UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Military

18 September 2001

Transcript: Rumsfeld Says U.S. Moving in "Measured Manner"

(War against terrorism will not be quick, easy, he says) (3610)
The United States will defend itself against terrorism, but the battle
will not be quick or easy, says Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
"This is a very new type of conflict, or battle or campaign or war or
effort, for the United States," he said September 18 during a Defense
Department briefing. "As a result, we're moving in a measured manner.
As we gather information, we're preparing appropriate courses of
action. And as I've suggested, they run across the political and
economic and financial, military, intelligence spectrum."
Rumsfeld said the prime terrorist target, the al-Qaida network led by
Osama bin Ladin, may have connections in 50 or 60 countries including
the United States, making any U.S. response more difficult. "We're
talking about a very broadly based campaign to go after the terrorist
problem where it exists," he said.
"Our adversaries are not one or two terrorist leaders, even a single
terrorist organization or network," he said. "It's a broad network of
individuals and organizations that are determined to terrorize, and in
so doing, to deny us the very essence of what we are, free people," he
said.
Rumsfeld said terrorists are trying to force the United States to
withdraw from the world or curtail its freedoms. "If we do that, the
terrorists will have won. And we have no intention of doing so," he
said.
President Bush has said the United States is going "to take this
attack to the terrorists" and intends to find ways to persuade the
countries that are harboring terrorists to stop doing so, he said.
"A country has every right in the world to defend itself," he said.
"And that is what we intend to do."
Following is the transcript of Rumsfeld's briefing:
(begin transcript)
United States Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
September 18, 2001
DoD News Briefing -- Secretary Rumsfeld
Rumsfeld: Good afternoon.
I just have a short couple of things I wanted to say, and then I'd be
happy to respond to questions.
As we have said, and I don't think it can be repeated enough, this is
a very new type of conflict, or battle or campaign or war or effort,
for the United States. We are moving in a -- as a result, we're moving
in a measured manner. As we gather information, we're preparing
appropriate courses of action. And as I've suggested, they run across
the political and economic and financial, military, intelligence
spectrum.
It's not a matter of a single event. We're talking about a very
broadly based campaign to go after the terrorist problem where it
exists, and it exists in countries across the globe. As I've
indicated, this one network, al Qaeda, that's receiving so much
discussion and publicity, may have activities in 50 to 60 countries,
including the United States.
Therefore, it will not be quick and it will not be easy. Our
adversaries are not one or two terrorist leaders, or even a single
terrorist organization or network. It's a broad network of individuals
and organizations that are determined to terrorize and, in so doing,
to deny us the very essence of what we are: free people.
The people who committed these acts are clearly determined to try to
force the United States of America and our values to withdraw from the
world or to respond by curtailing our freedoms. If we do that, the
terrorists will have won, and we have no intention of doing so.
We have a choice, either to change the way we live, which is
unacceptable, or to change the way that they live, and we have
-- we chose the latter. We intend to put them on the defensive, to
disrupt terrorist networks and remove their sanctuaries and their
support systems. This requires a distinctly different approach from
any war that we have fought before.
In the past, we were used to dealing with armies and navies and air
forces and ships and guns and tanks and planes. This adversary is
different. It does not have any of those things. It does not have
high-value targets that we can go after. But those countries that
support them and give sanctuary do have such targets. The terrorists
do not function in a vacuum.
They don't live in Antarctica. They work, they train and they plan in
countries. They're benefiting from the support of governments. They're
benefiting from the support of non-governmental organizations that are
either actively supporting them with money, intelligence and weapons
or allowing them to function on their territory and tolerating if not
encouraging their activities. In either case, it has to stop.
We'll have to deal with the networks. One of the ways to do that is to
drain the swamp they live in. And that means dealing not only with the
terrorists, but those who harbor terrorists. This will take a long,
sustained effort. It will require the support of the American people
as well as our friends and allies around the world.
And I must say that the support of the American people has been
overwhelming. Indeed, the support across the globe has been
overwhelming. It's notable that hundreds and hundreds of citizens from
more than 30 or 40 or 50 countries died in those attacks. So the world
has a stake in this as well. And the world grieves.
I know that all Americans, and certainly the men and women in uniform
are up to this challenge. The terrorists who did this in my view will
be seen to have made a mistake. They thought they could frighten
Americans into retreat and inaction, and they will find that Americans
have no intention of withdrawing from the world in fear.
I'll be happy to respond to questions. Charlie.
Q: Mr. Secretary, due probably in no small part to your admonition
about releasing classified information, nobody in this building is
saying anything about movements of troops -- (light laughter) -- or
planes or anything. Do you --
Rumsfeld: Good! (Laughter.) God bless them. (Laughter.)
Q: Do you plan beyond the 35,500 that you identified for call-up,
mostly for homeland defense, do you plan for or think there will be a
need to call up forces for offensive operations in this war, as you
say, on terror?
Rumsfeld: The best defense against terrorists is an offense. You
simply cannot batten down the hatches and try to cope with every
conceivable thing any terrorist could imagine to do. I mean, they're
already done some unimaginable things. The only answer is to take the
effort to them where they are.
With respect to reservists, the president's authorization that I
recommended is one, as I recall, that is up to 50,000 Reserve-Guard
combined. [ Executive order ] And we have at the moment no plans
beyond the 35. And it is purely going to be a decision as to how long
we have to do various things and what specialties seem to be the most
in short supply. And that task is going forward. Dr. David Chu is
working with the services, and they are proceeding to analyze that.
Q: Just one brief question. I realize you won't discuss operations and
all, but there's been much talk about Afghanistan and, at the same
time, just how extremely difficult it would be to do anything that
would work in Afghanistan.
Rumsfeld: That's true.
Q: How do you root them out of Afghanistan? How do you find them? How
do you strike them?
Rumsfeld: I think that one has to find ways to alter behavior. And as
I've indicated, that runs across the spectrum. You're quite right;
Afghanistan is a very poor country. It is a country that has had --
several countries have exhausted themselves pounding that country and
fighting. And as I think I've mentioned, it has a gross domestic
product per capita of something like $700, $800, $900 per person a
year. So it is -- there are not great things of value that are easy to
deal with. And what we'll have to do is exactly what I said -- use the
full spectrum of our capabilities.
Yes?
Q: Mr. Secretary, you said that the United States would not be
intimidated, would not be frightened by what has happened. Yet the
building in which you work has become an armed camp. Your own top
generals were unable to get here for hours this morning; there were
traffic jams created that would be potential targets for terrorists
well outside of the Pentagon. It looks like they have succeeded, that
they're winning.
Rumsfeld: Well, in a sense, you're right. Any time Americans alter
their behavior because of a clear and visible threat to their lives,
those that did the threatening have achieved some portion of their
goal. What we've got to do is to find ways to see that those traffic
jams are eliminated -- and I'm sure we will, in a day or two -- and to
attempt to get back to as normal a situation
-- but as the president indicated, with a heightened awareness and
vigilance, because it would be naive to think that there are no
potential threats. There are.
Yes?
Q: Mr. Secretary, this morning  -- 
Rumsfeld: And the inconvenience is something that I think, for the
most part, people are willing to undergo, given the fact that it has
required a significant change. If you look at the number of
firefighters and the Red Cross and the Salvation Army and every
conceivable organization out there, police -- trying to get the bodies
out of this building, it's not a surprise that some of the roadways
are blocked and that they're using the parking lot there for taking
the materials from the building and sifting through them and trying to
find bodies and trying to find classified material. And it is a very
difficult whole set of problems that the people are trying to manage
here, in a way that inconveniences people to the least possible way.
Q: But your own generals are not trusted to park their cars near the
building because they supposedly fear that your generals' cars would
have bombs in them?
Rumsfeld: To the extent that there is a heightened alert, it tends to
be because there is intelligence that suggests that's a prudent thing
to do. It takes a lot of dogs to check under cars. And even though a
car may belong to a perfectly responsible individual, it is not
necessarily physically in their custody 24 hours a day. And they may
not be aware of something that could have been done to the vehicle.
