Military

DATE=01/04/2002

TYPE=ON THE LINE

NUMBER=1-01256

TITLE=THE YEAR IN THE WAR ON TERRORISM INTERNET=Yes

EDITOR=OFFICE OF POLICY 619-0037

CONTENT=

THEME: UP, HOLD UNDER AND FADE

[Please note, this is a reissue of an episode of On the Line that was broadcast 12-21-2002.]

Host: The Year in the War on Terrorism. Next, On the Line.

[music]

Host: Al-Qaida, the terrorist network responsible for the September 11th, 2001, attacks in New York and outside Washington, no longer has a safe haven in Afghanistan. Its leaders are either dead or on the run. But al-Qaida is not out of business. Terror cells around the world continue to plot and carry out acts of sudden violence. The last year has seen terror bombings in Mombassa, Kenya; Bali, Indonesia; Karachi, Pakistan; Kabul, Afghanistan; Manila in the Philippines; and in Israel. How goes the world's fight against terrorists? I'll ask my guests, Elaine Shannon, correspondent for Time magazine, and author and defense analyst David Isby. Welcome and thanks for joining us today. Elaine Shannon, how do you assess the year's efforts against terrorism?

Shannon: Well, there have been a lot of arrests and they've gotten a lot of information. But when I go over to the F-B-I for instance and say, "Well, is it going to happen again?" They say, "Yes, tomorrow."

Host: And is that ever going to be the case that you won't be able to say, "Well it could happen tomorrow?"

Shannon: I think not -- because the nineteen hijackers were so good at going under the radar of everybody. There are no systems that can prevent somebody who's smart and determined and willing to change character and look different. And also, get organized in a very subtle way. Now, we may not see four hijackings all at one moment. That may have been prevented, but there certainly can be other, pretty significant attacks coming.

Host: David Isby, how do you assess the year in the war on terrorism?

Isby: Well, obviously it started with what's been one of the successes -- is the political consolidation in Afghanistan. Much as people talk about the nation state being less important, it was really important for the terrorists to basically have had their own country in the form of Taleban-controlled Afghanistan -- having your own flag, seat at the U-N and a sanctuary. That is now gone and they haven't really recovered, even though much of the leadership is still out there and as you said, there is still capability of attacking targets, especially relatively soft targets as in Bali or in East Africa.

Host: Well, David Isby, there's still a lot out there. Where are some of the places where they've holed up?

Isby: I think the most notable place is in the Pakistani border lands with Afghanistan, the frontier where Pakistan has historically kept only a limited military presence. They're probably not aware of the extent of this and indeed, exerting power there would be difficult for the Pakistani government. So that's part of it. Others are in other countries. We've seen Yemen, increased action there. Also there have been reports of action in Somalia, the Philippines, the same thing. So, they are still very much in business, but have been pushed towards margins and have to keep afloat by moving, staying underground.

Host: David Isby mentions the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan as perhaps the prime place where there's still al-Qaida operatives. Elaine, how have the efforts by Pakistan gone in the war on terrorism this last year?

Shannon: Well, they got Ramsi Binalshibh, who we think was involved in the nine-eleven planning and who is reported to be helping somewhat. And so, he may tell us a lot more about all the other players involved. We haven't got Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is believed to be one of the main intellectual authors of that attack. He's also the uncle of Ramzi Yousef, who was the mastermind of the first World Trade Center bombing.

Host: And is he believed to be in Pakistan?

Shannon: He's thought to be somewhere up in that region and they're very worried about him and several others in this sort of senior executive level.

Host: David Isby, how are the efforts by Pakistan going? There's been a rise in the popularity of Islamist parties in Pakistan as Pakistan's tried to crack down on terrorist groups within the country. How do you assess the efforts by Pakistan and where it's likely to go in the coming year?

Isby: Well, this is very key. The issue is really very tied to the fundamental question of the governance of Pakistan. President [Pervez] Musharraf had a year ago talked about rebuilding civil society in Pakistan, addressing some of the root causes that led to this widespread support. The record has been missed. A lot of the momentum has gone in his referendum in the elections, which only had limited international acceptance. And also he has not gotten any better in the situation in the confrontation of India and Kashmir. That, despite his efforts inside Pakistan, has not gotten him an improved situation in Kashmir. So that's going to be a key thing. However, Pakistan is still cooperating. They need, they feel, to keep this relatively quiet, at a level below that of troops, in sharing information and police cooperation.

Host: Elaine, the attack in Bali, Indonesia, the most bloody since the attack on the U-S on September 11th, 2001. How has that affected Indonesia's efforts in the war on terrorism? What's going on in Indonesia?

Shannon: Well, it's fascinating. The U-S has tried, mostly privately through the ambassadors and the C-I-A and a few others, to get the Indonesians to round up the people from Jemaah Islamiya, which is a local group that has a liaison with al-Qaida. There was a lot of denial going on and there may still be. Abu Bakar [Bashir], this cleric who is thought to be behind a lot of this stuff, he's in jail, he's out of jail, he's in jail -- I can't tell you where he is today. But there's another man called Hambali [Riduan Isamuddin], who is an important figure, and he's somewhere and the two of them together have set a lot of plots in motion over the years. I think we'll see more violence there.

Host: David Isby, did the attack in Bali fundamentally change Indonesia's willingness or unwillingness to be serious about the war on terrorism?

Isby: I think they certainly would look again to cooperate. They've also looked to solve some of the domestic issues. They're moving, for example, to try and stop the long-standing insurgence in Aceh in northern Sumatra. So, certainly the thing is there. But again, this is the much larger context of Indonesian politics. Certainly there has been broad-spread division, ethnic conflicts, religious conflicts throughout the country. And I believe that terrorists are using this by trying to take on the protective coloration of people who it would be politically difficult to clamp down on in Indonesia.

Host: Well, this problem in Indonesia is the problem elsewhere in the war on terrorism as well, and where you have Osama bin Laden clearly and other members of al-Qaida trying to attack the West, attack countries and by eliciting a counter-attack then they can say, "Oh, those countries are attacking Islam." And has that been successful for them in Pakistan and Indonesia and elsewhere?

Shannon: Well I think in many ways you hear a lot of people in Africa were saying, "oh good," when the Mombasa bombing happened. I think that the United States hasn't done a great job of appealing to peaceful peoples in the countries where Islam is dominant and to persuade them that it's not us against them. I think we've got a problem there.

Host: Is there a way to appeal to the peaceful people while still taking the actions that are necessary to confront those who are scheming to perpetrate acts of violence?

Shannon: I think there is, but I'm not a policy maker. I do see that I think the Bush administration has been criticized for being too West versus East, us against them.

Host: David Isby, what do you think about how you balance this being serious about taking strong efforts that need to be taken to stop the terrorists from committing acts of violence, while at the same time trying to appeal to the peaceful people who the terrorists are trying to hide behind?

Isby: It's very much a more parallel track, if you will. It's the battle of ideas. And that's certainly going to be a key part of it. We saw at the beginning of this year in Afghanistan, two enduring images, one of the people of Kabul welcoming back the people, the Afghans, including Americans who had supported them and flocking back to the movie theaters that had been suppressed by the Taleban and al-Qaida. And people throughout the Islamic world, however poor, if they get an extra few cents they go to the movies. And to see that this was something that al-Qaida would deny them, I think brought it home on a personal level. The other image from Afghanistan was that of U-S power. The Americans sent great big airplanes with very powerful bombs and blew them up. And they did not suffer at all. Neither did the government that supported them suffer. And the U-S has to work these two images, one of liberation, the other of power against those who use terror against us, to work with in pushing our message.

Host: Elaine Shannon, Indonesia was often criticized in this last year [for] not being serious enough or tough enough in the war on terrorism. How about other Southeast Asian countries, Malaysia and Singapore?

Shannon: Malaysia's been pretty aggressive, I believe, and Singapore very aggressive. And the Philippines and Singapore have arrested a bunch of people who were involved in two plots. Malaysia has also picked up a fellow who may have been involved in a plot in Singapore with a guy in the Philippines and may have been also on the periphery of nine-eleven. On the other hand, I do not believe that the C-I-A and F-B-I have had free access to some of the people that have been picked up there to question them. So, I think it still kind of makes it, there's still a problem being perceived as being too cooperative with the United States.

Host: Is cooperation increasing among the nations in Southeast Asia, David Isby?

Isby: Certainly there has been greater cooperation than there was before nine-eleven and not just in Southeast Asia. We've seen, for example, the recent cooperation from Yemen, with the death of a number of senior al-Qaida leaders there. Places like Somalia, which were before only considered by the United States to be failed states, are now assuring the U-S that they're not being used by international terrorists. And part of this is a sincere desire to support the international war and another part is to not end up in the crosshairs themselves of the U-S armed forces. So, between the two, I think we have seen greater cooperation. There's a lot of way to go and that's going to take many years.

Host: Well, you bring up Yemen and the killing of some senior al-Qaida operatives in Yemen. Tell us about what happened there.

Isby: Well, this was, according to press reports, done by a U-S pilotless aircraft, a U-A-V, unmanned air vehicle. U-S aircraft had been operating in support of Yemeni armed forces in this region and the Yemenis themselves had in fact lost a number of people to an ambush by al-Qaida people in the week previous. So, the U-S was indeed supporting the indigenous forces rather than putting U-S forces there on the ground.

Host: Elaine Shannon, is the use of an unmanned aircraft with missiles to track down particular al-Qaida leaders, does this say anything about the way the strategy and tactics in the war on terrorism are evolving as the war stretches out?

Shannon: Well, that was a first. And I think it'll happen again, particularly in a place like Yemen where it was in the desert, so they could land this missile on a car and not kill a bunch of civilians. And there was a little bubble of concern about our breaching Yemeni sovereignty, but not really very much. You can't do that though, in Pakistan or a populous city somewhere and you know, there's been speculation that bin Laden might even be in a city because you can't pick up people running around and aides and cars and all from a satellite when you're in a city.

Host: How have al-Qaida and their operatives responded to the evolution of U-S tactics and coalition tactics in fighting terrorism. Is there going to be a response to how they fight in Yemen perhaps?

Isby: Well, part of the response is, they've tended to go quiet every time one of the major people is picked up. Those people who knew him clandestinely generally end up assuming he's going to talk. So they will often leave where they are. If they're in jobs where they can acquire intelligence for al-Qaida, they may escape and evade, head off to where they think is a safe area, such as in the borderlands of Pakistan or take up a new identity in their own country.

Host: Well, that would suggest that every al-Qaida operative who is captured then has a ripple effect of disrupting the network.

Isby: That's very important. That's how you take a network apart, one stitch at a time. And one of the reasons why it's important to get the big fish, the people whose names are on the list, is because they tend to know more people, know more of the relationships. Again, just the fear that they're being compromised is often much more extensive than the damage you get from them directly.

Host: Elaine Shannon, David Isby says that al-Qaida operatives assume that when someone they know is captured, that that person is going to end up talking. Is that assumption right? Has the U-S and coalition had pretty good success getting information out of people they capture?

Shannon: Well, this is interesting, so they say, and are they telling us this because they want to help us or are they telling us this because it's a tactic? I think it's a tactic. They're tickling the wires, as they say.

Isby: One other thing is also, such things are often used to cover other information. Things like crypto, decrypts or other messages, these will be made public. You obviously don't want to say "We're decrypting these messages," or our agents inside another organization have told us this. You say, "We got this from an interrogation." And this way it very much helps the process along. It makes people think, "Oh my goodness, we're all compromised, let's go E-and-E, go to earth and wait this out."

Shannon: Well, there was an arrest of a member, a man named [Abd al-Rahim] al-Nashiri and they kept that, announced, well, they said --

Host: They being?

