February 25, 2005

From our nation's capital, this is "Washington Week." And now here's moderator Gwen Ifill.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: The president goes to Europe. Did he mend any fences or change any minds?

If it's Tuesday, it must be Belgium. President Bush hop-scotched across Europe this week, papering over old differences and cementing new friendships.

No temporary debate, no passing disagreement of governments, no power on earth will ever divide us.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: On the agenda, Iran, Iraq, and nuclear security. But are France, Germany, and Russia on the same page as the Bush administration? In Iraq, the new leadership begins to take shape. Who is the likely new prime minister, and what will the U.S. think?

And at home, a battle royal shapes up over Social Security, as lobbyists line up on both sides of the issue.

Covering these stories this week, Richard Keil of Bloomberg News, David Sanger of "The New York Times," Doyle McManus of the "Los Angeles Times," and Gloria Borger of "U.S. News and World Report."

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Good evening. The president returned last night from his European tour having accomplished a lot and a little. On the upside, he got friendly face time with two European leaders, France's Jacques Chirac and Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, who have been among his toughest international critics. And he got to talk cooperation, instead of confrontation, on stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and expanding the spread of democracy.

But did the happy talk last? Russian president Vladimir Putin was tough to read as he listened to the president yesterday.

President Bush (on tape): Democracies reflect a country's customs and culture and I know that. Yet democracies have certain things in common. They have a rule of law and protection of minorities, a free press and viable political opposition. I was able to share my concerns about Russia's commitment in fulfilling these universal principles in a constructive and friendly way.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: There was a lot of constructive and friendly going on on this week's trip, but what, if anything, was accomplished? Dick Keil is just back, fresh off the plane. David Sanger followed it all from Washington. Dick, were any fences mended on this trip?

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: I think so. The president had good and friendly meetings with Schroeder and President Chirac of France, two of his most vehement critics.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: And the president ate french fries.

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: We are back to calling them by the name they are most well known by. In terms of Iraq, there wasn't much to show for that. Very, very small contribution, about two million Euros. That worked out, somebody calculated, .4% of the supplemental budget request sent to Congress. France is contributing one single military officer, already at NATO, who will start coordinating things as yet undetermined. Nothing much has changed on Iraq.

On Iran there was more cooperation. The president said he had heart the carrot and stick argument, face-to-face from President Chirac and Prime Minister Blair and Chancellor Schroeder and said he was going to come home here and think about that and think about the advice he had been given by these men.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: The president was being almost conciliatory. David, he talked about Russia being true to democracy. When he stood next to Putin he was circuitous in the way he scolded him.

David Sanger, The New York Times: Four years ago when President Bush first met Vladimir Putin, they came together after a backdrop of a campaign in which President Bush had said as a candidate that we had been far too close to Russia's leaders. He said he looked into his eyes and glimpsed his soul. This time it seemed he glimpsed an old KGB agent. He was very cautious, as you saw before. He was very polite in his description publicly of their concerns, but in private, administration officials have been quite concerned that Putin is taking the country straight back to an era of centralization, restrictions on press freedom and they don't know what leverage they have to stop this. It is not clear right now that they have many.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: There were two different headlines, "The New York Times" called it a tense meeting, the "Washington Post" portrayed it less tense. The president, of course, said it was a frank discussion. So can you tell us, I mean, you were there, not in the room, but you were there. What was it like between those two, really?

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: Well, the president promised probably, David, six times going into this meeting he was going to have a very frank exchange with Putin. Administration officials tell me he absolutely did. There was time spent, too, not only in the private meeting, but the bigger group meeting talking about the incentives Russia has in terms of economics to halt this slide away from democracy. Perhaps the most significant thing that came out of the meeting with Putin was the announcement that the U.S. is really going to accelerate the push to get Russia into the WTO we have seen these battles and know the benefits they can bring to governments and countries who are trying to move to the next level economically.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: The world trade organization for the five viewers who don't know what that is.

