14 May 2002
Defense Department Briefing Transcript
(Afghanistan/military operations/joint task force, Pakistan/support
for coalition, Vieques/Navy training site, Iraq/military equipment,
Senate/DoD budget) (4310)
Assistant Secretary of Defense Victoria Clarke and Joint Chiefs of
Staff Vice Chairman General Peter Pace briefed reporters May 14 at the
Pentagon.
Following is the Pentagon transcript:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of Defense News Briefing
Victoria Clarke ASD (PA)
Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:15 a.m. EDT
(Also participating was Marine Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman, Joint
Chiefs of Staff)
Clarke: Good morning, everybody. I do not have a statement, other than
to say we promised to get General Pace out of here in about 20 or 25
minutes. So, he's got a few remarks and we'll get going.
Pace: Thank you, Ms. Clarke.
In Afghanistan, Operations Snipe and Iron Mountain concluded yesterday
with all forces returning to their bases. Coalition forces were out
searching for potential pockets of Taliban and al Qaeda. And all these
operations fall under Operation Mountain Lion.
On Sunday, U.S. forces raided a compound about 50 miles north of
Kandahar. We had intelligence that placed a senior Taliban commander
there. During this operation, U.S. forces were fired on; our troops
returned fire, killing five and capturing 32. The detainees were taken
to Bagram for screening, where we will determine their identity.
Also, two weapons caches were found by U.S. troops over the last week,
one in the vicinity of Orgun and one near Herat. They included more
than 800,000 rounds of .55-caliber ammunition, almost a million rounds
of machine-gun ammunition, over 600 rounds of rocket-propelled
grenades, over 700 mortar rounds, and five T-54 tanks. They also found
15 CONEX boxes buried in the side of a hill with over 1,500 mortar
rounds in them, and over 600 rounds of howitzer ammunition. The
ammunition, depending upon its condition, will either be destroyed in
place or turned over to the Afghan National Army for their training.
And that training of the Afghan National Army begins today with the
first 250 soldiers beginning their training, and another 160 to follow
shortly. The training will go on for about 10 weeks and it will
emphasize basic soldier skills in the beginning and will progress from
there.
U.S. Central Command is also preparing to establish a combined joint
task force in Afghanistan [Bagram]. The 18th Airborne Corps commander,
Lieutenant General McNeill, will be the first commander of this joint
task force. He will assume responsibilities for the majority of the
forces currently in support of operations in Afghanistan.
And with that, we'll take your questions.
Clarke: Charlie?
Question: Torie, there's a rather amorphous television report out of
Florida -- the local television station's reporting that the Coast
Guard has reported to other federal authorities that over the past
couple of months they've arrested as many as 25 what they call
"extremists," who might have been taken off of container ships in
Miami and Savannah and perhaps Long Beach, California, and that they
might have been bent on raiding a nuclear plant. Do you have anything
on that at all and --
Clarke: No, just -- we're aware of the reports. I could refer you to
the Coast Guard, but I'm sure the Coast Guard, just as we do, have the
policy they will not talk about any intel matters in detail. They
wouldn't go into any detail about their security arrangements. So I've
seen the reports. They seem to be attributed to unnamed federal
officials.
But I will say this, we are in a very different world since September
10th or September 11th, however you want to peg it. And we have
increased security across the board, including greatly increasing
security, working with lots of law enforcement agencies, and the
Department has increased security all around.
Q: Well, without going into any detail on what these people might have
been bent on, could you at least disabuse us or support the notion
that perhaps 25 people have been arrested on container ships or other
ships coming into the country at ports?
Clarke: I haven't seen anything on it.
Q: You haven't seen anything to confirm that?
Clarke: No, I have not seen anything on it.
Ivan?
