Tweet
The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer
October 11, 2007 Thursday
SHOW: NEWSHOUR 6:00 PM EST
Turkey Angry with U.S. Congress Over Vote on World War I
by Jim Lehrer, Margaret Warner, Judy Woodruff, Ray Suarez, Jeffrey
Brown
GUESTS: Tom Lantos, Mark Parris, Jimmy Carter, Ban Ki-Moon, Margaret
Soltan
HIGHLIGHT: Kwame Holman reports on an international argument over
labeling the World War I killing of Armenians as genocide. Judy
Woodruff speaks with former President Jimmy Carter. Ray Suarez speaks
with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.
RAY SUAREZ: Good evening. I`m Ray Suarez.
On the NewsHour tonight: the news of this Thursday; then, an
international argument heats up over branding the World War I killing
of Armenians genocide; then, two views of the state of the world from
former President Jimmy Carter and from U.N. Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon; plus, the winning work of Doris Lessing, Nobel laureate for
literature.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Turkey struck back today over a move in the U.S. Congress
to condemn genocide against Armenians. A House committee approved the
measure yesterday. It involves the killing of an estimated 1.5
million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks during World War I.
Today, Turkey condemned the vote and recalled its ambassador to
Washington. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the issue has been
put off for far too long.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), Speaker of the House: There`s never a good
time, and all of us in the Democratic leadership have supported
reiterating Americans` acknowledgment of a genocide. Genocide is
taking place now in Darfur. It did within not such in recent memory
in Rwanda. So as long as there is genocide, there is a need to speak
out against it.
RAY SUAREZ: President Bush and top officials in the administration
warned against pursuing the issue. They said U.S. operations in Iraq
are heavily dependent on cargo flights coming through Turkish air
space. We`ll have more on this story right after the news summary.
A U.S. raid on al-Qaida leaders in Iraq killed 19 suspected
insurgents today, but the military said 15 civilians were killed, as
well, including nine children. It happened during an air and ground
raid northwest of Baghdad.
And to the north, a car bomb killed seven Iraqis at a busy market in
Kirkuk. A police chief, the apparent target, was among more than 50
people wounded.
The U.N. mission in Iraq will examine recent shootings by private
security guards as possible war crimes; the announcement came today
in Baghdad. A U.N. official there said, "There cannot be rogue
elements that are above the law." Last month, guards for Blackwater
USA killed up to 17 Iraqis. And this week, guards for a company owned
in Australia killed two Iraqi women.
Also today, relatives of several shooting victims and one survivor
filed suit against Blackwater in federal court in Washington. They
asked for unspecified damages.
Authorities in Afghanistan shut down two private security companies
this week. Both were run by Afghans, but the Associated Press
reported 10 others face closure, including major Western firms. There
was no word on the names of those companies. Afghan officials said
some of the contractors are suspected of murder and robbery.
There was word today the U.S. Marines want to pull out of Iraq and
instead take a lead role in Afghanistan. The New York Times reported
Marine leaders think their force is better suited to the Afghan
fighting. In turn, U.S. Army units would focus solely on Iraq.
But in London today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates played down the
report.
ROBERT GATES, Secretary of Defense: I have heard that they were
beginning to think about that, and that`s all that I`ve heard. I have
seen no plan. No one`s come to me with any proposals about it. My
understanding is that it`s, at this point, extremely preliminary
thinking on the part of perhaps some staff people in the Marine
Corps, but I don`t think at this point it has any stature.
RAY SUAREZ: About 25,000 U.S. Marines are currently serving in Iraq.
There are no major Marine units in Afghanistan.
The Bush administration considered its options today after a federal
judge ruled against part of an immigration crackdown. The Homeland
Security Department wanted employers to fire workers if their
taxpayer I.D. or Social Security numbers do not check out. The judge
in San Francisco said officials did not consider the costs or give a
legal basis for the plan.
Today, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Congress needs to
act.
DANA PERINO, White House Spokeswoman: We can work as hard as we
possibly can on border enforcement issues, but if they get turned
over by the courts or turned over by localities, we`re going to --
it`s going to result in a situation that is absolutely unsustainable.
And so the president would like for Congress to get back to the table
and work on that, but I don`t think he anticipates that`s going to
happen within the next year.
RAY SUAREZ: Homeland security officials said they were still
considering whether to appeal the ruling.
Drug makers today ended U.S. sales of over-the-counter cough and cold
medicine for infants. The brands included PediaCare, Dimetapp,
Robitussin, Tylenol and others. The Food and Drug Administration had
warned of deaths linked to overdosing in children under 2. The FDA
holds a hearing next week on whether children under 6 should ever
take the drugs, among other questions.
British writer Doris Lessing won the 2007 Nobel Prize in Literature
today. She turns 88 this month and is the oldest recipient of the
literature prize. Her 1962 novel "The Golden Notebook" was seen as
inspiring a generation of feminist writers.
Today in London, Lessing said she thinks her age was the deciding
factor for the Nobel committee.
DORIS LESSING, Nobel Prize, Literature: I`ve never been on any of
these committees. You sit around, and you think, "Well, now, there`s
that one, and there`s that one, and there`s that one. Now she`s
getting on a bit in age. You better give it to her this year. She
might pop off, and we`ll never give it to her." This is what I think
happened.
RAY SUAREZ: The selection drew some criticism today. Literary critic
Harold Bloom called it "pure political correctness." We`ll have more
on this story later in the program.
The federal government reported today the deficit for fiscal year
2007 was the lowest in five years. It totaled just under $163
billion, down nearly 35 percent from the previous year. The
government included revenues from Social Security in calculating the
deficit, as it has for many years. Otherwise, the shortfall would be
much larger.
The Commerce Department reported today the U.S. trade deficit in
August was the smallest in seven months. A weak dollar and recalls of
Chinese goods were the main factors.
But on Wall Street today, a sell-off of technology companies pushed
stocks lower. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 63 points to
close at 14,015. The Nasdaq fell 39 points to close at 2,772.
That`s it for the news summary tonight. Now: a question of genocide
and of U.S.-Turkish relations; two world views, from former President
Jimmy Carter and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon; plus the winning
work of Doris Lessing.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Turkey, the Armenians, and the U.S. Congress. We start
with a report from NewsHour congressional correspondent Kwame Holman.
KWAME HOLMAN: In Turkey today, there were street protests decrying a
vote by a committee of the U.S. Congress. That vote labeled as
"genocide" the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in the
early 20th century.
Turkish politicians joined demonstrators in Istanbul, denouncing the
vote of American politicians. Erkan Onsel is vice president of
Turkey`s Labor Party.
ERKAN ONSEL, Vice President, Turkish Labor Party (through
translator): The United States of America legitimized the Armenian
genocide claim, which has swung over Turkey`s head like a stick and
which has posed a threat to Turkey for years. The U.S. has made it
clear once again that it targets Turkey.
KWAME HOLMAN: Turkey`s president, Abdullah Gul, also harshly
criticized the non-binding resolution, telling the state-run news
agency Anatolia, "Some politicians in the United States have once
again sacrificed important matters to petty domestic politics,
despite all calls to common sense."
And late today, the Turks recalled their ambassador to Washington.
The Bush administration had lobbied hard against a resolution sure to
upset a key American ally that plays a crucial support role for U.S.
forces in Iraq.
GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States: We all deeply regret
the tragic suffering of the Armenian people that began in 1915, but
this resolution is not the right response to these historic mass
killings.
ROBERT GATES, Secretary of Defense: Seventy percent of all air cargo
going into Iraq goes through Turkey. About a third of the fuel that
they consume goes through Turkey or comes from Turkey.
KWAME HOLMAN: But despite the administration`s pressure, the
Democratic-controlled House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted the
resolution by a vote of 27-21.
REP. BRAD SHERMAN (D), California: There are those who`d say that,
every time we discuss this resolution in committee, it`s an irritant
to our relationship with Turkey. That`s the best reason to vote for
it here and on the floor. Let us do this and be done with it. We will
get a few angry words out of Ankara for a few days, and then it`s
over.
KWAME HOLMAN: Some Republicans voted for the resolution, but most
opposed it, saying the timing was particularly bad.
REP. DAN BURTON (R), Indiana: The strongest ally in the area, and has
been for over 50 years, is Turkey. And I just don`t understand why
we`re going to cut our nose off, shoot ourselves in the foot at a
time when we need this ally.
KWAME HOLMAN: Democratic leaders say they will bring the measure
before the full House within weeks, a promise welcomed by the
country`s several hundred thousand Armenian-Americans, some of whom
were on hand for the committee vote.
ARTIN MANOUKIAN, Armenian-American: My grandfather was a survivor. I
think it`s a day of relief somehow, and I think I`m starting getting
that quest for justice. And I hope that, down the road, we will have
that.
HAIG HOVSEPIAN, Armenian National Committee: We were standing strong
on this historical record. We were not being coaxed into being silent
by somebody who calls themselves an ally of ours.
KWAME HOLMAN: The dispute came amid rising tensions along the
Turkish-Iraqi border, where Turkish troops have been skirmishing with
Kurdish nationalist guerrillas. Within days, President Gul is
expected to ask parliament for authority to cross the Iraqi border
and engage Kurdish guerrillas, known as the PKK.
RAY SUAREZ: Margaret Warner takes the story from there.
MARGARET WARNER: And for more on all this, we get two views.
California Democrat Tom Lantos is the chairman of the House Committee
on Foreign Affairs. He voted for the resolution yesterday.
And Mark Parris, a retired career diplomat, served as U.S. ambassador
to Turkey during the Clinton administration. He`s now a visiting
fellow at the Brookings Institution and directs their project on
Turkey.
Welcome to you both.
Congressman Lantos, this happened nearly 100 years ago. The House has
passed this same resolution twice, once in the `70s and once in the
`80s. Why do this now? What are you trying to accomplish?
REP. TOM LANTOS (D), California: Well, let`s put it in perspective.
Nazi Germany was responsible for the Holocaust, and the Ottoman
Empire was responsible for this genocide. We have the highest respect
for and the best friendship with the democratic modern Germany and
with the democratic and modern Turkey.
This is not a criticism of Turkey. This is not a criticism of the
Turkish people today or of the Turkish government today, and our
Turkish friends know this.
This is one of those events, Margaret, which has to be settled once
and for all: 1.5 million utterly innocent Armenian men, women and
children were slaughtered. And the Turkish government, until now, has
intimidated the Congress of the United States from taking this
measure.
This is not aimed at them, and they know it very well. I`m glad that
the ambassador was called back for consultation. Hopefully, he will
be able to explain to his colleagues that this has nothing to do with
contemporary Turkey.
MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Ambassador, why has Turkey reacted so sharply to
this resolution, which, as the congressman says, was not aimed at
what Turkey is today, modern Turkey, which wasn`t even a country
then?
MARK PARRIS, Former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey: I think, inevitably,
criticism is in the eyes of the beholder. And you visited Turkey. You
visited Turkey, as well. I don`t think that anybody who`s ever
visited Turkey can be in any doubt that Turks, at all levels, of all
levels of education and all parts of the country, view this kind of a
resolution as criticism and, frankly, as interference in their own
responsibility for coming to terms with their own history.
There are a lot of Turks who recognize and, frankly, admit -- and use
words like "genocide" -- that this is a part of their history that
they`ve got to come to terms with. I don`t know any of them who
believe that this will assist that discussion going forward or make
it easier for them to deal with neighboring Armenia.
All of them believe this will be a major setback, because it is
perceived as a major insult to Turkish credibility, honor by a long-
standing ally. So why do they feel this way? They`re human beings;
they know something terrible happened.
At some level, I`m sure that they`ve recognized that that`s going to
have to be dealt with. But they don`t appreciate third parties coming
in and legislating the means by which they should reconcile
themselves with their own history and with their neighbors.
MARGARET WARNER: All right, let me stay with you and ask you, so what
is the likely fallout, other than recalling the ambassador?
MARK PARRIS: Well, we don`t know. And my guess is that the Turkish
government, as we sit here today, doesn`t know. If this were
happening in a vacuum, they would look at this issue and their
interests and how to deal with it.
It comes at a time when they`re also dealing with another problem
relating to the United States, as your lead-in suggested, the loss of
over 30 citizens in the last two weeks to PKK terrorists that they
believe we haven`t done...
MARGARET WARNER: Kurdish.
MARK PARRIS: ... Kurdish terrorists -- our part to deal with in Iraq.
MARGARET WARNER: Defense Secretary Gates, Congressman, raised the
specter that Turkey might yank its support or its approval for the
United States to use an important air base in southern Turkey to
bring in materiel and supplies into the troops in Iraq.
REP. TOM LANTOS: I have a much higher regard for the intelligence of
our Turkish friends and for their sense of responsibility than to
predict that. I don`t think they will do that. I think they
understand that we are allies, we have been NATO partners for over
half a century. And I think it is demeaning to the Turks to claim
that they will take such an irresponsible action.
Let me give you another example, if I may, of just a few weeks ago.
The imperial Japanese government used tens of thousands of young
Asian women and girls as military prostitutes. We passed a resolution
in my committee denouncing this.
This was not aimed at the current democratic government of Japan; it
was aimed at the wartime military government of Japan. And while the
Japanese government made some critical comments briefly, the whole
thing has blown over. This will blow over.
I think it`s important, at a time when genocides are going on in
Darfur and elsewhere, not to be an accomplice in sweeping an
important genocide under the rug.
MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Ambassador, do you think this will blow over in
Turkey?
MARK PARRIS: I`d be surprised. I think a lot depends on what happens
on the House floor, if it comes to a vote. And I think one of the
reasons that the Turkish initial response will probably be restrained
is that they want to see what will happen there. And they wanted to
decide, frankly, what they`re going to do about this PKK problem on
their border.
MARGARET WARNER: Is the government under any pressure to do more?
What is the feeling among the Turkish sort of body politic about the
cooperation that Turkey is giving the United States in the Iraq war?
MARK PARRIS: Well, there`s a sense that they are playing an important
role. I think the fact is that more Turks have died in Iraq than any
other nationality, because their truck drivers are an important part
of the supply effort there. And our use of their facilities in
Incirlik and the port in Adana to bring in heavy transport is
critical.
There is, therefore, a very strong expectation among the Turkish
public that this cannot be allowed simply to blow over. They`re
expecting their leadership to do something to show that third
countries` legislatures cannot interfere in their history.
MARGARET WARNER: So if this doesn`t blow over, are you saying,
Congressman, that this nonetheless was worth the risk?
REP. TOM LANTOS: One of the worst things that happened to the United
States in recent years has been the plummeting globally of our moral
authority. This is a significant step in restoring the moral
authority of U.S. foreign policy.
U.S. foreign policy was strong when it was based on a sound
foundation of a moral authority. It`s Abu Ghraib and similar episodes
which have diminished our standing globally. And the international
community is not critical of the fact that the United States calls a
genocide a genocide.
MARGARET WARNER: So if the Turkish government makes clear -- as the
ambassador seems to be suggesting -- that a vote in the full House
could really put the cooperation at risk, it sounds like you would
not recommend holding back?
REP. TOM LANTOS: Well, let me say one other thing, if I may. Next
week, I am bringing to the committee a very strong pro-contemporary
Turkey resolution. We shall explain in exquisite detail that we
consider Turkey our friend, our democratic ally, and we expect to be
that for generations to come. This is an ugly chapter in Turkish
history which the House Foreign Affairs Committee described as such.
MARGARET WARNER: Would that allay Turkish concerns?
MARK PARRIS: With due respect to the congressman who I`ve known for a
long time, it simply won`t wash. The Turks -- the fine distinctions
here are going to be totally lost on the Turkish general population
and their politicians and the military. They will view this as part
of a pattern of American ignoring of Turkish interests, including the
problem in northern Iraq, which is resulting in killing of Turkish
citizens and soldiers as we speak today.
MARGARET WARNER: So are you saying -- briefly, are you saying that a
vote in the full House, that`s the red line for Turkey`s government?
MARK PARRIS: You can see graduated responses up to a vote in the
House to indicate that the Turks are serious about this. I think a
vote in the House will precipitate something that the Turkish
political leadership can take to its population and say, "We`ve shown
we`re serious; honor is served."
MARGARET WARNER: Former Ambassador Mark Parris, Congressman Tom
Lantos, thank you.
REP. TOM LANTOS: It`s a pleasure.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Next, two views of the world and its crises, beginning
with that of former President Jimmy Carter. He`s the author of a new
book, "Beyond the White House." He spoke with Judy Woodruff
yesterday.
JUDY WOODRUFF: President Carter, thank you for joining us. We
appreciate it.
JIMMY CARTER, Former President of the United States: Thank you, Judy,
I`m delighted to be with you again.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The book, "Beyond the White House," your latest --
what, your 24th book, is that right?
JIMMY CARTER: Yes, 24th.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Not as controversial as the last one?
JIMMY CARTER: Well, if it were more controversial, it might sell a
few more copies, but, no, it`s not as controversial as the last.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You`re writing about the work in here at the Carter
Center, your work since you left the White House, 25 years of working
in Panama, Sudan -- I`ve made a list here -- Bosnia, China, Haiti,
North Korea, on issues from guinea worm, river blindness, malaria,
fair elections, human rights, nuclear arms control, 70 countries, a
long list of issues. How do you decide what to focus on?
JIMMY CARTER: Well, we have an almost unlimited menu from which to
choose, with a lot of requests coming in to monitor this election or
that election, or to try to negotiate a peace agreement between these
two fighting forces, or to resolve this problem in producing more
food grains to eat or to eradicate this disease.
So we don`t have any problem finding enough things to do; the problem
we have is making sure we don`t overload ourselves inadvertently.
And so we have a very finely-tuned and I think a highly efficient
organization, now adequately financed. And with experience -- as you
pointed out -- in more than 70 nations on Earth, 35 of which are in
Africa, but the basic premise of the Carter Center is to fill vacuums
in the world.
If the United Nations or the World Health Organization or Unicef or
U.S. government or Harvard University is taking care of a problem, we
don`t get involved in it. We just kind of go where they are not
adequately treating a very important issue.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You do talk in the book about conflict resolution.
JIMMY CARTER: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You talk about monitoring elections, fair elections,
fighting disease, human rights. I mentioned all that. Do you ever
worry you`re spread too thin?
JIMMY CARTER: No, I don`t. We`re very careful about that, although I
might say that the Carter Center has had a policy of not fearing
failure. I mean, sometimes we are willing to take a chance on a
subject that seems to be doubtful of success, if we think that it
might be worthwhile.
But we limit ourselves. We`ve done, I think, 68 elections so far,
every one of them troubled elections. If they weren`t, we wouldn`t be
there. But we only take on about four or five per year. And we
husband our energy and then focus very sharply on a particular
problem until we`re assured that it`s been successfully resolved.
JUDY WOODRUFF: I want to ask you about Sudan and Darfur. You were
there last week. You met with Sudan`s president. Just in this period
of time, there have already been, what, two serious attacks on
villages in Darfur, the latest one against this one group that signed
a cease-fire last summer. Is the situation there getting worse, or is
it getting better?
JIMMY CARTER: It`s hard to say. I think it`s -- there`s not nearly as
many casualties as there were a year or so ago. And most of the
displaced persons, who would be refugees if they were outside the
country, but they`re in -- most of them are in camps and they are
safe.
The major violence now is because of a plethora, explosion almost, of
rebel groups, all of whom oppose the government, and they`re fighting
each other, strangely precipitated by the fact that the United
Nations and African Union has now planned peace talks to begin on the
27th of this month in Tripoli, Libya.
And so these rebel leaders see themselves as trying to qualify to go
to the international peace talks, so they are struggling to get
money, and vehicles, and weapons, and fuel, and so forth so they can
be branded as adequately important to go to the peace talks. So
that`s causing a lot of the problem in Darfur now.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You were there with this group of distinguished world
leaders, Archbishop Tutu and others. The Elders is the name of this
group. Do you feel you accomplished something?
JIMMY CARTER: I`ve read the trip report, and maybe in a too
subjective way I listed five or six things that we accomplished.
Nobody knows when you make an effort or when you plant a seed if it
will bear fruit or not.
But we understand the situation much more clearly. And I`ve sent my
trip report to the White House and to the State Department and to the
secretary-general of the United Nations outlining what we learned,
which may be informative to them.
There are two major peace agreements. One is a comprehensive peace
agreement that was consummated by the extremely beneficial
intersession of the George Bush administration, who called on John
Danforth, the former senator from Missouri, to negotiate a peace
agreement after eight years during which President Clinton did not
want to promote peace in the Mideast -- I mean, in Sudan. And that`s
holding so far.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So you`re saying the Bush administration has been
better in Sudan than the Clinton administration?
JIMMY CARTER: Infinitely better, yeah. It`s an interesting footnote
to history -- I don`t know if we have time -- but after the Florida
election, when all the Democrats were grieved because the Supreme
Court said Bush would be the president, Rose and I decided to go to
the inauguration. I think we were the only volunteer Democrats on the
reviewing stand.