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: Putin has made it clear to the president that is what he wants.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: I want to talk about Iran, the American and European positions are different. The Europeans want to go to Iran and offer positive incentives for stopping nuclear programs. The president goes into this trip saying, no way. He comes out saying the good news is our goals are in the same place. We are going to listen -- what is the phrase he used, David, think about what he heard.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Let's listen to what the president said. The nuclear proliferation was the clear sub text of this trip.

President Bush (on tape): The Iranian regime must end its support for terrorism and must not develop nuclear weapons. This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table. Diplomacy is just beginning. Iran is not Iraq.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: 'It is ridiculous but all options are on the table.' David Sanger, parse those words for us.

David Sanger, The New York Times: That means it is ridiculous because we are tied up across the road. It is ridiculous because we haven't yet proven they have a nuclear weapons program. But Doyle got right at the central issue, which is the Europeans see this problem a little bit differently than President Bush does. At 30,000 feet, yeah, we have the same goal, which is nobody wants Iran with a nuclear weapon. But the Europeans say that the Iranians have a right to go have a commercial nuclear program under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which they signed. There was an interesting moment on the trip where president Bush mischaracterized what Iran had agreed to. He said they signed a treaty and agreed never to enrich uranium. The treaty gives them the right to enrich uranium as long as it is inspected and fully disclose. They had not fully disclosed. They had hidden programs. George Bush doesn't want the Iranians anywhere near uranium. You can understand why. The Europeans are willing to live with it as long as they have assurances they are not going to use it for weapons.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: What about the Russians and Syria, and their relationship with Syria. Did the president make any headway on that?

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: It is a real point of contention, Gloria, selling weapons to Syria when everyone is concerned with what Syria is doing in Lebanon and the investigation of the assassination of the former prime minister. No breakthrough was made.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: And the Europeans want to sell arms to China.

David Sanger, The New York Times: That is the next interesting layer in this because the Europeans put a ban on selling arms to China in 1989 right after Tiannaman Square. They have come back and said different leaders, much more globalized, this makes no sense. The U.S. sees a China that is much more powerful than it has been before and can pose a greater threat to Taiwan than before. If there is a conflict with Taiwan, it is not the Europeans getting stuck in the strait there. It is us. They were completely separated on this. The president knows he is going to lose this argument the Europeans are going to go ahead with this. As one European diplomat said to me, gee, I didn't hear the president say he was going to block the sell of the IBM personal computer division to China. But he wants to block our technology.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: This was George W. Bush's charm offensive. We are now talking nicely with the Europeans and they are talking nicely with us. What are the big issues, Iran, Iraq, exports to China, we still have a lot of disagreements.

David Sanger, The New York Times: I didn't see much movement in the specifics with the possible exception that the president reached an agreement with Mr. Putin on some acceleration of taking out the old soviet nuclear, not arms, but fuel.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Can we circle back to Putin for a minute since you brought it up. It seems all the meetings the president had including Chirac and Schroeder, they had a lot of making up to do, it was important he walk some fine line with Vladimir, as he called him, and George. Why is Putin so important to the president?

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: One recent especially given recent history with Schroeder and Chirac, minus Tony Blair there is no one anyone else the European theater, we'll put Russia in the camp, he needs Putin.

Gloria Borger, U.S. News and World Report: This is a president who made such a point in the state of the union, talking about the Bush doctrine, democracy, and how he stands with those who stand for democracy. It was very clear that Putin's vision of democracy, if you will, is a little bit different.

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: That is very interesting. It is something Putin likely will bring up in the future if this continues. Last year in Istanbul, President Bush took pains to say democracy comes in many forms. We are not interested in imposing our version of democracy on anybody. Putin can say, if that is true, leave me to do this my own way. That is a point Putin brought up in his news conference yesterday.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Iraq is the sub text. Iraq was the thing nobody had agreed with the president on. That is the reason they all had to kiss and make up. In Iraq, the election is over, so now the politics have begun. And just like here in the good old U.S.A., the process is populated by power brokers, back-room dealings, and horse trading. Explain away, Doyle.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: Well, actually, it is good news because it is the way democracy works.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: It's messy.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: There is that part of democracy that happens on election day when they turn out on the day in January. Now in a parliament democracy where the parties haven't congealed yet, people swap jobs. As of today we know who the first interim prime minister of Iraq. Ibrahim al-Jaafari.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Do we know who that is?

