The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

MARGARET WARNER: Good evening. I'm Margaret Warner. Jim Lehrer is off today. On the NewsHour tonight, a summary of the news; a look at the challenges facing retired General Jay Garner in rebuilding Iraq; a conversation with New York Times columnist Tom Friedman about post-war reaction in the Arab world; a report on non-citizen soldiers who are fighting and sometimes dying for this country; and two embedded journalists reflect on their very different Iraq war experiences.

MARGARET WARNER: A former Iraqi prime minister is in coalition hands today. Muhammad Hamza al-Zubaydi was detained by free Iraqi forces south of Baghdad. He is believed to have played a key role in brutally quashing a 1991 Shiite uprising. Earlier the opposition Iraqi National Congress announced it was holding one of Saddam's Hussein's sons-in-law, and U.S. Central Command confirmed the capture of Saddam's scientific research minister. U.S. officials believe he can shed light on Iraq's nuclear program. Eight of the fifty-five most wanted Iraqi regime members are now in custody. A ninth is believed to have died. Efforts to restore basic services in Baghdad moved ahead today, as the American in charge of the rebuilding effort arrived in the capital. Tom Bearden has our report.

TOM BEARDEN: Retired General Jay Garner heads the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance. He said his first priority was to restore the basics, including water and electricity. The power was on in a few parts of the city. There, traffic signals worked, and local grocery stores were open.

WOMAN (Translated): The return of electricity to some parts of the city is a good thing for the people, and it makes us feel happy and safe. I think in two or three days, there will be electricity all over Baghdad.

TOM BEARDEN: More than 1,000 people lined up at this job fair. U.S. forces urged doctors, lawyers, engineers, and teachers to sign up. Over the weekend, the Iraqi College of Medicine became the first educational institution to reopen since the war began. It used to be called the Saddam College of Medicine. All other schools, including Baghdad's main university, remain closed. Humanitarian aid is now flowing more freely into the city. Today the World Food Program delivered 1,400 tons of flour to a warehouse in Baghdad. Another convoy of food arrived over the weekend for malnourished animals at the city's zoo. But tensions are still high. Thousands of Shia Muslims protested the arrest of one of their leaders today. Sheik Mohammed was reportedly seized by American forces, and some marchers warned of trouble if he was not released.

MAN ON STREET (Translated): This demonstration is peaceful, but if they don't release him, tomorrow definitely will be another demonstration, and it may take new diversions.

TOM BEARDEN: U.S. Central Command would not confirm or comment on the arrest. Army soldiers now control Baghdad; the marines withdrew yesterday. And a U.S.-run radio station announced an 11:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. curfew to help maintain order.

MARGARET WARNER: Iraq destroyed and buried chemical weapons and biological warfare equipment just days before the war began, that according to today's New York Times, which said an unnamed Iraqi scientist told a U.S. Military team about the destruction. The report said he also told them that Iraq had secretly sent unconventional weapons and technology to Syria in the 1990s, and had more recently cooperated with al-Qaida. U.S. Military officials said they're working to confirm the scientist's allegations. Syria wants a dialogue with the U.S., not heated exchanges -- those words from the Syrian foreign minister today; he said his country has now sealed its border with Iraq, and will require a visa from anyone seeking to enter. Yesterday President Bush said Syria was "getting the message" on American demands for cooperation. The U.S. has urged Syria not to harbor high-ranking Iraqi officials. A U.S. delegation left for Beijing today, for talks on North Korea's nuclear program. American, Chinese, and North Korean officials -are due to meet there Wednesday. In recent days, North Korea has issued conflicting statements about whether it has begun reprocessing spent fuel rods at its main nuclear complex, a crucial step in producing nuclear weapons. The State Department spokesman explained why the U.S. was going ahead with the talks.

RICHARD BOUCHER: This is important for us to be able to put on the table very serious issues that are at stake and to try to address them in a political and diplomatic manner. That's what we've always sought. We've managed to achieve a forum to do that, but actually resolving these issues may take a little more than one meeting or one set of meetings in Beijing. So we describe these as initial talks. As I said we really don't think that without the participation of Japan and South Korea, one could expect to achieve a substantive outcome.

MARGARET WARNER: Separately, South Korea said today it would go ahead with cabinet-level talks with North Korea over the nuclear weapons issue. Those talks are scheduled to begin next weekend in the North Korean capital. There was new political fallout today over China's handling of the SARS disease. In Beijing, the mayor was fired after it was disclosed the city's case numbers and death toll had been woefully underreported. The health ministry said the total number of cases in Beijing is now 448, more than ten times the previously reported number. Seven new deaths were reported in mainland China today, and six in Hong Kong. A key gauge of U.S. economic activity fell in March. The Conference Board, a business research group, said its index of leading economic indicators was down 0.2 percent. It was the second straight monthly dip. On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost more than eight points to close below 8329. The NASDAQ fell one point to close at 1424. Singer Nina Simone died today at her home in the south of France after a long illness. A top concert draw, her musical styles ranged from blues and spirituals to jazz and classical. She first gained fame in 1959 with her recording of "I Loves you, Porgy" from the George Gershwin musical, "Porgy and Bess." She later became a leading musical voice of the civil rights movement. Nina Simone was 70 years old. And that's it for the News Summary. Now it's on to building a new Iraq; "Tom's Journal"; non-citizen soldiers; and the media's war.