And afterwards, the new president and his mother and father and his
wife were very glad to see us there. So George Bush asked me if there
was anything he could do for me, and I said, "Yes, you can help
promote peace in Sudan after eight years of different policy." And he
said, "I`ll do it." So to make a long story short, he did it, not
necessarily because I requested it, but they were very successful.
JUDY WOODRUFF: At the same time, you`ve been critical of President
Bush and others in his administration for saying that the Sudanese
government has committed genocide in Darfur. Why is...
JIMMY CARTER: I don`t criticize him for that. That`s just a legal,
semantical argument. I think this -- I`m not trying to minimize the
attacks on the innocent people in Darfur by saying that, but the
United Nations and most of the human rights groups around the world
-- we`re one of them -- and the International Criminal Court and the
International Court of Justice, none of them would identify what`s
happened in Darfur as genocide.
Because genocide, in my opinion -- contradicted by some -- is an
attempt by a powerful group completely to eradicate from the face of
the Earth the existence of people because of their ethnic makeup or
because of their race or religion, and that was the case with Hitler
trying to exterminate the Jews, and that was the case in Rwanda, when
the Tutsis were attacked and over 500,000 were killed in two or three
days. That has not been the case in Darfur.
But I don`t know if I have time to explain, but the Darfurian problem
was caused when some of the people in Darfur rose up in a revolution
against the central government. And al-Bashir, the president, used
the Janjaweed that are the Arab Muslims -- everybody`s a Muslim --
were called upon by him to attack the black Muslims, and that`s when
the atrocities took place.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, I read the pro-Darfur activists are saying, by
criticizing the use of that term, you take some of the pressure off
the Bashir government, the Sudan government...
JIMMY CARTER: I doubt it.
JUDY WOODRUFF: ... in effect -- I read one said you played into the
hands of the government...
JIMMY CARTER: I don`t know who that was, but it`s not true.
JUDY WOODRUFF: ... that they should be held accountable.
JIMMY CARTER: No, the Elders put tremendous pressure on al-Bashir. We
had a long meeting both times. Our group was led by Desmond Tutu,
archbishop, and by Nelson Mandela`s wife, Graca Machel, and by me,
and by Lakhdar Brahimi, who was the number-one negotiator for the
United Nations for many years.
So we put tremendous pressure on al-Bashir to go to the peace talks
and to stop all of his attacks that were orchestrated from the
government and to perpetuate and carry out all the terms of the peace
agreement between him and the Darfurians and between him and the
south. So we put tremendous pressure on the government of Sudan.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So looking ahead, reason to be at all hopeful there
or...
JIMMY CARTER: Yes, yes, it`s much more hopeful than it was four or
five years ago, before the comprehensive peace agreement. That
agreement is holding so far in a very fragile way. But the leader of
the southern Sudanese, a man named Salva Kiir, and the leader of the
northern Sudanese, that is al-Bashir, they both, I think, are deeply
committed not to violate the peace agreement bad enough to cause a
re-eruption of war between the two. So that`s a positive development.
The success of the peace talks that are now contemplated at the end
of this month in Tripoli on Darfur, I think that that`s highly
conjectural, and it depends on how it`s constituted and how much
influence, and attention is given by the international community, and
how well they can implement the United Nations Security Council
decision to have a strong so- called hybrid force between Africans
and outside Africa forces to stabilize the situation in Darfur. All
those things are still unpredictable.
JUDY WOODRUFF: I just want to ask you about one other thing. I was
intrigued to read in the book, you write, "American presidents have
intervened more than 100 times in foreign countries since you left
office," you said, "in most cases using military force
unnecessarily." Do you think this is because the world is a more
dangerous place? Or do you think that your successors have been too
eager to intervene and use military force?
JIMMY CARTER: Well, maybe both. It`s hard to say why. It`s hard to
believe that that`s true, but it is. I`ve seen the statistics and
anyone that wants to can look it up.
But, you know, when you invade Grenada, or when you invade Panama to
capture a disreputable person, or when you bomb the Bosnia area, you
can always find justification for those military actions, but it`s
really surprising how many times in those 25 years -- that`s a long
time -- the United States has interceded, I wouldn`t say most of the
time militarily, but a lot of those have been military actions.
And tens of thousands of people have died. And I can`t say that I
disagree with all of those military actions. For instance, I think it
was fully justified after 9/11 to initiate a military action against
Afghanistan, because we hoped to create a democracy, and have a
flourishing economy, and to do away with al-Qaida, and to capture
Osama bin Laden.
We didn`t do any of those things. We made a mess out of Afghanistan,
because we were so eager to go into Iraq. So Afghanistan was
justified; Iraq was not. You can go down the list and make your own
judgments.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Speaking of Iraq, any plans for you to go there?
JIMMY CARTER: No, I don`t think so. I wouldn`t be called upon to do
that. One of the restraints on the Carter Center, as I mentioned in
this book, is that we don`t go into a sensitive area of the world --
politically speaking -- without approval from the White House. And
sometimes those approvals are not easy to come by.
JUDY WOODRUFF: President Jimmy Carter with yet another book, this one
"Beyond the White House." Thank you very much for talking with us.
JIMMY CARTER: I`ve enjoyed it, Judy. Thank you.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Now to the world view of the new secretary-general of the
United Nations.
When he took over as secretary-general of the United Nations 10
months ago, Ban Ki-moon acknowledged the challenges ahead.
BAN KI-MOON, United Nations Secretary-General: I start my duties at a
daunting time in international affairs, starting from Darfur to the
Middle East, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, North Korea...
RAY SUAREZ: Ban`s a career diplomat. He was South Korea`s foreign
minister before taking the U.N.`s reins from Kofi Annan. He`s the
first Asian to hold the post in 35 years.
The Harvard-educated Ban has laid out an ambitious agenda. He`s
pledged to restore trust in the 192-nation world body hit by scandal
in recent years.
BAN KI-MOON: I will seek to act as a harmonizer and bridge-builder.
RAY SUAREZ: The secretary-general says the U.N. has important skills
to offer in Iraq, but security can`t yet be guaranteed for his staff.
Other top priorities include: stepping up U.N. efforts to stem the
violence in Sudan`s Darfur region; addressing global climate change
issues; and more recently, the secretary-general has been a vocal
critic of the military crackdown in Myanmar, also known as Burma.
I spoke with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon before he started a round
of meetings today in Washington.
Secretary-General Ban, welcome to the program.
BAN KI-MOON: It`s a great pleasure to meet you.
RAY SUAREZ: Does the United Nations have any leverage in Myanmar? Can
it really stay the hand of a government that means to suppress the
democracy movement?
BAN KI-MOON: The United Nations itself has the highest moral voice,
as far as principled methods of democracy and human rights are
concerned, and we have been mobilizing all possible political
influences of leaders in the region and in the world.
I have spoken with many leaders in ASEAN, and ASEAN recently has
taken a very strong position vis-a-vis Myanmar`s human rights
situation. We have put forward some proposals demanding the release
of political detainees, and make socioeconomic and political
democratizations. These efforts will be continuously done at the
level of myself and through my special envoy.
RAY SUAREZ: You`ve just recently returned from Darfur. You spoke to
people in the camps, spoke to people in the government of Sudan.
Where do things stand now?
BAN KI-MOON: Now we are looking forward to the political
negotiations, which will be held on October 27th. Necessary
preparations are going on at the final phase.
What we are now working hard is to have all the rebel group leaders
participate in these political preparations, political negotiations.
We hope that they should demonstrate their commitment as leaders of
all these rebel movements, if they think about the future of their
country that they must participate, rather than staying out of these
political negotiations.
Now, the deployment of a joint hybrid operation in Darfur is also
going on smoothly.
RAY SUAREZ: The government in Khartoum has said all along that not
enough attention has been paid to the rebel groups that are fighting
against the central government that Sudan says is the real cause for
the humanitarian crisis. Does the rebel movement, these various
armies, have to be part of the peace process in order for the dying
and the killing to stop there?
BAN KI-MOON: It is necessary for those factional groups to
participate in these political negotiations because they are the
important stakeholders. We will have political negotiations where
their concerns could be heard.
And the continuing violence will gain nothing. They must cease these
violent means, and there should be a cessation of hostilities
immediately. Sudan`s government has assured that, as soon as these
political negotiations begin, they will declare a unilateral
cessation of the hostilities. I do hope that all of the rebel groups
will participate in this cessation of hostilities.
RAY SUAREZ: Now, another big world problem facing the U.N. that
you`ve spoken out about is global warming, but in your view, global
warming is part of the Darfur crisis, as well. Tell us about that.
BAN KI-MOON: The Darfur crisis, in fact, was a man-made crisis, but
you cannot rule out all these aspects of environmental degradation,
the absolute poverty, as well as the scarcity of natural resources,
particularly water. That has exacerbated all these situations.
Therefore, we must take some comprehensive resolution of this Darfur
situation. This is what I have been doing. I have three action plans.
One is ensuring peace and security in Darfur. Then, resolve this
issue through political negotiations. Without a political
negotiation, you cannot ensure a smooth peace and security there.
Then, there should be some hope, sign of hope to the Darfurian people
through developmental packages.
Therefore, my plan is to have all this comprehensive addressing three
tracks. They are now moving, and we have made some credible
progresses. But the important thing will have to come from now until
we see the final resolution of this issue.
RAY SUAREZ: But if there`s no worldwide approach toward greenhouse
gases and global climate change, will there be more Darfurs in the
world?
BAN KI-MOON: I am very much encouraged by the level of strong support
from the world in recognizing the urgency of this global warming
situation. The science has made it quite clear, and we have been
feeling the impact coming from global warming.
If we do not take actions, you cannot guarantee that we will not see
any second Darfurian situations there. I will continuously be
engaged, but we need strong support. This is a global challenge which
requires a global response, common and concerted efforts.
RAY SUAREZ: But let`s take a look at the permanent five in the
Security Council. Sitting on the permanent five are two of the
world`s biggest polluters -- China and the United States -- a major
oil exporter -- Russia -- and two very carbon-intense societies in
Britain and France. Are these the five countries that are really
going to help get the world to agree to emit fewer greenhouse gases?
BAN KI-MOON: It`s true that each and every country, not necessarily
the P-5, but all the countries, they have their own domestic
challenges. But what is encouraging is that all the countries now
recognize the significance and urgency and importance of taking
common action to address these global warming issues.
I am encouraged that the United States has also confirmed that the
United Nations should take the leading role, and the United States is
also very much committed to this process.
RAY SUAREZ: The United Nations hasn`t had a large-scale presence in
Iraq since the attack on the U.N. compound there. It`s been some time
since then. And now the American political leadership and the
candidates to take over the presidency are talking about having fewer
American troops there over time. Will this create an opening for the
reengagement of the world community in Iraq, the reengagement of the
U.N.?
