UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Military

19 November 2001

Transcript: Wolfowitz Says Taliban Forces Finding Few Friends

(He says no nation ruling by terrorism can survive for long) (3550)
Removing the radical Taliban government and militia and the al-Qaida
terrorist network from Afghanistan is still the main objective of the
U.S.-led coalition, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
says.
Wolfowitz, appearing November 18 on CBS TV's "Face the Nation," said
that as far as U.S. forces know, terrorist leader Osama bin Laden is
still in Afghanistan and has few choices of where to flee.
"This is a man on the run who is doing his best to hide," he said. "If
he does leave Afghanistan, I can't imagine any government in its right
mind harboring him. This is a man who is in very great danger."
Wolfowitz said one of the central lessons stemming from the collapse
of the Taliban government is that no group can successfully govern by
terror as the Taliban have done, because once people start feeling
afraid they don't offer any support.
"I think there's a lesson for all terrorists around the world, and all
governments that harbor terrorists, that it's not a distinguished or
glorious future that's facing these people," he said.
Wolfowitz said the coalition still is pursuing bin Laden and al-Qaida.
"Let's also remember we're going to continue pursuing the entire
al-Qaida network, which is 60 countries, not just Afghanistan.... This
is a campaign against all the global terrorist networks and the states
that support terrorism," he said.
Following is a transcript of the Wolfowitz interview:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of Defense
NEWS TRANSCRIPT
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz 
November 18, 2001
Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with CBS Face the Nation
(Interview with Bob Schieffer and Gloria Borger on CBS Face the
Nation.)
Schieffer: Today on Face the Nation, is Osama Bin Laden still in
Afghanistan? And what is the next stage of this war? We'll ask the
deputy secretary of defense, Paul Wolfowitz.
Kabul has fallen, and much of Afghanistan is in control of the
Northern Alliance. Are special operations forces close to finding Bin
Laden? And what if he goes into Iraq or Iran? We'll ask the deputy
secretary of defense.
Then we'll talk about the future of the Northern Alliance. Do they
want to rule Afghanistan? Will they share power? We'll ask their
spokesman, Haron Amin.
Gloria Borger will be here, and I'll have a final word on airport
security. But first, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz on Face
the Nation.
Announcer: Face the Nation, with chief Washington correspondent Bob
Schieffer. And now, from CBS News in Washington, Bob Schieffer.
Schieffer: Good morning again. Mr. Secretary, thank you for joining
us. Let me ask you first about some very late breaking news. There's a
story that's just moved on the wire, and I'll just quote it, "The U.S.
Navy was searching Sunday for two U.S. sailors missing in waters of
the Persian Gulf after the sinking of an oil tanker they and other
security forces had boarded." This was apparently an Iraqi oil tanker.
The thing sank. Ten people have been pulled off. Do you have any late
information?
Wolfowitz: The best information we have as of now is this was one of
many tankers that we seize and confiscate. And apparently it was very
rusty. It started sinking, and we put people on board to figure out
what was happening. I don't think it's more than that, but we'll know
later.
Schieffer: So, it appears to be an accident at this point? This would
be an Iraqi tanker that was seized --
Wolfowitz: As part of the -- as part of the maritime interdiction
operation. It is a reminder that at the same time we're conducting a
war in Afghanistan, we have military engaged in Bosnia, and in Kosovo,
and in Iraq, and in Korea. The world remains a dangerous place, not
just in Afghanistan.
Schieffer: We take these tankers because they've violated an embargo
--
Wolfowitz: That's why they're confiscated, yes. 
Schieffer: Okay. All right. Well, that clears that up, at least as far
as we know it at this point. Another late story on the wires --
Afghanistan opposition forces say the Taliban have offered to
surrender in the northern city of Kunduz. We know this is that last
stronghold they have along with Kandahar. Any late information on
that?
Wolfowitz: We have heard the same thing you have. Kunduz is clearly a
place where some of the worst people are holed up, and it may be in
fact that the Taliban is offering to surrender and some of the Arab
and other foreign terrorists that are fighting with them are not
surrendering, and we'll have to see.
