12 April 2002
U.S. Central Command Chief Says Afghan Situation Still Tough, Murky
(April 11 briefing at Washington Foreign Press Center) (7080)
Six months after combat operations began in Afghanistan, the security
situation in the country remains tough, according to General Tommy
Franks, commander in chief of the U.S. Central Command.
Franks, who is tasked with prosecuting the military operations in
Afghanistan, told reporters at the Washington Foreign Press Center
April 11 that "there will continue to be risk to international forces.
"And I would also point out that there will continue to be risk to the
Afghans themselves inside Afghanistan. ... [But] it is a heck of a lot
more stable in Afghanistan right now than it was on the 11th of
September last year," he added.
Asked to provide a broad view of the situation within the country,
Franks characterized it as murky. U.S. and coalition forces see the
tribal and ethnic "potential points of friction" that have existed for
2,000 years there, Franks said, and added that he expects them to
continue. Forces under his command, and those of the International
Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Kabul pay attention to these
relationships, he said, and provide a sense of stability just by being
there.
Franks also noted that a U.S. Army Apache assault helicopter had
crashed April 10 while returning with another helicopter from a
mission northeast of Kandahar. Though at first there were reports of
it having been shot down, Franks said his people now think it crashed
due to mechanical failure. The other helicopter landed beside the
destroyed helicopter and retrieved the two pilots, who were quickly
evacuated and are now receiving medical care, he said.
Franks also responded to questions about Turkey's pending role in
heading the ISAF; U.S.-Russia cooperation; anti-terrorism
contributions of Pakistan, India, China and Italy; the condition of
Abu Zubaydah; and possible effects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
on the Afghan military effort.
Following is the transcript of the briefing:
(begin transcript)
WASHINGTON FOREIGN PRESS CENTER BRIEFING, GENERAL TOMMY FRANKS
U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND, OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM
April 11, 2002
GENERAL FRANKS: Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This is my
first opportunity to be over here in the Foreign Press Center, and I'm
pleased to be here. I wanted to talk to you a bit today directly about
what we're doing in Operation Enduring Freedom and, specifically,
about the coalition aspects of Enduring Freedom.
You know, terrorism affects us all. Every legitimate government and
every civilized nation is affected by terror and affected by
terrorists. So it's something that all nations share -- even nations
that have differing political systems, different economic systems,
different cultural and ethnic backgrounds. It seems to me that on the
subject of terrorism, we're all -- we're all in agreement.
Shortly after the attacks on the United States on the 11th of
September of last year, we started to build an international coalition
to combat terrorist organizations with global reach. Today more than
100 nations are taking an active part in this global effort.
In my area of responsibility alone -- and my area includes Southwest
Asia, Central Asia to the Horn of Africa -- we have more than 60
nations involved in one way or another in Operation Enduring Freedom.
Some provide forces. Some provide resources. Some provide basing,
staging and overflight. And as I speak, more than 16,000 coalition
troops from 20 nations are involved inside my area of responsibility,
with more than 6,600 of those troops actually employed inside
Afghanistan. Additionally, 47 ships from 10 nations and 89 aircraft
from a variety of coalition states are operating in the Central
region, performing Enduring Freedom duties. As I speak today, 31
nations have liaison elements at my headquarters down in Tampa,
Florida. And perhaps most interesting, this coalition has continued to
build since we started combat operations on October 7th of last year.
The war on terrorism is, indeed, a global war. An awful lot has been
accomplished in this first six-plus months, but an awful lot remains
to be done.
And so with that, I'll be more than happy to take your questions.
Please.
MODERATOR: Again, one note: Please wait for the microphone and state
your name and news organization when you ask a question.
Let's start with Turkey.
QUESTION: with Turkey's NTV Television. General, what is the latest
about Turkey's taking command of the Afghan peace force? The other
day, there was an article in Washington Times quoting unnamed military
officials in Afghanistan that the Turkish military troops are unfit
for the peacekeeping mission. What's your evaluation? What's your
expectations for the Turks and the peacekeeping force? Thanks.
