BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 21, 2006

US Envoy: 'Arrogance,' 'Stupidity' In Iraq

Senior State Department Official Criticizes Washington On Arab TV

  • Play CBS Video Video The Battle For Iraq

    Iraqi security forces recently lost control of the city of Balad. Lara Logan talks to Russ Mitchell about the situation in Iraq and how militia groups are battling for control of Iraqi cities.

  • Video New Direction In Iraq?

    President Bush called in Gen. John Abizaid, the U.S. commander for the Middle East, to discuss the situation in Iraq. This may signal a change in tactics in Iraq. Jim Axelrod has more.

  • Video Militia Seizes City In Iraq

    An anti-American Shiite militia has taken control of the city of Amarah, Iraq. The U.N. says the rising violence may be creating a refugee crisis. Aleen Sirgany reports.

  •  (CBS/AP)

  • Interactive Battle For Iraq

    The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.

  • Who's Who Iraq Insurgency

    More on the militant groups behind the insurgency in Iraq and their motivations.

  • Interactive Attacks Map

    Details on the insurgency and terrorism that has continued to take lives since the fall of Saddam.

(AP)  A senior U.S. diplomat said the United States had shown "arrogance" and "stupidity" in Iraq but was now ready to talk with any group except Al Qaeda in Iraq to facilitate national reconciliation.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera television aired late Saturday, Alberto Fernandez, director of public diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department offered an unusually candid assessment of America's war in Iraq.

"We tried to do our best but I think there is much room for criticism because, undoubtedly, there was arrogance and there was stupidity from the United States in Iraq," he said.

"We are open to dialogue because we all know that, at the end of the day, the solution to the hell and the killings in Iraq is linked to an effective Iraqi national reconciliation," he said, speaking in Arabic from Washington. "The Iraqi government is convinced of this."

The question of negotiations between the United States and insurgency factions has repeatedly surfaced over the past two years, but details have been sketchy. One issue that was often raised in connection with such negotiations was the extent of amnesty the United States and its Iraqi allies were willing to offer to the insurgents if they disarmed and joined the political process.

State department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters Fernandez afterward said he didn't think reports of his comments were an "accurate reflection of what he said." Asked whether the Bush administration believed that history will show a record of arrogance or stupidity in Iraq, McCormack replied "No."

A senior Bush administration official questioned whether the remarks had been translated correctly.

"Those comments obviously don't reflect our position," said the official, who asked not to be identified because a transcript was not then available for review.

Fernandez spoke to the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera after a man claiming to speak for Saddam Hussein's outlawed Baath Party told the network the United States was seeking a face-saving exodus from Iraq and that insurgents were ready to negotiate but won't lay down arms.

"Abu Mohammed", a pseudonym for the man, appeared to set near impossible conditions for the start of any talks with the Americans, including the return to service of Saddam's armed forces, the annulment of every law adopted since Saddam's ouster, the recognition of insurgent groups as the sole representatives of the Iraqi people and a timetable for a gradual, unconditional withdrawal of U.S. and other foreign troops in Iraq.

"The occupier has started to search for a face-saving way out. The resistance, with all its factions, is determined to continue fighting until the enemy is brought down to his knees and sits on the negotiating table or is dealt, with God's help, a humiliating defeat," he said. The man wore a suit and appeared to be in his 40s but his face was concealed.

"There is an element of the farcical in that statement," Fernandez said of Abu Mohammed's comments. "They are very removed from reality."

Still Fernandez warned that failure to pacify the widening sectarian strife in Iraq as well as an enduring insurgency would damage the entire Middle East.

"We are witnessing failure in Iraq and that's not the failure of the United States alone but it is a disaster for the region. Failure in Iraq will be a failure for the United States but a disaster for the region."

Although the actual identity of Abu Mohammed remains unknown, the interview adds to growing indications that Iraq's Sunni insurgents sense the tide may be turning against the United States and the Iraqi government it backs.

Fernandez's comments, on the other hand, join a series of sobering remarks by President Bush and the U.S. military in recent days.

Bush this week conceded that "right now it's tough" for U.S. forces in Iraq and on Saturday met with his top military and security advisers to study new tactics to curb the staggering violence in Iraq. Three U.S. Marines were killed also Saturday, making October the deadliest month for American forces in Iraq this year.