But, I think -- you know, I think there are two lessons out of all of
this. Lesson number one is that when you govern by terror, and the
Taliban have ruled by terror, you don't have a lot of support once
people start being afraid. And secondly, I think there's a lesson for
all terrorists around the world, and all governments that harbor
terrorists, that it's not a distinguished or glorious future that's
facing these people.
Borger: Do you believe that Osama Bin Laden is still in Afghanistan?
Wolfowitz: To the best of our knowledge he is, but it -- I mean, I
think we understand he's not -- I hope people understand he doesn't go
around advertising his presence. In fact, this is a man on the run who
is doing his best to hide. If he does leave Afghanistan, I can't image
any government in its right mind harboring him. So, this is a man who
is in very great danger.
Borger: Well, if he does leave Afghanistan, and say he goes to
Pakistan or any other country, would you chase him down in any country
he goes to?
Wolfowitz: We are going to continue pursuing. Let's also remember
we're going to continue pursuing the entire al-Qaida network, which is
60 countries, not just Afghanistan and worst of all here in the United
States. And as the president has said, this is a campaign against all
the global terrorist networks and the states that support terrorism.
Schieffer: What is the state of the Taliban right now? And what is the
state of al-Qaida?
Wolfowitz: I think they are in great disarray, and they are on the
run. It bears repeating, I think, every state that supports terrorism
also rules its own people by terror. And we understood going into this
campaign that we had a great advantage working for us in Afghanistan
because the Taliban was very widely hated. And I think that the
reception that the Northern Alliance troops and the Pashtun rebels in
the South are receiving is testimony to that.
Schieffer: This seems to be going better, faster, than some people
thought in the very beginning. Why do you think that is? What tactic
has been used here that's made this go better than even some who were
for all of this thought it would go?
Wolfowitz: Well, when it's going well now, perhaps we should also
remind people that patience is order. A few weeks ago, people were
saying it's not going fast enough, and we said, "Let's be patient."
There's still a lot of work to be done in Afghanistan. And our main
objective, let's not forget, is getting al-Qaida and getting the
Taliban leadership, and there's a lot of work still to be done.
To come back, though, I think the fact is that this was a government
that ruled by fear. And when you remove the fear factor, it fractures
everywhere. And I think they -- they're in trouble all over the
country now.
Schieffer: Well, I guess what I was driving at, this is not just air
power this time. This is people on the ground calling in the air
strikes. Has that made a difference?
Wolfowitz: Well, it is remarkable. And one of the reasons why it took
a few weeks before we could make our air power fully effective was we
had to get people in on the ground to direct air strikes so that they
would take out the Taliban and not take out our people.
If you'd indulge me for a minute, I actually have with me a dispatch
that came from one of our special forces guys who was literally riding
horseback with a sword with one of the Northern Alliance --
Schieffer: With a sword? 
Wolfowitz: -- with a sword, with a Northern Alliance group of several
hundred people who had nothing but horses and rifles. And he said, "I
am advising a man on how best to employ light infantry and horse
cavalry in the attack against Taliban tanks, mortars, artillery and
machine guns -- a tactic which I think became outdated with the
invention of the Gatling gun. The Mujaheddin are doing very well with
what they have, but they couldn't do it without the close air
support." And he then goes on to describe how one of his enlisted --
two of his enlisted people, one air force, one army, had called in air
strikes, possibly -- certainly from aircraft carriers, maybe from
bombers in Missouri -- while Taliban artillery was hitting 50 meters
away. It's in a sense a return of the horse cavalry, you might say,
but no horse cavalry in history before this could call in air strikes
from long-range bombers.
Schieffer: But do these people -- do the people in the Special Forces
know how to ride horses? I mean, there is a difference in jumping on a
horse and hanging on and being able to ride. Are they trained to ride
horses?
Wolfowitz: I can't say for sure, but apparently these guys were. They
are trained in an extraordinary range of survival skills and local
customs and language, and they're quite an amazing group.