FRANKS: My association with the Turkish armed forces -
Q: (Off mike) -- microphone.
FRANKS: I'm sorry? Oh, they need this one?
My association with the Turkish armed forces over the years indicates
to me that in fact they are a well-trained and capable force. I
believe that the Turkish armed forces are, in fact, capable of
conducting the work inside Afghanistan. I think recently there has
been an assessment team from Turkey in Kabul discussing the
international security force and its operations, and I have -- I have
some confidence that Turkey will be able to serve as an entirely
capable force to lead ISAF.
I don't know as I stand here today exactly what the status of
discussion of when they would assume the responsibility of ISAF is. My
understanding is that the specific modalities and arrangements of
Turkey taking that mission are still being worked by our Defense and
State Departments. And so I'm very comfortable with where we stand
with it right now.
Thank you.
MODERATOR: Let's go back to TASS.
Q: (Name inaudible) -- TASS News Agency of Russia. General, would you
please provide us with some details of the present level of
cooperation between the United States and Russia? Thanks.
FRANKS: Sure. About, I guess it was, two and a half, three weeks ago,
I had an opportunity to visit in Moscow, and it was great. It was my
first time there. I had a chance to visit with Minister Ivanov,
enjoyed my short stay there very much. And I would pass to you the
same comment that I made to him, and that is that it seems to me that
an awful lot of people talk about the possibility of competition and
so forth, and what I stressed with the minister is the sense of not
competition, but the sense of cooperation that we see. As you know,
Russia was very quick to have a hospital in downtown Kabul and treated
a great many Afghans. Additionally, Russia has coordinated with us and
has cooperated as we have worked to move forces in and out of the
region. And so my sense is that there is an atmosphere of cooperation.
And I applaud it.
Q: Thank you, general. My name is Paul Coring. I'm with the Globe and
Mail of Canada. As the operations in Afghanistan continue and you
have, if not -- you have several thousand troops, coalition and
otherwise -
FRANKS: Right.
Q: -- on the ground, seemingly increasingly in fixed bases. How much
more serious does the whole issue of force protection become,
particularly given the long and storied history in Afghanistan of the
country's fighters being able to target troops that, whether or not
they are occupying, are in fixed locations?
FRANKS: Right. I think what one will find in any military operation is
that there will be a need for support hubs in an area -- in a combat
area. And I think what we see in Afghanistan is precisely that. I
think the forces that we see in that country, to include the Canadian
forces, will find themselves, I think I would describe it as out and
about; in fact, being deployed to and employed in a variety of places
inside Afghanistan. And so, that probably is the best that I can tell
you. I think that we will continue to hub some of our major operations
from a variety of places inside Afghanistan. But the good news
associated with that is that where we find these hubs, we also find a
great deal of force protection.
MODERATOR: In the back?
Q: Tahil Milzah (sp) from the Pakistani newspaper Dawn. General, could
you give us an update on what is the position regarding Pakistan's
request for spare parts following the lifting of sanctions, and
whether any requests have been made for new equipment?
FRANKS: Right.
Q: And please, sorry, because I may not get the chance, the third is
that could you also give us an update on Abu Zubaydah, where his
condition, where he is? Thank you.
FRANKS: I really can't give you much of an update on Abu Zubaydah. He
is under our control. He is under medical treatment. He is at no risk,
as I understand it, of loss of life. And so that is the status as I'm
aware of it. And I think it probably wouldn't be appropriate to talk
about the discussions that we are having with Abu Zubaydah. Suffice it
to say that he's under our control and that his health is being looked
after.
With respect to Pakistan, you know, the relationship with -- that our
country has, especially on the military-to-military side, since the
11th of September of last year has continued to improve on a daily
basis.
Are we where we want to be in terms of the maturity and the growth of
that relationship today? Of course we aren't. I can tell you that my
boss, the secretary of defense, is very much engaged in working, along
with other elements of our own country, to grow and mature the
relationship that we have with Pakistan.