U.S. military spokesman Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell said attacks in Baghdad were up 22 percent in the first three weeks of the holy Muslim month of Ramadan despite a two-month old U.S.-Iraqi drive to crush violence in the Iraqi capital.

On Wednesday, and again on Friday, Sunni insurgents believed to belong to al Qaeda in Iraq, staged military-like parades in the heart of five towns in the vast and mainly desert province of Anbar, including the provincial capital Ramadi. Some of these parades, in which hooded gunmen paraded with their weapons, took place within striking distance of U.S. forces stationed in nearby bases.

The parades proved to be a propaganda success, with TV footage of Wednesday's parade shown in many parts of the world, a likely embarrassment for the U.S. military as well as the embattled Iraqi government.

©MMVI, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 34 Comments
by leemiller38 October 23, 2006 2:04 PM EDT
If Alberto Fernandez had added illegal, immoral and incompetent to the stupid and arrogant he would have covered the fiasco well. The word stubborn describes our current stay the course attitude, but maybe stupid covers that too.
Reply to this comment
by exusmcsgt October 23, 2006 11:24 AM EDT
janem4-

I spent 6 years in Texas while Bush was governor.I was appalled that he could convince a majority of Americans to vote for him. Winning in Texas for the Bush's is another thing.

Any product would be superior to a self-righteous moron.

You ask "my party" to field a viable option. Being independent, there isn't much money left for "my party" after the hogs from the Repubs and Dems finish slopping at the trough.
Reply to this comment
by emhawks October 22, 2006 8:50 PM EDT
To heetseeker:
I respect your opinion & I hope & pray you're right. However, I truly believe the Bush adm. has crossed the bridge.I agree that to attack Iran while the outcome in Iraq hangs in the balance would definitely be the act of a madman; I think Cheney is almost there on that one. He's the one who is really in charge; he's our real President. Cheney is a brilliant person in many ways, but his brilliance has become twisted & perverted by his unquenchable desire for power & his greed.
Reply to this comment
by frankly6 October 22, 2006 5:53 PM EDT
Arrogance and stupidity? Add to that absolute dishonesty and you've got a clearer picture. Millions of people have been saying this for 3 long years including intelligence, middle east, and military experts. Did this information just reach the Whitehouse or is it election time?
Reply to this comment
by jn122736 October 22, 2006 5:36 PM EDT
The situation in Iraq reminds me of a picture postcard I bought years ago that pictured an obviously drunken cowboy riding his horse off a cliff. The horse was in mid air plunging head first off the cliff, the cowboy was rearing back with the stirrups pushed forward, the reins pulled back tight and yelling %u201Cwhoa you S O B whoa%u201D. That cowboy didn%u2019t realize he was going over a cliff either.
Reply to this comment
by heetseeker October 22, 2006 2:59 PM EDT
emhawks

I must say I cannot see the US invading/ attacking Iran anytime soon... even for this administration such a move would be a bridge too far... for very practical reasons we simply do not have the resources for it...

Furthermore... much as Iran's neighbours do not like its growing influence... to attack Iran whilst the future of Iraq still hangs in the balance would surely be the act of a madman and would inflame not only the middle east but a geographical area stretching from Indonesia to Morocco.... it is therefore simply not on...

Personally I think the administration's rhetoric on Iran is just that... an Iran attack is a no brainer...

Reply to this comment
by emhawks October 22, 2006 2:42 PM EDT
To peterbalwin & bluestardad:
I agree 100%! I think it is very possible that Fernandez could have been told to say what he did. As long as Bush/Cheney are in office, there will be no troop withdrawals ffom Iraq. They want to maintain control of the Mid. East oil fields by any means possible & the war is way too lucrative for them to stop now. I'm very concerned that if Bush/Cheney remain in office until '08, we will invade Iran ( even if we have a Democrat majority in Congress).
I also strongly believe that 911 should be re-opened & re-investigated. However, that is something else that will never happen as long as Bush/Cheney are in office.
For those of you who are interested, there is much info. available on the Internet about:
Project for the New American Century
The Carlyle Group
Bechtel
Brown & Root
Hallibuton
Saudi Binladen Group(SGB)
History of the Bush family involvement with bin Laden family.
Read the book "Crossing the Rubicon" by Micheal C. Ruppert.
Reply to this comment
by exusmcsgt October 22, 2006 2:08 PM EDT
heetseeker-

The deceit regarding Iraq originated in the administration's desire for bases in Iraq as a means of projecting American power in the middle east. The American public would have never backed a policy of hegemony, so Bush, et.al. veiled the motive with what they thought was a sure bet-that Saddam had WMD's.

