Q&A: RICHARD DURBIN
Transcript: Sen. Richard Durbin On Barack Obama's Leadership

© National Journal Group Inc.
Friday, March 21, 2008

National Journal On Air with Linda Douglass
Richard Durbin

National Journal's Linda Douglass sat down with Sen. Richard Durbin for the March 21 edition of "National Journal On Air." This is a transcript of their conversation. Audio of the full show is also available.


Q: I want to welcome Senator Dick Durbin. He is the majority whip for the United States Senate and he is one of the top senior advisers to the presidential campaign of Barack Obama. Welcome, Senator Durbin.
Durbin: Good to be with you, Linda.
Q: So this is a week when we are talking about the Iraq war, and one of the questions for all of the Democrats who oppose the war is this one: Is the surge working?
Durbin: Well, it's certainly working in the places where we've added 30,000 soldiers. They are the best army in the world and, where they've been placed, they've brought more order and more peace. But that's just a tactical advantage. The idea was to bring 30,000 more troops and the Iraqi government would move forward, make important political decisions, start taking control and defend their own country. That hasn't happened. We're a year into this now with 30,000 additional American soldiers risking their lives and the Iraqis have been painfully slow at making these decisions.
Q: Well, but you know the American public seems a bit divided on this question. Even though they clearly think the war was a mistake, it wasn't worth going, they're very unhappy with the progress. There was a recent Gallup poll that showed that something like 65 percent of Americans think the United States has an obligation to at least establish a reasonable level of stability in Iraq before withdrawing the troops. And they are also ambivalent about what's going to happen to Iraq if we do leave. So is it clear that withdrawal is the right way to go?
Durbin: Well, I can tell you from my point of view -- and I think that Senator Obama shares this point of view -- the Iraqis are not going to stand up and make the hard decisions necessary to govern and defend their own country as long as they can lean on the American military. We have literally lost 3,992 American lives as of this taping and sadly more will follow. And we have to reach a point where the Iraqis accept this responsibility. Saying that we are going to stay there for 50 or 100 years as Senator [John] McCain has said is absolutely unacceptable. It really says to the Iraqis: take your sweet time. Go ahead and dawdle if you must. Do business with the Iranians on the side if you think it's entertaining. That is not, in my mind, the kind of focus that we need. The Iraqis have to understand that there will come a time in the near future when America will stop sending our best and bravest soldiers into combat and spending $12 to $15 billion a month on their country.
Q: Senator McCain has a very different view from yours and Senator Obama's. He says the United States is on a precipice of winning a major victory against radical Islamic extremism. He's called Senator Obama's plans for withdrawing the troops "irresponsible," and he says that these are his conditions for bringing home American troops: when al-Qaida is defeated, when Iran's influence is contained, and when the potential for a truly cataclysmic civil war in Iraq is finally remote. Now, are you saying that those are conditions that you think cannot be met before pulling out?
Durbin: Well, first, let me say this about Senator McCain's view that we're on the verge of victory: How long has it been since President Bush declared, "Mission accomplished"? I mean, we have heard this over and over and over again. And the sad reality is that when President Bush leaves office on January 29, 2009, he will hand over to his successor two wars and an economy that is struggling to survive in America. And to talk about, as Senator McCain has, staying indefinitely until Iraq has reached a level of stability, in his judgment, is to really invite a long-term, expensive commitment in terms of American lives and American treasure.

I quite honestly believe he is right in terms of eradicating al-Qaida. They were, in fact, the people responsible for 9/11. We took our eye off the target when we stopped focusing on Afghanistan and moved toward Iraq. And I would agree with him -- and I'm sure Senator Obama backs me up on this -- we will continue to fight al-Qaida until they are eradicated, period. Secondly, of course, we want to give the Iraqis a chance. But after five years, after all these deaths and all of this money, how long will we wait?

Q: You know, he's also -- your candidate, Senator Obama -- talking about Senator [Hillary Rodham] Clinton and the war and the Clinton campaign has responded fairly vigorously, as Senator Obama has questioned her commitment to really end the war. And the Clinton campaign has said, "Look, Senator Obama gave a speech opposing the war and then he was in the Senate for 18 months before he came to the floor and made a speech opposing the war -– didn't do much while he was in the Senate to try to bring the war to an end." Was he as forceful as he should have been?
Durbin: You know, I think the Clinton campaign is overlooking the obvious. There was a moment in October 2002 when Senator Clinton, Senator Durbin and certainly Mr. Obama, who was then in the [Illinois] Legislature, had a chance to speak up about giving President Bush the authority to go to war. I voted against that war, Senator Clinton voted for it, and Mr. Obama made it clear while he was on the campaign trail he opposed that war. So that is the reality. That's how this started. Giving the president that authority put it in that position.

I will tell you that many of us hoped that the war would come to an end sooner than we find ourselves today. And we supported the troops obviously in ways that we thought would give them strength but also give the president an opportunity to change his policy. But Senator Obama reached the same conclusion I did -– this president, given this kind of open-hand policy, was going to continue his policy indefinitely. Senator Obama and I reached the same conclusion. Providing the money for him by way of a blank check just meant more American lives would be lost. We've done our very best to change this policy, and I think Senator Obama has been as forceful, if not more so, than any other candidate in this campaign.

Q: Final question, Senator. Senator Obama did say in his speech the other day, you know, "Who are you going to trust to end the war -- somebody who opposed it from the beginning or somebody who started opposing it when they were preparing a run for president?" Well, he was obviously talking there about Senator Clinton. Should Americans not trust Senator Clinton to bring the war to an end?
Durbin: I'm not going to speak about the trustworthiness of Senator Clinton, but I will say this: I know what Barack Obama believes. I know he stood up and expressed those beliefs publicly when it wasn't popular. He took a position, as I did, opposing this war and giving the president this authority. And he has been pushing ever since for change in policy. I think the American people realize that, despite the courageous efforts of troops, it's time to change this policy. Staying for 50 or 100 years or equivocating in any way is not going to bring an end to this war.
Q: OK, well, thank you so much to Senator Dick Durbin. He is the majority whip of the United States Senate and one of the senior supporters of Senator Obama. Thanks very much for joining us, Senator.
Durbin: Thanks, Linda.