I can't tell you today exactly how much security assistance has been
provided to Pakistan since last September, but I can tell you that the
vectors, that the momentum in order to mature the relationship improve
every day.
MODERATOR: (Off mike.)
Q: Paddy Smith, Irish Times. We've heard anonymous reports from the
Pentagon that Israeli actions in the Palestinian cities have begun to
affect your ability to call on the support among Gulf states in
particular.
FRANKS: Right.
Q: Would you comment on those claims?
FRANKS: I won't tell precisely which Gulf states are represented at my
headquarters in Tampa. I'll leave that for each of those nations to
comment on.
But I will tell you that as I speak today, we have representatives of
a number of Gulf states at my headquarters in Tampa, and we find the
security relationships to be robust and capable. And I guess I'd sort
of close the answer to your question by saying that the number of
representatives that I see in Tampa at my headquarters in Coalition
Village has continued to grow since 9/11, and we have not seen the
departure of a single one of those countries.
And so the situation in the Middle East -- serious, to be sure --
serious, to be sure, and, I think, being addressed in a great many
ways. An awful lot of energy by our government is going into the
Middle East situation.
But in -- my own relationship with countries in the Gulf and in fact
across my area of responsibility remains positive, and our
relationships remain strong and good.
MODERATOR: Here up front.
Q: Satoru Suzuki with TV Asahi of Japan. General, yesterday evening
NBC News reported that plans are well under way for starting war
against Iraq, perhaps by the end of the year, and that for that
purpose, you are moving your Central Command command center from
Tampa, Florida, to capital -
FRANKS: Right.
Q: First, is the report accurate? And secondly, about this Operation
Enduring Freedom, how helpful has Japan's logistical support for the
entire operation been so far? And do you expect that you will need
Japan -- such support by the end of this operation?
FRANKS: Let me talk to the latter part of your question first.
The support by Japan causes us to count them among that number of very
helpful coalition partners in this global war on terrorism. It has
been important to our operations globally and will remain important to
our operations in the future.
I think all of us realize that Operation Enduring Freedom is not
likely to end in the next one, two, three months; this is going to be
-- this is going to be a prolonged operation. And my personal view is
that the commitment by each of the nations in this coalition, while
it's terribly important today, will remain terribly important for the
foreseeable future.
With respect to the -- I guess the story, the media story that came
out last night -- I didn't see it; someone told me about it. And I
will say that I have not been asked to move my headquarters anywhere
from Tampa, Florida. I believe that our president has not taken a
decision, and I think I'm being perfectly honest and perfectly open in
saying that. And so I really can't say that the story was accurate, if
in fact the story suggested that we intend an imminent attack in some
other country.
Okay.
Q: Parasuram from the Press Trust of India. What kind of help are you
getting from India in Operation Enduring Freedom?
Secondly, you are now engaged in the big task of forming an Afghan
army. How big of an army, and will that army be able to run the
country like armies elsewhere, able to control the warlords and --
(inaudible) -- the country. And will they have salaries, will they
have pensions, and just a regular army?
FRANKS: First off, with our relationship with India and the support
being provided Operation Enduring Freedom, I think perhaps some in
this audience wouldn't know, I think perhaps, sir, you are aware that
the way we have drawn our unified command plan boundaries for our
American armed forces, Pakistan remains in the central region, which
is my area of responsibility, and India remains within the area of
responsibility of Admiral Denny Blair in the Pacific -- in our Pacific
Command. The contribution, the support, the relationship between India
and our Pacific Command, and between India and our country, remains
robust, remains strong. And the support of global terrorism, as I --
or the support of this campaign against global terrorism by India is
noteworthy.
And so I sort of describe that because that support is much more
inclined to be in the region as in the relationship with Pacific
Command than it is to be vis-à-vis United States Central Command, in
my area of responsibility.
Now with regard to the training of the Afghan national army: We have
taken a decision to be involved in that training, to bring together
other nations in order to form a package that will support the
training of an Afghan army. I'm not sure what the ultimate strength of
that army will be, but I am sure that we are going to be about the
business of getting on with the training of that force so that it can
provide a sense of stability to Afghanistan. I think we recognize that
without a national army under the control of a legitimate authority
inside Afghanistan, the way ahead is going to be very, very rough.
