Discussion with Former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Running the Pentagon is one of the toughest jobs in U.S. Our next guest knows firsthand. Caspar Weinberger served three presidents in cabinet positions, including seven years as secretary of defense in the Reagan administration. He has written a book. It is just out. It is called "In The Arena," a memoir of the 20th century. Cap Weinberger joins me now. It's an honor to have you with us.</s>CASPAR WEINBERGER, FMR DEFENSE SECRETARY: Very nice to see again.</s>ZAHN: You've been one busy man.</s>WEINBERGER: Its been very busy time. Yes, they have taken just about everybody else, so they're down at the bottom of the barrel now, and I get a lot of calls, but it's a very exciting time.</s>ZAHN: Do you get any briefings from the Pentagon these days?</s>WEINBERGER: Not really. Occasionally, yes. They have meetings with former secretaries and things of that kind, but they are very busy, and they don't need any help from any exes, and they're doing very well, they're doing a wonderful job.</s>ZAHN: Well, let's talk about what you view as either effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of the campaign. The primary goal down the road is to get rid of terrorism, and along the way, the administration has made it quite clear they want to get Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar. Are you optimistic that we will get him dead or alive?</s>WEINBERGER: It may be that he will be holed up in a cave, and sealed in or something of that kind, but he is totally ineffective. I think it would be neater and more tidy if you actually had him put him in jail cell, perhaps next to Noriega down in Panama or something like that, maybe even tried him sometime. But his effective days will be ended when we have completed the -- I think I think we are doing it just right, doing a wonderful job.</s>ZAHN: What is your chief concern about this period of time now, where we are relying on a lot of human intelligence from the CIA. We, of course, have just, of course, suffered our first combat death, Michael Spann. There is great concern, and even Donald Rumsfeld said the other day, that there is so much lawlessness in Afghanistan you are basically talking about town-to-town fighting here.</s>WEINBERGER: Well, it's a very messy situation. Technically, when the commentators talk about cleaning up the remaining pockets of resistance, that's exactly what we are doing, but a remaining pocket of resistance could be a very messy, very dirty business, and this is the -- Kandahar I think is the last stronghold, and it will take a while to root them out of there. There effectiveness is being destroyed all the time, and is being curtailed by the constant attacks. I think we are doing just what we should be doing, but you're right, we are going to take quite a while, and the principal worry is whether the American people have the patience to stay with it during the time that it takes, because the goal is essential.</s>ZAHN: And then the other critical question is whether the allies will stand by the United States. You know no doubt heard what the president said earlier this week, making a somewhat veiled threat to Iraq, the Iraqis immediately responding saying get lost. Do you think this war will expand to Iraq?</s>WEINBERGER: I think ultimately it will yes, because I don't think we will ever have any peace in the region until we get rid of Saddam Hussein. He is a virulent, bitter hater of the United States. He is very close to bin Laden, and they both work together, and they are both terrorists. And Saddam Hussein is -- it will be different kind of attack there, although in many cases, I think there will be similarities. We will try to encourage Kurds and people from the north of Iraq, against whom he has used a gas on his own people, and they hate him. There is a theory around that you might lose all your Arab and Muslim allies if you go after bin Laden personally or after Saddam Hussein. I don't agree with that</s>ZAHN: You don't.</s>WEINBERGER: No I don't.</s>ZAHN: You even have Chancellor Schroeder out there who has made a commitment to troops in Afghanistan, scratching his head, you know, there was a</s>WEINBERGER: I can't speak for Schroeder or why he would do that, but the fact of the matter is most of the Arab leaders that I have talked to, and I have talked to quite a few of them, are -- basically, they hate Saddam Hussein. They fear him, and they aren't yet ready to come out publicly and say we should go after him. They would be absolutely dancing in streets if we got him, because he has so oppressive, and keeps about anywhere from 10,000 to 15,000 troops personally guarding him all the time, and he is a man I think who's demise would be welcome. There is a theory that you lose all your Arab allies if you go after him. I don't see this at all. If the allies want to rid terrorism, ultimately, we are going to have to gets him.</s>ZAHN: There is an interesting piece in "The Wall Street Journal," saying Attorney General John Ashcroft is taking so much heat for the prospect military tribunals, when in fact it is secretary of defense that would administer it.</s>WEINBERGER: Yes, the secretary of defense usually takes all heat for everything, as I remember it.</s>ZAHN: You probably don't miss that much, do you? You no doubt know that civil liberties groups are out there saying that is a ridiculous option to consider.</s>WEINBERGER: Well, it is based I think largely on a misunderstanding of military tribunals. In most of the wars we have been in, starting with George Washington in the Revolution, we have used them, and I think people don't really understand where the whole idea of reviving that came from. It came basically from the idea, that if we should capture bin Laden, and bring him home, and have a regular trial for him, and not a military trial, a regular trial, you would have all of O.J. Simpson's attorneys standing up screaming at each other for two or three years, and we don't want that kind of spectacle and it's not necessary. And the military tribunal only applies to foreign prisoners, people taken on battlefield or for causing it, and it's a means of summarily hearing and disposing of their case. Certainly, it's not a trial, and you don't have juries. You have a military group that makes the decision, but, it's for a very limited number of people, and I think when you look back at some of the more recent trials we have had with all of the protections which we have built in and have had over the centuries, people would not really want to go through all that with Saddam Hussein or with bin Laden. And so that's basically where the idea originates, but it would apply to a very small number of people. And the whole idea of a military tribunal sounds terrible, if that is all you say about it. But if you understand what it is and explain it, and remember that Lincoln used it and Washington used it all the rest, I don't think it would have quite so much opposition.</s>ZAHN: Nevertheless the administration is quite concerned about the perception, because they're already saying that as an option, in a death penalty case, instead of a two of thirds majority deciding it might be...</s>WEINBERGER: Perception is everything, and -- but I think if bin Laden were captured, I can't that any poll would reveal a very large number of people opposed to having a summary trial for him.</s>ZAHN: All right, Cap Weinberger, great to see you. His new book, once again, is called "In the Arena, a Memoir of 20th century." I felt like I took a walk through most of the last century as a paged through the book last night.</s>WEINBERGER: It's a very long life. I'm a very old party...</s>ZAHN: You are not. We could all learn a lot from reading the book, Thank you again. Maybe have you drop and talk about a different chapter of history.</s>WEINBERGER: I'm be delighted to get a more pleasant topic.</s>ZAHN: OK, take care. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com