For Immediate Release
Office of the Vice President
March 19, 2006
Interview of the Vice President by Bob Schieffer, CBS News Face the Nation
CBS News Washington
Washington, D.C.
10:31 A.M. EST
Q Good morning, again. And the Vice President is in the studio
with us this morning for this live interview.
Mr. Vice President, thank you very much for coming.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Good morning, Bob.
Q Let's start right in about Iraq because that's right at the
top of the list this morning. The conservative columnist George Will in
this morning's paper, reflecting what I think is a growing unease among
some Republicans now, says that conditions in Iraq today are worse than
they were after the elections in December. And today, Ayad Allawi, the
former interim Prime Minister, the most pro-American of the Iraqi
leaders, I think, says that we can no longer mince words, Iraq is in the
midst of a civil war. Do you agree with that?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don't, Bob. I think the assessment that we
get from General George Casey, who is our man commanding in Iraq, from
Zal Khalilzad, the ambassador, from John Abizaid, who is the general in
charge of Central Command, doesn't square with that.
Clearly, there is an attempt underway by the terrorists, by Zarqawi
and others to foment civil war. That's been their strategy all along.
But my view would be they've reached a stage of desperation from their
standpoint. For example, the bombing of the mosque in Samarra here a
couple of weeks ago that is a reflection of the fact that they are doing
everything they can to stop the formation of a democratically elected
government.
Zarqawi himself was quoted two years ago saying that if the Iraqis
ever achieve that objective, put together a democratic government, that
he'd have to pack up his bags and go elsewhere. And I think that's
absolutely the case.
So what we've seen is a serious effort by them to foment civil war,
but I don't think they've been successful.
Q You don't think they're there yet?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don't.
Q Mr. Vice President, all along the government has been very
optimistic. You remain optimistic. But I remember when you were saying
we'd be greeted as liberators. You played down the insurgency. Ten
months ago, you said it was in its last throes. Do you believe that
these optimistic statements may be one of the reasons that people seem
to be more skeptical in this country about whether we ought to be in
Iraq?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, I think it has less to do with statements
we've made, which I think were basically accurate, and reflect reality,
than it does the fact that there is a constant sort of perception, if
you will, that's created because what's newsworthy is the car bomb in
Baghdad. It's not all the work that went on that day in 15 other
provinces in terms of making progress towards rebuilding Iraq.
The facts are pretty straightforward. The Iraqis have met every
single political deadline that's been set for them. They haven't missed
a single one. They took over, in terms of sovereignty, 21 months ago.
They held national elections the following January. They wrote a
constitution -- one of the best constitutions in that part of the world.
They held a referendum on it last October, and last December, had
turnout of about 78 percent in terms of the election, and now are
putting together a government which they'll form up here shortly.
On the security front, we've seen major progress in terms of
training and equipping Iraqi forces. Today, roughly half of all of the
missions that are being conducted over there are with Iraqis in the
lead. They've been very successful now in terms of training and
equipping over a hundred battalions of Iraqi troops. And it continues
to improve day-by-day. Those are the facts on the ground. That's the
reality.
Q But may I just interrupt?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Sure.
Q Isn't it also a reality that the violence continues? They
keep finding these people that have been executed? And isn't it also
reality that they can't seem to put a government together? They can't
seem to find a way, a compromise to get this government together.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Bob, it took us a lot longer to put an
effective government together when we tried to do it 200 years ago than
it has taken the Iraqis. It's remarkable when you think about a group
of people who have been under the heavy hand of oppression for 35 years,
with Saddam Hussein, one of the bloodiest dictators in modern times,
slaughtered hundreds of thousands of his own people, started two wars,
used weapons of mass destruction against his own folks, to emerge from
that as effectively as they have in as short a period of time as they
have.
Yes, there's continuing violence. Why? There's continuing
violence because our adversaries understand what's at stake here,
because they know that if we're successful in establishing a democratic
government in Iraq, that that's going to put enormous pressure in that
part of the world on all of those other regimes and governments. It
offers a counter to the bloody ideology that Osama bin Laden and the al
Qaeda organizations have tried to perpetrate throughout that part of the
world.