Now, if that's the case, and the dogs are busy doing other things,
which they are, it seems to me not unreasonable. And I would cast it
slightly differently. I would say that what we've got here is a
distinctly different circumstance in the Pentagon, and the people are
dealing with it, in my view, in a very professional way, and I think
that for the most part the people inconvenienced are as well.
Q: Before I ask my question, I want to follow up on Jack's. Are you
saying that there is credible intelligence that the Pentagon is still
a target of terrorist attack?
Rumsfeld: No. What I'm saying is that, as the president indicated,
it's important to get back to work, and it's important to get about
your business. But as we know, Washington National's not open. Why?
Well, because it is so close to so many very high-value targets that
it would not be a wise thing to do until we manage that. People are
being inconvenienced at airports with their baggage. The baggage
checks are considerably more careful -- much more careful than in the
past. It's all of those things that are quite understandable, it seems
to me.
Q: To follow up on something you said earlier, you said that terrorist
-- states that support these terrorists do have armies, do have
navies.
Rumsfeld: Some.
Q: Right, some do. The State Department has -- I forget what the list
is -- six or seven identified terrorist states. Are you this morning
declaring war on these nations that harbor terrorists?
Rumsfeld: No. What I'm saying is that the United States of America has
been savagely attacked by terrorists. Those terrorists live and work
and function and are fostered and financed and encouraged, if not just
tolerated, by a series of countries on this globe. And we are saying
that we think that is striking directly at the way of life of the
American people, and that we intend to find ways to alter that
behavior.
Q: And you said this morning also that we have to drain the swamp. To
do that, you sometimes have to get muddy. Is the United States
prepared to suspend or ignore some legal requirements, burden of
proof, to go after people who have long been identified as suspect
terrorists, but the U.S. hasn't been able to get at, because they just
don't have the kind of conclusive evidence to take to court?
Rumsfeld: The president has indicated that he intends to take this
attack to the terrorists. And he intends to find ways to persuade the
countries that are harboring terrorists to stop doing that. I think of
it in the sense of self-defense, and there is nothing that inhibits
the United States of America from defending itself. And that is what
we intend to do.
Q: Could I follow that up?
Rumsfeld: Yes.
Q: Would you mind, sir, if I deferred, and let him follow it up?
Rumsfeld: Sure.
Q: I just wanted to -- do you think that  -- 
Rumsfeld: I was just going from left to right.
(Laughter.)
Q: Try the middle.
In the cases where those regimes that are supporting terrorism ignore
your entreaties to stop, is it going to be U.S. policy to try to
change those regimes?
Rumsfeld: Each would be an individual case, one would think.
Q: Do you have evidence of state support for this attack?
Rumsfeld: I think I'll leave that to the Department of Justice -- they
and the FBI and the intelligence gathering agencies -- I mean, I know
a lot, and what I have said, as clearly as I know how, is that states
are supporting these people.
And how -- what constitutes evidence and who wants to present it at
what time I'll leave to the people in that business. I'm in a
different business.
Yes.
Q: Sir, if I could have a preliminary question, that was the longest
pregnant pause I think I've every witnesses. What --
Rumsfeld: Sometimes I go longer. (Laughter.)
(Cross talk.)
Rumsfeld: I'm old-fashioned. I like to engage my brain before my
mouth. (Laughter.)
Q: But quite frankly, I mean, can you sort of elaborate on the
pregnant pause? I mean --
(Laughter.)
Rumsfeld: Well, sure. It's a sensitive matter. And the United States
is careful about what it does. And we are a democracy. And we do have
a free press. And we do have a Congress. And we do have rules. And we
do consider ourself a nation of laws. And that's a good thing. We're
also not stupid. And we're not going simply allow things to happen to
us that strike at all of those things that I just described. And the
proper way to think of it is that a country has every right in the
world to defend itself. And that is what we intend to do.
Q: So now I wonder if I could ask the question I wanted to ask, which
was about your comment about curtailing freedoms. Already, you know,
there are some people who are wondering whether the more severe
restrictions you're putting on access to the press, both here, but
more importantly --
Rumsfeld: No, I've not put any restrictions on access to the press.
All I've suggested is that the people who handle government classified
information not violate federal criminal law and put American lives at
risk by doing it.
Q: But there's talk about -- but there's talk about withdrawing
access, for instance, to combat operations, that type of thing, and
direct coverage, et cetera.
Rumsfeld: There's talk about everything in the world in this town. I
have not even addressed that subject.
Q: So this is not a matter that has been decided?
Rumsfeld: It has clearly not been decided. I have -- I have made no
decisions with respect to the press. All I have done is to suggest to
the Honorable Torie Clarke, assistant secretary of Defense for public
affairs, that she wrap her head around that subject. And unless there
are emanations from that head, which I doubt -- (laughter)
Yes.
Q: Mr. Secretary  -- 
Q: Sir, in terms of self-defense measures, can you talk to us
conclusively about whether the 1976 ban on assassinations in any way
inhibits the Department of Defense from targeting individual terrorist
leaders?
Rumsfeld: There is no question but that that ban does have effect. It
restricts certain things that government can and cannot do.
Q: Mr. Secretary?
Q: Mr. Secretary?
Clarke: We gotta make this the last question -- (inaudible) -- last
question. We need to get you --
Rumsfeld: Okay. I've got to -- I've got a meeting. I'll take the three
right here.
Q: Mr. Secretary, American planes dropped two targets in southern Iraq
today, and I was wondering if you could elaborate, if you've seen any
change in the behavior of Iraqi forces since the attacks last week, or
--
Rumsfeld: The action by coalition forces in Iraq were part of a very
normal pattern that has been under way throughout the time I've been
in the Department and before.
To the extent that the Iraqi government continues to fire at coalition
aircraft and to move air defense capabilities in those areas where we
operate, in the no-fly zones, we intend to keep taking action against
those capabilities -- radars, communications systems, SAM sites, AAA,
and the like -- and that's what took place.
Q: Sir, could you explain your comments this morning on CBS [
transcript ] when you said you didn't want to provide evidence to the
Taliban of Osama bin Laden's involvement in this, if there is any?
General Zinni in October told the Senate Armed Services Committee
that's exactly the route he would recommend that people go -- in
presenting this evidence so that the world can see their guilt. Could
you explain what your concern would be in providing -- is it that
they'd alert individuals, and --
Rumsfeld: It is a dilemma. What happens is the United States of
America and our friends around the world gather information to provide
for their national security. There are pieces of intelligence
information that come in that we do in fact expose to foreign
countries from time to time. We do it to make a persuasive case.
Sometimes we have to do it in a court of law. We do it, for example,
also with respect to counterproliferation efforts, where we're trying
to get countries to stop their people from spreading weapons of mass
destruction across the globe.
You have to be very careful in doing it, because if you do it, you are
running the risk that you will compromise a source of information or a
method of gathering information. And to the extent you compromise a
source or a method of gathering information, you have damaged
yourself, because we have found that when we do that, frequently when
we do that -- not always when we do that, but frequently when we do
it, within a relatively short period of time, that source of
information dries up, and they find other methods of communicating or
other methods of providing information or dealing with each other, or
that method becomes less useful over a period of time.
Now, you have to balance your national security interest in getting
someone to stop a specific act against your national security interest
in being able to continue to gather information and know what's taking
place. So it is not a simple matter.
And those are calculations that ultimately get made. And it's a
balance -- what are you getting for what you're giving up? And how
satisfied are you? It's not dissimilar from the problem when you -- a
spy is captured and people, instead of prosecuting them vigorously,
end up making an arrangement with them to try to find out what they
compromised, so that you can save people's lives. And yet you, on the
other hand, don't punish the individual to the extent that they merit
it.
Yes?
Q: Given your very strong statements here about self-defense for
America, do you agree with what the president said yesterday -- bin
Laden should be brought to justice, dead or alive? Do you much care
either way?
Rumsfeld: Of course I agree with what the president said. (Laughter.)
That question guaranteed the answer.
No, he's right. I mean, the people need -- people and organizations
and countries that do things that are this damaging -- not just to our
country but to the world -- do need to be held accountable. And there
are a variety of ways of holding people accountable.
Thank you very much, folks.
Q: Thank you.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list