Now the specific modalities of how many people: I'm not sure that we
know that yet. I do know that through meetings of a variety of nations
of the international community, there has been shown a great deal of
interest in how to pay the salaries and how to equip this force over
time. And so -- and I think that will come to pass. And so I feel good
about the training of the Afghan national army, which -- and I think
that training will probably also involve border security. There may be
police training involved in this. And so I think what we're really
about is setting up conditions of stability inside the country. And in
order to do that, we're going to need to train these forces that can
respond to either the interim authority or a transitional authority
post-loya jirga. So that's where we stand right now.
Q: Chakero Grammalier (ph), Italian News Agency, ANSA. Two questions,
General. First: Do you think that Afghanistan is today a safer place
for international troops than it was a few weeks ago? Or do you think
there will be still a need for big operations there? Second question:
Regarding the Italian contributions to Enduring Freedom, how do you
appreciate that?
FRANKS: The Italian contribution to Enduring Freedom -- once again, I
won't specify exactly what that is; I'll leave that to the Italian
government to do. But I can tell you that Italy has made a substantial
contribution to this effort in the face of global terrorism. In fact,
Italy is represented at my headquarters in Tampa, has been since early
in this and is a very important member of this approach that we're
after in Enduring Freedom.
With regard to the security situation inside Afghanistan, to be honest
with you, I would characterize the security situation in the country
as tough. I mean, this is Afghanistan, and I think that there will
continue to be risk to international forces. And I would also point
out that there will continue to be risk to the Afghans themselves
inside Afghanistan. How long will this sense of instability last? I'm
really not sure. So I don't think I'd say that the security situation
is either better or worse. I think we have been saying since we
started this operation with our first troops inside Afghanistan that
it's a dangerous place to work. It's a dangerous place for our armed
forces to be. I can tell you this, that it is a heck of a lot more
stable in Afghanistan right now than it was on the 11th of September
of last year.
MODERATOR: Back in the back.
Q: Thanks. Greg Torode from the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong.
FRANKS: Hi, Greg.
Q: General, you've spoken about other countries around the region.
What about China? Specifically on the issue of overflight rights, I
understand you don't have them with China.
FRANKS: Right.
Q: And has there been any discussion of bases, of use of bases?
Thanks.
FRANKS: No discussion on the use of bases in China that I know of.
Once again, China isn't in my area, and so there may have been, but
not any discussions that I know of. We have not pursued basing or
staging or overflight from my command with China, because, as you
know, Afghanistan is a country surrounded by a lot of other countries,
and each of them has been forthcoming in terms of movement of both
humanitarian assistance and support as well as military support and
military formations and forces in and out of Afghanistan. So, can't
give you much more on China. Just don't know it.
Q: (Off mike) -- the question of their cooperation with us?
FRANKS: Who do you mean?
Q: China.
FRANKS: Oh, I really don't know. I mean, because in my command, we
have not had an approach to China. We have not needed to approach them
in terms of the work we were doing inside Afghanistan. Now, that
doesn't mean that our State Department or our Office of the Secretary
of Defense may not have had discussions, but I've not been involved in
them, so I just don't know.
Q: Khaled Abdel Karim (sp) with Middle East News Agency of Egypt.
Sir, six months after Operation Enduring Freedom went on I wonder if
we can have initial assessment of civilian casualties in Afghanistan
so far. And second, I wonder if you can comment on increasing reports
on having U.S. troops based in Qatar instead of the Saudi place. These
reports have been denied, but at least they serve as the smoking gun
so far. So what's your comment? Thank you.