There's a lot at stake here. It's not just about Iraq. It's not
about just today's situation in Iraq. It's about where we're going to
be 10 years from now, in the Middle East, and whether or not there's
going to be hope and the development of governments that are responsive
to the will of the people, that are not a threat to anyone, that are not
safe havens for terror, or manufacturers of weapons of mass destruction
-- that's our vision and our view -- or whether or not the terrorists
succeed.
And if they succeed, then the danger is that Iraq will become a
failed state as Afghanistan was a few years ago when it was governed by
the Taliban, a safe haven for Osama bin Laden, and the base from which
they launched attacks against the United States and our friends around
the world.
Q Let me read to you what Senator Kennedy, liberal Democrat from
Massachusetts, and a long-time opponent of the war said on the third
anniversary. Here's part of his statement. He said:
"It is clearer than ever that Iraq was a war we never should have
fought. The administration has been dangerously incompetent. And its
Iraq policy is not worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in
uniform. Yet President Bush continues to see the war through the same
rose-colored glasses he has always used. He assures the American people
we are winning, while Iraq's future and the lives of our troops hangs so
perilously on the precipice of a new disaster."
Dangerously incompetent is what he is saying. I want to give you a
chance to respond.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I would not look to Ted Kennedy for
guidance and leadership on how we ought to manage national security,
Bob. I think what Senator Kennedy reflects is sort of the pre-9/11
mentality about how we ought to deal with the world and that part of the
world.
We used to operate on the assumption before 9/11 that a criminal
attack -- a terrorist attack was a criminal act, a law enforcement
problem. We were hit repeatedly in the '90s and never responded
effectively, and the terrorists came to believe not only could they
strike us with impunity, but if they hit us hard enough, they could
change our policy, because they did in Beirut in 1983, or Mogadishu in
1993.
We changed all that on 9/11. After they hit us and killed 3,000 of
our people here at home, we said, enough is enough. We're going to
aggressively go after them. We'll go after the terrorists wherever we
find them. We'll go after those states that sponsor terror. We'll go
after people that can provide them with weapons of mass destruction.
We'll use our intelligence and our military services very aggressively.
And we have.
We did in Afghanistan. We've done it in Pakistan. We're working
with the Paks. We captured or killed hundreds of al Qaeda. We've done
it in Saudi Arabia. And obviously, we're doing it now in Iraq. That
kind of aggressive forward-leaning strategy is one of the main reasons
we haven't been struck again since 9/11 because we've taken the fight to
them.
Senator Kennedy's approach would be pack your bags and go home;
retreat behind your oceans and assume you can be safe. But we learned
on 9/11 that, in fact, what's going on 10,000 miles away in a place like
Afghanistan, or Iraq can have a direct impact here in the United States
when we lost 3,000 people that morning. And we know now that the
biggest threat that we face of all isn't just another 9/11, it's a 9/11
where the terrorists have something like nuclear weapons, or a deadly
biological agent to use against us.
The Iraq situation has to be viewed within the broader context of
the global war on terror. It is a global conflict. You can't look just
at Iraq and make decisions there with respect to how that's going to
come out without having major consequences for everything that's going
on. And I think we are going to succeed in Iraq. I think the evidence
is overwhelming. I think Ted Kennedy has been wrong from the very
beginning. He's the last man I'd go to for guidance in terms of how we
should conduct U.S. national security policy.
Q Well, let me ask you about this charge of incompetence because
we hear that not just about Iraq, but we hear it more and being raised
sometimes by members of your own party on a variety of issues -- the
bumbling after Katrina, the Harriet Miers nomination, the failure to see
the political implications of the Dubai ports deal. Some people are
even saying you need a staff shake-up over at the White House, Mr. Vice
President.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Bob, you know what this reminds me of? It
reminds me of 30 years ago when I was Jerry Ford's chief of staff and
you were the CBS correspondent covering the White House.
Q That's right.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: We had the same kind of stories then, the same
kinds of controversy. Administrations go through peaks and valleys.
It's a tough business that we're involved in. And when you're down in
the polls, you're going to take shots that you don't deserve. And when
you're up in the polls, you're probably going to get praise you don't
deserve. So I don't think we can pay any attention to that kind of
thing.
The President has got a job to do. I've worked very closely now
with this man for over five years. He's a superb leader. He's tough.
He's decisive. He's willing to take tough decisions. He ignores the
background noise that's out there in the polls that are taken on a daily
basis. He's doing a superb job. He's got great people around him. And
I simply don't give credence to those kind of comments.
