02 April 2002
Rumsfeld Says Possible Biological Attack Is Chief Concern
(Defense Secretary interviewed on MSNBC March 28) (1260)
Terrorists and terrorist organizations want to acquire weapons of mass
destruction, says Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, but he is
primarily concerned about them getting and using biological weapons.
Interviewed on MSNBC March 28, Rumsfeld said nuclear weapons are
relatively more difficult to handle, manage, transport and detonate
than are chemical or biological weapons. The latter "can be done in
relatively small places with dual-use equipment [i.e., with both
military and civilian application], and there are a variety of
delivery mechanisms. Some biological weapons involve contagions, and
that's a terribly dangerous thing," Rumsfeld said.
Rumsfeld also spoke about the possible casualties caused by use of
weapons of mass destruction, the extent and dispersal of the terrorist
al-Qaida network, the U.S. strategy of denying terrorists sanctuary,
and the decision to close the Pentagon's Office of Strategic
Information.
Following are excerpts from the interview:
(begin excerpts)
DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
March 28, 2002
(Television Interview with Brian Williams, MSNBC TV)
Williams: ... [W]e begin with Donald Rumsfeld himself reminding us how
our world has changed.
Rumsfeld: Our margin for error has shrunk enormously. When you think
of the power and reach of weapons, and the fact that the weapons of
mass destruction can kill not thousands as we had with the attacks on
the Pentagon here in this building where we sit, and also in New York,
but tens of hundreds of thousands of people can be killed. We don't
have a big margin for error. We have to be right. We have to see that
we go after these folks where they are.
Williams: If we all knew what you know, would we be more or less
nervous about daily life in the United States?
Rumsfeld: Oh, my goodness. I don't know that it serves any useful
purpose to be nervous about things. It's a difficult world. It's a
dangerous world. There are a lot of people who have been trained to
kill, and to terrorize. They're located in 40 or 50 countries in cells
today as we talk. And they are willing to sacrifice their lives to
kill other people. Can we deal with that? Sure. Is it likely there
will be another terrorist attack? Sure, it is true. ...
Williams: The United States didn't get them all. They are gone. Do you
worry that too many of them got away?
Rumsfeld: Oh, goodness. I worry that they're all over the world. You
bet. There were thousands trained in those training camps, but there
is no question if it's not an army, a navy, or an air force, all they
have to do is just melt into the mountainside, go into a cave, go back
into their village, go across one of those porous borders of
Afghanistan. They've transited, we know, they've gone through Iran
down into ships, and headed -- tried to get into Yemen, and Saudi
Arabia, and various other Middle Eastern countries. All you can do is
keep after them, keep putting pressure. ...
Williams: ... September 11th made it painfully clear that terrorism
against American targets is not the distant threat that many of us
might have once thought. Hijacked jetliners fully loaded with fuel
flying into office buildings took care of that. But is there an even
greater, more deadly threat to come -- nuclear weapons in the hands of
terrorists?....
Rumsfeld: There is no question but the terrorists and terrorist
organizations want weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear
weapons. Nuclear weapons, however, are more difficult to handle and
manage, more difficult to detonate, more difficult to transport, and
if I were asked, among those nuclear, chemical and biological, which
did I think was the more likely and the more worrisome to me at the
moment, I probably would say biological. It can be done in relatively
small places with dual-use equipment, and there are a variety of
delivery mechanisms. Some biological weapons involve contagions, and
that's a terribly dangerous thing....
Williams: American forces are in countries, as we speak, that you
probably never dreamed they'd be deployed in when you started this
job. Where does it end?
Rumsfeld: Well, I think we have to keep the pressure on, and we can't
allow Afghanistan to be stopped as a haven and a sanctuary and simply
have some other country become the sanctuary and the haven. So what we
have to do, as the president said, is go after the terrorists where
they are, but also make sure that other countries are not creating a
sanctuary for terrorists, as a substitute for Afghanistan. So we're
trying to help train some folks in Yemen, we're trying to help train
some folks in the Philippines, and relatively small numbers of people,
in the hundreds, not in the thousands.
Williams: You have no concerns that we're in too many places right
now?
Rumsfeld: Look, my concern is that the al Qaeda will find a country
where they can find a sanctuary and a haven, and continue their
attacks on the United States, on our friends and allies, and on our
deployed forces, and on our interests. And we can't let that
happen....
Williams: How often are you forced to shave the truth in that briefing
room, because American lives are at stake?
Rumsfeld: I just don't. I think our credibility is so much more
important than shaving the truth. So when I don't know something I
just say I don't know it. If it's something I'm not going to talk
about, I just say I'm not going to talk about it. If it's advice I
give the president or the National Security Council I just tell them I
don't get into that. If it's an intelligence matter I say that we
don't discuss intelligence. There isn't a need for anyone to do that
in the Pentagon.
Williams: The United States did use misinformation in World War II
liberally. And a recent attempt in this building to maybe engage in a
little misinformation you received some unshirted hell from people,
and kind of took it back. Mistake?
Rumsfeld: I don't know. There's no question we have to do information
operations. For example, if the Taliban is telling people that the
food we're delivering is poisoned, we have to tell them it's not. If
they're saying this is a war against Moslems, we have to tell them
it's not, that that's not true. And so we had a radio program that we
were beaming there, and that is not misinformation, that is not
disinformation, it is information. And that is what we were doing. And
the information operations activities that the Pentagon was planning
to do in the Office of Strategic Information were perfectly
appropriate.
For whatever reason, the implication was drawn that they were going to
do things that were not appropriate. So what do you do? Well, I said,
let's close up the shop. Since that's what the perception is, let's
close it up. We'll go ahead and do what we have to do anyway. I said
that at the press briefing, and we will. We'll do exactly what we have
to do to protect the lives of the men and women in uniform, and to see
that our country is successful, but it doesn't involve lying....
(end excerpts)
(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
|
|
|