FRANKS: (Laughs.) I don't think that -- I don't think that any
arrangements have been made with any of our supporting countries
inside my area of responsibility to dramatically increase forces
inside the region. I said two or three weeks ago that it would not --
I don't think it would be very smart of us to not continue to look at
our command and control capability, not vis-à-vis any other country,
but our overall command and control capability inside the region. And
so I think if you go back the 50, 60 years that we have had
relationships with countries inside this region, you will find that on
-- that in some periods of time we have had a higher troop
concentration in some and a lower troop concentration in others. And
so beyond the normal sort of routine approach that would improve our
command and control, my command's ability to command and control
inside this area, which is 7,000 miles from the United States, I am
not aware of some approach that I have seen reported that says there
appears to be a desire to, you know, to make a massive build-up
someplace.
It's like the question I answered a minute ago when someone said are
you moving your headquarters to a country in, you know, in the area?
And the answer is, as I said then, the president has not issued any
instructions for us to move command and control headquarters into the
region beyond what we have right now for Operation Enduring Freedom. I
won't predict the future at all. I just -- I'm not in a position to
know that. And so I just stay away from, you know, trying to make a
prediction.
And you had a second question also.
Q: The amount of casualties, civilian casualties -
FRANKS: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Civilian casualties: I've read a
lot about that, I've heard a lot about it, and I always respond in a
couple ways. I say in my experience, which is more than 35 years in
the profession, I have never seen a more accurate, a more accurate
fight. The use of precision weapons by the coalition inside
Afghanistan has been truly remarkable.
Now, I have also said that does not mean that civilians have not been
killed in this process. I don't have an assessment of a number of
civilians having been killed. But I will say that this is the most
accurate military campaign I believe that we have ever conducted. And
I'll also say that while -- any loss of civilian life in a war is
regrettable.
Unfortunately, I think history will bear me out when I say that there
always are unintended civilian -- you know, civilian casualties in a
war.
So I think that's regrettable, but I think what is not regrettable is
the incredible humanitarian assistance that over the past six months
has probably resulted in a great many Afghan citizens being alive
today that would not have been alive had they not received the support
in a humanitarian way that has been given.
MODERATOR: We'll go here.
Q: (Will Lee ?) with CNN International. General Franks, can you shed
some light on the latest crash of an Apache helicopter in northeast
Afghanistan? You know, conditions -
FRANKS: Right.
Q: We understand that the Pentagon reported there was a hard landing
at the beginning.
FRANKS: Right.
Q: Can you shed a little light about that? And also, real quick, was
the U.S. -- actually, not the U.S., the whole international coalition
involved in any way, shape, or form on the capture of those people
intended to assassinate the defense minister of Afghanistan? It was
only an Afghanistan operation?
FRANKS: Right. Right. My troops, Operation Enduring Freedom troops, to
the best of my knowledge -- and I think I would know -- were not
involved in the action that you asked about.
With regard to the Apache helicopter, yesterday Apache helicopter in
fact -- I guess we could say it either had a hard landing or crashed,
but the fact of the matter is that they helicopter was destroyed in
the process. The belief right now is that it was some form of
mechanical malfunction, but I'll leave it to the people on the ground
to make a determination of that. I think there was some initial
reporting that said that the helicopter had been shot down, and then
there was some reporting that said: Well, you know, there was a
mechanical failure. What my people on the ground have said at this
point is they believe mechanical failure.
And in fact this was two Apache helicopters which had been on an
operation up to the Northeast of Kandahar, and they were returning
when one of them reported a failure and went in hard. The other one
landed -- very brave people -- landed and extracted the two pilots
from the downed Apache, brought them to the side, and they were
evacuated very, very quickly and are receiving medical care now. And
so that really is probably the most up-to-date and factual report that
I have on it.
MODERATOR: (Off mike.)
Q: Thanks. General, Phoenix -- I'm from Phoenix TV of Hong Kong.
FRANKS: Hi.
Q: I have two questions. One is, given the new support from Central
Asia countries, is the U.S. military presence there to stay, or at
least to stay for a while?
The second question: Iraq. You said there's no imminent plans on Iraq.
Is that because you're waiting for enough international support in
military or political terms so that once you get enough of them and --
then you will launch the attack?
