Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

DATE=2-5-04

TYPE=INTERVIEW

NUMBER=3-866

TITLE=PAKISTAN

BYLINE=DAVID BORGIDA

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

CONTENT=

MR. BORGIDA

And now joining us, Don Oberdorfer, Distinguished Journalist at the Johns Hopkins University's Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Distinguished Journalist in Residence and a distinguished journalist, a former diplomatic correspondent at the Washington Post. Thanks for joining us again to talk about these two very important stories on this day.

Let's begin, Mr. Oberdorfer, with the Pakistan story, which is, I guess if you look at it, a story that, as we say in the business of journalism, has legs. Even though he has been pardoned, Mr. Khan, it's a story that I don't think, and probably most analysts aren't thinking, will go away immediately.

MR. OBERDORFER

Well, the story won't go away immediately but, much more important, the nuclear materials that he supplied may not go away immediately. He's talking about Libya, Iran and North Korea. Libya has agreed to give up its nuclear program, so that one is perhaps under control. Iran has made an agreement in October with the British, the French and the Germans, they say, to put their nuclear weapons program under control. We'll see. It's not certain that that's going to stick.

North Korea is a big problem. The program which A.Q. Khan and Pakistan supplied and which the United States found out about in the summer of 2002 is still an important bone of contention. And this I think, as ElBaradei has said several times in recent days, North Korea is the most dangerous place on earth in terms of the nuclear breakout for nuclear weapons.

MR. BORGIDA

Let's talk a little bit about how this has played out in Pakistan. First, Mr. Khan appearing on television, dramatically confessing but saying that the military and the President had no knowledge of all this. Then the next day he is pardoned. This all leads skeptics and some analysts to suggest that perhaps it was a quid pro quo in getting this done quickly and getting it behind the Government of Pakistan. What are your thoughts on the way it was handled?

MR. OBERDORFER

Well, I think there is plenty of evidence that this was a very choreographed operation in the last several days. There are reports, news reports, today that Khan had supplied to his daughter, who lives in London, a lot of details about what the military in Pakistan knew, which he was going to make public if he was indicted.

And on the other side of it, the Government of Pakistan apparently had a very long bill about how he profited, which it was going to make public if he didn't do the right thing. So it appears, according to the news reports anyway, each side was sort of blackmailing the other. And the end result is they've decided to get this behind them by having Khan come out, admit that he had done these things, but then pardon him.

MR. BORGIDA

It is an interesting drama, but certainly with very, very high stakes. And we will keep an eye on this story here on NewsLine and VOA Radio as well.

Mr. Oberdorfer, finally, I would like to ask you about Mr. Tenet and his speech here in Washington. Not commonplace for a CIA director to be delivering a speech defending the work of the intelligence community. Your take on that?

MR. OBERDORFER

Well, it's very, very unusual. I can't recall when this has taken place. Maybe back in the seventies, when the CIA was under fire for other reasons.

I doubt that it's going to silence his critics or it's going to win him very much. There is going to be quite a bit of second-day parsing of what he had to say, possibly even from within his own agency. He tried to say that, you know, we basically got it right, without quarrelling that much with the assessment of David Kay, the weapons inspector, who said, you know, we were wrong. And his own, as I understand it, the CIA's own assessments show that that they were far, far from accurate in their prewar estimates. That it was not easy, it was very difficult, because they had very little information coming out of Iraq after the inspectors had left.

So one can understand it. But if you're going to take the country to war based on intelligence, not based on an actual act by some other country but what you think some other country might be planning to do, in other words, a preemptive or preventive war, and you're not right, I think the consequences could be very grave.

MR. BORGIDA

Well, we'll keep a close watch on this. Of course, President Bush has been saying that, regardless of the weapons program and whether they find it or not, at the moment the world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein. That is the President's view. And we'll keep track of all the different views on the matter in the days, weeks and months ahead.

The views of Don Oberdorfer, Distinguished Journalist in Residence at the Johns Hopkins University and a former Washington Post diplomatic correspondent. Thanks for joining us today.

MR. OBERDORFER

Glad to be here.

(End of interview.)

NEB/PT