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: Today he collected the most important endorsement in Iraq, Ayatollah Sistani, the muslim leader. It is like the Catholic candidate being endorsed by the Pope. Jaafari is the leader of one of the most conservative Islamist pro-Iranian parties in the Iraqi firmament. He is not the America's first choice. The first choice of a lot of officials is Iyad Allawi. The second choice was the finance minister. A lot of concerns about Jaafari among people in the Bush administration. Why? He spent 10 years in Iran. He believes Islamic law ought to be at the core of Iraqi law. He was opposed to the American offensive in Fallujah in November to take that town back. One former official said to me the real key question is if we want to go after the insurgents again, will this man pull the trigger. He is popular among the Shii'a. He has a reputation as a conciliator. He has said all the right things. He wants to reach out to all the other groups. Democracy doesn't always give you who you chose. The administration is going to work with him.

David Sanger, The New York Times: Some in the administration have said you can be pro-Iranian and not be a tool of the Iranians. Is he that man?

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: He probably is that man. The history of his party is that in 2000, that party had to choose between a very pro-Iranian wing. Jaafari was moderate. He didn't want to make the party an Iranian front. If the United States wants to take action against Iran, even under Jaafari, it is almost impossible.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: How does this work for the Kurds and the Sunnis

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: Of course, those are the two other groups. Remember, of course, the Shii'a Muslim coalition got 48% of the vote. Interestingly the way the rules worked out that means they end up with about 55% of the seats, they have a majority of the seats in the assembly. They have to reach out to do the big institutional things. They have to reach out to the Kurds. Two big issues are there. The Kurds want a lot of autonomy. The Shii'a want less autonomy for the region. They are going to try to put together a coalition. It is going to be tough.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: what happened to allawi? He was supposed to be the golden boy.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: The problem is he got tagged a little bit as the Americans' man. He ran well in the secular middle class who were afraid of this Islamist wave. The majority of Shii'a in Iraq and the majority of Iraqis really want some form of Islamist government. We as Americans and the Bush administration is going to have to deal with it, if you like. There are going to be laws probably passed. There are going to be clauses in the constitution that talk about Islamic law that are going to make people a little worried. Hillary Clinton was in Iraq and took a shot at Jaafari saying she had concerns about his stance on this sort of thing. He said she had no business talking about Iraqi politics.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: She would probably agree, actually.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: Maybe she would now. Dick asked about the Sunnis. That is an interesting piece. They sat out the election. They were the base of support for Saddam Hussein. They have very few seats in the assembly, but they are trying to negotiate for jobs and get back in the game.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: we hear more news about the continuing violence and insurgency. What effect does that on trying to form a government. Clearly, that cannot be a good thing.

Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times: No. It is not a good thing. The 275 members of the assembly make 275 targets for terrorism. It is going to be tough to get Sunnis into the room. Those people are going to be risking their lives. On the optimistic side, you have a real politics going on. It is legitimate. It is Iraqi. None of these people are American puppets. So if they start facing down the insurgency we may find ourselves in another place.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Thank you, Doyle. The president may have been away from Washington last week, but the debate over his main domestic priority only picked up more speed. The lines have been drawn over Social Security, and neither Democrats, who oppose the president's plan to create individual accounts, nor Republicans, who mostly, kind of, support it, have yet gained the upper hand. The president hasn't sent a plan to capitol hill yet, but the lobbyists are already hard at work, aren't they, Gloria?

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: I'm shocked. I'm shocked about that.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Lobbyists working in Washington.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: While the president is away, the mice will play. Of course they were. They were not in town this week.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Congress wasn't either.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: Right. You had senators and congressmen dispersing to meet with their constituents in town halls across the country. Republicans kind of testing these, can I say private accounts? Am I allowed to say private accounts.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Everything is loaded except individual.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: You had Democrats mostly railing against the individual accounts. Nothing happens in a vacuum. In Washington you had the interest groups starting to coalesce. The AARP, American Association of Retired Persons, which, you will recall, was with this White House on the prescription drug benefit, now fighting this White House on Social Security. They spent a few million bucks on newspaper advertisements. The old swift boat folks were back. You remember them, fighting against John Kerry. They were there taking on the AARP, of all things, which lots of republicans said, stop, it is really dumb to take on the AARP. We don't want to do that. It is very clear, again, this is going to be a tough -- it is very clear, Gwen, this is a legacy issue for this president. What is so interesting about this issue is it has not yet coalesced. It is fluid. The polls are all over the place. There is a late poll tonight that says only 30% of Americans support these accounts. Other polls have shown 50% of Americans support them. Public opinion is up for grabs.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: is it not coalescing because we haven't seen a plan, maybe?

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: We haven't seen a real plan. We know a little bit about what the president is talking about. Also, I think it is a very complex and complicated issue. Also there is a real demographic difference in this country. The president said to people over 55, don't worry about it. Not going to affect you. And young people -- and they are opposed to it. Young people are either split or for some notion of retirement accounts.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: I read somewhere this week that one of the members of Congress went on to his home district and was greeted by young people who were chanting hey, hey, ho, ho, social security has got to go.

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: The president will travel next week to New Jersey and Indiana to talk about what he is going to again be describing as the crisis in the social security system. We know the government's own numbers don't back up any crisis argument. The polls, perhaps more importantly, the polls show the people are not buying that either. He is going back to that theme. Is it going to work for him?

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: It hasn't been working.

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: Is he counting on the ad barrage from the Chamber of Commerce.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: He is counting on that. What is a crisis to somebody is a problem to somebody else. If you are 25 years old, you probably never thought that Social Security was going to be there for you anyway so you don't think this is a crisis. If you are 55, you might think this is a crisis. By the way, one thing that is interesting and I talked to some people who have come back from their districts, they say the town halls are being well attended by people over 55 whom the president said don't worry about it. Why? Because they don't believe him. And they believe that they will be affected by these changes.

David Sanger, The New York Times: Gloria, this leaves the president a little bit where he was before he left for Europe. He has a very good pitch of what the nature of the problem is.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: Yes.

David Sanger, The New York Times: He has a hard time making the case of personal or individual accounts or whatever we decided to call them solve the problem.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: because they don't.

David Sanger, The New York Times: How does he get past that? That and the AARP may be the woulder in the road.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: the president says in 2018 we have a problem. By 2042 we have a real problem. I'm taking this on, but --

Gwen Ifill, moderator: his partisans say the solution we have heard so far isn't going to solve the problem.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report: That is the point. The retirement accounts are a really great idea. He is not saying we have a problem and this is the solution. He says we have a problem and as part of the solution this is a great idea even though it adds trillions of dollars to the deficit. I think he is really, you know, it is a very difficult case for him to make because it is ideological, philosophical and very long term because if you want to put a band-aid on Social Security to shore it up, people could get in a room and agree on how to do that, I think.

Richard Keil, Bloomberg News: two questions. Is the boulder in the road the inevitably of benefit cuts and his real problem not a united Democratic caucus which to this point has shown no signs of cracking or the caucus with deficit hawk Republicans?

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report:I think it is all of the above.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: A big boulder.

Gloria Borger, US News and World Report:And the president has a lot of trouble, as you have spoken about on this show, with his own party. The chairman of the House Subcommittee on Social Security representative Jim Mccreary of Louisiana made an innocuous statement about these retirement accounts and was descended upon the president's top economic advisors. He hade to make a statement saying maybe we ought to take a look at this, right? I think they are having problems with their own republicans looking at the midterm elections, with the Democrats and it is a tough sell.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: It is a tough sell and that is why they call it the third rail. Thanks, everybody. Feel like you want to hear a little more? Then go online and click on over to the "Washington Week" webcast. Your questions, our answers. You can find us at pbs.org. Keep track of daily developments every night on "the newshour with jim lehrer," and we'll see you right here next week on "Washington Week." Good night.

Gwen Ifill, moderator: Join the email exchange on our website. We'll use your questions in our reporters roundtable, found only on "Washington Week" online. Write us at washingtonweek@pbs.org.