FRANKS: Well, with respect to Iraq, that's a degree of speculation
that I probably wouldn't enter into. I will say that Saddam Hussein
has been a problem for his own people and has been a problem for the
international community for a long time. But in terms of speculating
about action that may be taken at some point in the future, I don't
think it would be -- I don't think it would serve us to, you know, to
be able to do that.
And I'm sorry -- your other question?
Q: The Central Asian countries -
FRANKS: Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. For sure we have terrific cooperation
with all the countries in Central Asia. They have worked closely with
us during Operation Enduring Freedom, and they continue to work with
us today. So I think what will happen is that we'll continue to mature
our security relationships with the countries in Central Asia.
And I don't think that it would serve any purpose for me to predict
basing or staging or something in one of these countries because, to
my knowledge, a decision to do that hasn't -- simply hasn't been made.
I believe that my contact with the leadership in each one of the
Central Asian states, as well as my contact with officials in Russia,
has indicated that there is an understanding that for the course of
Operation Enduring Freedom, we'll certainly continue to work from
Central Asia in support of our operations in Afghanistan.
Q: General, this is Thomas Gorguissian of Al Wafd, the Egyptian Daily
Newspaper. After six or seven months from Enduring Freedom starting,
which is October 7th, how do you see now on your radar as director of
Central Command the hot spots besides Afghanistan?
FRANKS: Right.
Q: The second question: Do you foresee -- I'm not trying to make --
put you in the -- to predict or speculate.
FRANKS: Right.
Q: But the ongoing clashes of violence between -- in Israel and
Palestinian lands, is there -- do you expect or do you see, foresee,
or you are assessing that there is something -- spillover will happen
in that region, so what steps you can take?
FRANKS: Right. With respect to the Middle East, I think the crisis in
the Middle East is terribly important. And I think so much energy is
being put into it, to the issue, certainly by your own government in
Egypt as well as the government in Jordan, and as well as our own
government and governments in Europe, that I don't think any comment
that a military man from the United States of America could make about
that would be, you know, either very helpful or, in fact, very
factual.
The only comment that I can make is that -- is the one that I made
earlier that says the coalition of forces that I see related to
Operation Enduring Freedom have seen no lack of interest and no lack
of commitment.
And so I feel -- you know, I feel very good about that.
With respect to the six or seven months that we've had the operation
going on in that -- in Afghanistan: I think that the commitment of
each one of the states involved in it remains high. I think that we
have not seen any deterioration of focus on what we're trying to do.
My expectation is that the commitment by countries to Enduring Freedom
is going to remain for the foreseeable future. And that sort of --
that sort of gives you the best that I can.
I think you had a second question, also.
Q: Yeah, I was asking, besides Afghanistan, what are the hot spots?
FRANKS: Yeah. The hot spots that we see are the same ones that we have
seen for a long period of time. They're the states that are on the --
our State Department list of countries that sponsor international
terrorism. We continue to watch those very carefully. I think it's
been widely reported that we're working with the government of Ali
Abdullah Saleh -- President Saleh inside Yemen on training activity
because he has an interest in dealing with the terrorist problem that
does exist inside Yemen. And so we're working with him there.
I've mentioned that we're also watching in an intelligence way some of
the other countries in the region. And so that is -- that's an
accurate status. I don't see any change inside our area of
responsibility in the states that we think bear close watching.
Q: Jorge Baniales (ph) from the Spanish News Agency -- EFE. Here in
Washington, all the coverage we see about Afghanistan is like a
spotlight following around the U.S. troops -- where they move, where
they are based.
FRANKS: Right.
Q: Can you give us a more broad view? What is happening the rest of
the country, for example, in the North, with reports about
retributions against Pashtuns? In the West with militias or groups
that are more linked to Iran? Do you see re-emergence of the
traditional ethnic rivalries or a consolidation of the interim
government? What is the general situation?
FRANKS: Across Afghanistan -- across Afghanistan, murky -- murky, as
I've described it before. There of course inside Afghanistan, one will
find tribal affiliations. One will find ethnic affiliations. This is
the history of Afghanistan, going back more than 2,000 years. And so
do we see these potential points of friction in Afghanistan? Of course
we do. We have seen them since we started the operations.
