The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer; December 1, 2006

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . Pacific Life, The Power to Help You Succeed. And by BP, CIT, the Archer Daniels Midland Company, the Atlantic Philanthropies, the National Science Foundation, and with the continuing support of these institutions and foundations. This program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you. Mass protests in Lebanon today demanded the ouster of the pro-Western government, vast crowds of Hezbollah supporters and others, filled the streets of Beirut. It was the latest move in a growing power struggle between the government and pro-cerian

factions. We have a report narrated by Nick Peyton Walsh of Independent Television News. Sheldon has peaceful protest felt so ominous. The message to Lebanon's beleaguered government from nearly a million protesters tonight. We will not leave until you do. Yesterday his baller chief Sheikh Nasrallah told his supporters to take to the streets until the government resigned. Today they surrounded Prime Minister Fauz Senora, penned in behind barbed wire and troops. The lines drawn as just to declare a final chapter in a sectarian struggle plaguing the country's elite. One that for Beirut has always meant bloodshed and chaos. We first saw the same flags in February last year as part of a cedar revolution that forced the troops of neighboring Syria out.

But now the boots on the other foot, the pro-cerian Hezbollah emboldened after surviving Israel's onslaught in this summer's war, a staging and identical political offensive. Just display as if to answer any doubts that they had the people power to oust Mrs. Senora and the American tutelage, they say, runs his government. He was calm at prayer today, but last night, Mr. Senora was determined to rein in an autonomous his baller. We will not allow them to topple the democratic system, its organisations and its basis. We will not accept a state inside a state. Mrs. Senora in a perilous position after Minister Pierre Jamal was shot dead last week. Already hand strung by resignation, if his cabinet loses two more ministers, it will collapse. We'll have more on this story right after this news summary. The new president of Mexico, Philippe Calderon, took office today amid chaos in the National Congress.

Hours earlier, leftist protesters, broad with Calderon's conservative supporters, the protesters back on Dr. Manuel Lopez Oberdor, he lost last summer's election by less than a percentage point. We'll have more on this story later in the program tonight. At least 15 more Iraqis were killed in scattered violence today. Several died in a series of U.S. and Iraqi raids on insurgents. Overall, the Interior Ministry reported 1850 Iraqi civilians were killed in November. That was up 44 percent from October's record toll. And the U.S. military said another American soldier was killed on Thursday. That made 68 U.S. deaths in November. At least 630 were wounded. There were more details today on the Iraq study group's report, due next week. The Washington Post said the bipartisan panel will recommend pulling nearly all U.S. combat forces from Iraq by early 2008. As described as a goal, not a firm timetable, today the U.S. commander in northern Iraq

said the shift to Iraqi control is well underway. As they develop capacity and accept responsibility for security, we will turn more and more responsibility over to them. From day one, this has been our focus. We will continue to partner with Iraqi partners, and I expect that over the next three or six months, they will assume full responsibility for security of Iraq's people. The U.S. National Intelligence Director, John Negroponte, said today, Iraq is much more dangerous now than Vietnam was in the 1960s. He spoke to Sea-Span. Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki faced a growing political revolt today. Two top Sunni politicians openly criticized his policies. One of them, Vice President Tarik Al-Hashimi, called for a new government. He said, everything is moving in the wrong direction. The situation must be addressed as soon as possible. Meanwhile, Shiite supporters of Muqtada Al-Satter, boycotted the government for the third

straight day. On Monday, one of Iraq's leading Shiite politicians, Abdul Aziz Al-Hahqim, will meet with President Bush in Washington. Bill Benedict left Turkey today. He ended the four-day visit, promising better understanding and dialogue with Muslims. At a final mass, he said, the Roman Catholic Church, which is to impose nothing, and merely asks to live in freedom. Will have Margaret Warner's report from Turkey later in the program tonight. Back in this country, the first major snowstorm of the season roared across the nation's midsection today. It was blamed for at least five deaths. Use our correspondent, Betty Ann Bowser, narrates our report. It looked like a winter wonderland in many places, as the storm left a blanket of up to a foot of snow. But along with the snow, the system dropped a dangerous mix of ice and freezing rain from the Texas Panhandle to the Great Lakes.

For drivers, the snow and ice caused treacherous traffic conditions. Visibility was reduced to near zero on some roads. Air travelers were stranded overnight at Chicago and other major hubs, St. Louis and Dallas Fort Worth, as hundreds of flights were canceled ahead of the storm. A flight that we could have got on at nine o'clock was canceled, so we wound up here. They sent us over to the high rate over there was ridiculous. Nice. So we wound up on cats here. We are for camped up. Sea trucks were out in force to restore power to 2.4 million customers. In St. Louis alone, the storm knocked out power to more than 400,000. For schoolchildren, the snow meant a welcome day off. Thousands of schools and businesses closed their doors for the day. As the day went on, the system headed toward the Northeast and Canada, ahead of it, heavy rain and strong wind moved through the mid-Atlantic states.

A typhoon left nearly 200 people dead in the central Philippines today, 260 others were missing. The storm drove ashore on Thursday and moved back out to sea early today. Heavy downpours touched off flash floods and mudslides, entire villages were swamped. It was the fourth major typhoon to hit the Philippines since September. In Britain, an Italian security expert tested positive for the poison that killed Alexander Litvinenko, a former Russian spy. Mario Skalamella showed low levels of radioactive polonium-210. The two men met the same day Litvinenko became ill. A family friend said the Russian's wife also has low-level contamination. The incoming speaker of the U.S. House, Nancy Pelosi announced a new chairman of the House Intelligence Committee today, East Texas Congressman Sylvester Reyes, a former Border Patrol Agent and Vietnam War veteran.

He was elected to the House in 1996, Pelosi picked him over two more senior lawmakers. This was World AIDS Day marked by warnings, protests and solemn services. The President of Ukraine warned the virus is spreading rapidly in the former Soviet bloc, elsewhere crowds in South Africa held vigils to mark the day. In Asia, there were large parades to raise awareness. The AIDS pandemic has killed 25 million people worldwide since 1981. An economic news U.S. manufacturing activity was down in November for the first time since 2003. The Private Institute for Supply Management reported that today. On Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost more than 27 points to close at 12,194. The Nasdaq fell 18 points to close at 24-13. For the week, the Dow lost 7-tenths of a percent, the Nasdaq almost 2 percent. And that's it for the news summary tonight.

Now, crisis in Lebanon, chaos in Mexico, shields and Brooks, and Margaret in Turkey. Lebanon, we get an update from Anthony Shadeed, Middle East correspondent for the Washington Post, Jeffrey Brown spoke with him earlier today from Beirut. Anthony, this was clearly a major demonstration you witnessed today. How seriously is it being taken by people you're talking to in terms of its potential impact on Lebanon's future? I think it's being taken very seriously on Lebanon here. There is a sense that this crisis has escalated pretty dramatically in some ways has become a popular confrontation with what we saw today, tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of people in downtown Beirut, thousands of values stay until the government falls. There is a sense of this crisis building and this crisis escalating, neither side necessarily sees a way out of it. In fact, in fact, there isn't a way out without one side winning or losing.

But I think what's more dramatic for a lot of people in Lebanon is that we're seeing two faces of the country actually face-to-face right now, we're seeing the Lebanon that might be represented by Hezbollah, it's political culture, it's perspective on life, it's ideology. Up against a government, the republicans are very different perspective of Lebanon. One more accommodation in some ways of Israel, for instance, one more western in the back of the United States and France. It is a contest between two very different countries at this point. Well the opposition was first demanding more power in the government. Are they now demanding the people you talk to actually bring down the government and do they think they can do it? There's perhaps still a compromise out there, some kind of reformulation of the cabinet that would give Hezbollah more power. What his blood's been seeking for it and it's allies is basically what they call a blocking third. It would be a third of the cabinet that would allow them to veto any government decision they disagreed with.

The government has obviously rejected that and they're opposed to that idea. At this point, Hezbollah says it's not going to end these protests until it does force the government to resign, force it to formulate a new cabinet. Now as recently as yesterday the prime minister said that he rejected that flatly, said it was an attempted coup and he was not going to accept his blood demands. There is a question of, again where this goes, can Hezbollah actually bring about enough pressure to force the government to resign? It's going to play out over probably days even weeks and right now there is that sense that the streets are very loud even right now with thousands of people down there. They're going to stay put there for at least, at least the short term. I understand today there was a large military and police presence. How much support does prime ministers in your a half in the military and for that matter in the public at large? The military seems loyal to the government and there's not a lot of question about that. Like you pointed out, there were thousands of people, thousands of soldiers and police in the streets today. The government headquarters, which is known as the said, I was basically barricaded between

coils of barbed wire and metal barricades, protesters didn't try to pass through the barricades or the march on the government headquarters itself. That's probably a good thing. The government headquarters right now is home to actually the prime minister and several ministers who have kind of taken up residence there, mid-done certainty. It's a very, there's a lot of unease out there, a lot of anxiety. There was an assassination of a government minister last week and I think there's a fear among a lot of people that the protests may not be the only dramatic moment that we see in the weeks ahead. Well, there was apparently an intent today to keep things non-violent. Did it actually play out that way? And is there a fear it may go in the other direction at any moment? You know, it did. It was actually, it was quite, in some ways it was great theft of today, the protests dancing, singing, clapping. There wasn't a lot of anger out there, although of course their demands are very stark. I mean, we're talking about the resignation of the government, but it was kind of a carnival like atmosphere, almost among the protesters, it began about 12 o'clock noon and then

pretty much dissipated by five or six, but like I said, there's still thousands of people down there right now and they're keeping up, it's still pretty lively. You mentioned the assassination only about 10 days ago of Pierre Jamile. Are there fears that others in the government may be still targets? There are fears, and that's been talked about a lot, we continue to hear about confrontations in the streets, for instance. We continue to hear about lists that might be circulating about other ministers who would be assassinated. There's a lot of rumor at this point and I think given the crisis, given that how pitched the crisis is, these rumors are probably going to probably gather in the days ahead of we're probably going to hear a lot more rumors. Right now this situation feels relatively calm. We did expect this protest, this protest played out, I think it's more what's the next step, how will Huzzville have you put even more pressure on the government at this point? All right, Anthony Shaddeed of the Washington Post.

Thanks again. My pleasure. Still ahead, denied shields and brooks and turkey at a crossroads, they come after our report on the Stormy Presidential inaugural in Mexico today, Ray Suarez has that story. The official ceremony was rushed, and followed brawling and chair-throwing in the Mexican Congress. The people have chosen me. I will work for the good of the country and the prosperity of the Union, and if I don't do it, I mean, the people demanding. Both the outgoing and incoming presidents are members of the pro business and pro trade national action party, known as Pan, but Calderon's opponent, Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador, labeled the July election count fraudulent.

He's refused to concede in the 12 weeks since the country's highest court certified Calderon's win. Calderon-Obrador of the more left-wing Democratic Revolution, or PRD party, has declared himself shadow president, swearing himself in before a huge crowd last month. His supporters of staged protests across the country. With the Congress in an uproar, outgoing President Fox took off the ceremonial presidential sash in a hastily arranged midnight swearing-in ceremony at the Presidential Palace, Calderon appealed for unity in a televised message. I do not ignore the complexity of the political times we are living, nor our differences. But I am convinced that today we should put an end to our disagreements, and from there start a new stage whose only aim is to place the national interest above our differences. The new 44-year-old president comes into office promising to create jobs and reduce poverty. But he also faces major unrest outside Mexico City.

Only 3,000 people have been killed in the last two years in an increasingly ruthless war between rival drug gangs. Five hundred of those deaths occurred in Calderon's home state of Mishwakan, this year alone. The popular tourist destination of Wajaka has been the scene of escalating violence. A teacher's strike that began in May mushroom to a broad protest against the state and national governments. And people have been killed in clashes between demonstrators and police. And from war, we talk with Jorge Castaneda, who served as Mexico's foreign minister during the Fox Administration. He's now a professor at New York University, and Pamela Starr, an analyst at the Eurasia Group, a risk consulting firm. She was previously a professor at the Autonomous Technical Institute of Mexico in Mexico City for eight years. Professor Castaneda, what does the tumult surrounding the swearing-in of the New Mexican President mean about the strength of the country's democracy and its institutions?

Well, actually, rate things turned out much better than most people expected. At the end of the day, both Fox, the outgoing president and Calderon, the incoming president were able to be present at the Swarrigon ceremony in the National Congress, then Calderon was able to deliver a message to the nation, which was a clear, precise, very definitive message. So I think that actually things worked out much better than most people thought. And I think the opposition has showed itself to be much weaker than most people thought. Is that enough? No, it's not. Calderon now has to actually do things and not just say things. But he said the right things today, the ceremony took place, the left-wing opposition was not able to stop the swearing-in ceremony or the inauguration. I think it's a big step forward from Mexico and from Mexico's institutions, given the uncertainty that we were facing as late as last night, when nobody knew what was going to happen, Ray.

Professor Star, what do you make of those pictures, those scenes that we saw coming from Mexico City this morning? Well, I have to agree with Jorge to a certain degree. I think it was a very important step forward for Mexican democracy. Felipe Calderon was legally installed as the president of Mexico today. But I also think that the concerns that the left was going to be able to disrupt the inauguration and prevent Calderon from taking the oath of office today was somewhat overstated. They were able to prevent Fox from giving his state of the union address in September, but mostly because Fox allowed them to do so. He agreed to step down. Felipe Calderon has made it plain throughout the last month that he would not allow that to happen, that he would not enter the presidency looking weak and backing down before the opposition of the left and easily outmaneuvered them today. What does he have to do coming right out of the box? What are the first couple of main tasks for this new president? First and foremost, he has to develop political capital. He has to build the support in the society and in the political class to be able to govern Mexico.

He enters a weak president who does not have legitimacy in the eyes of about a quarter of the electorate, who faces a strong opposition not only from the left, but also from the former ruling party, the pre in the legislature. His party only holds 41% of the seats, so to get anything approved, he has to work with the legislature. So he's going to need to find a way to, as Jorge said, begin to get things done, but also in the process to be able to develop a working relationship in the legislature so that he can actually govern for the remainder of his presidency. Well, Professor Castaniena, you just heard your colleague. He's a divided Congress, a shadow president, a serious crime and economic problems. Can he do all those things that she just spelled out in the agenda? Well, I think he has to do everything Pamela Star said, but he also has to try and begin to dismantle Mexico's monopoly system, Mexico's a monopoly game. We have a monopoly on television, a monopoly in telecommunications, a monopoly in cement, a monopoly in political representation, monopolies in the unions, monopolies in the bread and tortilla industry, Mexico's a country run by monopolies.