BAN KI-MOON: As the secretary-general, I am in the process of very
seriously considering how the United Nations can increase our
presence there, how we can make a different contribution to peace and
security there.
However, the United Nations does not have all the necessary resources
or tools. Our security and safety has been largely dependent upon the
MNF forces. However, we`ve been taking necessary, again, preparations
to have integrated security accommodations for our staff and our
activities there.
We are going to help promote national reconciliation, a national
dialogue, and help promote regional cooperation. The United Nations
has a competitive edge in political facilitation and humanitarian
assistance. This is what we are now considering.
RAY SUAREZ: But you also have to have a welcome from the United
States and from the government of Iraq to be involved there. Do you
have that now?
BAN KI-MOON: As the situation develops in the future, I know that the
United Nations will have to be engaged more, and the United Nations
needs full cooperation and support from all of the international
community, including the United States and other big powers, and
particularly the Iraqi government.
RAY SUAREZ: Recently, there was a meeting between the heads of state
of the two Koreas. Was this an encouraging sign? Do you think it
actually helps build down the tension on the peninsula?
BAN KI-MOON: I am very much encouraged as secretary-general of the
United Nations, as one of the Korean citizens, to have seen this very
moving development of situation. It will certainly pave the way to
solidify the common ground.
RAY SUAREZ: And stop the North Korean nuclear program?
BAN KI-MOON: North Korea has committed to disenable their nuclear
facilities, with the ultimate proposal for dismantling all nuclear
weapons and nuclear programs. This is, again, a very good,
encouraging sign toward the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
This will, again, bring the peace and security not only on the Korean
peninsula, but beyond this Korean peninsula in Northeast Asia.
RAY SUAREZ: Ban Ki-moon, Mr. Secretary-General, thanks a lot.
BAN KI-MOON: It gives me great pleasure. Thank you.
RAY SUAREZ: We have an insider forum on the Darfur crisis on our Web
site. You can send your questions to Sarjoh Bah, an African expert
with the Center on International Cooperation at New York University.
To participate, go to PBS.org.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: And finally tonight, the Nobel Prize for Literature goes
to British author Doris Lessing. We begin with a report from John
Sparks of Independent Television News.
JOHN SPARKS, ITV News Correspondent: Five o`clock this afternoon, at
Doris Lessing`s home in London, wine to celebrate, but she was in a
contemplative mood.
NOBEL PRIZE COMMITTEE ANNOUNCER: The Nobel Prize in Literature for
2007 is awarded to the English writer Doris Lessing.
JOHN SPARKS: Eight hours earlier in Stockholm and the big
announcement. Ms. Lessing had been on the short list for the world`s
biggest literature prize for years, yet the duty of informing the
prolific author fell to a journalist outside her home.
JOURNALIST: We`re photographing you. Have you heard the news?
DORIS LESSING, Nobel Prize, Literature: No.
JOURNALIST: You`ve won the Nobel Prize for Literature.
DORIS LESSING: Oh, Christ.
JOHN SPARKS: Ms. Lessing`s first novel was published in 1950. Dozens
of works of fiction followed, along with plays and non-fiction and
autobiography. She was a child of the British Empire, born in Persia
and raised on a farm in Rhodesia. There was little formal learning,
but her parents loved books.
DORIS LESSING: Well, they also read and told stories, and my mother
ordered books. Now, we`re in the middle of Africa, you understand,
ordering books from England. So I had the most wonderful list of
books as a child.
JOHN SPARKS: Doris Lessing inspired a generation of feminists with
her breakthrough novel "The Golden Notebook." Women were depicted as
they really were and as they can be: angry, bored, aggressive. For
many, it was a revelation.
DORIS LESSING: When I wrote "The Golden Notebook," and I wrote these
things that women were saying, apparently it was absolutely
astounding to everyone. "My god, what an extraordinary revelation!"
But I was writing down what women were saying.
What surprises me is that everyone reading that book would have heard
women saying these things, but they weren`t listening to what they
were saying.
JOHN SPARKS: She`s attracted her fair share of critics, labeled at
various times the black writer, the communist writer, the mystical
writer. The series of science fiction books written in the 1980s were
judged harshly by some.
DORIS LESSING: This is what one has to expect from the literary
establishment, I`m afraid. Well, they didn`t like my so-called
science fiction. Why should they? It was absolutely outside what they
were used to. But in my view, my personal view, it`s some of the best
writing I`ve ever done. And when they get around to noticing it...
JOHN SPARKS: Still, Ms. Lessing, who`s 88 this month, has won most of
the big literary prizes. Now she says she`s got the royal flush.
DORIS LESSING: Well, I feel a bit like the icing on the cake. That`s
what it is. I mean, no one -- I mean, it`s such a glamorous prize,
and so many good people have won it, so you can`t say you don`t care
about it.
RAY SUAREZ: Jeffrey Brown has more.
JEFFREY BROWN: And with me is Margaret Soltan, professor of
literature at George Washington University.
Welcome to you.
MARGARET SOLTAN, Professor of Literature, George Washington
University: Thank you.
JEFFREY BROWN: For those not familiar with the work of Doris Lessing,
what themes stand out?
MARGARET SOLTAN: She`s interested in conflict. She hates conflict,
but she`s interested in the ways in which lives inevitably seem to
resolve themselves into conflict, either conflict between men and
women or conflict between nations.
But she generally in her novels and short stories focuses on people
under pressure, people who`ve tried to live meaningful lives and made
certain decisions towards a meaningful life, but somehow everything
is falling apart and the basis of their existence is under question.
So, for instance, in her most famous novel, "The Golden Notebook,"
the main character has been a very committed communist in England in
the 1950s and she begins to realize this has been a terrible error.
And the novel really is sort of anatomizing how it is she goes about
recognizing the error and fixing it.
JEFFREY BROWN: Is there a distinctive Lessing style? We heard how
prolific she is. Is there a distinctive style, or has that changed
over time?
MARGARET SOLTAN: Her style has changed a lot over time. She`s been at
this for more than 60 years, and she`s a compulsive writer. She says
she can`t stop writing. And, I mean, she gardens, and she goes to the
opera, but basically she just writes.
She`s essentially a realist, in the tradition in England of someone
like George Eliot. She doesn`t do particularly experimental fiction.
She experiments with theme, and her science fiction novels,
obviously, are very surreal in various respects.
But the novels that I think she`s best known for and the short
stories are essentially realistic in nature. It`s not fancy prose.
It`s just strong, confident, beautiful prose.
JEFFREY BROWN: And how much of her own biography -- we heard about
growing as a girl in Africa -- how much of that appears in the work?
MARGARET SOLTAN: Tons. She`s a very autobiographical writer. Even
when the context is science fiction, you can tell that she`s
incorporating her life into it.
"The Golden Notebook," again, is profoundly autobiographical. She,
herself, of course, was a member of the party and underwent this kind
of traumatic choice to leave it, with all that that meant.
Her sexual relationships, her marriages, her having lived in various
countries, and her always, I think, trying to lead a committed
political life, as well as a committed and meaningful personal life,
is inherent in all that she writes.
JEFFREY BROWN: "The Golden Notebook" has this status as a classic, a
feminist novel, and yet it sounds as though she herself didn`t want
that tag, or that she was at least ambivalent about it.
MARGARET SOLTAN: That`s right. I think not ambivalent. You know,
she`s pretty annoyed about, as I take it from reading interviews with
her, about that status, the sort of feminist icon novel. And I think
it`s for a couple of reasons.
One is simply that all serious novelists want to be taken as dealing
in universal themes. So I think you`d find Philip Roth being unhappy
about being called a Jewish novelist. And you`ll find Lessing unhappy
about being tagged as, in some sense, a feminist writer.
She wants universal themes. And then, too, her attitudes toward
feminism have changed radically over the years, and she has lots of
trouble with it, considers it to be a species of political
correctness and to have dehumanized men. She sees it as sort of
founded, fairly or unfairly, founded on a certain kind of
male-bashing, which she objects to.
So, no, I think it`s quite true that she doesn`t want to be known as
a...
JEFFREY BROWN: We heard her in that clip tossing aside the criticisms
that have come from some in the literary mainstream, but they have
been there, certainly the last couple of decades, and certainly with
some of the science fiction that she`s written.
MARGARET SOLTAN: Sure. And about that I would say that I think, like
Norman Mailer, who she resembles in some respects and who she
admires, she`s a writer who has a long history of writing and a long
history of engagement, and serious engagement, and maybe on some
level somewhat naive engagement in intellectual questions and moral
questions.
And I think anyone who`s a serious fiction writer who has 60-plus
years of engagement in various modes of existence and various
spiritual ideas -- you know, she`s interested in Sufism, et cetera --
is going to look silly sometimes and is going to be subjected to some
ridicule.
But, I mean, you know, talk about Blake, or Whitman, or D.H.
Lawrence, or any of them. You know, they`re people who are forging
new ideas, and trying out things, and they`re very vulnerable, and
they specialize in human vulnerability in their work. So I`m not
surprised she`s been attacked.
JEFFREY BROWN: Well, we only have a short time here, and you teach
20th century literature, I know. Where do you put her, in terms of
her overall legacy? What will last? What will stand?
MARGARET SOLTAN: I think what will stand out is "The Golden
Notebook." I think what will stand out are her short stories, which
are brilliant and beautiful. You know, even when she was very young,
writing short stories, really good.
Among those, listeners might be most -- viewers might be most aware
of "To Room Nineteen," which is a story about a woman who commits
suicide. And it`s much anthologized and discussed. It`s really a gem
of a short story.
And so I think she`ll be remembered as someone who wrote brilliant
short stories and who accomplished "The Golden Notebook," and all
that it has in terms of literary qualities and also in terms of
global impact.
JEFFREY BROWN: All right, Margaret Soltan on Doris Lessing, thanks
very much.
MARGARET SOLTAN: Thank you.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Again, the other major developments of this day.
Turkey rejected a U.S. House committee vote that condemned genocide
among Armenians during World War I. The Turks recalled their
ambassador to Washington.
The U.S. military in Iraq announced a raid killing 19 suspected al-
Qaida members, but also 15 civilians, including nine children.
And drug makers ended U.S. sales of over-the-counter cough and cold
medicine for infants. The FDA warned last week of deaths linked to
overdosing.
We`ll see you online and again here tomorrow evening, with David
Brooks and E.J. Dionne, as well as Republican presidential candidate
Ron Paul, among others. I`m Ray Suarez. Thanks for joining us. Good
night.