Q: Torie, a question for General Pace, if I may, Torie. Secretary
Rumsfeld and others from that podium repeatedly say and keep saying
that we're getting very good cooperation, excellent cooperation from
Pakistan. And yet it seems obvious that there are large cells of the
"unfriendlies" who have taken refuge in Pakistan and that President
Musharraf is less than anxious to go after the so-called tribal
regions, for reasons that he claims are that the country's spread too
thin with its possible conflict with India, and also he doesn't want
to antagonize a fragile lash-up. What's the solution? What can we do
if he won't actually go after these people?
Pace: Well, first, I will echo what you've heard many others say from
up here, and that is that the cooperation we have had from President
Musharraf specifically and the Afghan people -- excuse me -- the
Pakistan people has been superb.
As you know, the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is porous,
very difficult to even know when you're on which side of the border,
much less whether or not there's al Qaeda present on either side. It
would not surprise me at all that there would be concentrations of al
Qaeda that have slipped across into Pakistan.
I know that President Musharraf is working in cooperation and we're
working in cooperation with him to assist in -- certainly in sharing
intelligence and to assist in ways that he might see appropriate in
terms of his own country. But when it comes to what President
Musharraf is going to do inside of his own country, I really need to
defer to him and what he thinks is appropriate to do inside of his own
sovereign nation.
Q: And a quick follow-up. We know -- and it's been reported -- that
we've done some quick and dirty missions over there. We've gone in,
and there have been some arrests, working with the FBI. But are there
any plans, without, you know, getting into OPSEC, you know, where
large U.S. forces would move across the border and take part in some
of those sweep operations?
Pace: I cannot answer that.
Clarke: Okay, Pam.
Q: As we were coming in here, I heard that Pakistan I think just today
or in the last 24 hours arrested 25 believed al Qaeda or Taliban
members in Western Afghanistan. Does that sound familiar to you?
Western Pakistan -- sorry.
Clarke: I have no idea.
Pace: No, I haven't seen it, although the Pakistan government has been
working hard and has, in fact, over the past several months arrested
folks throughout their country, so the fact that they might --
Q: Any in the last 24 hours?
Pace: No -- not to mean it didn't happen; I'm just not aware of it.
Q: Okay. Could you actually explain to us the significance of the
creation of the Combined Joint Task Force, how that changes the
structure that's in there now and why the change?
Pace: Sure. It -- this is a decision made by General Franks, the
commander in chief of U.S. Central Command, to provide on-scene
command-and-control structure in a joint task force that will be
headquartered in Afghanistan. And all the U.S. forces in Afghanistan
will work for Lieutenant General McNeil who is the current commander
of the 18th Airborne Corps but will go to Afghanistan as the commander
of the Joint Task Force.
Q: Where will it be headquartered, and how is that different from the
structure that currently is there?
Pace: Initially it will go into Kandahar, and then between General
McNeil and General Franks, they'll determine the best long-term
location.
Q: Does that signal a more permanent presence for U.S. troops in
Afghanistan? Sounds like we're setting up a homestead there.
Clarke: I'd say two things and then turn it back to the general. We
have made it so clear every step of the way that we'll stay as long as
it takes to get the job done, but we have no desire to stay one day
longer. And my sense of it is that we're constantly assessing what's
the appropriate mix of people and resources, and this is just a
natural evolution in that process.
Pace: Great answer.
Clarke: Tom.
Q: Yeah that's been my question, too. Why wasn't this done earlier in
the campaign? I mean, what is the logic of doing it now? And what does
it do to -- (inaudible) -- Pakistan, the 101st -- I mean, the other
units in there in terms of the command and control structure?
Pace: I can give you a generic answer to that, and then I really need
you to go ask Tom Franks, because it's his command decision to do
this. And what Tom has done is determine that now is the time when he
wants to have a subordinate to him who is doing hands-on, day-to-day
Combined Joint Task Force works. So --
Q: (Off mike) -- take some of the pressure off him, in a sense?
Pace: I think it allows him to be able to spend perhaps a little more
time on the rest of his region. But again, the specific timing of this
and why General Franks believes that now is the time is really a
question you should ask him because it's a commander's decision on how
to organize his force.
Q: General, you said that he'd be in charge of the majority of the
forces there. What forces would he not be in command of?