None of this has been transformed over the last 15 years when so many other things have changed in Mexico. What Calderon has to do is to try to begin to dismantle this corporativist monopoly system that has been running Mexico for 70 years. I know this is a very difficult challenge for him, but I also think it's the only way for him to strengthen his presidency. On many issues, he is going to be following the same line, Fox is following. Most of his cabinet are made up of people from the Fox administration. Most of his policies will be the same as the Fox administration's policies. I don't think there will be any major changes on most issues, but he has to change on this one specific issue, start dismantling Mexico's monopoly game without that the country cannot grow, Ray, there's no way. But does that mean Professor Starr biting the hand that feeds him and fed pun in this last election?

Does it mean opposing big business when you ran as a pro-capitalist candidate? To certain degree, it does, Ray. I mean, part of the problem, I agree with Jorge, that that's one of the things that Calderon should do, and Mexico needs for him to do. But I think it would be a terrible mistake for him to try to start doing that right out of the gate. He simply doesn't have the political capital. And Jorge talks about monopolies, he's referring not only to the private sector monopolies, meaning Jorge would have to directly confront a very powerful business community. But also he's talking about monopolies in the state sector, the monopoly in oil production, in electricity generation, et cetera. And those are things that Calderon simply does not have the political capital to do. He cannot confront the business community. He cannot try to change the constitution for allow for private investment in the oil sector, the electricity sector, that's a guaranteed way to reunite or maintain the unity of the left and the decideness of the left in its opposition to him. It would be a big mistake. Well, Professor Castanero, let's talk a little bit more about the unity of the left. The country was very closely divided in the election.

The new president won by a hair. And now the defeated, the vanquished, aren't going home. They aren't giving an inch. They say they're going to oppose him in every way they can for six whole years of this term. Well, they talk the talk, Ray, but they don't walk the walk today. They did not really try to make it impossible for Calderon to be sworn in. They, in fact, allowed him to enter the chamber through the back door. They allowed Fox to enter. They allowed both of them to do the ceremony quickly. Probably some of them were bought off, others were convinced, others felt that it was bad politics for the, to continue on this road of confrontation. So I think the left is beginning to break up. It won't break up definitively, but still more and more of the PRD Congressman Senators and governors will realize that they have a lot to work with Calderon. And they will also realize that if he takes this anti-monopoly stance, which is both private

and public like Pamela Starr says, but includes freeing up the labor movement, freeing up the private monopolies and breaking up the private monopolies in Mexico. And yes, allowing private investment in the public monopolies, of which there are only two left, that's an agenda that part of the left not only can live with, but actually would be very happy with. So I think the left is beginning to break up a little bit on its own. And what we saw today, they could have done a much better job. They were out tricked, outflanked, outmaneuvered by Calderon and by Fox, which I think is a very good thing for the country, but I think they also let themselves be outmaneuvered right. Very briefly, Professor Castinier, that what's America looking for, as it looks south to Mexico City and this new administration? Well I think the Bush administration and the United States in general, Ray, should really help Calderon do what he wants to do. Unlike the Bush administration stance towards Fox since 2001, when there was no immigration

agreement, when there was no real cooperation on other issues, the Bush administration and mainly the Democratic majority in the House and the Senate should reach out to Calderon, reach out to Mexico, get an immigration reform, get an immigration agreement, do the other things that have to be done on Mexican infrastructure, on drug enforcement, on cooperation at the border. So the two countries work together. This idea that Mexico has to put its own house in order, without the United States support, simply ignores geography, ignores history, and ignores the enormous disparity between the two countries. Professor St. Louis. In 12 years since NAFTA, it's time to fix it. I would agree, but I would think the focus is somewhere else. I think with the United States, the best thing you can do to help Philippa Calderon is to accept the fact the United States is either going to import goods from Mexico or it's going to import workers. The United States has to get realistic and realize that it either helps Mexico grow or it's going to continue to import illegal labor from Mexico.

That's where the focus needs to be. And as Professor Castaneda suggested of reaching out from the new Democratic Congress, is that in the cards? I highly doubt that the Democratic Congress is going to pass any kind of a migration agreement. I just don't see that in the cards before the 2008 presidential election in the United States. My emphasis on the need for a focus on trade and growth in Mexico, as opposed to for some sort, excuse me, of comprehensive migration agreement. Professor St. Louis. Professor Castaneda, thank you both. Thank you, Ray. Now the analysis of shields and Brooks syndicated columnist Mark Shields, New York Times columnist David Brooks. David, that big political noise we hear is the coming of the Baker Hamilton report on Iraq. Based on the leaks and anything else you know about it, what in fact is it going to say? Well, it's charts on the Hill ground.