I won't predict whether these things turn into -- or these
relationships turn into open difficulty or not. I will say that I
think the frictions will continue. I think the international community
will continue to work with these frictions.
And I think one of the things that is very good about Operation
Enduring Freedom and the International Security Assistance Force
operating in Kabul is the point that you made, and that is that on a
given day -- and they won't be the same every day -- but on a given
day, there will be international forces from our task force in a
variety of places inside Afghanistan. I mean, you may well see -- you
may well see some of our people from the coalition in Mazar-e Sharif,
you may well see them in Herat, you may well see them in Konduz, in
Jalalabad.
And so the relationships that are being maintained by our coalition
people in Enduring Freedom are, in my view, assisting in looking after
these relationships. Now, they're not there for the purpose of taking
sides with one group against another group, and that's -- so we won't
do that; we'll stay away from that. But there is a sense of stability
that is being provided by simply having coalition forces in the
country.
Q: (Name and affiliation inaudible.) My question is about Mr. Zahir
Shah. He planned a lot of time and he changed his plan to come to
Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan safe for him right now and he is coming in
the future?
FRANKS: I'm sorry, who are you asking about?
Q: Zahir Shah.
FRANKS: Oh, yeah. Really not a decision -- really not a decision for
us to make. I think that in consultation with Chairman Karzai and
Fahim Khan, the minister of defense, and so forth, the king will make
a determination about when is the appropriate time for him to come
into Afghanistan.
I think I described the situation in Afghanistan as one that's going
to require our attention for the foreseeable future, and I'll leave it
at that. I know that there is interest in having the king return to
Afghanistan, but the timing of all of that and the specific security
is really not for me to call.
Q: Thank you. Raghubir Goyal from Asia Today and India Globe. I was at
the Pentagon the other day when you had a press conference from
Florida. It was a great press conference. Also, you are doing a great
job and your forces, the U.S. forces. But my question -
FRANKS: I hear it coming! (Laughter.)
Q: Yes, sir. You can take it as not easy job, what you are doing,
defending the international borders and the U.S. borders.
My question is that, what is the reason, sir, after all, having
state-of-the-art technology and the best of the best military on this
earth, that we still do not have the most wanted international
terrorist, Osama bin Laden and the top of his lieutenants? Is that
because that some of the countries who promised the United States that
they will do what you wanted them to do, they have not done or have
not helped you?
And second question will be -- if I can.
FRANKS: OK. First off, thank you very much. (Laughter.)
India has been very supportive and very responsive. Pakistan also has
been very -- (laughter) -- has been very supportive and very
responsive.
Your question about how can the most powerful military in the world
fail to have killed or captured one man, or five men -- well, gosh,
think about the question. That's not what militaries do. And even the
very best law enforcement capability that we have, whether it's in
your own country or whether it's in another country, whether it's in
our own case here in the United States, will find that sometimes it
takes years to find a single person.
Whether it's in your own country or whether it's in another country,
whether it's our own case here in the United States, we'll find that
sometimes it takes years to find a single person. And it -- and I
don't think we would be wise to predict how long it will take, not
just the United States of America, but the international community, to
find the terrorists that we're after to be sure that these networks
are completely broken.
And so, you know, you're looking for -- or you're talking about some
personalities who do not want to be found. They do not want to be
found. Irrespective of any one of the countries, it's possible for
people to hide for some period of time. But I can tell you that these
people are on the run. They are on the run. And when they're on the
run, that is good for the people on this planet who oppose terrorism.
Will we get them? We will get them. But I don't think any of us will
predict the time. And when I say "we", I'll be quick to say that I
don't limit "we" to being the military forces of our various
countries. I think that we'll all be in this together because it's
best for us if we resist terrorism and if we continue to break these
networks. And I think all of us are united in wanting to do that.
And I think you had a second question.
Q: Second, sir, quickly. One, is he's still alive -
FRANKS: Well, you can ask a quick question; that doesn't mean I'll
give you a quick answer.
