TONIGHT

• Home
• Video
• Podcasts/RSS 
• Local Showtimes
• Past Shows
• Blogs
• About the Show
• Tell Tavis
• Features
• Mobile

RELATED LINKS

• Mr. Alexander's bio
• Article on Mr. Alexander

E-mail a friend

Tavis: Clifford Alexander was the first African American to serve as a Secretary of the Army. That was under former president Jimmy Carter. Previously he was chair of the Equal Opportunity Commission and a special assistant to President Lyndon Johnson. He's now the president of Alexander and Associates and joins us tonight from his home base in Washington. Mr. Secretary, nice to see you again, sir.

Clifford Alexander: Pleasure to see you, Tavis.

Tavis: Glad to have you on.

Alexander: Thank you.

Tavis: Let me start by asking you, first of all, what you make of this deadline to pull out of Iraq on June 30. Now we have the United Nations that, as you well know, the Security Council, at least, has approved a resolution supporting the end of the occupation, as it were, in Iraq. Before I get into this issue of the troops and what happens to them, what do you make of this June 30 deadline?

Alexander: It's better than no deadline because we shouldn't have been there in the first place, but presuming that we're there, what we now must understand, hopefully, that this is Iraq. The people of Iraq should make determinations on their own behalf, and rather than being an occupier as we've been, let us be helpful if we can for a mess that we created.

Tavis: You didn't waste any time making it very clear that we should not have been there. Care to explain why you say that?

Alexander: I think we shouldn't have been there, because if you look at when you project power in this world and when you kill civilians, as we have done, you should do it only in the economic or political interest of our nation. There was no clear reason to do this. There have been shifting reasons that have been given--weapons of mass destruction, we're going to bring democracy to the people of Iraq. Well, what we should realize is it's often been said that Muslim nations never had democracy. That's historically inaccurate, and it's absolute nonsense, so we have, I think, risked the lives and lost the lives of our Americans because we made a foolish blunder. Now, having made that foolish blunder, we are now there, and what is it we can do, that in the interest of humanity, in the interest of the American people, the interest of all the other allies that we have, and certainly the interest of the Iraqi people, save as many lives as possible? And I do think that this resolution is one helpful step. There need to be a lot of other steps, and part of it is as quick a removal of our forces and other forces as is possible and the reinstatement of the people of Iraq to their own country, because we don't belong there. We don't know much about their history. We don't know what their relationship is, if any, to terrorism. We know that because we went, there is terrorism now in Iraq, and that is clearly against the national interest, so this administration needs to show less aggressiveness, less potential...almost contempt for people, and more understanding of what is in the interest of the nation and of the world, and that means talking to people, that means understanding that lives in other nations are as valuable as ours, and it also means that we have to listen and not just talk to the world.

Tavis: I wanted to have you on, in part, because I wanted to talk to you specifically about the troops, and no better person to do that with than you, given your many years of experience and certainly as the first person of color, the first African American to head the army. Let me ask you before I get to talking about the troops in Iraq right now, what's going to happen to them. What it is that you say to a parent who's lost a daughter, lost a son in Iraq, particularly against the backdrop of your own personal belief that we should not have been there in the first place, but these lives have been lost? There are many men and women obviously who are not coming home and others, God forbid, who may still come home in body bags. Talk to me about what it means to put your life on the line, to serve your country in a place where you have no--you have no say-so. The commander-in-chief says you go, you have to go, but it's a war that people like you say that they shouldn't be having to fight in the first place.

Alexander: Well, there is not enough that can be said to anyone who has lost a loved one in a war. There isn't enough to comfort them. You do try and do that. You don't do it, I think, with lies. You don't do it by saying that you were creating nobility, that you were freeing people. I think you do it because they decided to volunteer and serve their nation, and they decided, those who lost their lives, to take that risk. Of course families should be proud, but one can never overcome the kind of grief that they're bound to suffer. And I do think that we do have to keep in mind that in all of these situations, it is not just Americans that are dying, that in Iraq, in particular, there are literally maybe tens of thousands of civilians who have died. Now, each of them wonder what was this about and what was this for. It is always better to be talking about differences that you have rather than fighting them out, particularly with the kinds of armaments we have in today's world. And let's not presume and think that you can take the concept of democracy and superimpose it on people. Democracy flourishes when it is grown from within, when it comes from the earth, when it comes from the people, when they realize that the yoke of oppression is a bad thing. Let's remember, in the Middle East, you have had oppression for the last century by dominant countries such as Great Britain and France and Belgium and Luxembourg, others who came in and subjugated people in that region to their own form of life for their own economic interest. So it's a little hard for democracy in Iraq to formulate in the 1920s when the British come in and take over the country and decide that they're going to run it and if you dare do something about it, they're gonna kill you. So it's a little hard to call that a democracy. Now, what we had to do is at least learn from that lesson, that as we have our troops there, let us be as helpful as is possible, but let us most of all--and which we have not done--let's do some planning for the future, not sort of the Rumsfeld arrogant approach to the world, but take the world as we see it, plan with it about how can we preserve lives, how can we see to it that the economy of that country is revitalized so that the people of that country really do have some understanding of a future. What has happened in this war was when we went into the war, as you may remember, it was said that they would greet us with chocolates and flowers, and the world would be sweet and happy, and that the oil revenues would pay for this. This may end up costing the American people over 300 billions of dollars. We've already spent over $200 billion on this. Think what could be done in the rest of the world to help end hunger or AIDS or something else. Think of what could be done in our cities. Think of what could be done in health care. Think of all of these things as we parade around pretending that somehow we are gonna end, uh, totalitarianism in one country.