Shannon: The government. "We've got an important person, but we're not going to tell you who it is." And that was a tactic to get people buzzing, to get them to e-mail each other or call each other or travel to see each other, because when people are traveling or communicating, they're visible, they're more visible. And finally the name came out. In fact, they asked several news organizations to withhold that name for a little bit, so they could make sure that if he told them about somebody, they could get somebody to the other person's place before the people moved.

Host: David Isby, what kind of efforts have been made by Saudi Arabia this last year in the war on terrorism?

Isby: Well, certainly, that's been a key issue, in fact, this is tied up with the overall problems on the U-S Saudi relationship, which has certainly had a very stormy twelve months. But, you know, even though of course, there have been arrests, there has been a degree of cooperation, yet you still have the fundamental issues of money. And if there is to be a [Karl von] Clausewitzian [a 19th Century military strategist] center of gravity of international terror, it's probably the money and a lot of that comes from Saudi Arabia. So I think that, rather than specific examples of cooperation with the Saudi side, remains the key issue.

Host: Has there been any progress, Elaine, on reducing the money coming out of Saudi Arabia that falls into the hands of terrorists?

Shannon: I'm not sure. I know there are some more investigations and I think we're going to see some more indictments in this country of people who were raising funds and some of the charities that are going to be named have also received big bucks in Saudi funds. But, can you prove that the Saudis did this with a wink and a nod? No. I mean, did they do it to fund terrorism? Certainly not. But they've been quite careless about where their money has ended up and now they're paying for it. Their image looks bad and they're very put out about the whole thing.

Host: David Isby, let's move down to North Africa. What kind of efforts have been made in Morocco and places like Algeria, where there's been a long history of Islamist violence?

Isby: Well, certainly there has been also, we saw also earlier this year an attack on a synagogue in Tunisia, which was claimed by al-Qaida. And again, this was certainly not a way of helping their cause. Tunisia has a long history of generally good relations between the Muslim majority and the Jewish and Christian minority. And this was certainly not appreciated there on the ground in Tunisia. Elsewhere, Algeria, Egypt have had insurgencies themselves and there's not a lot of sympathy on the ground for terrorism. There wasn't a lot of sympathy for bin Laden after nine-eleven. You know, it used to be, yes, everyone cheers for Charlie Chaplin when he's being chased in the movies by a big dumb cop. And America sometimes appears to be the biggest, dumbest cop of all time. But these people don't at the grass-roots level have a lot of sympathy for terrorism.

Host: Elaine, in Morocco there have been some prosecutions of al-Qaida cells. Has Morocco been pretty tough in the war on terrorism in the last year?

Shannon: Well, as David mentions, all of these countries have been a lot tougher than they were before and I haven't heard any complaints about Morocco as being particularly intransigent.

Host: How about in Kenya after the Mombasa bombing? You mentioned earlier in the show that you had heard that there was a buzz in Kenya that there were people who were happy that this had happened. Is that an overwhelming sentiment there? Is that a minority opinion?

Shannon: Oh, I don't know. I haven't seen the polls, but I think the Kenyan government, the authorities have been extremely helpful to the F-B-I and C-I-A. After the bombings in 1998 they shared telephone records and apartment records, all kinds of records. And these records traced to other people and gave the agencies a big picture of networks, including people who were in this country. But the al-Qaida people always learn from this, so they, when they were planning nine-eleven, they didn't contact any of those people who were blown [found out] by what was discovered in 1998. Now, who was involved this time and are they related to the other people who were involved in the Nairobi bombing, could be because the 1998 bombings were planned in Mombasa and not everybody's been picked up.

Host: David Isby, is Kenya going to be a long-term al-Qaida strong point if this is someplace where they've had a series now of bombings?

Isby: Certainly is, but again it's because it's what you call a soft target. Kenya's security apparatus is relatively weak. The government has problems and it really just can't clamp down. Nor can it track citizens as effectively as a more developed country, as in Europe. A lot of the nine-eleven people were in Europe. We now found they left a paper trail behind them with government visas, that sort of thing.

Host: I'm afraid that's all the time we have for today. I'd like to thank my guests: Elaine Shannon of Time Magazine and Defense Analyst David Isby. For On the Line, I'm Eric Felten.