Q But many people say that they're just worn out. And we all
know whether you like him or don't like him, respect him or don't
respect him, people who work at the White House work very long hours.
They work very, very hard. Is it possible that maybe they're just
suffering a little fatigue here, and it would be good to bring some
people?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, we're always -- there actually -- there
has been a fair amount of change and movement if you look at -- been a
lot of changes in the Cabinet in the second term. But we got some very
good talented people there. But the President will make decisions when
he wants to move people around and make those kinds of choices, that's
really up to him. But I think the notion that somehow the staff is
exhausted, yes, these are tough jobs. No question about it. But we've
got some very good, very able, very talented folks who are devoted to
the President, devoted to trying to do what's right for the country, and
I think that -- I think the country has been well served by this
President and by the --
Q You don't see any shake-up coming?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I'm not in the business of making predictions.
The President hasn't indicated he plans to make any changes. If he does
and when he does, I'm sure he'll announce it.
* * * * *
Q And we're back now with the Vice President. Mr. Vice
President, I must say candidly you have become a lightning rod in this
administration -- whether it's defending the administration when John
McCain says he wants to eliminate torture, on this whole eavesdropping
thing. Some Republican pundits suggest that you may have become a
liability. I know Secretary Rumsfeld once offered to resign. Have you
ever thought of that? Or would you think that would be something that
would be helpful to the President?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I made sure both in 2000 and 2004 that
the President had other options. I didn't ask for this job. I didn't
campaign for it. I got drafted, and -- delighted to serve, and it's
been the highlight of my career to be part of this administration. I've
now been elected to a second term; I'll serve out my term.
Q The fact that you have become some people say a hate magnet in
some ways because you have spoken out on some of these issues, is this
some version of a "good cop, bad cop" kind of routine where you take the
heat the keep the President from taking it?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: It may look that way. It's not conscious. I
think -- what I would say about it, Bob, is that this has been a
different kind of arrangement than most administration's have between
the President and the Vice President, primarily because I'm here to
serve him, I'm not here to run for higher office. Most of my
predecessors spent a good part of their time as Vice President getting
ready to run for President, and thinking about their own campaigns for
President. I've made it clear from the outset that I'm not a candidate
for President. I won't run for President. I've taken the Sherman
statement, if nominated, I will not run; if elected, I won't serve.
I've been very, very firm on that.
So my job is to do what I can to support him and to support the
administration. My advice to him is untainted by any concern I might
have about how the folks in Iowa look at me with connection with the
2008 Iowa caucuses. And when I speak out on an issue, it's because
somebody needs to speak out on the issue. And I can do it without fear
in a sense that I'm not here trying to burnish my image, or improve my
standing in the polls. I'm here to do a job that needs to be done for
the President of the United States. And I'm perfectly willing to go out
and speak out on those issues such as the NSA terrorist surveillance
program because I believe very deeply in what we're doing. It's the
right thing to do, and, frankly, I don't spend a lot of time worrying
about the polls.
Q Well, let me -- since you just brought that up, will you
support the move now underway in the Congress to give them more
congressional oversight on the eavesdropping program?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I've been directly involved on behalf of the
President negotiating with members of both the House and the Senate in
the intelligence committees in setting up the new arrangements. We
negotiated an arrangement whereby there'll be subcommittees in both the
House and the Senate of the intelligence committees that a larger number
of members -- for example, seven members now in the Senate instead of
just the two that have been briefed previously off the committee -- will
be fully briefed into the program. And we've already had that briefing.
Shortly, we'll have a similar briefing for the House.
We are working with them to give them broad oversight with respect
to this program. But it's a very important program. It is totally in
compliance with the laws and constitution of the United States. It has
been a major success in preventing attacks against the United States,
and it needs to be preserved and protected.
Now, the intelligence area is one of the areas the President asked
me to work on when I first came onboard, and I've had an interest in
this subject going back 30 years to my days in the Ford administration.
So it's an appropriate one for me to work on. But it also means going
out publicly and defending it. A lot of people would perhaps run for
the hills or avoid controversy. And obviously, I don't feel that way.