Q: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. One, is he still alive, when you say "he's on
the run" or "they're on the run and may be hiding somewhere"?
FRANKS: Right.
Q: And two, if you, as the general in the area, region, you must be
talking on a regular basis with General Musharraf in Pakistan -
FRANKS: Yes, yes.
Q: -- that he's asking another five years of his military rule to be
extended, if you approve that.
FRANKS: Right. Right. I don't have a comment to make about the
referendum in Pakistan with General Musharraf. I do talk to him, but I
will tell you, when I talk to him, it's about the military issues that
our two nations are cooperating on.
And the point that you made in the first part of your second question
is a valid one. We don't know whether a given personality is still
alive, or -- you know, you could be talking about bin Laden, you could
be talking about a variety of people. I will not believe that one of
these personalities is dead or captured until I see evidence that he
is dead or until I know he's been captured. And so in some cases we
simply don't know. I have not seen evidence that bin Laden is dead,
and so I must believe that he is still alive. And I think it will be
like that until we get the confirmation. But the confirmation will
come.
MODERATOR: On the end here. We've got time for about one or two more
questions.
Q: Egan Austamm (sp), correspondent for the Swiss daily Tages
Anzeiger.
FRANKS: Yes, sir.
Q: If you look at the military -- at Israel's military operation in
the West Bank, in what ways does Operation Protective Wall compare to
Operation Enduring Freedom and in what ways isn't this the case, from
your or the Pentagon's point of view?
FRANKS: Actually, I would tell you that you'd have to talk to the
Pentagon about it. Not to sort of just toss your question aside -- I
think the question is valid -- but I really can't give you a good
answer, because I have not done the study. I -- my people, my staff,
and I have not done the study on the approach being used by Israel in
terms of this current ongoing operation. I have pretty good
familiarity with what's going on in Operation Enduring Freedom, but I
don't have the same degree of familiarity with the approach being
taken inside Israel, and so I just can't comment on it.
One more, please.
MODERATOR: Last question.
Q: General, in a -
MODERATOR: Can you identify yourself?
Q: Jose Carreno with El Universal. Outside your area, about a couple
of years ago the Washington Post -- (off mike). Would you care to make
your own -- (off mike)?
FRANKS: Dana Priest is a friend of mine and, I think, was the author
of this particular point. I guess what I would say is, that was before
I took my current job. That was when -
Q: (Off mike.)
FRANKS: That was when Tony Zinni was commander in chief, and I think
Ms. Priest traveled with him and made that observation, not
specifically about General Zinni, but about unified commanders.
I really don't think it's the case that unified commanders act as
proconsuls of the Holy Roman Empire, so to speak. I think the
implication of what was said is that you take a unified commander, and
he will visit countries in his region, and as he visits countries in
the region, he will deal not only with military people, but he'll also
deal with the civilian leadership in these countries.
I don't -- that does happen, and that is the way it'll be done,
because the relationship between a unified commander and the American
representatives in a country -- the U.S. ambassador, for example --
will be very good because the military portfolio in any one of our
countries will be a part of the ambassador's portfolio. In many of the
countries where we have relationships, some of the most substantial
relationship we have will be security assistance. Now if you pick a
country where that's the case, then you will also find that a
commander in chief will frequently deal with other people in the
government in that country. So that's where I think the comment comes
from.
I know that my own boss uses me to go out in the region and to discuss
not only the specific military-to-military relationships, but also the
context within a country or within a region. And so I think the choice
of term is interesting, but what I find is that commanders in chief
represent our country in the security assistance or military-
to-military relationships that may exist in a region.
And that really is the best answer that I can give you.
I can tell you that commanders in chief enjoy the work. I very much
enjoy it. I enjoy the relationships that I have with people out in my
region. I said early on that I find those relationships to be very
supportive. I find them to be friendly. I find them to be
professional. And I think that that's the experience of each of the
unified commanders. Thank you very much.
Q: Thank you, General.
END
(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
|
|
|