October 11, 2007 Thursday
SHOW: NEWSHOUR 6:00 PM EST
Turkey Angry with U.S. Congress Over Vote on World War I
by Jim Lehrer, Margaret Warner, Judy Woodruff, Ray Suarez, Jeffrey
Brown
GUESTS: Tom Lantos, Mark Parris, Jimmy Carter, Ban Ki-Moon, Margaret
Soltan
HIGHLIGHT: Kwame Holman reports on an international argument over
labeling the World War I killing of Armenians as genocide. Judy
Woodruff speaks with former President Jimmy Carter. Ray Suarez speaks
with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.
RAY SUAREZ: Good evening. I`m Ray Suarez.
On the NewsHour tonight: the news of this Thursday; then, an
international argument heats up over branding the World War I killing
of Armenians genocide; then, two views of the state of the world from
former President Jimmy Carter and from U.N. Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon; plus, the winning work of Doris Lessing, Nobel laureate for
literature.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Turkey struck back today over a move in the U.S. Congress
to condemn genocide against Armenians. A House committee approved the
measure yesterday. It involves the killing of an estimated 1.5
million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks during World War I.
Today, Turkey condemned the vote and recalled its ambassador to
Washington. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the issue has been
put off for far too long.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), Speaker of the House: There`s never a good
time, and all of us in the Democratic leadership have supported
reiterating Americans` acknowledgment of a genocide. Genocide is
taking place now in Darfur. It did within not such in recent memory
in Rwanda. So as long as there is genocide, there is a need to speak
out against it.
RAY SUAREZ: President Bush and top officials in the administration
warned against pursuing the issue. They said U.S. operations in Iraq
are heavily dependent on cargo flights coming through Turkish air
space. We`ll have more on this story right after the news summary.
A U.S. raid on al-Qaida leaders in Iraq killed 19 suspected
insurgents today, but the military said 15 civilians were killed, as
well, including nine children. It happened during an air and ground
raid northwest of Baghdad.
And to the north, a car bomb killed seven Iraqis at a busy market in
Kirkuk. A police chief, the apparent target, was among more than 50
people wounded.
The U.N. mission in Iraq will examine recent shootings by private
security guards as possible war crimes; the announcement came today
in Baghdad. A U.N. official there said, "There cannot be rogue
elements that are above the law." Last month, guards for Blackwater
USA killed up to 17 Iraqis. And this week, guards for a company owned
in Australia killed two Iraqi women.
Also today, relatives of several shooting victims and one survivor
filed suit against Blackwater in federal court in Washington. They
asked for unspecified damages.
Authorities in Afghanistan shut down two private security companies
this week. Both were run by Afghans, but the Associated Press
reported 10 others face closure, including major Western firms. There
was no word on the names of those companies. Afghan officials said
some of the contractors are suspected of murder and robbery.
There was word today the U.S. Marines want to pull out of Iraq and
instead take a lead role in Afghanistan. The New York Times reported
Marine leaders think their force is better suited to the Afghan
fighting. In turn, U.S. Army units would focus solely on Iraq.
But in London today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates played down the
report.
ROBERT GATES, Secretary of Defense: I have heard that they were
beginning to think about that, and that`s all that I`ve heard. I have
seen no plan. No one`s come to me with any proposals about it. My
understanding is that it`s, at this point, extremely preliminary
thinking on the part of perhaps some staff people in the Marine
Corps, but I don`t think at this point it has any stature.
RAY SUAREZ: About 25,000 U.S. Marines are currently serving in Iraq.
There are no major Marine units in Afghanistan.
The Bush administration considered its options today after a federal
judge ruled against part of an immigration crackdown. The Homeland
Security Department wanted employers to fire workers if their
taxpayer I.D. or Social Security numbers do not check out. The judge
in San Francisco said officials did not consider the costs or give a
legal basis for the plan.
Today, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Congress needs to
act.
DANA PERINO, White House Spokeswoman: We can work as hard as we
possibly can on border enforcement issues, but if they get turned
over by the courts or turned over by localities, we`re going to --
it`s going to result in a situation that is absolutely unsustainable.
And so the president would like for Congress to get back to the table
and work on that, but I don`t think he anticipates that`s going to
happen within the next year.
RAY SUAREZ: Homeland security officials said they were still
considering whether to appeal the ruling.
Drug makers today ended U.S. sales of over-the-counter cough and cold
medicine for infants. The brands included PediaCare, Dimetapp,
Robitussin, Tylenol and others. The Food and Drug Administration had
warned of deaths linked to overdosing in children under 2. The FDA
holds a hearing next week on whether children under 6 should ever
take the drugs, among other questions.
British writer Doris Lessing won the 2007 Nobel Prize in Literature
today. She turns 88 this month and is the oldest recipient of the
literature prize. Her 1962 novel "The Golden Notebook" was seen as
inspiring a generation of feminist writers.
Today in London, Lessing said she thinks her age was the deciding
factor for the Nobel committee.
DORIS LESSING, Nobel Prize, Literature: I`ve never been on any of
these committees. You sit around, and you think, "Well, now, there`s
that one, and there`s that one, and there`s that one. Now she`s
getting on a bit in age. You better give it to her this year. She
might pop off, and we`ll never give it to her." This is what I think
happened.
RAY SUAREZ: The selection drew some criticism today. Literary critic
Harold Bloom called it "pure political correctness." We`ll have more
on this story later in the program.
The federal government reported today the deficit for fiscal year
2007 was the lowest in five years. It totaled just under $163
billion, down nearly 35 percent from the previous year. The
government included revenues from Social Security in calculating the
deficit, as it has for many years. Otherwise, the shortfall would be
much larger.
The Commerce Department reported today the U.S. trade deficit in
August was the smallest in seven months. A weak dollar and recalls of
Chinese goods were the main factors.
But on Wall Street today, a sell-off of technology companies pushed
stocks lower. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 63 points to
close at 14,015. The Nasdaq fell 39 points to close at 2,772.
That`s it for the news summary tonight. Now: a question of genocide
and of U.S.-Turkish relations; two world views, from former President
Jimmy Carter and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon; plus the winning
work of Doris Lessing.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Turkey, the Armenians, and the U.S. Congress. We start
with a report from NewsHour congressional correspondent Kwame Holman.
KWAME HOLMAN: In Turkey today, there were street protests decrying a
vote by a committee of the U.S. Congress. That vote labeled as
"genocide" the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in the
early 20th century.
Turkish politicians joined demonstrators in Istanbul, denouncing the
vote of American politicians. Erkan Onsel is vice president of
Turkey`s Labor Party.
ERKAN ONSEL, Vice President, Turkish Labor Party (through
translator): The United States of America legitimized the Armenian
genocide claim, which has swung over Turkey`s head like a stick and
which has posed a threat to Turkey for years. The U.S. has made it
clear once again that it targets Turkey.
KWAME HOLMAN: Turkey`s president, Abdullah Gul, also harshly
criticized the non-binding resolution, telling the state-run news
agency Anatolia, "Some politicians in the United States have once
again sacrificed important matters to petty domestic politics,
despite all calls to common sense."
And late today, the Turks recalled their ambassador to Washington.
The Bush administration had lobbied hard against a resolution sure to
upset a key American ally that plays a crucial support role for U.S.
forces in Iraq.
GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States: We all deeply regret
the tragic suffering of the Armenian people that began in 1915, but
this resolution is not the right response to these historic mass
killings.
ROBERT GATES, Secretary of Defense: Seventy percent of all air cargo
going into Iraq goes through Turkey. About a third of the fuel that
they consume goes through Turkey or comes from Turkey.
KWAME HOLMAN: But despite the administration`s pressure, the
Democratic-controlled House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted the
resolution by a vote of 27-21.
REP. BRAD SHERMAN (D), California: There are those who`d say that,
every time we discuss this resolution in committee, it`s an irritant
to our relationship with Turkey. That`s the best reason to vote for
it here and on the floor. Let us do this and be done with it. We will
get a few angry words out of Ankara for a few days, and then it`s
over.
KWAME HOLMAN: Some Republicans voted for the resolution, but most
opposed it, saying the timing was particularly bad.
REP. DAN BURTON (R), Indiana: The strongest ally in the area, and has
been for over 50 years, is Turkey. And I just don`t understand why
we`re going to cut our nose off, shoot ourselves in the foot at a
time when we need this ally.
KWAME HOLMAN: Democratic leaders say they will bring the measure
before the full House within weeks, a promise welcomed by the
country`s several hundred thousand Armenian-Americans, some of whom
were on hand for the committee vote.
ARTIN MANOUKIAN, Armenian-American: My grandfather was a survivor. I
think it`s a day of relief somehow, and I think I`m starting getting
that quest for justice. And I hope that, down the road, we will have
that.
HAIG HOVSEPIAN, Armenian National Committee: We were standing strong
on this historical record. We were not being coaxed into being silent
by somebody who calls themselves an ally of ours.
KWAME HOLMAN: The dispute came amid rising tensions along the
Turkish-Iraqi border, where Turkish troops have been skirmishing with
Kurdish nationalist guerrillas. Within days, President Gul is
expected to ask parliament for authority to cross the Iraqi border
and engage Kurdish guerrillas, known as the PKK.
RAY SUAREZ: Margaret Warner takes the story from there.
MARGARET WARNER: And for more on all this, we get two views.
California Democrat Tom Lantos is the chairman of the House Committee
on Foreign Affairs. He voted for the resolution yesterday.
And Mark Parris, a retired career diplomat, served as U.S. ambassador
to Turkey during the Clinton administration. He`s now a visiting
fellow at the Brookings Institution and directs their project on
Turkey.
Welcome to you both.
Congressman Lantos, this happened nearly 100 years ago. The House has
passed this same resolution twice, once in the `70s and once in the
`80s. Why do this now? What are you trying to accomplish?
REP. TOM LANTOS (D), California: Well, let`s put it in perspective.
Nazi Germany was responsible for the Holocaust, and the Ottoman
Empire was responsible for this genocide. We have the highest respect
for and the best friendship with the democratic modern Germany and
with the democratic and modern Turkey.
This is not a criticism of Turkey. This is not a criticism of the
Turkish people today or of the Turkish government today, and our
Turkish friends know this.
This is one of those events, Margaret, which has to be settled once
and for all: 1.5 million utterly innocent Armenian men, women and
children were slaughtered. And the Turkish government, until now, has
intimidated the Congress of the United States from taking this
measure.
This is not aimed at them, and they know it very well. I`m glad that
the ambassador was called back for consultation. Hopefully, he will
be able to explain to his colleagues that this has nothing to do with
contemporary Turkey.
MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Ambassador, why has Turkey reacted so sharply to
this resolution, which, as the congressman says, was not aimed at
what Turkey is today, modern Turkey, which wasn`t even a country
then?
MARK PARRIS, Former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey: I think, inevitably,
criticism is in the eyes of the beholder. And you visited Turkey. You
visited Turkey, as well. I don`t think that anybody who`s ever
visited Turkey can be in any doubt that Turks, at all levels, of all
levels of education and all parts of the country, view this kind of a
resolution as criticism and, frankly, as interference in their own
responsibility for coming to terms with their own history.
There are a lot of Turks who recognize and, frankly, admit -- and use
words like "genocide" -- that this is a part of their history that
they`ve got to come to terms with. I don`t know any of them who
believe that this will assist that discussion going forward or make
it easier for them to deal with neighboring Armenia.
All of them believe this will be a major setback, because it is
perceived as a major insult to Turkish credibility, honor by a long-
standing ally. So why do they feel this way? They`re human beings;
they know something terrible happened.
At some level, I`m sure that they`ve recognized that that`s going to
have to be dealt with. But they don`t appreciate third parties coming
in and legislating the means by which they should reconcile
themselves with their own history and with their neighbors.
MARGARET WARNER: All right, let me stay with you and ask you, so what
is the likely fallout, other than recalling the ambassador?
MARK PARRIS: Well, we don`t know. And my guess is that the Turkish
government, as we sit here today, doesn`t know. If this were
happening in a vacuum, they would look at this issue and their
interests and how to deal with it.
It comes at a time when they`re also dealing with another problem
relating to the United States, as your lead-in suggested, the loss of
over 30 citizens in the last two weeks to PKK terrorists that they
believe we haven`t done...
MARGARET WARNER: Kurdish.
MARK PARRIS: ... Kurdish terrorists -- our part to deal with in Iraq.
MARGARET WARNER: Defense Secretary Gates, Congressman, raised the
specter that Turkey might yank its support or its approval for the
United States to use an important air base in southern Turkey to
bring in materiel and supplies into the troops in Iraq.
REP. TOM LANTOS: I have a much higher regard for the intelligence of
our Turkish friends and for their sense of responsibility than to
predict that. I don`t think they will do that. I think they
understand that we are allies, we have been NATO partners for over
half a century. And I think it is demeaning to the Turks to claim
that they will take such an irresponsible action.
Let me give you another example, if I may, of just a few weeks ago.
The imperial Japanese government used tens of thousands of young
Asian women and girls as military prostitutes. We passed a resolution
in my committee denouncing this.
This was not aimed at the current democratic government of Japan; it
was aimed at the wartime military government of Japan. And while the
Japanese government made some critical comments briefly, the whole
thing has blown over. This will blow over.
I think it`s important, at a time when genocides are going on in
Darfur and elsewhere, not to be an accomplice in sweeping an
important genocide under the rug.
MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Ambassador, do you think this will blow over in
Turkey?
MARK PARRIS: I`d be surprised. I think a lot depends on what happens
on the House floor, if it comes to a vote. And I think one of the
reasons that the Turkish initial response will probably be restrained
is that they want to see what will happen there. And they wanted to
decide, frankly, what they`re going to do about this PKK problem on
their border.
MARGARET WARNER: Is the government under any pressure to do more?
What is the feeling among the Turkish sort of body politic about the
cooperation that Turkey is giving the United States in the Iraq war?
MARK PARRIS: Well, there`s a sense that they are playing an important
role. I think the fact is that more Turks have died in Iraq than any
other nationality, because their truck drivers are an important part
of the supply effort there. And our use of their facilities in
Incirlik and the port in Adana to bring in heavy transport is
critical.
There is, therefore, a very strong expectation among the Turkish
public that this cannot be allowed simply to blow over. They`re
expecting their leadership to do something to show that third
countries` legislatures cannot interfere in their history.
MARGARET WARNER: So if this doesn`t blow over, are you saying,
Congressman, that this nonetheless was worth the risk?
REP. TOM LANTOS: One of the worst things that happened to the United
States in recent years has been the plummeting globally of our moral
authority. This is a significant step in restoring the moral
authority of U.S. foreign policy.
U.S. foreign policy was strong when it was based on a sound
foundation of a moral authority. It`s Abu Ghraib and similar episodes
which have diminished our standing globally. And the international
community is not critical of the fact that the United States calls a
genocide a genocide.
MARGARET WARNER: So if the Turkish government makes clear -- as the
ambassador seems to be suggesting -- that a vote in the full House
could really put the cooperation at risk, it sounds like you would
not recommend holding back?
REP. TOM LANTOS: Well, let me say one other thing, if I may. Next
week, I am bringing to the committee a very strong pro-contemporary
Turkey resolution. We shall explain in exquisite detail that we
consider Turkey our friend, our democratic ally, and we expect to be
that for generations to come. This is an ugly chapter in Turkish
history which the House Foreign Affairs Committee described as such.
MARGARET WARNER: Would that allay Turkish concerns?
MARK PARRIS: With due respect to the congressman who I`ve known for a
long time, it simply won`t wash. The Turks -- the fine distinctions
here are going to be totally lost on the Turkish general population
and their politicians and the military. They will view this as part
of a pattern of American ignoring of Turkish interests, including the
problem in northern Iraq, which is resulting in killing of Turkish
citizens and soldiers as we speak today.
MARGARET WARNER: So are you saying -- briefly, are you saying that a
vote in the full House, that`s the red line for Turkey`s government?
MARK PARRIS: You can see graduated responses up to a vote in the
House to indicate that the Turks are serious about this. I think a
vote in the House will precipitate something that the Turkish
political leadership can take to its population and say, "We`ve shown
we`re serious; honor is served."
MARGARET WARNER: Former Ambassador Mark Parris, Congressman Tom
Lantos, thank you.
REP. TOM LANTOS: It`s a pleasure.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Next, two views of the world and its crises, beginning
with that of former President Jimmy Carter. He`s the author of a new
book, "Beyond the White House." He spoke with Judy Woodruff
yesterday.
JUDY WOODRUFF: President Carter, thank you for joining us. We
appreciate it.
JIMMY CARTER, Former President of the United States: Thank you, Judy,
I`m delighted to be with you again.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The book, "Beyond the White House," your latest --
what, your 24th book, is that right?
JIMMY CARTER: Yes, 24th.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Not as controversial as the last one?
JIMMY CARTER: Well, if it were more controversial, it might sell a
few more copies, but, no, it`s not as controversial as the last.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You`re writing about the work in here at the Carter
Center, your work since you left the White House, 25 years of working
in Panama, Sudan -- I`ve made a list here -- Bosnia, China, Haiti,
North Korea, on issues from guinea worm, river blindness, malaria,
fair elections, human rights, nuclear arms control, 70 countries, a
long list of issues. How do you decide what to focus on?
JIMMY CARTER: Well, we have an almost unlimited menu from which to
choose, with a lot of requests coming in to monitor this election or
that election, or to try to negotiate a peace agreement between these
two fighting forces, or to resolve this problem in producing more
food grains to eat or to eradicate this disease.
So we don`t have any problem finding enough things to do; the problem
we have is making sure we don`t overload ourselves inadvertently.
And so we have a very finely-tuned and I think a highly efficient
organization, now adequately financed. And with experience -- as you
pointed out -- in more than 70 nations on Earth, 35 of which are in
Africa, but the basic premise of the Carter Center is to fill vacuums
in the world.
If the United Nations or the World Health Organization or Unicef or
U.S. government or Harvard University is taking care of a problem, we
don`t get involved in it. We just kind of go where they are not
adequately treating a very important issue.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You do talk in the book about conflict resolution.
JIMMY CARTER: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You talk about monitoring elections, fair elections,
fighting disease, human rights. I mentioned all that. Do you ever
worry you`re spread too thin?
JIMMY CARTER: No, I don`t. We`re very careful about that, although I
might say that the Carter Center has had a policy of not fearing
failure. I mean, sometimes we are willing to take a chance on a
subject that seems to be doubtful of success, if we think that it
might be worthwhile.
But we limit ourselves. We`ve done, I think, 68 elections so far,
every one of them troubled elections. If they weren`t, we wouldn`t be
there. But we only take on about four or five per year. And we
husband our energy and then focus very sharply on a particular
problem until we`re assured that it`s been successfully resolved.
JUDY WOODRUFF: I want to ask you about Sudan and Darfur. You were
there last week. You met with Sudan`s president. Just in this period
of time, there have already been, what, two serious attacks on
villages in Darfur, the latest one against this one group that signed
a cease-fire last summer. Is the situation there getting worse, or is
it getting better?
JIMMY CARTER: It`s hard to say. I think it`s -- there`s not nearly as
many casualties as there were a year or so ago. And most of the
displaced persons, who would be refugees if they were outside the
country, but they`re in -- most of them are in camps and they are
safe.
The major violence now is because of a plethora, explosion almost, of
rebel groups, all of whom oppose the government, and they`re fighting
each other, strangely precipitated by the fact that the United
Nations and African Union has now planned peace talks to begin on the
27th of this month in Tripoli, Libya.
And so these rebel leaders see themselves as trying to qualify to go
to the international peace talks, so they are struggling to get
money, and vehicles, and weapons, and fuel, and so forth so they can
be branded as adequately important to go to the peace talks. So
that`s causing a lot of the problem in Darfur now.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You were there with this group of distinguished world
leaders, Archbishop Tutu and others. The Elders is the name of this
group. Do you feel you accomplished something?
JIMMY CARTER: I`ve read the trip report, and maybe in a too
subjective way I listed five or six things that we accomplished.
Nobody knows when you make an effort or when you plant a seed if it
will bear fruit or not.
But we understand the situation much more clearly. And I`ve sent my
trip report to the White House and to the State Department and to the
secretary-general of the United Nations outlining what we learned,
which may be informative to them.
There are two major peace agreements. One is a comprehensive peace
agreement that was consummated by the extremely beneficial
intersession of the George Bush administration, who called on John
Danforth, the former senator from Missouri, to negotiate a peace
agreement after eight years during which President Clinton did not
want to promote peace in the Mideast -- I mean, in Sudan. And that`s
holding so far.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So you`re saying the Bush administration has been
better in Sudan than the Clinton administration?
JIMMY CARTER: Infinitely better, yeah. It`s an interesting footnote
to history -- I don`t know if we have time -- but after the Florida
election, when all the Democrats were grieved because the Supreme
Court said Bush would be the president, Rose and I decided to go to
the inauguration. I think we were the only volunteer Democrats on the
reviewing stand.