Borger: Well, maybe this occurred -- this story in the Washington Post
today -- before these forces got on the ground, but the Washington
Post reports that as many as 10 times over the past six weeks air
forces have believed that they've seen the top Taliban leadership,
al-Qaida leadership, and they could not get them because bureaucratic,
you know, a cumbersome bureaucratic process that kept them from
striking. Can you tell us about this?
Wolfowitz: Well, first of all, I can only tell you a certain amount,
because frankly it's a bit distressing that people go to the
Washington Post or to any newspaper with complaints that they
apparently unwilling to go to the leadership of the Defense Department
and explain.
But here are two basic facts. I mean, number one, we have said from
the beginning that one of the major concerns in this campaign is to
avoid unnecessary civilian casualties, and that we have said from the
beginning, and apparently that's what these people are complaining
about. But it is part of the strategic success here, I think, that we
have in fact been very careful not to kill civilians, not that we've
always succeeded, but we've worked hard at it.
Secondly, it seems to me indisputable that we have achieved some
significant success on the ground. I think General Franks and his
people are really to be commended. Bear in mind, they had three weeks
to plan this campaign. No one anticipated a war in Afghanistan before
September 11th. They started after -- three weeks after the president
gave them the go-ahead. They've been at it for six weeks only now.
There is still a lot of work to be done, but it is impressive what
they have accomplished.
Schieffer: I'd like to go back to something that you are reported to
have said early on in this campaign when there seemed to have been a
debate going in within the inner circles of the administration about
whether you just went after Osama Bin Laden or you also went after
Saddam Hussein. And it was reported that you were one of those who
said we should go after Saddam Hussein also. And your direct quote on
the record, while you never commented on that, was, "This is about
more than just one organization." Do you believe that this war ought
to be widened now to include Saddam Hussein, Mr. Wolfowitz?
Wolfowitz: I think we have got to keep our focus right now on
Afghanistan. There's a great danger that we're going to declare
victory before we have achieved our objectives there. But the
president has made it clear from the beginning, and as recently -- and
recently as well, that this is about more than just Afghanistan and
more than just al-Qaida. And he, I think, is -- I have known this
about him since I first observed him during the campaign -- this is a
man who enjoys debate among his advisors. He encourages it. He learns
from it. And he's a president who makes decisions, and when he makes
decisions, it's a team that pulls together and focuses on the
objective. And the objective right now has got to be on Afghanistan
and finishing our work there.
Schieffer: Well, under what circumstances should we go after Saddam
Hussein?
Wolfowitz: The president has stated the objective I think very
clearly. And the objective is to dismantle the global terrorist
networks and state support for terrorism. And there are a number of
states that support terrorists. Saddam Hussein is one of them but not
the only one. And there are a number of ways one can imagine that they
might get out of that business. Frankly, I would hope, as they observe
the fate of the Taliban in Afghanistan, some of them would be
reconsidering whether this is a promising career.
Schieffer: Well, should Saddam Hussein be worried right now? 
Wolfowitz: I think any government that supports or harbors terrorists
should be very worried right now.
Borger: Do you personally believe that he had anything to do with the
events of the September 11th?
Wolfowitz: There is a lot that we still don't know about the events of
September 11th and we are still looking for evidence, we're still
collecting evidence. In fact, one of the things we hope to gain as we
achieve our objectives in Afghanistan is more and more intelligence
about that network. And it's not, by the way, just about September
11th. It is even more importantly about preventing what may happen
next year or the year after. This is a campaign not just for
vengeance, it is a campaign to prevent future terrorist acts against
the United States and our friends.
Borger: But you seem to be saying that you believe that it is still
possible that he was involved in some way?
Wolfowitz: Here's what I think we know, and we know it not just about
Iraq but a number of countries -- that they consider terrorism an
instrument of national policy, and that they pursue weapons of mass
destruction. And the combination of those two things has got to be of
particular concern to this country.
Schieffer: Let's talk a little bit about what's going to happen next
in Kabul, what you want to happen? Obviously the Northern Alliance
forces are there. They got there first, with no small amount of help
from the United States air power and those people you have talked
about on the ground. Let me just be the devil's advocate and say to
you why shouldn't they feel that they're entitled to take control of
the government here? Why should they at this point think that they
ought to share power with some other groups in the country? And what
is it that we want to happen?