When they got caught with their pants down, the motive shifted to regime change, still not admitting that it was all about permanent bases in the middle east.

Congress, by the way, pulled the plug two weeks ago on the funding for these bases, an action that got virtually no news coverage.
Reply to this comment
by heetseeker October 22, 2006 1:49 PM EDT
If the cap fits....

Let's say for the purposes of argument, that the comments of Alberto Fernandez were in fact mis-translated... but surely the question is... are they true? To deny the truth, does not make it a lie...

On the issue of Iraq this administration has been clearly arrogant and stupid (at the very least)...

Was it not this same administration that assured us that Saddam was in possession of WMD when the evidence suggested that he was not?... Was it not this administration that constantly dismissed the insurgency as "dead-enders" & "remnants"...

Was it not this administration (under its CPA sub division) that oversaw the bunkering & smuggling of Iraq oil & the squandering of hundreds of millions of dollars... Was it not this administration that oversaw (& in all likelihood instigated)the abuses at Abu Grahib....

Was is not this administration that only last year described the insurgency as being "in its last throes"...

On the issue of Iraq, this administration has not only been arrogant & stupid it has been deceitful, incompetent, lacking in integrity, lacking in humility, dishonest and dillusional...

Reply to this comment
by peterbaldwin-2009 October 22, 2006 1:48 PM EDT
Fernandez's contrite confession is atypically honest for an administration that is loathe to admit errors. Why did he do it? Because he was told to do it - in the latest chess move in the game to trick and fool the public once again. It is a Rovian ploy to engender hope among the masses that there has been a new Rumsfeld epithany, a turning point - kind of like Lucy, in Schultz's Peanuts, telling Charlie Brown that she would not yank the football this time, that his time she realy, really, sincerely means it. This time the big lie is not going to get much traction, though, because the people have been burned too many times. The tip off was a mere 30 minute meeting between Bush and his top general on the ground on Friday and a niney minute photo-op before bike riding. Nothing will change until the Republican Reichstag is crushed and the child Fuhrer is dethrowned.
Reply to this comment
by grumpas October 22, 2006 1:14 PM EDT
Those two words Arrogance and Stupidity have been the story of George's whole life! He looked like a cocky arrogant little twit the first time I saw him on television! The impression has only gotten worse over the years! It tells you something about 51% of our nations mentality that they even voted for the arrogant little .......! He never ceases to amaze me with his ignorance! He exudes it through every pore! Anyone with a brain in their head knew he was going unleash the Islamic Fundamentalist's by invasion! He was going to wind up with an uncontrolable mess! Afganistan is going the same way Iraq is! So, it's not that far behind anymore!
Reply to this comment
by exusmcsgt October 22, 2006 12:52 PM EDT
P.S. Petesis-

The immediate retraction does not make us all look stupid and arrogant, in my opinion, but rather Bush and those who voted for the self-righteous moron.
Reply to this comment
by exusmcsgt October 22, 2006 12:35 PM EDT
Petesis-

I wouldn't assume that the administration is ready to admit the obvious. CNN reports in regards to the administration's reaction to Fernandez's comments: "I can only assume his remarks must have been mistranslated. Those comments obviously don't reflect our policy," a senior Bush administration official said.

Their policy has not been to admit the truth and will not be. To admit the truth would be to admit a mistake, and history will show Bush as error prone and never reticent.