FOCUS - THE NEW IRAQ

MARGARET WARNER: After weeks of planning in Kuwait, the man in charge of rebuilding Iraq finally entered the beleaguered capital today. Spencer Michels reports.

SPENCER MICHELS: Retired U.S. Lieutenant General Jay Garner began his visit to Baghdad this morning proclaiming it a great day.

LT. GEN. JAY GARNER: What better day can you have in your life than to be able to help somebody else to help other people. That's what we intend to do.

SPENCER MICHELS: Garner came with a staff of 20 which will grow to about 500 in the weeks to come as he wrestles with infrastructure and security problems. He promised to make an immediate assessment. (Crowd chanting ) When American troops first arrived, some Iraqis greeted them with open arms and jubilation, but the mood is more mixed today, and Garner now must deal with anger at the U.S. His first stop was the thousand- bed hospital which was bombed during the war and looted afterwards. The U.S. presence was not welcomed by a nurse who called it a humiliation.

NURSE (Translated): They said they came as liberators. What liberation? This is an occupation. It is not a liberation. They're supposed to provide us with a better life; the party opposition in exile -- why don't they come and create a government to rule the country?

SPENCER MICHELS: Currently armed Shia Muslims have been at the hospital at a security force. Throughout the city, Shiite protest marches were another reminder of the opposition that Garner and U.S. forces face. Garner will also have to deal with internal Iraqi disputes and security remains a problem. Just last week U.S. Marines stopped two robberies at bombed- out banks. At one of them, crowds gathered to cheer on the arrests, but jeered when the Baghdad police arrived ten minutes later. And then there's the war-torn infrastructure. Garner's arrival could not be watched by Iraqis on TV since most of Baghdad is without power. One of his first stops was at a power station, one of three that serves the blacked-out city of five million people. A U.S. engineer said he hoped 10 percent of Baghdad would have power tonight. At the power station, Garner said we "will be there as long as it takes. We will leave fairly rapidly." And he downplayed his own role.

LT. GEN. JAY GARNER: I don't rule anything. I'm the coalition facilitator to establish a different environment where these people can pull things together themselves and begin a self- government process and with our assistance begin the reconstruction process and end up with a democracy that represents the freely elected will of the Iraqi people.

SPENCER MICHELS: But even as General Garner made his rounds of Baghdad, many Iraqis remain skeptical of his mission.

MAN (Translated): The leadership must be Iraqi. We don't need a British or U.S. mandate. We are Iraqi Arabs. First of all, we are Muslim and we don't want to be ruled by American.

SPENCER MICHELS: The uncertainty Garner faces was echoed at the Pentagon this afternoon by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who said he couldn't predict how long the U.S. would maintain a military presence in Iraq.

DONALD RUMSFELD: It depends on how this thing ends. It depends on how rapidly this interim government evolves. It depends on how successful external influences are in trying to change what's going on in that country adversely. There's so many variables. It's just not possible. We have no desire to be there for long periods. We simply don't. That's just a cold, hard fact.

SPENCER MICHELS: Rumsfeld added that the U.S. does not plan a permanent presence in Iraq and does not plan to function as an occupier.

MARGARET WARNER: To help us sort through the immediate challenges ahead for Gen. Garner's operation, we're joined by former Ambassador Richard Sklar, President Clinton's special representative for reconstruction following the war in Bosnia. New York City police commissioner Raymond Kelly: He directed the international police monitors in Haiti, a U.S.-led force that sought to end human rights abuses and establish an interim police force there. Bob Perito, a former Foreign Service officer and justice department official involved with peacekeeping and post- conflict operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor, and elsewhere; he's now special adviser to the rule of law program at the United States Institute of Peace; and Adeed Dawisha, a political science professor at Miami University of Ohio, who's written widely on the politics of the Middle East. Born in Iraq, he's now an American citizen. Welcome to you all.

If the aim, as Gen. Garner said, is to establish a different environment, Bob Perito, what is the most urgent thing he has to address first?

BOB PERITO: I think the most urgent thing he has to address first is establishing security and the rule of law. And this is going to involve more than just bringing back a few Iraqi police officers. It's going to take vetting and retraining the Iraqi police, establishing a viable judicial system, and a prison system that conforms with international human rights standards.

MARGARET WARNER: Ray Kelly, that sounds a little like what your brief was in Haiti. How hard is it to do this and how do you go about it?

COMMISSIONER RAYMOND KELLY: Well, I think this situation is much more complex than it was in Haiti. I think the first thing you do is monitor the police closely. You have to be right on top of them. And to do that, the only force available, of course, is the U.S. force. In Haiti, we had professional police officers from 20 countries. That construct is not there. As Bob said, you have to vet the existing police. Obviously you're going to have to put some of them back on the streets. That's not particularly easy to do. We're going to have to use our own intelligence community to help in that regard and also Iraqis that we trust. But it is a heavy lift. There's no question about it. You have conflicting religious issues, tribal issues, you have I assume most of the leadership of the police force are Ba'ath Party members. We have to ask ourselves is that who we want to reinstall in power? So it's a very complex situation.

MARGARET WARNER: Bob Perito, I know you've looked closely at the various components of the regime security and police structure. Are there elements at least of that institution that can be used, built upon, and what elements cannot?

BOB PERITO: Well, Saddam ruled through a series of organizations that we generally call the security services. These were loyal to him, and these institutions have to be dismantled and done away with. Below that was the strata of professional police officers. And historically the national police of Iraq had a reputation for integrity, professionalism and honesty. And I think this group of people, this institution can be rehabilitated and reformed, but it's going to take effort and it's going to take training and it's going to take some time.

MARGARET WARNER: Do you agree with Ray Kelly that the only people right now there to do it are the U.S. military?

BOB PERITO: Well, that's right. Also -- but Gen. Garner's team also has civilian law enforcement professionals in it. And these people are have been through this process in other parts of the world. And they're going to play a major role in this as well.

MARGARET WARNER: Ray Kelly, how hard was it to take police officers who were used to operating one way, including what we might consider certain... with a certain element of brutality, and quickly training them to operate in another way and still be the law and order force in the country?

COMMISSIONER RAYMOND KELLY: Well, we had such an overwhelming presence there that it clearly was an intimidation factor. Again as I said we monitored the police very closely. We simply didn't allow them to go out on patrol without having a monitor with them. It doesn't appear to me that we have the forces there to do that right now. It is going to be a significant change. They were the instrumentality of a repressive regime so we're going to have to do a fair amount of training to the police officers that Bob thinks may be salvageable. So I think again more difficult certainly in this situation than it was in Haiti.

MARGARET WARNER: Professor Dawisha, how workable does this element of Garner's project sound to you in an environment in which so many members of the old regime and the old apparatus are around?

ADEED DAWISH: This is going to be difficult. It will depend on what kind of information he gets, to what extent there is cooperation from the various elements within the police force and within society as a whole. He will have to depend on the expatriates who have their own information. I'm actually encouraged by the number of people who have come forward from society as a whole, doctors, engineers, pharmacists, scientists, as well as policemen wanting their jobs back and actually pointing fingers at those who had kind of committed some human rights violation. This is encouraging but it's not going to be easy particularly as members of the Ba'ath Party - (network difficulty) -- large and from what we've seen so far are quite able at sabotaging the efforts by the coalition forces to bring some kind of normalcy to Iraq.

MARGARET WARNER: What do you mean that we've seen them sabotaging the efforts already? What would you point to?

ADEED DAWISHA: Just look at the huge demonstrations that occurred after the Friday prayers last Friday. About fifteen/twenty thousand people came out on to the streets. These people did not come out as a result of some spontaneous kind of passion against the coalition forces. They had hundreds upon hundreds of banners that were already ready for them. They were large. They had some really kind of written in good English and excellent Arabic -- things that have been already late for them maybe a day or two earlier and basically thrust into their hands to go out in the streets and demonstrate. Also, if you look at the demonstration, you could easily pick out the ones who are leading the chants, the ones who are arousing the emotions of the crowd. The group that's doing that or has done that actually are groups that are associated with the old regime-- probably second tier Ba'ath Party members who probably are worried that the longer the coalition forces stay, then the greater the chances of the Ba'ath Party being banned and its assets stripped. And that's not going to serve their own interests.

MARGARET WARNER: So Ambassador Sklar, how does Gen. Garner operate in this environment? I mean he's supposed to make the trains run on time, but he's operating in this political environment in which they are people calling for him to leave.

RICHARD SKLAR: Well, on the security front, I would quickly go as we did in Bosnia to European leaders with all respect to Ray Kelly's competence, I think he'd agree that if we with had some great Irish or Danish or Dutch policemen coming in with three or four hundred Europeans, we'd do several things. We'd bring that professional training and we'd take the focus away from the U.S. We have to get the focus off us and on to an international effort. And I think the police is the first place to start. Kelly has a difficult job on all counts but I do agree security first and I would advocate bringing in our European allies as the leaders of this police reform rather than letting it be the U.S. military or even U.S. civilian police.

MARGARET WARNER: Based on your experience, what would you recommend he do about Ba'ath Party members and others who, one, may have committed crimes in the past but, two, are out and trying to sabotage his efforts?

RICHARD SKLAR: Well, I think they're out trying to sabotage but I think there's also an uprising out of the Shiite community who have been long repressed. I'm not sure it's Ba'athist as much as it is an attempt to gain power. I think a de-Nazification, as was done in Germany, ought to be tried. And I think you ought to look to the local community, not to exiles, and not even our intelligence forces to determine who are the trusted members of the community. The community know which policeman directed traffic and which assisted the lost child and arrested their son or daughter and took them away for torture. We have to go to the local communities to identify individuals who can be trained to do the security work.

MARGARET WARNER: Back to you Bob Perito. Now, you talked about a rule of law including a justice system. How do you set up a justice system in which people are punished for crimes whether looters or whatever and whose law prevails?

BOB PERITO: This is intriguing. I think we've messed a step in Iraq that we took in Haiti, Kosovo and Bosnia. That was the creation of an international police force that could come in with the training, the monitoring and the effective supervision. We don't have that as well for the judicial system. Like the police, the regular judicial system of Iraq had a tradition of independence, impartiality and honesty; that was suppressed during the Saddam regime under revolutionary courts, ad hoc tribunals all kinds of things which the Saddam regime did to, you know, to avoid the rule of law. I think this basic judicial system can be rehabilitated and reformed. But once again, we need international jurists, prosecutors, court administrators to come in and work with the Iraqis and train them and bring them back up to international standards. The same is true of the prison system as well.

MARGARET WARNER: Ray Kelly, what would you add to the justice- dispensing side of this system?

COMMISSIONER RAYMOND KELLY: I think Bob is absolutely right. I would sayin retrospect we didn't do that very well in Haiti. We didn't pay enough attention to the judicial or the penal system. And we paid a price for that. Obviously we're taking people into custody; they're being arrested. You need a system that's functioning to handle them. Right now it's dormant. I would say a system that worked 35 years ago is going to be pretty hard to resurrect in the short term. So, again lots of challenges here.

MARGARET WARNER: Professor Dawisha, back to you. What does Jay Garner do also about different factions that are just asserting authority by themselves? There was a story today I think in the Washington Post about a gentleman who has proclaimed himself mayor of Baghdad and he's holding court and dispensing decisions. What do you do about people like that?

ADEED DAWISHA: Well, I think, you know, Gen. Garner has to use diplomacy and wisdom as well as some strong-arm methods. People like that are going to come and go. A man like this took advantage of the kind of chaos and the looting and the lack of law and order that existed in Baghdad and proclaimed himself mayor. He says that he was elected by a group of tribal leaders, professionals, and religious leaders. It's not very clear who these people are. But nevertheless, when Garner takes over in Baghdad, he will be able to remove people when he sees fit. He has the power behind him. And I think that as the -- kind of the progress towards more normalcy occurs, when basic services are rendered, electricity is back, security is improved, more and more policemen come into the fold and start working with the Americans, as people begin to see that the situation is becoming more and more normal and therefore as people begin to in a sense realize that this normalcy is associated with the American presence, I don't think it's going to be that difficult for him to remove people like Mr. Zubaida who is the supposedly the new mayor of Baghdad.

RICHARD SKLAR: If I could comment on that -- although it may be the right thing to do, I think it will put a terrible onus on Gen. Garner. He will then look like the autocratic dictator even when he's doing right. That's the last thing we need. We will then look like the oppressors, the occupiers, the conquistadores. We have to move away from that. We have to find a way to diffuse the power of these folks. One of the w ways is with money. Money will lead to power. We have the power to dispense the money. I don't think autocratic removal, except in the case of Ba'athist thugs, is the way to deal with these rising centers of power.

MARGARET WARNER: Bob... go ahead. Somebody else was trying to get in, yes.

ADEED DAWISHA: Can I say something?

MARGARET WARNER: Yes, Professor. By all means.

ADEED DAWISHA: I would say that the way to do that is through creating an interim government as soon as garner can. Then he can work through the interim government. Once you have an interim government in place then in cooperation with the Americans and with Garner, they can do the kind of things that I talked about. I didn't want to... I did not mean to imply that Garner will come in and autocratically put people in and take people out. That certainly, I agree with the speaker, that that is not going to leave a good impression but if you have Iraqis working in place as an interim government, then you can do all kinds of things that I had said could be done before.

MARGARET WARNER: Very briefly before we go from Bob Perito and Ray Kelly, how long do you think this will take? This was the question Donald Rumsfeld couldn't answer today. Howlong do you think American forces will have to be in there in substantial numbers?

BOB PERIOT: I think American forces will have to be there quite a while, a matter of months if not more than a year. In Bosnia in six years we're still there.

MARGARET WARNER: And Ray Kelly.

COMMISSIONER RAYMOND KELLY: I would say for at least a year. We don't have the structure in place to go in and replace our troops. So we're going to be there and we're going to be there in force for at least a year, probably significantly longer.

MARGARET WARNER: All right -- Gentlemen....

RICHARD SKLAR: Margaret, I would bet on five or ten years. As Tom Friedman said, this is going to be the mother of all long hauls.

MARGARET WARNER: All Right. We'll leave it there. We're about to hear from Tom Friedman. Thank you all four very much.

SERIES - TOM'S JOURNAL

MARGARET WARNER: And still to come on the NewsHour tonight, "Tom's Journal"; non-citizen soldiers; and two embedded journalists.

Gwen Ifill has tonight's conversation with New York Times columnist Tom Friedman on his most recent overseas reporting trip.

GWEN IFILL: Tom Friedman is just back from a reporting trip through the Middle East that took him to many of his old haunts, including Egypt, Israel, the West Bank, Jordan, Kuwait, and southern Iraq. He joins us now. Tom, since you're being quoted all over the program tonight, I want to take you back before we get to that whole section of where you were in the Middle East let's talk about, you went to Europe first. You went to France and to Brussels.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: Went to France and Brussels, Gwen. What struck me in France, first of all, was people were unapologetic. They felt they stood on principle. They were proud their government stood on principle, but at the same time you sensed just a tinge of embarrassment especially as the war was unfolding, as we were cutting through Iraq and as it was clear what kind of evil regime was being exposed. And I sensed especially from the people in the business community I heard, they're very disquieted by the notion of a long-term tension between the United States and France that could affect Franco-American investment and business.

GWEN IFILL: In Brussels, you were at NATO.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: In Brussels, I was at NATO headquarters. There's a revolution going on at NATO -- quite striking. NATO is moving to the South. This is no longer going to be an organization sitting on the eastern front with the Soviet Union. NATO is going to move into Kabul to take over the security operation in Kabul. I'll bet you before we're done in Iraq you're going to see NATO in Iraq as well. I think in three or four years you're going to see NATO be kind of a NATO-Russia organization, focused really on the instability from the South and no longer be an East-West alliance.

GWEN IFILL: You went to Cairo, you went to Egypt and visited with old friends there and some new friends, and talked a little bit about the Arab world's reaction to everything that was going on exactly at the same time in Iraq. What did you pick up?

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: What was striking, Gwen, I met with a class of American studies students from Cairo University one of the few American studies classes in the whole Arab world. And what was interesting talking to them is everyone has kind of the worst impression of what we're doing. "We're there for oil in Iraq. We're there to defend Israel. We're there for bases." But at the same time, Gwen, you know, I heard from all of these young people curiosity because what they understand is that they're seeing something they've never seen before in their lifetime. And that is American power being used in the Arab world not to sustain the status quo, not to buttress some Arab oil sheik and not to just protect Israel. They're seeing the revolutionary side of American power -- America coming to the region not just with its military might, but with its ideas. And at some level, they're really curious to see if we're true to our ideas and we really do develop a kind of progressive forward-looking Iraq.

GWEN IFILL: But in countries outside of Iraq, Saddam was not... people weren't necessarily weeping at the passing out of power of Saddam. It was Saddam-ism you say that Americans should be aware of.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: Absolutely. There is something called Saddam-ism. It really is something that you see in this kind of post- colonial, somewhat humiliated part of the world, where people rally around these kinds of dictators just because they stick a thumb in our eye. You know, I met with a group of opposition Egyptian journalists one day over tea. It was really striking how much... I mean, they were rooting for Saddam to defend Baghdad, to hold the fort. One of things I said to them was "wait a minute, guys, don't you see how you would benefit most from a freer Iraq? I mean, imagine," I said to them, "if in two years Iraq held a free and fair election; Jimmy Carter came and certified a free and fair election in Iraq." Who else is holding an election in two years? Egypt is holding an election in two years. So can anyone imagine that if Iraq held a free and fair election that wouldn't also affect the kind of election Egypt would almost have to hold? I tried to show them the positive side of this. But for now that outlook of Saddam-ism, because it's so many feeling that they are being defeated, they are being humiliated. Even though rallying behind guys like Saddam, they know it's like a bad addiction. It's very much still there.

GWEN IFILL: You went to Tel Aviv, where people must be kind of holding their breaths waiting to see what the ultimate outcome is for Israeli-Palestinian relations.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: As soon as the Israelis realized that they wouldn't need their gas masks, that Saddam was not going to attack them, on the one hand they're relieved and happy that the United States is changing the regime in Baghdad which is a regime dedicated to Israel's destruction. At the same time though I certainly sensed among Israeli officials, Gwen, an awareness that this story is going to loop back to their door just as the Gulf War One ended up in a Madrid peace conference I think there is an awareness and we're seeing that played out today that we are going to follow up this war with Iraq-- we, the United States-- with, I think, a much more aggressive effort to promote some kind of Israeli- Palestinian peace settlement.

GWEN IFILL: After taking the long way around you finally... you've come to southern Iraq and visited a hospital in Umm Qasr.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: Umm Qasr, which was the first city liberated by the war. I went in with Kuwaiti Red Cross, which was quite interesting really, and gave me more freedom to Rome and talk to people. Three things struck me from that three things struck me from that visit. First of all was how abjectly poor this town was. This was a major port city. This was more poor than some of the worst sub-Saharan African villages I've ever visited. It was unimaginably and shamefully poor when you think how rich this country is in natural resources. It tells you a little bit of what Saddam did. Another thing that struck me in talk to go people in the hospital, doctors and nurses, after you talked to about the situation at the moment, every person I talked to had a story about Saddam having taken a son, a brother, a cousin or a relative. But the third thing that struck me in talking to them because I kind of expected garlands and flowers, was how suspicious they were of us. "You're here for the oil, right?" I mean, that was kind of the mood of a lot of people. It was a reminder that there's a... they have their narrative and we have ours. Our narrative was the statue coming down on... and the liberation of Baghdad. That's certainly part of the truth of what happened there. It's a big part of the truth. But there is another narrative going on from their point of view. One that comes from watching the Arab satellite TVs, al Jazeera -- that this is some kind of American occupation. You are going to see a kind of struggle between those two. We have to remember they haven't been watching Fox TV down there. They've been watching Arab TV, and it's bombarded them with a very different set of images than we have. As the previous segment really alluded to, everything really depends now, Gwen, on what we build there. We can talk all we want. We can say we're here for these motives. They can say we're there for these motives. If we build a decent Iraq, if we help Iraqis build a decent Iraq, I think a lot of this can go away.

GWEN IFILL: There's the rub. Exactly how does the United States go about that in an environment where people were suspicious even before, happy to be liberated but not necessarily happy to have the liberators stay.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: I think the key thing is to focus on two things, Gwen. One is process -- that we develop a fair, transparent process for bringing Iraqis forward to run their own country. If we start anointing X, Y or Z or pushing aside X, Y or Z, we're in trouble. The other thing is a lesson I learned after Israel. I went to the West Bank and looked at the Israeli occupation from Ramallah there and the problems it's run into. One of the real lessons of the Israeli occupation is what happens when the mainstream-- in this case the Israeli mainstream-- doesn't have a clear view of what it wants to do with this territory. When the mainstream doesn't have a clear view, trust me, the extremes will. And the extremes will drive the agenda. I think it's so important that President Bush focus as much with blinders and a laser beam on building that kind of decent accountable rule-of-law Iraq that he fought the war with that he now fights the post war with.

GWEN IFILL: You write about the series of walls which the United States must overcome, not just the obvious ones, but all kinds of lurking barriers which still exist to getting this goal that you say the United States should be aiming for.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: Well, one of those walls is clearly the wall between Israelis and Palestinians. Why is it important for us to be seen to be working to break down that wall? We're now in kind of a pre- political moment in Iraq, Gwen but very soon as you heard earlier here people are going to be jockeying for power. Now say you're one of the pro- American people and you want to run for mayor of Baghdad or for governor of Baghdad province or whatever. But I'm a Shiite cleric and I want that job, what's the quickest way for me to de-legitimize you? It's to say, oh, you're working with the Americans who are lackeys of Ariel Sharon. These stories will all get tied together. We won the ground war, but there was an air war -- an air war in the air waves. It's still going on. That's why it's so important for us to address in a fair way-- not bashing any side or other-- the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as we try to move forward on Iraq because they'll intersect.

GWEN IFILL: With so many people within and without Iraq who have a vested interest in the outcome how do you stop someone from hijacking the peace process?

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: You stop them from hijacking it by hijacking it yourself, that is, by keeping a laser focus of your eye on the prize. What is the prize we're trying to go create? We're trying to create an Iraq that will allow for the emergence of Iraqis who are Iraqi nationalists who don't want to be occupied who are true Muslims, true to their faith but at the same time have a progressive, modernizing agenda and are willing and ready to work with us. That's the Iraq we want. And everything we do in the region, in the Arab-Israeli context and in Iraq has to keep a laser focus on will it support that prize.

GWEN IFILL: Well, Tom, thanks again for taking us along on your trip.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: Thanks so much, Gwen. Thank you.

FOCUS - NONCITIZEN SOLDIERS

MARGARET WARNER: Now, non-citizens who serve in the U.S. Military. Jeffrey Kaye of KCET-Los Angeles reports.

JEFFREY KAYE: George Rincon took video of his son Diego just before the soldier shipped out to war.

GEORGE RINCON: The last time that I saw my son alive, and I knew it.

JEFFREY KAYE: 19-year old Diego Fernando Rincon was killed last month in Iraq, along with three other members of the third infantry division by a suicide bomber. Rincon had been trained to assist medics as a combat lifesaver. He was also a light machine gunner. Near his home in Conyers, Georgia, recently, Private First Class Rincon received a funeral befitting a military hero: A flag-draped casket, a contingent of army officials, and a 21-gun salute. But this ceremony included an extra formality: An immigration official came to present a citizenship certificate.

SPOKESMAN: Be it known that Diego Fernando Rincon gave his life in the defense of the United States as a member of the United States armed forces on March 29, 2003, and on that day is declared posthumously to be a citizen of these United States. (Applause)

JEFFREY KAYE: Rincon was a citizen of Colombia, one of 37,000 noncitizens serving in the active duty U.S. armed forces. The military requires only that immigrants be permanent residents, not necessarily citizens in order to serve. Nearly 13,000 reservists are also noncitizens. Rincon was one of at least seven noncitizens among the 128 U.S. Military personnel killed so far in the war in Iraq. All have been awarded posthumous citizenships. In 1989, when Diego was five years old, the Rincon family moved to the U.S. to escape violence. George had worked in Colombia as a bodyguard.

GEORGE RINCON: Bombs all over the place and, I don't know. The drug cartel, they was doing terrible things to the people and that's why I said to myself that I have to move to a different place.

JEFFREY KAYE: Someplace safer.

GEORGE RINCON: Better. Yeah.

JEFFREY KAYE: Reporter: In high school, Diego was active in gymnastics and drama. It was Sept. 11 that convinced Diego to join the U.S. Military, according to his older brother, Fabian.

FABIAN RINCON: We were just like all Americans, angry. But I think the difference between the Americans that were angry and my brother, and I guess other people that eventually signed up for the service, was that they took that anger and they focused it into a resolve that made them want to sign up and want to change things.

SOLDIER: Private get your head up and look where you're going.

JEFFREY KAYE: About 2.5 percent of active duty armed forces are noncitizens. Many do their basic training at Ft. Benning, Georgia, where Diego Ricon also prepared to become a soldier.

SOLDIER: Let's go!

SOLDIER: Yes, drill sergeant!

JEFFREY KAYE: For civilians, citizenship requires five years of residency in the U.S. Military personnel had been required to wait only three years, but last July, President Bush issued an order eliminating the waiting period for the military. Some in Congress want that provision written into law. Among the infantry recruits at Fort Benning, Darius Franczek from Poland; Petr Malinowski, another Pole; Aleksandr Chernin from Belarus; and Juan Gonzalez, born in Mexico. Company Commander Captain Derek Denny says in his experience citizens and noncitizens generally sign up for the same reasons.

CAPT. DEREK DENNY: They're here to get money for education purposes. They're here to take care of their family; they're here to get job experience. And a lot of them are here just to serve their country.

JUAN GONZALEZ, Citizen of Mexico: Actually my whole family works in the construction business, and that's like very hard work, and I work with them and I didn't want to work in construction. So that's why I joined the army so I could have a better life and more benefits.

DARIUS FRANCZEK, Citizen of Poland: My dad would have paid for my college, but I was slacking off too much, partying too much. It was more about my friends than about myself, you know. So, I'm here to straighten out, and I'm doing it. Plus I'm serving the greatest country in the world. So I'm proud of it.

JEFFREY KAYE: Immigrants have had a long history in the U.S. Military. They've fought in all U.S. wars. But as long as they are noncitizens, their opportunities in the U.S. armed forces are limited. For the most part they cannot be promoted to officers, and they don't have access to classified information. At Rincon's funeral, his brother read his last letter home.

DIEGO RINCON: I believe that God has a path for me. Whether I make it or not, it's all part of the plan. It can't be changed, only completed.

JEFFREY KAYE: At the time of their son's death, Rincon's family was in the process of applying for citizenship.

SERIES - THE MEDIA'S WAR

MARGARET WARNER: Finally tonight, the media's war. Hundreds of journalists traveled with U.S. fighting forces in Iraq. Media correspondent Terence Smith looks at how the arrangement worked out.

TERENCE SMITH: In the popular lexicon of the war in Iraq, they are known simply as embeds, or embedded reporters, the 600-plus journalists authorized by the Pentagon to train, travel, and share the dangers and discomforts of the battlefield with U.S. Military units.

CORRESPONDENT: There was such a concern that it might have been booby trapped.

TERENCE SMITH: Embeds use state-of- the-art technology including satellite telephones, videophones and mobile satellite uplinks to transmit their stories and images often in real-time.

DAVID BLOOM: They call this hurricane route.

TERENCE SMITH: NBC modified a tank and shipped it to Iraq to enable the late correspondent David Bloom to report the third infantry's drive towards Baghdad. His "Bloom Mobile" came to symbolize the immediacy of embedded reporting before the 39-year-old suddenly died of a pulmonary embolism in the desert. Later, Bloom's cameraman at NBC, Craig White, captured a firefight against Iraqi defenders in Baghdad.

CARAIG WHITE, NBC News: You can never feel by looking at pictures what it's like to be in a battle like that. When large artillery go off, live shells, RPG's go off-- a key battle. ( Gunfire ) Fire came from all sides, 360 degrees.

TERENCE SMITH: Martin Savage of CNN provided a riveting first-hand account.

MARTIN SAVAGE: This is Baghdad University and it is warfare on this campus.

TERENCE SMITH: As the first brigade of the seventh marines fought their way into Baghdad. In all, three embedded reporters were killed during combat, including the columnist Michael Kelly. Seven other journalists who were not embedded also lost their lives. Top military leaders were initially skeptical about the embedding process, but commanding General Tommy Franks became a convert.

GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: It permits the viewership and the listenership and the readership of the various countries on this planet to be able to get a sense, to be able to get a take of what's going on on this battlefield. I'm a fan of it. I think it was a very good thing to do.

TERENCE SMITH: The public reacted positively as well.

CORRESPONDENT: We just heard an... what the hell.

TERENCE SMITH: A recent poll done by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that eight in ten respondents described the reports from embedded journalists as fair and objective.

TERENCE SMITH: Joining me now are two reporters who were embedded with different units. George C. Wilson, military writer for the "national journal," who was with the first marine division. And Mark Strassman, a CBS News correspondent who was with the army's 101st Airborne Division. Welcome to you both.

TERENCE SMITH: Mark Strassmann, one of the early stories that you had to report as an embedded reporter with the 101st was not a pleasant one from their point of view. That was the story of the... when a soldier rolled a grenade into the officer's tent. Were you able, as an embedded reporter, to report that the way you wanted to and felt you should?

MARK STRASSMANN: You're right. It was a very bad story from the military's standpoint not only because it was a sneak attack in the dead of night. Two soldiers would end up being killed as a soldier tossed three grenades into three adjoining tents, apparently targeting the senior officers of the brigade I was with. But the story behind the story was that as the first real test of the embedding process, it did work. I mean, our access was great. The communication from them to us in terms of what was happening was great. The colonel, the senior commander there, a guy named Ben Hodges, told me fairly soon after and before they actually made the arrest of the soldier that he believed that a soldier was missing, that grenades were missing, and that they thought that the bad guy was actually one of their own. So from my standpoint, there was great information flow, there was great access, and it sort of showed the value of building up a relationship of trust with somebody before it really got to a point where that relationship would be tested.

TERENCE SMITH: Right, and Mark... Mark, were there any restrictions placed on you on what you could report?

MARK STRASSMANN: They were sensitive about a couple of things -- about releasing his picture, because we did have video of that, and they were also sensitive, very sensitive about the fact that he had converted recently to Islam. But in the end, both those details got out simply because there was nothing about the embed's rules of engagement that prevented that. So, no, there was no attempt to really restrict anything, just a sense of concern about the onedetail about the soldier's background and about getting out his picture.

TERENCE SMITH: George Wilson, what was your experience? You were with an artillery unit. How did it go for you?

GEORGE C, WILSON: Well, I thought the unit was moving all the time and we stayed behind the front line troops, so you had a sense of what was going on in the battle you were involved in. But the view is too narrow. You were someone like the second dog on the dog sled team, and you saw an awful lot of the dog in front of you and a little bit to the left or the right. But if you saw an interesting story to the left or the right, you couldn't break out of the dog sled team without losing your place because we were losing all the time. Also, the smaller the unit, the more action you saw, but also the less of a chance of getting your story transmitted. So I had to go the old-fashioned way of dictating a lot of stories through the satellite phone, and then the military, in its wisdom, confiscated my satellite phone for reasons I never really understood. So then I was at the mercy of finding a larger unit which had the transmission capability to get rid of my story.

TERENCE SMITH: I think the military maintained that that particular brand of satellite phone, and there were many others, had a GPS, Global Positioning Satellite capacity, might give away the location of the unit?

GEORGE C. WILSON: They gave me three different reasons, none of which made sense to me.

TERENCE SMITH: But did you encounter restrictions of, either for security or any other reason, George, that made it a problem for you to report what you wanted to report?

GEORGE C. WILSON: Not direct restrictions, but the higher up you went, like if you went to the first marine division headquarters, you couldn't sit in on the command briefings. But if you went to smaller outfits, like the regimental level, they were much more cooperative and you could sit in on the briefings and they kind of trusted you not to give away the store. So I have to say it depended where you were. I did talk to other reporters who were told that they couldn't sit in the command briefing unless they agreed to show their stories that were resulted from those briefings to the command before it was transmitted. So that was indirect censorship.

TERENCE SMITH: Mark Strassmann -

MARK STRASSMANN: Terry, my experience was just very different. I mean, we were allowed to sit in on every single briefing, of course with the understanding that we weren't going to give away the game plan before the game started. But I was allowed to sit in there and see all the war strategizing and the war gaming. I mean, there were times when I sort of felt like, you know, a character in some Tom Clancy novel in progress. I mean, I wasn't Jack Ryan, but I was definitely somebody sitting in there listening to what was the battle plan and how it was all going to take shape, and there was never any attempt by anybody there to sort of restrict us. Now that said, we were at a brigade level not a division level, and perhaps the experience there would have been different.

TERENCE SMITH: Mark... let me ask Mark this. You got to know these soldiers. You were traveling with them, spending every day with them, and I'm sure there was some empathy for them. Did that compromise your objectivity in any way?

MARK STRASSMANN: You can't spend that much time with that many guys-- mostly men, a few women-- that many guys who are genuinely good guys and being asked to do a tough thing at a tough point in history and not develop some affection for them. Thestory there though from my standpoint was this. There really weren't that many instances when it went badly for them. Once we left Camp Pennsylvania where that grenade attack happened and a couple of soldiers were killed, nobody with my brigade was killed, especially around the city of Najaf, which is the main mission these guys had, which was to liberate that city. So there were not that many tests of that. What we had was a series of very one-sided battles, because in the end, as we all know, Saddam Hussein was essentially fighting well above his weight class. So this was never really an issue where whatever affection and empathy we might have for the soldiers around us was going to get in the way of a story. That said, I don't really think it was going to be an issue for me. I mean, there have been lots of situations where covering events in civilian life and you know people reasonably well because they're contacts of yours or whatever, and sometimes you have to do tough stories on people. It's not personal, it's business.

TERENCE SMITH: George Wilson, you wrote last week in the National Journal that you felt some pressure to be a cheerleader for the units you were with?

GEORGE C. WILSON: Well, I think the Pentagon set it up that way. I enormously admired the grunts, the marines, and the conditions they put up with and the junior officers but if you couldn't get out of the dog sled team and investigate something on your own because you had no mobility, you had no wheels of your own, and you had to wait in line basically for vehicles to become available, I felt that my auditing function and my responsibility to readers to give some accountability was very much restricted by the logistics of it and the positioning of the reporters. And in contrast to my colleague's experience, if you know... if you remember the marine generals spoke a good game, but they didn't play it. For instance --

TERENCE SMITH: You also wrote, George, that you felt you were something of "a willing propagandist." What did you mean by that?

GEORGE C. WILSON: Well, I think it was set up that way, that you were put in a position where you would certainly not be antagonistic to the kids that you were involved with and admired and you went in, in those conditions without having the ability like I had in other wars to check things out for myself. So in effect I was putting myself in a position to be a propagandist, which was great for the Pentagon, but not so great for the readers.

TERENCE SMITH: Right. Mark Strassmann, we're almost out of time, but I want to ask you both very quickly. Would you do it again?

MARK STRASSMANN:I would definitely do it again. I might not want to do it again tomorrow, especially because my wife is eight months pregnant, but, yes, I would definitely do it again. I mean, I had never had such an immersion into a culture like that. I got to see a part of history that I otherwise probably would not have been able to see. So, yeah. I mean, there were things I might have changed about it, but clearly I would do it again.

TERENCE SMITH: George Wilson.

GEORGE C. WILSON: Not under those conditions. I think I couldn't do my auditing job under those restrictions, and I needed mobility to serve the reader well. After all, the Iraqi army basically did not show up. It wasn't much of a fight, and yet you wouldn't know that from reading most of the press.

TERENCE SMITH: George Wilson, Mark Strassmann, thank you both very much.

RECAP

MARGARET WARNER: Again, the major developments of the day: A former Iraqi prime minister was taken intocustody south of Baghdad by forces of the Iraqi National Congress. And retired General Jay Garner arrived in Baghdad to and retired general Jay Garner arrived in Baghdad to head the rebuilding effort. He said his first priority is restoring basic services like water and electricity.

MARGARET WARNER: And, once again, we close with our continuing honor roll, in silence, of American military personnel killed in Iraq. We present them only after the deaths are official, and photographs become available.

MARGARET WARNER: We'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening. I'm Margaret Warner. Thanks for being with us. Good night.