Wolfowitz: Well, they ought to have learned the lesson from a few
years back when they did seize power in Kabul and they turned half the
country against them because the largest single ethnic group in
Afghanistan, the Pashtun, who largely occupy the South, were not happy
at the idea of these other groups controlling their capital. And I
think that we can't dictate the future of Afghanistan, but I think
many Afghans, including Northern Alliance commanders, have learned
something from the miserable history of the last 20 years, that if
they want peace, they have got to let others in Afghanistan live in
peace. And I --
Schieffer: Well, do you think that's realistic, that they will be
willing to do that?
Wolfowitz: First of all, our objective to get the al-Qaida and to stop
giving Afghanistan as a safe harbor for terrorists. Beyond that, it's
got to be the Afghans and maybe with some help from the international
community who have their main -- to determine their own future -- is
it realistic that they will behave better than they did in the past?
Yes. It's also realistic that there's going to be problems. But I
think we have to keep a focus on what are our main objectives in that
country.
Borger: Mr. Wolfowitz, Vice President Cheney told CBS News this week
that if we do kill or capture Osama bin Laden that the United States
should expect some sort of revenge attack. Can you tell us about that?
Wolfowitz: I think we have to anticipate attacks under almost any
circumstances. And clearly this is a campaign not just in Afghanistan,
and the most important piece of the campaign, which is not military,
is here in the United States. Hopefully we've had some success, but we
don't know for sure. We don't know what we've disrupted by the people
we've arrested here over the last two months, but I think we've had
some affect. And we hope that these two things will start to work
together, that we get more intelligence out of Afghanistan that will
allow them to disrupt things. But yes, I think it's entirely possible
that they have plans laid for what they will do if Osama bin Laden is
killed. And it's an -- I think it's a good reason not to think of this
as just about one man or even just one organization. We really have
got to eliminate all of these networks.
Schieffer: The whole idea of weapons, do you think it's possible that
they have some kind of what people are calling the "dirty bomb,"
something that would spread radiation if they do not have a nuclear
weapon?
Wolfowitz: It is possible. We haven't seen very much evidence. I guess
there are documents that at least one agency got out of Kabul that
suggest maybe they have something. Maybe they just have documents
intended to scare us. Bin Laden claimed the other day, I think, on an
interview that he had or suggested that he had nuclear weapons, but
that may have been more to frighten us than for reality. We try to
look for every trace we can that there might -- but I mean, obviously,
that would be the most colossal danger to the United States. And so
far, I can't say that we have hard evidence --
Schieffer: I just want to go back to one thing you said. You seem to
be saying this morning that our business is to get in there and get
these terrorist and kind of get out of Dodge, that it will be up to
others and up to the Afghans to decide what happens after that. Is
that basically what you're telling us?
Wolfowitz: I'm saying the military objective, the purpose of our
military is to accomplish those things. I'm not -- as a national
objective, I think yes, we would like to see a stable Afghanistan
afterwards, but that's not going to be achieved by the American
military, and it's not even going to be achieved primarily by
outsiders. In fact, one of the lessons of Afghanistan's history, which
we've tried to apply in this campaign, is if you're a foreigner, try
not to go in. If you go in, don't stay too long, because they don't
tend to like any foreigners who stay too long.
And so I think the road to constructing a more stable Afghanistan and
one that is not once again a harbor for terrorists has got to be
providing incentives for the Afghanistan people to live better with
one another. And I think a lot of those incentives are going to prove
to be humanitarian and economic. And there's a great opportunity here
to help educate those women who have been deprived of education for
the last five years under the Taliban. There's a great opportunity to
provide medical care and other kinds of basic assistance that the
Afghan people need. And hopefully, through those kinds of instruments,
we will also have the influence to encourage them to do what they need
to do, but we can't do it for them with our military.
Schieffer: Paul Wolfowitz, thank you very much. Thank you very much.
When we come back, we're going to talk to a representative of the
Afghan Northern Alliance, Haron Amin -- in just a minute.
(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