If you have George Bush over here who wants to keep fighting and keep going until we win, and Jack Mirth over here who wants to really have some sort of imminent withdrawal, it's sort of there in the middle. It's clearly heading toward the exits, but a very slow gradual heading toward the exits. Maybe a goal of withdrawing our combat troops by 08, but that would still leave perhaps 70 as many as 70,000 troops in Iraq in two years, and then it's conditional. And so what it really is is a very, it's a political compromise, and I think it has a lot of public support. My doubt is what does it have to do with the reality on the ground in Iraq? Are we going to be able to keep withdrawing if the violence gets worse? If the violence gets worse and Iraqi politicians become more insecure, less likely to reach across sectarian lines, are we going to keep withdrawing if the Iraqi army fails, doesn't show up for battles, are we going to keep withdrawing? So there's the whole Iraqi reality that I'm not sure how it applies to. The American reality I completely understand, it's right there in the middle where a lot of people are. Right there in the middle where it ought to be, Mark? Well, I think Jim did it show if the consensus is formed now in solidifying around an exit

strategy. I think that's what the point is just over the details. Yeah, I think that's what it is. I think that there are two other things at play here in the big thing. One is that it may be too little and too late. I mean, that events seem to be in the saddle right now throughout the Middle East. When the best news out of the Middle East is from the Israeli-Palestinian sector, I mean, then you really know you're in trouble. There's been nothing but bad news there. Including today, of course, as we do in Lebanon, leaving the story. It's just everywhere you turn it. I mean, the Iran Syria card, I mean, they have a capacity for causing great trouble. We don't know if they can use their leverage for any good. And that'll probably come with a price in Lebanon, maybe the price. I mean, there's just, it seems to be that this is beyond the Baker Hamilton. I'm not minimizing it's important, the effort or the sincerity of the people involved. But unaddressed throughout this whole debate by the Democrats, as well as the Republicans, what is our moral obligation to the Iraqis and to the Iraqi nation?

I mean, we went to war without world support, without the support of the world community, without a valid rationale for going to war, with either wrong assumptions or false pretenses, or we were having secured that victory. We were unprepared and made bad decisions. And we took a brutal, repressive, stable, secular Iraq. And turned it into a brutal, unstable, three aquatic and unlivable Iraq. And what is, I mean, as we talk about leaving, what is our responsibility? You want to pick up on that? Well, I mean, I do think we have a responsibility there. And a lot of people who oppose the war think we should stay because we have a responsibility there. Not to have it devolve into a genocidal civil war. Nonetheless, my emphasis now would not be on us or be on them. I really think it's time not to worry about us and what we want for Iraq, but to look at the reality of Iraq. And to adapt our plans to their reality.

And the reality of Iraq is that 10,000 Iraqis are moving every week to their sectarian homelands. The country is dividing itself. A lot of people, a lot of Americans are moving. A lot of middle class people are in Jordan and Syrian and neighboring cities. So the reality of the country is that it's split. And the reality of the country is that everyone there who gets interviewed in the paper, wants a strong government. And the reality is they're not going to have a strong government if it's Sunni and Shia, together because those two communities right now can't have a strong government. So I'm migrating much closer to what Peter Galbraith has been saying, which Obama didn't have a strong government. Or you have some government in the center to divvy up the oil. But really look where authority, look where reality is it's local. Well, speaking of a reality, President Bush went to Jordan and met with Maliki. What came out of that? What was that point of that meeting, do you think? I think it's hard to know, they clearly wanted to know what kind of guy is Maliki. And I've been hearing radically different things from within the administration about whether he's hopeful or hopeless. And I don't think they really know.

There's just a great deal of debate in the administration. In fact, I'd say now the most important debate is not actually in the Baker Hamilton Report. It's within the administration with some people in the State Department and elsewhere saying, let's give up on the Sunnis. I think David Ignatius reported that it's the 80% solution. We just did- You said that on this program, well, it's not a matter of fact. So the Shia and the Kurds, we just can't reconcile this country. And that's sort of the one winner strategy. I would admit that you had to have a two-winner strategy. The Sunnis have to feel like leaders, winners, and the Shia, but they just can't be winners together. Some people were suggesting that the president going to Jordan to talk to Maliki, etc. was a small step, at least, trying to even preempt Baker Hamilton. Is that a legitimate thing? Well, I think that during the campaign, up until November 7th, that Baker Hamilton Commission and study group was used regularly by the White House, by the President, to show with the Sun to active consideration, to show that they weren't just wed to the status quo, that they were open. No, no standing course.

No. And since the election, since the election, they've been pre-empting basically and debunking what are the alternatives. I mean, the President says there's no graceful exit, the President is not talking about Syrian and Iran. I mean, it seems to be moving away from it, no longer available to him. I do think that what we're seeing, Jim, somewhat, is reminiscent of the debate. And the administration is busy about it, to what we saw in Saigon in 1975. And then the debate that David just portrayed has been in the administration. In the administration, and that is, when the one great score comes to right beside your name, he writes not whether you want to lost, but who gets the blame. And you'll recall in the last days of the reverse of the John F. Kennedy. Exactly, and in the last days of the fall of Saigon, and the end of Vietnam War, it was questioned, well, it was the Vietnamese. It was them. They failed. Well, the very same people who told us that this would be a democracy born when Baghdad fell, and it might be difficult,

and it was just awaiting to be created, and now say, well, there's something in the culture of the Iraqis. They just can't do it. They're unable to do it. So I think this may be for domestic political consumption and trying to write the first draft of history as much as it is for any real policy. Well, there, I'm different. Listen, no one's minimizing the U.S. failure. You take a country, you take away all their police, you let everybody at a jail. If we didn't, this country would be ugly. So nobody's minimizing that. Nonetheless, to say that the Iraqis are not partially the blame for their own country is wrong. This is a government that has not been able to deal on oil. This is a government that has not been able to reach out. These are people like Sutter, who have brutally committed want to commit acts of genocide, to say that the Iraqis have behaved well, is also not true. So there's ample blame to go around, just within the administration, there's certainly an attitude of every man from itself.

You're beginning to see leaks significantly, the Steve Hadley memo on Maoism. Does that even lead to me? Do you think that was an intentional leak by the administration to put Maliki on the defencey before that? I don't think so. I haven't spoken to Michael Gordon, our reporter, that I wouldn't ask him who he got it from. But it said in the story, an administration official, I would say the election had an effect psychologically liberating. An effect on a lot of people who were unhappy, but marching to the party line. And now they're talking about radically different ideas, and they're suggesting radically different things. It's become much harder to report on the administration. It used to be you talked to one of them, you knew what they all thought. But now, no more. Jim, I'm simply saying that the attempt to pin it on the Iraqis is usually accompanied, almost invariably, by any failure to address what did go wrong on the party of the administration. And to confront the wrong decisions that were made every single step of the way. And somehow that the policy that led to all of those decisions is not going to be re-examined.

And certainly in the Iraq study group, the other thing the Iraq study group is going to provide. And it's important, and that is it's going to provide political cover for both democrats and republicans. And it's the republicans, because it is in the middle. And anybody can look at it and get anything out if they want. I mean, they were coming up with this essentially with Jack Reed, the Center for Rhode Island, and Carl Levin have been talking about for almost a year. But what it's the republicans who want to get Iraq resolved before 2008. They don't want to go another chance. Speaking of 2008 before we go, Bill Frist decided he wouldn't go Governor Vilsack. The Democratic governor of Iowa said he would go. Surprise on what happened to Bill Frist. The great man who's not an actual politician, cared about being a doctor, didn't really master politics. Tried to pretend he was more conservative than he really was, and like a lot of people who fake it, he overdid it. And so he's a great man, but not an actual politician. Frist? Bill Frist is totally admirable physician.

I mean, it's been weeks providing medical care in Tarot, in Africa, to Paris, Africa. But over ambition on his part, and egregious bad judgment on the part of the White House, put him in a position to Senate Majority Leader. I mean, he was bound to fail, and you can't run for president as Senate Majority Leader. I mean, Bob Dole, a gifted politician, couldn't do it. You have to annoy too many people. Exactly. And you carry the institutions. Sure. Shame with it. What about Bill Sack? See, Bill Sack is serious candidate? He's a series candidate in the sense that he's a red state Democrat. That is some, a Democrat who's won in one in a state that George Bush carries. Just as Mitt Romney has an appeal, as a blue state Republican, he's just the opposite. And he did something that used to be commended for. He didn't go through the sham and the hypocrisy of an exploratory committee. He said, I'm wrong. I'm wrong. What do you think about Bill Sack? I'm a great personal story in orphan, who was adopted by a woman with alcohol and drug problems and rose up to become governor. And I think plausible, a serious policy guy happened to be in the Carter Center yesterday.

And you forget where Jimmy Carter was in 1975 or Bill Clinton, right? So, yeah, quite possible. I wouldn't bet on him, but possible. Question is whether a governor in the post-9-11, I mean, the governor's would break credits and, you know, the national security being what it is for the nation. Yeah. Thank you both very much. Good to see. And finally tonight, Margaret Warner's wrap-up of her reporting trip to Turkey, a nation caught by history and the present between East and West. If you want to get a glimpse of modern Istanbul with echoes of 1930s Berlin, just catch this nightclub here. Female impersonators sing to a packed house, while trendy business people, their spouses and special friends inhale the food and scotch, wine and rocky, Turkey's potent national

liquor. At least for now. But Club Manager Gulsam Samim worries how long it can last in the current political climate. You have an Islamic government now? Yes. We're not happy with it. Are you worried that a place like this where you shut down? I don't think so. But they have other ways of making pressure on people. Do you come under pressure as the manager of a club like this? Not yet. Are you worried that you met? Of course. Worried because modern Turkey, 99% Muslim in faith, is at a crossroads, sandwich between East and West, it's struggling with its identity as it hasn't since 1923. That's when the founder of modern Turkey came all out of Turkey, whose images still loom everywhere, decreed Turks should adopt the Latin alphabet and Western dress. He imposed a legal separation between religion and state, which Turks define as secularism.