Pace: I said majority because it's not clear to me that he'd have 100
percent of the forces, and I didn't want to mislead you. Again, the
best person to ask that is in Central Command to find out exactly
which it is, Eric. I did not want to say 100 percent because it's
conceivable that there might be some forces that, for whatever reason,
General Franks might want to retain under his own control.
Clarke: Let's go to (Johnson?).
Q: General Pace, can you talk a little bit more about who was arrested
and who was shot yesterday, or I guess it was two days ago, in this
raid north of Kandahar? And any idea whether the senior Taliban
commander that you had the intelligence about was among those
casualties or those taken?
Pace: I can help you a little bit there. All I know -- all we know for
sure is that when they went in for this raid, which was a result of
the combined intelligence that we had gathered, that when they went
in, they were fired upon. In firing back, they killed five, still to
be identified, and captured 32, still to be identified. And that's all
we know right now.
Q: What about the commander? You said that there was some intelligence
that a senior Taliban commander was there. I mean, was he in fact
there?
Pace: We do not know that yet.
Q: Who was he?
Pace: Cannot tell you that.
Q: Do you know whether the people detained are even Taliban or al
Qaeda? Do you know that?
Pace: I do not. They are just now in the initial interviewing process.
We have folks who are detainees now, who have been detainees for
several months, who we still do not know the exact identity. They do
not carry ID cards. They do not always tell you the truth. So we do
not know whom we have right now.
Q: Why do you suspect that they were Taliban and al Qaeda?
Pace: Because of the intelligence that was -- we collected prior to
the operation.
Q: Do you have any identification of the bodies that were taken from
that grave, that mass grave in Tora Bora yet?
Pace: I do not. I do not and I'm not aware of that.
Clarke: No. Back here? Let's go back.
Q: The people who were killed and captured, were they in a single
compound? Was this in a village? How were they -- what was going on at
the time that the raid was made, and what did you find? Were these all
men who were taken into captivity? Were they all men -- (inaudible)?
Pace: I do not have the specifics on that. I -- the details I gave
you, which is five killed and 32 captured, is all that I personally
know about the operation's results. To get the details of how that
unfolded tactically on the ground, I need to refer you to Central
Command.
Q: Nighttime raid, General?
Pace: I'm sorry?
Q: Nighttime raid?
Pace: I think that's true.
Q: So you're saying you don't know what the compound was being used
for or what kind of activity was seen that may have been --
Pace: I'm saying that I cannot tell you -- I will not tell you the
intelligence that led us to the operation. I do not know the tactics
on the ground that was used with regard to taking down the compound.
Q: Can you tell us a little more about the operation into the Herat --
I believe this is the first -- you said there were some weapons
recovered in Herat. Did I --
Clarke: Two weapons caches --
Pace: One in Herat, one in --
Q: Yes, you mentioned two locations --
(Cross talk.)
Pace: No, let me get the right names for you. One was Orgun --
O-R-G-U-N.
Q: Right.
Pace: Hold on; let me make sure I get it right.
Q: Herat?
Pace: And one near Herat; that's right.
Q: Where is Orgun, General?
Pace: South of Gardez.
Q: I may be mistaken, but that's the first I've heard about an
operation like this out in Herat area. Can you tell us anymore about
that? Do you have any more details?
Clarke: We actually were --
Q: (Inaudible.)
Clarke: No, we were talking about these sorts of things this morning,
anticipating people that say "Where are we in the -- what are these
significant -- what's the significance of these things?" It's almost
exactly what we've said all along would happen. There would be
different pockets of resistance. We would continue to scour a lot of
different places, trying to surface intel, trying to root out the
remaining pockets, trying to find these large caches of ammunition, so
we can make sure they get out of the bad guys' hands. This is pretty
much what we've expected all along.
And expect the unexpected. Everyone's focusing on one part of the
country; something will pop up somewhere else. That's the nature of
the business.
