'Meet the Press' transcript for March 1, 2009

MR. DAVID GREGORY:  Our issues this Sunday:  After almost six years and the loss of more than 4,000 American lives, President Obama says the war in Iraq is coming to a close.

(Videotape)

PRES. BARACK OBAMA:  By August 31st, 2010 our combat mission in Iraq will end.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY:  But is the exit strategy realistic?  Is the worst really over in Iraq?  And will an increase of 17,000 U.S.  troops in Afghanistan be enough to stop the growing violence there?  An exclusive interview with the man who will be charged with implementing the new strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan, the first person to ever serve as secretary of defense under presidents from two different parties, Robert Gates.

Then, President Obama announces a $3.6 trillion budget plan that transforms the role of government.

(Videotape)

PRES. OBAMA:  This budget is an honest accounting of where we are and where we intend to go.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH):  The era of big government is back, and Democrats are asking you to pay for it.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY:  Is the plan a political gamble for the new president?  What impact will this massive spending plan have on the economic crisis?  And how will the Republican Party structure its opposition against a popular president?  Our political roundtable weighs in:  chair of the National Democratic Leadership Council, former Democratic congressman from Tennessee Harold Ford Jr.; John McCain's chief strategist during the 2000 presidential campaign, Republican strategist Mike Murphy; White House press secretary during President Clinton's first term and author of "Why Women Should Rule the World," Dee Dee Myers; and host of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," former Republican Congressman from Florida Joe Scarborough.

But first, yesterday evening I sat down with Robert Gates in his first television interview as President Obama's secretary of defense.

Mr. Secretary, welcome back to MEET THE PRESS.

SEC'Y ROBERT GATES:  Thank you.

MR. GREGORY:  For the first time at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina on Friday, the president talked about a date certain for the withdrawal of U.S.  forces from Iraq.  This is what he said.

(Videotape, Friday)

PRES. OBAMA:  But August 31st, 2010 our combat mission in Iraq will end.  I intend to remove all U.S.  troops from Iraq by the end of 2011.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY:  Now, the president talks about the combat mission being over by August of 2010; the idea being that we're currently at about 142,000 troops, that residual force would be roughly 50,000 troops.  But those forces left in Iraq will still be in harm's way.  There will be some fighting, they will be dying.  This war will go on beyond August of 2010.

SEC'Y GATES:  They do have a very different mission, but that mission will be principally a training, assistance, advisory role.  There will be a limited counterterrorism operations aspect to it, and we will still have some soldiers embedded with Iraqi units as part of, of the training effort.  But it's a very different kind of arrangement, and our soldiers will be consolidated into a limited number of bases in order to provide protection for themselves and for civilians who are out working in the Iraqi neighborhoods and countryside as well.  So I think that the way General Odierno plans this, the, the risk to our troops will be substantially less than certainly was last year, and it has, has gradually declined.

MR. GREGORY:  So that mission then changes with, with a smaller force.  How, how do you describe it generally?  Is this a situation where U.S.  forces are, are standing down and Iraqi forces are finally standing up in that principle position?

SEC'Y GATES:  Well, the Iraqi forces already are standing up in a significant way.  They basically organized the security for the provincial elections last month and did a very good job.  We were in the background, helped them with some planning and so on.  But it, but it is a very different kind of mission, and the units that will be left there will be characterized differently.  They will be called advisory and assistance brigades.  They won't be called combat brigades.

MR. GREGORY:  But nevertheless, we say the combat mission is over, U.S. troops will still be in harm's way.

SEC'Y GATES:  Yes, but at a very different level than in the past.

MR. GREGORY:  Some Democrats, supporters of the president--critics of the war, like the president, who was opposed to the war in Iraq--think that the size of the residual force at 50,000 troops is too big.  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was interviewed on MSNBC this week by Rachel Maddow.  This is what she said.

(Videotape, Wednesday)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA):  And I don't know what the justification is for 50,000--a presence of 50,000 troops in Iraq.  I do think that there's a need for some, and I don't know that all of them have to be in country.  I would think a third of that, maybe 20,000, a little more than a third, 15,000 or 20,000.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY:  Does this agreement represent, on the part of the president, a concession to his commanders on the ground to keep a larger force than perhaps he originally wanted for fear that the county might come apart without a significant U.S.  presence?

SEC'Y GATES:  No, I don't think it was a concession.  I think that there was a lot of analysis of the risks that were involved.  I think that if the commanders had had complete say in this matter that, that they would have preferred that, that the combat mission not end until the end of 2010.  And so having a somewhat larger residual or transition force mitigates the risk of having the combat units go out sooner.

MR. GREGORY:  Hm.

SEC'Y GATES:  So it was really a dialogue between the commanders in the field, the Joint Chiefs here, myself, the chairman and the president in terms of how, how you mitigate risk and how you structure this going forward.

I think the important thing to point out, though, is that the president has said that that will be a transition force of 35,000 to 50,000, and it's a way station.  We--as he pointed out, in the absence of any new agreement with the Iraqis we have to be at zero by the end of 2011.  So that 50,000 or 35,000 is a way station on the way to zero.

MR. GREGORY:  The president did not want to extend that combat mission until the end of 2010 as his commanders wanted.  Why not?