But a new political party with Islamist roots won national elections three years ago, and the country's secularists say it's mounting a sneak attack on Turkey's secular culture. There is no something called soft Islamist government. Beddry Baikom is a prominent artist and an ardent politically active secularist. He points to steps that the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, has taken at the national and municipal level, rewriting schoolbooks to insert Islamic themes, trying to restrict alcohol-serving restaurants to ghettoize red zones outside the cities, campaigning, though not yet succeeding, to lift the ban on headscarves in universities and government buildings. Take a frog and you put it into boiling water. The frog would jump out and you could not cook it and eat it. So what you do is you take a frog and you put it in kind of a coldish lukewarm water

and you start heating the water very, very slowly. And then the moment the frog realizes what happened, it's too late. This is the example we give for what they're doing to the Turkish society. That's not the view taken on the campus of Fati University, where students tend to come from more pious religious families. It's a private college, but must still obey the Turkish ban against wearing the headscarf or veil. Student Hava Donmez, who pulled up her sweatshirt while we spoke on camera, says she faced a painful choice. Because Islam commands her to be covered, but even more so, she says, it commands her to learn. It's hard because you are trapped between your choices and between your emotions and between your, maybe, here, I was trapped in my religion belief and in my education. Her friend Daria Marjan doesn't wear a headscarf on or off campus, but she thinks Hava

should be free to express her religious beliefs without undermining modern secular turkey in any political sense. It can't threaten people and I think people makes this problem not a headscarf. The headscarf issue is central in Turkish politics today as a symbol of the struggle over whether to redefine the secularism of the modern Turkish state. The tolerance that they want for the veil is something that they don't show at all for the other lifestyles, including the miniscirt, including women wearing sleeveless shirts, including alcohol, including nude pictures, it's a political propaganda tool. It's not at all the conservative traditional headscarf that our grandmothers used to wear. This is like a totally invented by Islamist fundamentalist lifestyles and agendas and political

goals. The conservative people of faith, like Fatah University Dean Al-Parslan Al-Jichen, says it's the secularist who are intolerant and unjustifiably paranoid about a secret plan by religious people to change the culture. This is what they are basically saying that these people are hypocrites. They say openly that they want secularism, but inside they don't want. They're saying this about the government. They say this about anyone who is actually religious. And as a result, they try to make an atmosphere of feeling uncomfortable in a religious environment. Turkey's religiously conservative prime minister, Rachip Ta'Ith Erdogan, insists he's more interested in cementing Turkey into the West than in trying to Islamize its culture. One recent Sunday, he spent all evening at a party-sponsored debate for young people over globalization.

And the pro-globalization team won. Erdogan's people noted was his government that last year began negotiating for Turkey to join the European Union. And his foreign minister, Abdullah Gould, says Turkey is moving briskly to adopt evermore European economic, political, and social norms. Our government is a reformist government in this country. After so many years, there's a single party government at the upgrade to the Democratic standard. Turkey is modernized, and it's getting out with it, it's getting all modernized. To see a surprising aspect of Turkey's modernization, we went 500 miles east of Istanbul into the religiously pious heartland of Turkey, a major base of the ruling party's support to the city of Caisserie. Here live the so-called Anatolian Tigers, businessmen who've built vast complexes of factories and mosques for their workers to pray, and now produce a growing share of Turkey's GDP.

One decade-old business, keep out denim, sells $17 million worth of denim clothing each year, nearly half of it as exports, hugging the hips of young European women in a way that would make some conservative Islamist cringe, but not the factory's owner, Chilal Hasnal Chiche. A pious Muslim, he prays five times a day, and has made his pilgrimage to Mecca. But business, he says, is business. Of course, in our Islamic culture, we're not in the habit of wearing clothes like these, but it's our business to manufacture them. We understand the demands of our customers, and we produce accordingly. On his factory floor, he notes men and women work together, and while some women wear headscarves, others don't. The number one Caisserie powerhouse is the boydack group. One of Turkey's top 10 conglomerates is on track to sell $1.8 billion this year in furniture,

textiles, and financial services in Turkey and abroad. The company's deputy chairman, Shukru Boydack, voted for Erdogan's party, but says the West needn't worry about it trying to take Turkey in an Islamist direction. It is because the people in our government are religious that those thoughts come to people's minds, but I definitely don't believe that Turkey will move to the right or become more Islamic. 75% of Turks don't believe in this, maybe even 90%. Recent polling here seems to bear that out. A survey published just last week by a respected Istanbul think tank did find that a greater percentage of Turks now identify themselves primarily as Muslims, yet it also found that only 9% favor imposing Islamic Sharia law down from 21% just a few years ago. And that gives heart to those who believe that Turkey's essential character won't change.

Many members of Istanbul's business elite, Muslim but secular in their private attitudes, seem to have made their peace with this government because it is instituted the kind of economic reforms and stability that have been very good for business. They don't publicly acknowledge any worries about the government's alleged Islamist designs. I have a business woman, I only talk with facts and figures and intentions, it's difficult to read. Gulair Sabanchay is the most powerful business woman in Turkey today, as chairman of the country's second largest conglomerate, the Sabanchay group. And she's bullish on Turkey's prospects for joining the European Union. There is a sentiment in Europe against Turkey right now, but I fear this is temporary. And also, have we all know that the public opinions change. Turkey needs to stay on this route.