Q: When you find these large weapons, storage areas -- especially the
one in Orgun -- 1.8 million rounds of ammunition is a lot of
ammunition.
Q: Not if you have 54 tanks.
Q: Are some of the warlords in the area, saying "Hey, that's mine?"
Anybody claimed it?
Pace: At the time that it was found and at the time that the caches
were destroyed -- the parts of the caches that were destroyed, there
was no indication that it was other than the Taliban or al Qaeda. But
the fact that someone might come along a day or two from now and say
something different from that is certainly possible, but we have, as
you know, Special Forces with the warlords, very, very open and good
communications there. So when we find these caches, they are in areas
that we have received intelligence about Taliban and al Qaeda, so the
presumption when we find this is that, in fact, it is not a warlord's
cache.
Q: I ask the question because, as you may know, the British destroyed
the weapons cache that they blew up late last week. Now one of the
warlords has stepped forward and said, "That's my stuff they blew up.
I told the interim government that, and I told anybody else who would
listen, and they went ahead and blew it up anyway."
I'm just trying to get a sense of who owned this stuff. Would you care
to comment on that mix-up?
Pace: I won't comment on the Brits. I will let them comment on their
own operations.
I can tell you that when we go in to these areas on the search
operations that we've been doing, that we go there based on
intelligence, and that when we uncover arms caches like this, that are
deep in the mountains and that are in the locations that we find them,
and because of our liaison with -- between our special forces and the
warlords, that our presumption is that what we have found is in fact
contraband. We then take -- if it's usable, it gets sent back to Kabul
for the Afghan national government. So if in fact we did make a
mistake, it is still available to the government. If it's unusable, we
blow it in place, which means it would have been unusable to a
friendly government in any case. So I don't see that there's a risk
here in capturing this ammunition and delivering it to the central
government.
Q: So would it be the policy -- let's say this was a mistake. Would it
be the policy to either confiscate or destroy 1.8 million rounds of
ammunition, no matter whose it was, given the long-term instability
and volatility of Afghanistan? Whether it belonged to a warlord or al
Qaeda, it would seem to me that the interim government doesn't want
1.8 million rounds of ammunition sitting around waiting to be fired at
somebody. So is it the policy to confiscate it no matter whose it is?
Pace: I wouldn't say it like that.
I'd turn to the policy lead.
Clarke: I'd say the policy -- (laughter). No, it's a good question.
The policy is to ensure that it's not used for the purposes that in
some cases it was intended. That it is -- you know, one of our
military objectives is to ensure that Afghanistan doesn't return to
what it was, which was a free running field, a free -- an open haven
for the terrorists to operate. And so one of the things we have to do
is make sure those sorts of things are either destroyed, so the bad
guys can't use them, or they're put in the hands of the appropriate
authorities, who will use them for the right reasons, such as
establishing the Afghan national army.
Q: Are these the biggest finds to date, so far, in the world?
Clarke: Don't know.
Pace: If they're not, they're close. We have found tanks in the past.
We have found large ammunition caches in the past. Whether or not this
is the largest, I don't know. But it's a good-sized take.
Clarke: Let's go behind Pam and --
Q: General --
Clarke: Charlie, let's move around a little bit, and then we'll come
back.
Q: General, you said you don't know the whereabouts of the Taliban
commander that you were looking for. Does that -- just to clarify,
does that mean he could conceivably be among those who were killed or
you have in custody?
And separately, Brigadier Lane, the British commander, said that he
felt it was strategically good news that his troops and other troops
in the coalition hadn't been finding pockets of Taliban and al Qaeda
in Afghanistan. Would that be your reading of the missions?
Pace: It is possible that the leader we were looking for is among the
dead. It is possible that he is amongst the detainees. And it is
possible that he was not there or that he slipped away.
With regard to when you're going on a sweep operation and you don't
find enemy in the area you're sweeping, if in fact what your purpose
is, is to go out and make sure that the area is not re-infiltrated,
then I would agree that that's good news.
Q: Was the commander Omar, by any chance?