Q Let me go back to one thing you said about serving out your
term because you hear some of these Republican pundits and strategist
that say, well, since the Vice President does not have any aspirations
to be President, maybe a year or so before his term is up, he might step
aside for one reason or another so you could put somebody else into the
job, and then that person would then have a head's up on getting the
nomination. Would anything like that ever make sense to you?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, nobody has suggested it to me.
Q All right, that's a good answer, a direct answer.
We have, I must say, Mr. Vice President, known each other as you
mentioned back to -- since back to the days when President Ford was
President. You were very open. You were -- you dealt with reporters a
lot. But Brent Scowcroft, who has known you longer than I have, said
the other day, I don't know Dick Cheney any more. I want to ask you, do
you think you have changed since those days?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm a lot older. I've got less hair.
Q So am I.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: And what I've got left is gray. Circumstances
have changed, I think, Bob. The job I have now as Vice President is to
be an advisor to the President primarily. I don't run anything. I'm
not in charge of the White House. I'm not in charge of the Defense
Department as I once was, or a congressman from Wyoming. And the most
valuable service I render to him is to give him advice, and that advice
is most valuable when it's totally private -- when he knows what I've
recommended, and I don't talk about it. I don't talk about the
conversations I have with him.
I think Presidents need to have somebody around them that is
totally reliable and trustworthy and is going to protect those
communications they have with the President. They need to be able to
have somebody they can level with. And I sort of see that as my role in
this administration. It means I don't give very many interviews. It
means I am cautious about what I say and what I'm willing to talk about,
and that preserves my value to him. Some people look at that and say,
well, Cheney has changed, or Cheney has shifted. Or another tendency, I
think, is to always assume that the President -- any President is a
black box and it's the advisors around him that run things, or this
faction is up, and therefore that's why this happened. They fail to
give adequate credit to the man himself.
This President has very firm ideas. He makes decisions very
decisively. When you see policy annunciated out there, for example, the
belief in spreading freedom and democracy is the key to our national
security strategy. That's pure George Bush. That's not just because I
believe it, or others in the administration believe it. That doesn't
mean one faction is up, or one faction is down in the great game of
advice as it's commented on by the talking heads. That's what George
Bush believes.
And I think a lot of my friends out there look and see some of the
policies, we've pursued and disagree. But to suggest somehow I've
changed, or my fundamental views of the world have evolved over time,
basically, I don't think that's valid.
Q I must ask you about what you have called the worst day of
your life -- the day that you accidently shot your friend Harry
Whittington down in Texas on that hunting expedition. You didn't make
it public for almost a day. Now, you told Brit Hume the other day that
you still thought that was the right way to go about it. But I just
want to ask you, now that you've had some time to reflect on it, could
that have been better handled?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's one of those situations or
circumstances that is obviously difficult, and generates controversy.
It's probably the first time the Secret Service have had to worry about
a protectee shooting somebody else, instead of being shot at.
(Laughter.) As the President said the other night, he's at 38 percent
in the polls, and as a result of this incident, I shot the only trial
lawyer in Texas who supported him. (Laughter.) So people can laugh
about it now, but at the time, it was deadly serious.
Q Oh, I can imagine.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: And I must admit, the first thing I thought
when I saw what had happened and rushed over to help Harry, I did not
think, gee, I better call the press corps and tell them what's going on
here.
Q Sure. But later on, shouldn't you have --
THE VICE PRESIDENT: This is about 6:00 at night. By the time we
got him to the hospital, and we did not know until the next morning
exactly the status of his medical condition. And that's when we began
to notify the press. And there's been controversy over whether we
should have called the White House press corps -- I didn't have any
press people with me; this was a private trip -- or do it the way we did
it. And the way we did it, I thought was appropriate, which was to have
Katherine Armstrong, who was a witness to all of these events call the
local newspaper. They immediately got it, immediately put it on the
wire and everybody had it. So it struck me as a bit of a tempest in a
teapot over the question of how it was announced.
It was announced by us, I believe in a timely fashion as soon as we
knew what Harry's status was.
Q Well, you do believe that elected officials owe the public an
explanation for their actions?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Sure. This was not part of my public duty and
responsibility, or my official duties at all, but there's bound to be
interest in it when something like that happens because I am the Vice
President. And we treated it that way.
Q All right, Mr. Vice President, thank you so much for coming.
END 10:51 A.M. EST
|