And afterwards, the new president and his mother and father and his
wife were very glad to see us there. So George Bush asked me if there
was anything he could do for me, and I said, "Yes, you can help
promote peace in Sudan after eight years of different policy." And he
said, "I`ll do it." So to make a long story short, he did it, not
necessarily because I requested it, but they were very successful.
JUDY WOODRUFF: At the same time, you`ve been critical of President
Bush and others in his administration for saying that the Sudanese
government has committed genocide in Darfur. Why is...
JIMMY CARTER: I don`t criticize him for that. That`s just a legal,
semantical argument. I think this -- I`m not trying to minimize the
attacks on the innocent people in Darfur by saying that, but the
United Nations and most of the human rights groups around the world
-- we`re one of them -- and the International Criminal Court and the
International Court of Justice, none of them would identify what`s
happened in Darfur as genocide.
Because genocide, in my opinion -- contradicted by some -- is an
attempt by a powerful group completely to eradicate from the face of
the Earth the existence of people because of their ethnic makeup or
because of their race or religion, and that was the case with Hitler
trying to exterminate the Jews, and that was the case in Rwanda, when
the Tutsis were attacked and over 500,000 were killed in two or three
days. That has not been the case in Darfur.
But I don`t know if I have time to explain, but the Darfurian problem
was caused when some of the people in Darfur rose up in a revolution
against the central government. And al-Bashir, the president, used
the Janjaweed that are the Arab Muslims -- everybody`s a Muslim --
were called upon by him to attack the black Muslims, and that`s when
the atrocities took place.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, I read the pro-Darfur activists are saying, by
criticizing the use of that term, you take some of the pressure off
the Bashir government, the Sudan government...
JIMMY CARTER: I doubt it.
JUDY WOODRUFF: ... in effect -- I read one said you played into the
hands of the government...
JIMMY CARTER: I don`t know who that was, but it`s not true.
JUDY WOODRUFF: ... that they should be held accountable.
JIMMY CARTER: No, the Elders put tremendous pressure on al-Bashir. We
had a long meeting both times. Our group was led by Desmond Tutu,
archbishop, and by Nelson Mandela`s wife, Graca Machel, and by me,
and by Lakhdar Brahimi, who was the number-one negotiator for the
United Nations for many years.
So we put tremendous pressure on al-Bashir to go to the peace talks
and to stop all of his attacks that were orchestrated from the
government and to perpetuate and carry out all the terms of the peace
agreement between him and the Darfurians and between him and the
south. So we put tremendous pressure on the government of Sudan.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So looking ahead, reason to be at all hopeful there
or...
JIMMY CARTER: Yes, yes, it`s much more hopeful than it was four or
five years ago, before the comprehensive peace agreement. That
agreement is holding so far in a very fragile way. But the leader of
the southern Sudanese, a man named Salva Kiir, and the leader of the
northern Sudanese, that is al-Bashir, they both, I think, are deeply
committed not to violate the peace agreement bad enough to cause a
re-eruption of war between the two. So that`s a positive development.
The success of the peace talks that are now contemplated at the end
of this month in Tripoli on Darfur, I think that that`s highly
conjectural, and it depends on how it`s constituted and how much
influence, and attention is given by the international community, and
how well they can implement the United Nations Security Council
decision to have a strong so- called hybrid force between Africans
and outside Africa forces to stabilize the situation in Darfur. All
those things are still unpredictable.
JUDY WOODRUFF: I just want to ask you about one other thing. I was
intrigued to read in the book, you write, "American presidents have
intervened more than 100 times in foreign countries since you left
office," you said, "in most cases using military force
unnecessarily." Do you think this is because the world is a more
dangerous place? Or do you think that your successors have been too
eager to intervene and use military force?
JIMMY CARTER: Well, maybe both. It`s hard to say why. It`s hard to
believe that that`s true, but it is. I`ve seen the statistics and
anyone that wants to can look it up.
But, you know, when you invade Grenada, or when you invade Panama to
capture a disreputable person, or when you bomb the Bosnia area, you
can always find justification for those military actions, but it`s
really surprising how many times in those 25 years -- that`s a long
time -- the United States has interceded, I wouldn`t say most of the
time militarily, but a lot of those have been military actions.
And tens of thousands of people have died. And I can`t say that I
disagree with all of those military actions. For instance, I think it
was fully justified after 9/11 to initiate a military action against
Afghanistan, because we hoped to create a democracy, and have a
flourishing economy, and to do away with al-Qaida, and to capture
Osama bin Laden.
We didn`t do any of those things. We made a mess out of Afghanistan,
because we were so eager to go into Iraq. So Afghanistan was
justified; Iraq was not. You can go down the list and make your own
judgments.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Speaking of Iraq, any plans for you to go there?
JIMMY CARTER: No, I don`t think so. I wouldn`t be called upon to do
that. One of the restraints on the Carter Center, as I mentioned in
this book, is that we don`t go into a sensitive area of the world --
politically speaking -- without approval from the White House. And
sometimes those approvals are not easy to come by.
JUDY WOODRUFF: President Jimmy Carter with yet another book, this one
"Beyond the White House." Thank you very much for talking with us.
JIMMY CARTER: I`ve enjoyed it, Judy. Thank you.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Now to the world view of the new secretary-general of the
United Nations.
When he took over as secretary-general of the United Nations 10
months ago, Ban Ki-moon acknowledged the challenges ahead.
BAN KI-MOON, United Nations Secretary-General: I start my duties at a
daunting time in international affairs, starting from Darfur to the
Middle East, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, North Korea...
RAY SUAREZ: Ban`s a career diplomat. He was South Korea`s foreign
minister before taking the U.N.`s reins from Kofi Annan. He`s the
first Asian to hold the post in 35 years.
The Harvard-educated Ban has laid out an ambitious agenda. He`s
pledged to restore trust in the 192-nation world body hit by scandal
in recent years.
BAN KI-MOON: I will seek to act as a harmonizer and bridge-builder.
RAY SUAREZ: The secretary-general says the U.N. has important skills
to offer in Iraq, but security can`t yet be guaranteed for his staff.
Other top priorities include: stepping up U.N. efforts to stem the
violence in Sudan`s Darfur region; addressing global climate change
issues; and more recently, the secretary-general has been a vocal
critic of the military crackdown in Myanmar, also known as Burma.
I spoke with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon before he started a round
of meetings today in Washington.
Secretary-General Ban, welcome to the program.
BAN KI-MOON: It`s a great pleasure to meet you.
RAY SUAREZ: Does the United Nations have any leverage in Myanmar? Can
it really stay the hand of a government that means to suppress the
democracy movement?
BAN KI-MOON: The United Nations itself has the highest moral voice,
as far as principled methods of democracy and human rights are
concerned, and we have been mobilizing all possible political
influences of leaders in the region and in the world.
I have spoken with many leaders in ASEAN, and ASEAN recently has
taken a very strong position vis-a-vis Myanmar`s human rights
situation. We have put forward some proposals demanding the release
of political detainees, and make socioeconomic and political
democratizations. These efforts will be continuously done at the
level of myself and through my special envoy.
RAY SUAREZ: You`ve just recently returned from Darfur. You spoke to
people in the camps, spoke to people in the government of Sudan.
Where do things stand now?
BAN KI-MOON: Now we are looking forward to the political
negotiations, which will be held on October 27th. Necessary
preparations are going on at the final phase.
What we are now working hard is to have all the rebel group leaders
participate in these political preparations, political negotiations.
We hope that they should demonstrate their commitment as leaders of
all these rebel movements, if they think about the future of their
country that they must participate, rather than staying out of these
political negotiations.
Now, the deployment of a joint hybrid operation in Darfur is also
going on smoothly.
RAY SUAREZ: The government in Khartoum has said all along that not
enough attention has been paid to the rebel groups that are fighting
against the central government that Sudan says is the real cause for
the humanitarian crisis. Does the rebel movement, these various
armies, have to be part of the peace process in order for the dying
and the killing to stop there?
BAN KI-MOON: It is necessary for those factional groups to
participate in these political negotiations because they are the
important stakeholders. We will have political negotiations where
their concerns could be heard.
And the continuing violence will gain nothing. They must cease these
violent means, and there should be a cessation of hostilities
immediately. Sudan`s government has assured that, as soon as these
political negotiations begin, they will declare a unilateral
cessation of the hostilities. I do hope that all of the rebel groups
will participate in this cessation of hostilities.
RAY SUAREZ: Now, another big world problem facing the U.N. that
you`ve spoken out about is global warming, but in your view, global
warming is part of the Darfur crisis, as well. Tell us about that.
BAN KI-MOON: The Darfur crisis, in fact, was a man-made crisis, but
you cannot rule out all these aspects of environmental degradation,
the absolute poverty, as well as the scarcity of natural resources,
particularly water. That has exacerbated all these situations.
Therefore, we must take some comprehensive resolution of this Darfur
situation. This is what I have been doing. I have three action plans.
One is ensuring peace and security in Darfur. Then, resolve this
issue through political negotiations. Without a political
negotiation, you cannot ensure a smooth peace and security there.
Then, there should be some hope, sign of hope to the Darfurian people
through developmental packages.
Therefore, my plan is to have all this comprehensive addressing three
tracks. They are now moving, and we have made some credible
progresses. But the important thing will have to come from now until
we see the final resolution of this issue.
RAY SUAREZ: But if there`s no worldwide approach toward greenhouse
gases and global climate change, will there be more Darfurs in the
world?
BAN KI-MOON: I am very much encouraged by the level of strong support
from the world in recognizing the urgency of this global warming
situation. The science has made it quite clear, and we have been
feeling the impact coming from global warming.
If we do not take actions, you cannot guarantee that we will not see
any second Darfurian situations there. I will continuously be
engaged, but we need strong support. This is a global challenge which
requires a global response, common and concerted efforts.
RAY SUAREZ: But let`s take a look at the permanent five in the
Security Council. Sitting on the permanent five are two of the
world`s biggest polluters -- China and the United States -- a major
oil exporter -- Russia -- and two very carbon-intense societies in
Britain and France. Are these the five countries that are really
going to help get the world to agree to emit fewer greenhouse gases?
BAN KI-MOON: It`s true that each and every country, not necessarily
the P-5, but all the countries, they have their own domestic
challenges. But what is encouraging is that all the countries now
recognize the significance and urgency and importance of taking
common action to address these global warming issues.
I am encouraged that the United States has also confirmed that the
United Nations should take the leading role, and the United States is
also very much committed to this process.
RAY SUAREZ: The United Nations hasn`t had a large-scale presence in
Iraq since the attack on the U.N. compound there. It`s been some time
since then. And now the American political leadership and the
candidates to take over the presidency are talking about having fewer
American troops there over time. Will this create an opening for the
reengagement of the world community in Iraq, the reengagement of the
U.N.?