Reply to this comment
by bluestardad October 22, 2006 11:04 AM EDT
Don%u2019t expect any type of serious policy change, redeployment of troops, ending of the Iraq war, shifting troops to Afghanistan or anything that remotely resembles common sense from this Administration%u2019s review of Iraq policies or the Baker Commission. Time and time again the American people have held out hope that this Administration will do the right thing and time and time again we have been let down. From Afghanistan, Iraq to Louisiana this administration%u2019s policies are not based on common sense or the will of the people who elected them. President Bush has been described that "He's not somebody who gets jumpy at polls." That translates to %u201CI do not care what the People who elected me think%u201D. But that is OK now too because he has exposed his true self to the American People and we are going to dethrone this administration and those who supported it starting November 7, 2006. The problem is how many more people will die because of its ineptitude before we the American People can intervene?
Reply to this comment
by petesis October 22, 2006 10:48 AM EDT
This is big news. The administration possibly telling it like it is? Wow. That is news. Of course I am sure this will all be retracted like that will make it better. I think this is the way to go. Maybe stating the facts will gain us a little credibility back. Retracting all this will just make us look more arrogant and stupid then we already are.
Reply to this comment
by October 22, 2006 10:26 AM EDT
Let's not forget that a year or two ago, there was also talk of negotiating with insurgents.

The talks went nowhere because the insurgents have nothing to lose.

Whether you care to admit it or not, they have the upperhand.

Kill one, and there will be ten to take his place.

Also, everyone keeps comparing Iraq to Vietnam.

A more accurate comparison is the war between Afghanistan and Russia during the 80's - and we know how that turned out.
Reply to this comment
by d1hawk October 22, 2006 9:55 AM EDT
First impression.... people see what they are... Just as a jealous companion is very often the one that is fooling around, people that make accusations like arrogant and stupid are seeing somthing that they themselves know very well. How often we see ourselves in others. I suspect that Alberto Fernandez is now on the fast track to retirment.
Reply to this comment
by heetseeker October 22, 2006 9:36 AM EDT
My enemies enemy is my friend!...

The administration had better think carefully its next tactical move in Iraq... the reports that they are talking to insurgents may seem reasonable... but just remember what happened the last time we broke bread with the insurgent mujahadeen in Afghanistan, during the '80s.... in less than a generation they had trained their sites on us... & the rest is bitter & painful history...

This is a shot gun marriage that is both necessary & destined to end in divorce... It is necessary because of Iran ... a purported comment by an insurgent leader, Ibrahim al-shimary described the US occupation as a disease and Iranian influence as the sympton... he went on to described the symption (Iran) as worse than the disease....

Clearly, both the administration and the sunni insurgency see Iran's influence as a greater evil (for now) and might therefore be ready to do a deal to stay the influence of Iran...

However, like many shot gun marriages are union with insurgents will end in acrimonious divorce... this is because, no sooner than the threat of Iran is managed... the insurgents will turn their attention back to us... with even greater ferocity...

The fact is, in Iraq, loyalities (much like our rationale for going to war in the first place) are flimsy & unsustainable...
Reply to this comment
by gramto7 October 22, 2006 8:12 AM EDT
Isn't it amazing how soon the Republicans can forget all the good that was done by President Clinton, but they sure remember that intern, who was above legal age and consented to have *** with the man. The one thing that happened in his entire presidency that should not have been anyone's business but his, Hilary's, and Monica's is about all they will ever remember. Forget about the $4 trillion or so in the BLACK that he had our national finances. Neither will they remember that their champion, Duhbya, managed to turn that $4 trillion BLACK into more than $4 trillion RED in something like two years or so.
Reply to this comment
by alphaa10-2009 October 22, 2006 8:03 AM EDT
Fernandez is not speaking ad lib to a hidden microphone, so his comment probably has a thread of deniable endorsement all the way to the Oval Office.

What is so remarkable for the past 5.5 years is Bush postured resolve and unbending determination to "stay the course", considering any suggestion of negotiation tantamount to surrender.

Having admitted WMDs are no longer the issue and never were, it is easy to see why this consumate political opportunist and prevaricator wants to strike the tents and head home. Iraq is a political implosion and costing Bush (not to mention us) dearly. Not merely loss of polltical capital, but impending bankruptcy.

If anything proves Bush is simply out of options with a disaster he created, this is the signal event.
Reply to this comment
See all 34 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie." Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: