iraq and its neighbors.

So the President has talked very importantly that that really is our
objective, to try and get the Iraqis in a position to do that. It's going
to take a long time. And even a democratic government in Iraq that is able
to provide security and serve -- be an ally in the war on terror is going
to have to cope with a level of violence for a long time. And that is why,
of course, the training of the Iraqi security forces that we're doing is so
essential, so that they will be able to manage to keep the society going
forward, and so that people can begin to return to normal life, but
recognize that there will still be a level of violence there for a long
time.

Q Will they be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with American troops, though,
as they try to cope with that violence over the next 10 years? Will there
be tens of thousands of American troops in Iraq, yes or no?

MR. HADLEY: What the President said yesterday was that we all -- if you
look at what he has said, if you look at, for example, what the
Baker-Hamilton commission has said, if you look at what Iraqis have said,
as well as what people in Congress, we all want to get to the point where
Iraqis have the government capacity and the security forces in order to
take responsibility for security.

Is there a role for the United States in helping that process after January
of 2009? The President said very clearly he thinks there is; that it is a
kind of role that we've talked about that we would like to transition to,
where we are doing training, embedding, strengthening Iraqi forces as they
take responsibility for security; being there to protect obviously our own
interests, which are to go after al Qaeda and to make sure that al Qaeda
can never use Iraq as a safe haven from which to plan attacks against us;
help stabilize the country; reassure the government; keep the neighbors, in
some sense, at bay. These are things that we can do in support of what,
over time, everybody wants to be an increasing Iraqi role.

So will we be engaged in Iraq after January 2009? I think the President
hopes so. And I think if you listen to people like Senator Lugar and other
people who have talked about the situation in Iraq, they believe that a
precipitous withdrawal would be bad for American interests, and they
believe it matters to American security how the Iraq project goes, and they
believe we need to find a basis for being engaged in Iraq after January of
2009.

What the President has said is, that's what he wants to do, to leave Iraq,
when he leaves office, on a ground and in a place that's sustainable for
Iraqis, sustainable for Americans, that we could support in terms of our
resources and our men and women in uniform. That's his goal.

Q Now you talked about a precipitous withdrawal. What if we changed the
adjective there, and instead talked about a phased withdrawal. The
President yesterday explicitly told members of Congress not to try to
dictate --

MR. HADLEY: Exactly.

Q -- for our policy. I'm wondering if the President is, in some way, asking
members of Congress to abdicate their role to advise and consent and guide
the President, particularly on foreign policy, and in doing so to defy the
wishes of their constituents, to essentially turn a deaf ear to what
they're hearing back home?

MR. HADLEY: No, I think that he said very clearly, I think in his comments
yesterday and elsewhere, he hears the same voices our senators and
representatives hear. He knows this is hard for the American people. It's
been four years; we've lost some of our best and brightest. There is no
question this has been difficult for the American people, he understands
that. What he said yesterday very clearly was, issues about force levels
and operations need to start with the recommendations of our commanders in
the field.

That's why he said very clearly, in a structured process, I'm going to hear
from Ambassador Crocker; I want to hear from General Petraeus; I'm going to
consult with Secretary Gates; I'm going to consult with the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs. He's obviously going to consult with Secretary Rice. And then
he said, I am going to consult with the Congress, Republicans and
Democrats, and then on the basis of that, as Commander-in-Chief, as you
would expect, he will come forward with what he believes the next step is
in terms of Iraq.

So I think it is an open process, an inclusive process. But it's the right
process, because I think the American people expect that before making
decisions to change strategy, to change policy, to make decisions on force
levels, we ought to be hearing from the men and women on the ground who are
actually carrying out the mission. That's what the President thinks makes
sense for him, he thinks it makes sense for Congress, and of course it's
exactly what Congress prescribed in the legislation last May in connection
with the supplemental request.

So we think in last May the Congress got it right; that's why the President
signed the bill. There is a process for doing an orderly consideration in
September about where we are in Iraq. It starts with a report from General
Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, but it's, as the President said, it will be a
process that will be an inclusive one, and will include Republicans and
Democrats in Congress.

Q You spent time on Capitol Hill this week meeting with members of
Congress, particularly Republicans who have a certain amount of
consternation about the war. You've asked them -- the President has asked
them to be patient, to wait until September. How difficult is that for them
to do, to be patient?

MR. HADLEY: Well, I think it's been interesting to look at the votes. I
think that we are at a position where we will get to September, because I
think as people have thought about it, and you say to them, look at your
own legislation, look at the orderly process we agreed upon, look at the
fact that the reinforcements are now just complete, and that in many ways
we're now really seeing the application of the strategy in practice, I
think people are saying -- coming to the conclusion that it's sensible to
wait and hear from our local commanders and our ambassador to see where we
are in September. It's what the Congress set out in the legislation, and I
think members and the American people think, that's right, you can't be
making those kinds of operational decisions de novo in legislation in
Congress, that waiting to September is the right way to go.

And I think you're seeing it in terms of the votes, and I think that was
the message that Secretary Rice, Secretary Gates, I and the President have
been sending Congress over the last 10 days. And I think Congress got it,
and they agree. And it's the right place for us to be.

Q You've been generous with your time. I just want to ask you one last
question, if I can. This is a very difficult time for the American public.

MR. HADLEY: Of course.

Q And when you look at this administration, there have been a number of
missed signals -- on the level of violence in Iraq after the invasion, on
Saddam Hussein's weapons stockpiles, on a number of decisions about when
and where to place troops, and when and where and how to replace certain
people who were architects of the war.

As the American public looks at what has happened in the past, why should
they trust this administration to lead us out of this conflict? Why should
they believe that this administration has the vision to find the best way
forward?

MR. HADLEY: We have talked about a process where the American people,
through their elected representatives, and through a lot of smart people
who have commented on this, have offered their views. There is a great
national debate on where we should be going forward. The process I've
described is that September is a way to structure that debate with the men
and women in uniform and the folks in the field with the Congress and with
the American people.

So I think it's -- the process the President has laid out is a good
process. History will judge on the stewardship of this period, but I think
we should not underestimate the challenge that came to this country after
9/11. For many people, 9/11 may seem as a blip. I think what it was an
opening round of a struggle that this country is going to have to be waging
well after this President, and that is against an ideological movement that
is antithetical to everything we stand; that has been very active, and
we've seen it do attacks in America, we've seen attacks in Europe, we see
it active in North Africa, we see it in Iraq.

Q And we're told this week that al Qaeda is as great a threat now as it was
before 9/11.

MR. HADLEY: No, that's actually not what you're told. What we're told is
that since 2001, and particularly in the last two years, we have seen some
regrouping and some renewal of operational activity and training. It is
certainly not at the level of what it was before 2001. It is certainly not
where it would be if we had not, as a nation, taken all these actions that
we've done since.

But the reminder, and the wake-up call on those reports is, al Qaeda
continues to be a threat to the United States. It is going to be a
long-term threat, and the challenge, as the President said, is going to be
two fold -- one, going after them operationally, overseas, so we don't have
to deal with them at home; but secondly, and more profoundly, to come up
with an alternative vision to the dark vision of the terrorist and
extremists, and that is the freedom and democracy agenda.

We need to fight this enemy operationally, we need to fight it
ideologically, in terms of our values and principles and alternative
vision. And that's going to be a long-term challenge, not just for the
United States, but really for many nations -- friends and allies around the
world, who stand for a positive vision rather than a negative vision. And
that, I think, is the thing the American people understand.

We have a major challenge that we are in some sense in the opening hours
of. And what we need to do as a nation is come together and put in place
the tools we need both to wage the operational war and also to wage the war
of ideas. This administration has made a start at doing that. We,
obviously, need the support of Congress and the American people. But it is
also going to be a vocation for the administrations that come after this
country [sic]. And I think it is one of the challenges our generation
faces. We've started on that effort, and I'm confident the American people,
as they have in the past, will rise to the challenge and will do it.

Q If you will just indulge me -- you've looked ahead and talked about the
next administration. What would be your best piece of advice for the person
who occupies this office in the next administration?

MR. HADLEY: There will be opportunities to do that, but that's 18 months
away, and a lot of things will happen. I think what we are trying to do,
and what the President has told us to do, is to make progress on all of
these fronts, as much as we can in the time that is left for his
presidency, and then to leave to the next administration the tools they
need to deal with the challenges we face; make as much progress as we can
in resolving and solving these issues, and then leave the new
administration with the tools they need. That's what we're trying to do.

Q Mr. Hadley, thank you very much for talking with us.

MR. HADLEY: Thank you very much.

END 11:42 A.M. EDT

===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070713-6.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)