BAN KI-MOON: As the secretary-general, I am in the process of very
seriously considering how the United Nations can increase our
presence there, how we can make a different contribution to peace and
security there.
However, the United Nations does not have all the necessary resources
or tools. Our security and safety has been largely dependent upon the
MNF forces. However, we`ve been taking necessary, again, preparations
to have integrated security accommodations for our staff and our
activities there.
We are going to help promote national reconciliation, a national
dialogue, and help promote regional cooperation. The United Nations
has a competitive edge in political facilitation and humanitarian
assistance. This is what we are now considering.
RAY SUAREZ: But you also have to have a welcome from the United
States and from the government of Iraq to be involved there. Do you
have that now?
BAN KI-MOON: As the situation develops in the future, I know that the
United Nations will have to be engaged more, and the United Nations
needs full cooperation and support from all of the international
community, including the United States and other big powers, and
particularly the Iraqi government.
RAY SUAREZ: Recently, there was a meeting between the heads of state
of the two Koreas. Was this an encouraging sign? Do you think it
actually helps build down the tension on the peninsula?
BAN KI-MOON: I am very much encouraged as secretary-general of the
United Nations, as one of the Korean citizens, to have seen this very
moving development of situation. It will certainly pave the way to
solidify the common ground.
RAY SUAREZ: And stop the North Korean nuclear program?
BAN KI-MOON: North Korea has committed to disenable their nuclear
facilities, with the ultimate proposal for dismantling all nuclear
weapons and nuclear programs. This is, again, a very good,
encouraging sign toward the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
This will, again, bring the peace and security not only on the Korean
peninsula, but beyond this Korean peninsula in Northeast Asia.
RAY SUAREZ: Ban Ki-moon, Mr. Secretary-General, thanks a lot.
BAN KI-MOON: It gives me great pleasure. Thank you.
RAY SUAREZ: We have an insider forum on the Darfur crisis on our Web
site. You can send your questions to Sarjoh Bah, an African expert
with the Center on International Cooperation at New York University.
To participate, go to PBS.org.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: And finally tonight, the Nobel Prize for Literature goes
to British author Doris Lessing. We begin with a report from John
Sparks of Independent Television News.
JOHN SPARKS, ITV News Correspondent: Five o`clock this afternoon, at
Doris Lessing`s home in London, wine to celebrate, but she was in a
contemplative mood.
NOBEL PRIZE COMMITTEE ANNOUNCER: The Nobel Prize in Literature for
2007 is awarded to the English writer Doris Lessing.
JOHN SPARKS: Eight hours earlier in Stockholm and the big
announcement. Ms. Lessing had been on the short list for the world`s
biggest literature prize for years, yet the duty of informing the
prolific author fell to a journalist outside her home.
JOURNALIST: We`re photographing you. Have you heard the news?
DORIS LESSING, Nobel Prize, Literature: No.
JOURNALIST: You`ve won the Nobel Prize for Literature.
DORIS LESSING: Oh, Christ.
JOHN SPARKS: Ms. Lessing`s first novel was published in 1950. Dozens
of works of fiction followed, along with plays and non-fiction and
autobiography. She was a child of the British Empire, born in Persia
and raised on a farm in Rhodesia. There was little formal learning,
but her parents loved books.
DORIS LESSING: Well, they also read and told stories, and my mother
ordered books. Now, we`re in the middle of Africa, you understand,
ordering books from England. So I had the most wonderful list of
books as a child.
JOHN SPARKS: Doris Lessing inspired a generation of feminists with
her breakthrough novel "The Golden Notebook." Women were depicted as
they really were and as they can be: angry, bored, aggressive. For
many, it was a revelation.
DORIS LESSING: When I wrote "The Golden Notebook," and I wrote these
things that women were saying, apparently it was absolutely
astounding to everyone. "My god, what an extraordinary revelation!"
But I was writing down what women were saying.
What surprises me is that everyone reading that book would have heard
women saying these things, but they weren`t listening to what they
were saying.
JOHN SPARKS: She`s attracted her fair share of critics, labeled at
various times the black writer, the communist writer, the mystical
writer. The series of science fiction books written in the 1980s were
judged harshly by some.
DORIS LESSING: This is what one has to expect from the literary
establishment, I`m afraid. Well, they didn`t like my so-called
science fiction. Why should they? It was absolutely outside what they
were used to. But in my view, my personal view, it`s some of the best
writing I`ve ever done. And when they get around to noticing it...
JOHN SPARKS: Still, Ms. Lessing, who`s 88 this month, has won most of
the big literary prizes. Now she says she`s got the royal flush.
DORIS LESSING: Well, I feel a bit like the icing on the cake. That`s
what it is. I mean, no one -- I mean, it`s such a glamorous prize,
and so many good people have won it, so you can`t say you don`t care
about it.
RAY SUAREZ: Jeffrey Brown has more.
JEFFREY BROWN: And with me is Margaret Soltan, professor of
literature at George Washington University.
Welcome to you.
MARGARET SOLTAN, Professor of Literature, George Washington
University: Thank you.
JEFFREY BROWN: For those not familiar with the work of Doris Lessing,
what themes stand out?
MARGARET SOLTAN: She`s interested in conflict. She hates conflict,
but she`s interested in the ways in which lives inevitably seem to
resolve themselves into conflict, either conflict between men and
women or conflict between nations.
But she generally in her novels and short stories focuses on people
under pressure, people who`ve tried to live meaningful lives and made
certain decisions towards a meaningful life, but somehow everything
is falling apart and the basis of their existence is under question.
So, for instance, in her most famous novel, "The Golden Notebook,"
the main character has been a very committed communist in England in
the 1950s and she begins to realize this has been a terrible error.
And the novel really is sort of anatomizing how it is she goes about
recognizing the error and fixing it.
JEFFREY BROWN: Is there a distinctive Lessing style? We heard how
prolific she is. Is there a distinctive style, or has that changed
over time?
MARGARET SOLTAN: Her style has changed a lot over time. She`s been at
this for more than 60 years, and she`s a compulsive writer. She says
she can`t stop writing. And, I mean, she gardens, and she goes to the
opera, but basically she just writes.
She`s essentially a realist, in the tradition in England of someone
like George Eliot. She doesn`t do particularly experimental fiction.
She experiments with theme, and her science fiction novels,
obviously, are very surreal in various respects.
But the novels that I think she`s best known for and the short
stories are essentially realistic in nature. It`s not fancy prose.
It`s just strong, confident, beautiful prose.
JEFFREY BROWN: And how much of her own biography -- we heard about
growing as a girl in Africa -- how much of that appears in the work?
MARGARET SOLTAN: Tons. She`s a very autobiographical writer. Even
when the context is science fiction, you can tell that she`s
incorporating her life into it.
"The Golden Notebook," again, is profoundly autobiographical. She,
herself, of course, was a member of the party and underwent this kind
of traumatic choice to leave it, with all that that meant.
Her sexual relationships, her marriages, her having lived in various
countries, and her always, I think, trying to lead a committed
political life, as well as a committed and meaningful personal life,
is inherent in all that she writes.
JEFFREY BROWN: "The Golden Notebook" has this status as a classic, a
feminist novel, and yet it sounds as though she herself didn`t want
that tag, or that she was at least ambivalent about it.
MARGARET SOLTAN: That`s right. I think not ambivalent. You know,
she`s pretty annoyed about, as I take it from reading interviews with
her, about that status, the sort of feminist icon novel. And I think
it`s for a couple of reasons.
One is simply that all serious novelists want to be taken as dealing
in universal themes. So I think you`d find Philip Roth being unhappy
about being called a Jewish novelist. And you`ll find Lessing unhappy
about being tagged as, in some sense, a feminist writer.
She wants universal themes. And then, too, her attitudes toward
feminism have changed radically over the years, and she has lots of
trouble with it, considers it to be a species of political
correctness and to have dehumanized men. She sees it as sort of
founded, fairly or unfairly, founded on a certain kind of
male-bashing, which she objects to.
So, no, I think it`s quite true that she doesn`t want to be known as
a...
JEFFREY BROWN: We heard her in that clip tossing aside the criticisms
that have come from some in the literary mainstream, but they have
been there, certainly the last couple of decades, and certainly with
some of the science fiction that she`s written.
MARGARET SOLTAN: Sure. And about that I would say that I think, like
Norman Mailer, who she resembles in some respects and who she
admires, she`s a writer who has a long history of writing and a long
history of engagement, and serious engagement, and maybe on some
level somewhat naive engagement in intellectual questions and moral
questions.
And I think anyone who`s a serious fiction writer who has 60-plus
years of engagement in various modes of existence and various
spiritual ideas -- you know, she`s interested in Sufism, et cetera --
is going to look silly sometimes and is going to be subjected to some
ridicule.
But, I mean, you know, talk about Blake, or Whitman, or D.H.
Lawrence, or any of them. You know, they`re people who are forging
new ideas, and trying out things, and they`re very vulnerable, and
they specialize in human vulnerability in their work. So I`m not
surprised she`s been attacked.
JEFFREY BROWN: Well, we only have a short time here, and you teach
20th century literature, I know. Where do you put her, in terms of
her overall legacy? What will last? What will stand?
MARGARET SOLTAN: I think what will stand out is "The Golden
Notebook." I think what will stand out are her short stories, which
are brilliant and beautiful. You know, even when she was very young,
writing short stories, really good.
Among those, listeners might be most -- viewers might be most aware
of "To Room Nineteen," which is a story about a woman who commits
suicide. And it`s much anthologized and discussed. It`s really a gem
of a short story.
And so I think she`ll be remembered as someone who wrote brilliant
short stories and who accomplished "The Golden Notebook," and all
that it has in terms of literary qualities and also in terms of
global impact.
JEFFREY BROWN: All right, Margaret Soltan on Doris Lessing, thanks
very much.
MARGARET SOLTAN: Thank you.
(BREAK)
RAY SUAREZ: Again, the other major developments of this day.
Turkey rejected a U.S. House committee vote that condemned genocide
among Armenians during World War I. The Turks recalled their
ambassador to Washington.
The U.S. military in Iraq announced a raid killing 19 suspected al-
Qaida members, but also 15 civilians, including nine children.
And drug makers ended U.S. sales of over-the-counter cough and cold
medicine for infants. The FDA warned last week of deaths linked to
overdosing.
We`ll see you online and again here tomorrow evening, with David
Brooks and E.J. Dionne, as well as Republican presidential candidate
Ron Paul, among others. I`m Ray Suarez. Thanks for joining us. Good
night.