This accession process is important for Turkey. The process itself is important for Turkey. It is the journey that is important, not the destination. The EU this week took steps to stall Turkey's membership over Ankara's refusal to let Greek Cypriot ships dock in its ports, as well as concerns over Turkey's human rights record, its treatment of religious and ethnic minorities, and the prosecution of intellectuals on charges of insulting so-called Turkishness. Yet Sabanchay is confident the Europeans won't throw them off the track. You wrote recently in the Financial Times that the EU needs Turkey more than Turkey needs the EU. What did you mean? Turkey has a first young population, the demography is very important, which all the numbers show that Europe would need this in the future. Second Turkey has a geographical location. It's a bridge for energy sources.

Turkey is a bridge for cultural sources. I think both Europe needs Turkey, and I also call Turkey needs Europe. The United States has lobbied hard for the EU to admit Turkey, even though it's a Muslim country. For the U.S. has a major stake in anchoring Turkey in the West, says the U.S. ambassador here, Ross Wilson. The debate here over what some regard is creeping fundamentalism on the one-hand secularism that adaturks principles on the other is one of the fundamental divides in Turkish politics today. They're very loud and very lively, very vibrant debate going on. That's a good thing. That's what democracies do. I think we have certainly, I have a lot of confidence in the ability of Turkey's citizens and its institutions and its leaders to sort through these in what's going to be a very interesting political year. One thing that could throw Turkey off the EU track is political upheaval. And there's talk that could be triggered if Prime Minister Erdogan gets his ruling party

control parliament to elect him as President next April. That would eliminate the last remaining secular figure with the power to veto pro-Islamist legislation, a vision that terrifies the secular forces here. The military has intervened in politics before, staging coups in 1960, 71, and 80, and pressuring and Islamist government to quit in 1997, and many Turks told us if the political opposition can't unite, they're counting on the army to protect them from the Islamists. This fall, the army's new chief of the General Staff gave pointed speeches warning of a reactionary threat in Turkey and valing that the Turkish armed forces will forever stand against such threats. We have to keep an eye on this because we have been given this responsibility by our constitution, by the constitution of this nation. We've talked to even young people here who say, in the end, if this government tries

to push this country in an Islamic direction, the Turkish military will step in and save us. What would you say to them? It's the civil population's responsibility to protect the democracy. It's not the initial, initially, it's not the army's mission. But he added, if public opinion insists there's no other way, quote, the army should do whatever is necessary. How this complex, multilayered country, from its cosmopolitan hub of Istanbul to 5,000-year-old villages in the heartland, resolves its internal debate, will have consequences for Turkey, the region, and the world. As the evening at the Istanbul nightclub wore on, the westernized revelers belted out a Turkish rendition of the 1970s classic, I Will Survive. It was an assertion of confidence in a certain kind of future for Turkey, a future

that they may yet be called upon to defend. And again, the major developments of this day, mass protests in Beirut, Lebanon demanded an end to the pro-Western government, conservative Felipe Calderon took office as president of Mexico, despite leftist protests, and an early snowstorm paralyzed parts of the U.S. midsection. Washington, we can be seen later this evening, on most PBS stations. We'll see you online and again here Monday evening. Have an ice weekend. I'm Jim Lara. Thank you and good night. Major funding for the new hour with Jim Lara is provided by... Somewhere in the heartland, a child is sitting down to breakfast. Which is why a farmer is rising for a 15-hour day, and a trucker is beginning a five-day

journey. An ADM is turning corn and wheat, soy and cocoa beans into your favorite foods. Somewhere in the heartland, a child is sitting down to breakfast. Which is why so many work so long, and take their job to heart, ADM, resourceful by nature. At CIT, we provide the financing to keep healthcare strong and healthy. We help energy companies find new resources. We work with communications companies to make the world smaller and life bigger. We offer financial aid to make college possible for more students. At CIT, we help finance the future, because that's the place to be. See it with CIT. And by Pacific Life, Toyota, BP, the Atlantic Philanthropies, the National Science Foundation, and with the continuing support of these institutions and foundations.

And... This program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you. Who do you trust to tell all sides of a story? Who do you trust to let different voices be heard? Who do you trust to teach your children? Who do you trust to help make sense of it all? Americans trust PBS more than any other television network. To purchase video cassettes of the news hour with Jim Lehrer, call 1-866-678-News.

We are PBS. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . the future with confidence. Pacific Life, the power to help you succeed. And by BP, CIT, the Archer Daniels Midland Company, the Atlantic Philanthropies, the National Science Foundation, and with the continuing support of these institutions and foundations and this program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you.

Thank you. Mass protests in Lebanon today demanded the ouster of the pro-Western government, vast crowds of Hezbollah supporters and others.