Tavis: Speaking of thinking of various things, I've been thinking, as you've been listing here, about the fact that, by my count 3 times now, you've brought to the attention--my attention, and I suspect that of our viewers, how we need to be thinking about the loss of other life, how other life is as precious as American life. I ask this respectfully. It may be easy for you to say that now that you're the former Secretary of the Army, but tell me honestly whether or not generals, American generals specifically, actually think in those terms? Is it win by any means necessary and do what the commander in chief says, or do you really think about the loss of other life?

Alexander: I think people in uniform, and that's generals, but just as importantly sergeants and privates and corporals, think about it more than you and I do as civilians, because they are at risk. And the greatest peaceniks, actually, are people in uniform. They understand that if they do go to war, that not only are they at risk, but think of what they must be thinking about as they kill others, and they do think about that, and they do worry about that. Now, sometimes it is important for us to exercise power, but it is not important and has not been important in this instance, and it is also important for us to remember that there are other dangerous places in this world. We have an active army now of about 485,000 people. We have about 80,000 of those people, uh, in Germany. We have about 40,000 of those people in Korea. And this is not just the army, but all of the armed services. Another 40,000 in Japan. They're scattered around the world. We are stretched very, very thin, and we're now concentrating more and more resources and people in Iraq. We have to understand that there is a rest of the world that will be watching this and wanting to know what power we do have.

Tavis: Let me ask you, speaking of being stretched thin, and I love the difference in terminology. Uh, the common terminology is troop extensions--uh, when you keep troops longer than you told the American people they were gonna be there. We call them troop extensions. You guys call them stop loss orders. So whether you call it troop extensions or stop loss orders--I love the spin on that last title, that last term, at least--what do you make of the fact that General Richard Myers, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, cannot commit, will not commit to the American people that there won't be troop extensions or stop loss orders, uh, beyond where we are now, which is about 2 1/2 months left under the order that they're now working under?

Alexander: It's yet a further piece of proof of the inability of this group to plan the way they should. They didn't plan for this war properly. If they had listened to some of the uniformed leadership, in the army in particular, they would have known with this war and with the occupation that followed, they would have needed more resources than they have. If they had needed more resources, maybe they would have thought about whether they should have done it in the first place. But now when they can't tell you, who is gonna tell us? Uh, you and I aren't gonna think about it. It isn't the average person on the corner that's gonna think about it. So that's what they are professionally paid to do, and the commander in chief and, in particular, his secretary of defense, his inability to state to us what this is gonna cost and with the back of his hand telling the media in this country that he can't compute that and don't really ask him about it, is an insult to this democracy. In a democracy, it is the responsibility of the elected leadership to come forward with facts. We're having an attorney general right now who is refusing to give memoranda to the congress. If I had done that when I was Secretary of the Army, they would have dragged me out by both feet. I think the kind of arrogance that is being projected by the executive branch is out of keeping with a democracy and a democratic form of government. But far more importantly, it's risking lots of lives.

Tavis: Let me close with this, speaking of something out of touch with democracy, and everybody agrees on this, I suspect, that this, uh, Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal, particularly at Abu Ghraib, has made all of us embarrassed on behalf of this country that we are fortunate to live in. Um, what is the impact of that scandal on American soldiers serving abroad who might, at some point, be captured themselves?

Alexander: Well, the impact is twofold. First of all, let us put it in context. This is not an American characteristic. It is characteristic of a failure of leadership within the military and maybe within the defense department, that they felt that they could get away with doing this that was as inhumane as we have seen it. Now the impact on the many, many thousands more who serve us day by day valiantly is a shame about what's been done. It's the same kind of furor that you and I feel internally, that somebody that is representing our country would do something that we are fighting to protect the world against. That John McCain, as great a man as he is, would say that never doing his time, that this kind of thing happened to him during his 5 years of captivity. We have to be outraged, as we have been. We have to be more open about it. And you know, it isn't the worst thing in the world to admit to error. And having admitted to error, then we must become far more open with ourselves, with our media, with our congress, with the American people. And then after having become open to them, change our ways. We cannot let people rot away in jails without seeing lawyers. We can't let our justice department because some knob-headed lawyer writes a memo saying that you can do this and you won't get prosecuted, keep information away from the American people. That is un-American, and they need to stop doing it.

Tavis: Well, I'm delighted to talk to you, and we'll have to do it again, uh, in the not-too-distant future. Mr. Secretary, as always, you're welcome here, and thanks for coming on tonight.

Alexander: Thank you so much, Tavis. Good to be with you.

Tavis: Thank you. Clifford Alexander, former Secretary of the Army. Up next on this program, musician Henry Rollins on his recent visit to U.S. troops in Iraq. Stay with us.

 

Back to June 10, 2004