Pace: I will not confirm who it was.
Q: Is that the area where he grew up, is it not?
Pace: I do not know that.
Clarke: In back.
Q: Yeah. From -- (affiliation off mike). I have just a question about
Vieques. The Navy has just finished her exercises last month. Do you
still plan to leave the island by May 2003, and do you have plans to
have this exercise somewhere else in the U.S.?
Clarke: We plan -- and I'll ask the general to help me out on this --
we plan to make sure we have the means and the capabilities to provide
the best training and readiness for the people in the Navy and the
Marines. So that's what we are continuing to pursue. Mm-hmm.
Q: Do you plan any reparations for the people of the island, what they
claim?
Clarke: I'm sorry?
Q: Do you plan any -- to pay any reparation to the inhabitants of the
island?
Clarke: There are already funds paid -- you guys keep me straight on
this -- but funds paid to Puerto Rico as part of our arrangements for
the training exercises that are there.
Q: (Off mike) -- 50 and 40.
Clarke: Yeah. Charlie, and then up --
Q: General, perhaps you made clear and I just missed it. When did you
say these caches were found at Orgun and Herat?
Pace: That was over the past weekend, last couple of days.
Q: Over the --
Clarke: Mmm-hmm. Yeah?
Q: The joint task force -- when do you anticipate that headquarters
being set up and General McNeill going over there? And will this
entail any additional staff being sent to the area, or will it be
cobbled together from forces that are already there?
Pace: It will be stood up the end of May-beginning of June. General
McNeill will go over. He'll have a staff with him of less than 500. It
will not be cobbled together; it will be a staff that he has been
working with, that he has trained with. They will then go over, get
acclimatized. And when General McNeill feels that he is situationally
aware and ready to take command, he'll report that fact to General
Franks, and the two of them will decide the exact date of the
turnover. But probably the end of this month-beginning of next.
Q: His staff from 18th Airborne Corps, or will they will staff coming
out of CENTCOM?
Pace: It'll be a large chunk of his staff from 18th Airborne Corps,
plus he'll have Army -- excuse me, he'll have Navy, Air Force and
Marine augmentees to that staff so that his joint staff can work in a
joint environment.
Q: Does the task force have a name; does the JTF have a name?
Pace: Right now it is Joint Task Force Afghanistan.
Clarke: Let's do Fama and then Dale to wrap up.
Q: A question for you on Iraq. The U.N. Security Council today passed
the resolution of Iraq. Could you just reiterate your thoughts on what
this resolution means in terms of whether there's -- this will
absolutely guarantee that no military equipment get into Iraq?
Clarke: Well, I don't know --
Q: The secretary has spoken on that before.
Clarke: Sure. And I'd refer you to the State Department on the
resolution itself. The secretary has spoken. And given the Iraqi
regime's history and patterns and practice, there's a high degree of
skepticism of any commitments they make.
Dale?
Q: The Senate version of the DOD authorization bill cuts about $800
million, I think, out of the Department's program for missile defense
R&D next year and shifts it to other programs. Is the Department's
position that missile defense is untouchable, or are you open to
negotiation with the Congress on what that funding level ought to be?
Clarke: You know I was just talking to our legislative affairs people
about that this morning, and evidently we did have some communications
back up in the form of a letter expressing our concerns about that.
And I wasn't able to dig it all out. But we'll try to do so later
today.
Thanks, everybody.
Q: Tori, one more. Do you --
Clarke: One more?
Q: Do you have the details on the amendment, budget amendment deciding
what was going to happen with the money that you had originally
planned for the Crusader?
Clarke: No, I believe the Army is going to come back in a few days
with a more specific or more detailed plan of how they would devote
the funds to other technologies that would have benefits across the
board.
Q: Or Secretary Rumsfeld's testimony on Thursday?
Clarke: It's in a few days. I don't have a date certain for it.
Q: How about a big party for the press, if you -- (laughter).
Clarke: Thanks, everybody.
Pace: (Laughs.)
(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
|
|
|