SEC'Y GATES:  Well, first of all, there were the Joint Chiefs and others who felt that if you look at the risk and, and also you look at the strain on the force and the need for additional forces in Afghanistan, and looking more broadly at, at our forces, there were those in the Department of Defense who were arguing very strongly for the 19-month period.  So I think, I think this really was the product of a dialogue between the president and the chiefs and the commanders.

MR. GREGORY:  You've always said it's important to be a realist about Iraq. President Bush originally thought that the U.S.  would be able to get down to 30,000 troops by September of 2003.  Tom Ricks, the author, as you know, of "Fiasco" and now "The Gamble," has covered the Pentagon in this war extensively, said this about the plan to end the combat phase:  "I don't think it's going to happen.  Why doesn't he [President Obama] just say as they stand up, we'll stand down.  He is walking in the failed footsteps of his predecessor, which is being persistently overoptimistic about Iraq." Let's be clear here.  Has the president said that if things get worse, if things go bad, that all bets are off?  That he would stop the withdrawal?

SEC'Y GATES:  What the president has said is that as commander in chief he always remain--retains the flexibility and the authority to change a plan or adjust it if he thinks it's in the national security of the United States. The fact is, I don't think any of us believe that that will be necessary.

MR. GREGORY:  But again, it's possible if there's a deterioration, he reserves that right to end the withdrawal.

SEC'Y GATES:  I would characterize the likelihood of significant adjustments to this plan as fairly remote.

MR. GREGORY:  Fairly remote.

But let's talk about where there are potential flash points in Iraq.  People I've talked to say there are three real areas.  In the north you've got tension between the Arabs and the Kurds; the prospect of the Kurds, perhaps, trying to split off from Iraq.  In Mosul, a large al-Qaeda in Iraq presence. In the south, in Basra, oil-rich area, as you know, militia groups fighting over that oil revenue.  In your judgment, what are the prospects of civil war once U.S.  forces come out in large numbers?

SEC'Y GATES:  Well, first of all, I think it's important to remember we have another 18 months, and we are going to have a substantial force there.  I would disagree that there is a, a significant instability in Basra.  I think Basra is one of the real success stories from Prime Minister Maliki's offensive down there last year.  So I--Mosul is a problem.  The Arab-Kurb tensions are a problem.  The need to get an oil law is a problem.  So, so there are problems.  We have the, the concerns associated with a national election at the end of this year, is one of the reasons why General Odierno wanted to keep those troops there as long as possible, or a significant number of troops.  So there's no question, we've had a significant military success. There has been real progress on the political side, but there is clearly unfinished business in that arena as well.  But we will still be there with a significant presence for another 18 months.  And, and as we've seen just over the last six to 12 months, what we have mostly seen is significant progress. And I think most of the people most closely associated with that expect--with Iraq expect that progress to continue.

MR. GREGORY:  There is an agreement between the United States and Iraq to pull all forces out by 2011.  That's what the president alluded to.

SEC'Y GATES:  Right.

MR. GREGORY:  What are the prospects that in fact U.S.  forces remain in Iraq beyond that date?  Which is possible if you renegotiated that deal, if the Iraqis said please stay.

SEC'Y GATES:  It's, it's really not a renegotiation, it would be a completely new negotiation.  My guess is it would be at the instigation of the Iraqis, and, and we would just have to wait and see.  At this point it's completely hypothetical.  We have a signed agreement with the Iraqis that says, that says we have to be out of there...

MR. GREGORY:  Mm-hmm.

SEC'Y GATES:  ...by the end of 2011, and that's what we're all planning on.

MR. GREGORY:  General Odierno, Odierno has said he expects and would want, in fact, U.S.  forces there at some level, perhaps 35,000, at least until 2015.

SEC'Y GATES:  Well, I, I also have said that I thought perhaps we would need to have troops there beyond that time.  That was all--what certainly my remarks were before the SOFA was signed.

MR. GREGORY:  Mm-hmm.

SEC'Y GATES:  And before we made a commitment to be out of there by 2011.  If we're there beyond that, it'll be because of a new agreement and negotiated with President Obama and, and based on what he thinks is in the best interests of our country.

More from NBC News broadcasts   To fight crime, city hires ex-cons   20 years later, Wall’s fall still being felt   Army chief: More troops needed in Afghanistan Army releases names of Fort Hood fatalities House stages Saturday health showdown Warship built from Twin Towers’ remains Follow on Twitter: NBC News | msnbc

MORE FROM MEET THE PRESS

Meet the Press Section Front

Nov. 8: Casey, Barbour, Rendell, roundtable, Brokaw Nov. 1: Tim Geithner, David Plouffe, roundtable Oct. 25: Cornyn, Schumer, Burnett, Sorkin, roundtable Oct. 18: Jarrett, Dodd, Kyl, Shriver, Podesta Oct. 11: Levin, Graham, McCaffrey, Myers, roundtable Oct. 4: Ambassador Susan Rice, roundtable Sept. 27: Bill Clinton, Paterson, Kyl, Webb Sept. 20: President Obama, Sen. Graham, Rep. Boehner, roundtable Sept. 13: Durbin, Cornyn, Dean, Gingrich, roundtable Sept. 6: Axelrod, roundtable Meet the Press Section Front   Add Meet the Press headlines to your news reader: