Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports
America Strikes Back: What's the Best Way to Find Bin Laden
Aired November 19, 2001 - 17:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: Today on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS: "America Strikes Back." The hunt for Osama bin Laden.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: People can hide in caves for long periods, and this will take time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: What's the best way to find him? And what will be the best outcome, dead or alive?
The events of September 11th lead to a new law.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today we take permanent and aggressive steps to improve the security of our airways.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: But will your flight be safer? We'll hear from one expert who thinks not.
Why is the U.S. focussing on the Middle East in the middle of a war in Afghanistan?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We have a vision of a region where two states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: And we'll get the latest from the front lines, as "America Strikes Back."
JOHN KING, GUEST ANCHOR: Hello from Washington. I'm John King, in for Wolf Blitzer. What happens if the United States finds Osama bin Laden? Would the United States be better off if he's captured alive? This hour we'll get the take of a man who served under a previous U.S. president.
But first, Catherine Callaway in Atlanta with the latest developments -- Catherine.
CATHERINE CALLAWAY, CNN ANCHOR: Good afternoon, John. We're hearing from the Pentagon now that the hunt for Osama bin Laden is now including more American ground troops. A spokeswoman said that more commando units entered southern Afghanistan Friday. And Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld cautioned today that bin Laden's whereabouts are still unknown.
Airstrikes today against Taliban targets in the northern city of Konduz. The U.S. ally, Northern Alliance, says that thousands of hard-core Taliban fighters are trapped in that city and fighting back fiercely. And Defense Secretary Rumsfeld says that the United States would oppose any surrender agreement that allowed Taliban fighters to flee the city.
And in the Afghan capital of Kabul today, residents swarmed to the cinema for the first public movie screening since the Taliban seizure of power. Hundreds of people were turned away. And during the five years of Taliban rule, most public entertainment was banned.
In Washington today, President Bush signed the newly-passed airline security bill. Among other measures, the bill makes airport baggage screening the job of the federal government. Despite the government's efforts to reassure travelers, AAA is predicting a sizable drop in holiday travel this Thanksgiving.
And also today in Washington, the Federal Trade Commission said it would shut down sites on the Internet that market bogus treatments for anthrax and other biological weapons. In an e-mail sent to certain Internet marketers, the FTC said that claims of cures for anthrax must be provable. A spokesman said that fraudulent claims may be met with prosecution.
And that's the headlines. We turn it now back to John King in Washington -- John.
KING: Thank you, Catherine.
Another day, and still the question on everyone's mind is: where is Osama bin Laden? The Pentagon insists it does not have the answer, but a short time ago President Bush gave this indication that bin Laden's days may be numbered.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: We're hunting him down. He runs and he hides. But as we've said repeatedly, the noose is beginning to narrow. The net is getting tighter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: With the Taliban in retreat and United States forces increasingly free to roam Afghanistan, the signs from southern Afghanistan point to a bigger and bolder U.S. effort to bring bin Laden to justice. Let's go first now to the Pentagon and CNN military affairs correspondent, Jamie McIntyre -- Jamie. JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, as the U.S. continues to increase its number of troops on the ground, the Pentagon is sending the signal that it's hopeful that Afghan forces will eventually find bin Laden, perhaps even one of his own may turn him in. Sources say that the best U.S. intelligence indicates that bin Laden is still in Afghanistan, likely in the vicinity of Kandahar, but as President Bush said, on the move.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUMSFELD: It would it be foolhardy for me to try to speculate. The Al Qaeda and Taliban leadership can be any number of places. And they move frequently. And, therefore, to try and think that we have them contained in some sort of a small area, I think would be a misunderstanding of the difficulty of the task.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: U.S. bombing is now concentrating on sealing caves used by bin Laden's Al Qaeda network, but the Pentagon says it is not conducting a cave-by-cave search, nor does it intend to. That would require a much different force than the several hundred special operations troops that are now on the ground, even though that number continues to grow.
Instead, the U.S. is relying on bounty hunters lured by the $25 million reward the United States has put up in order to give bin Laden up. Rumsfeld said today that leaflets advertising the $25 million reward have been falling over Afghanistan, in his words, like snowflakes in December, over Chicago -- John.
KING: Jamie, there have been reports from the region that Northern Alliance and other opposition forces are negotiating, if you will, terms of surrender with the Taliban, and also with foreign nationals. Chechens, Pakistanis, others who have come in to fight with the Taliban. What is the defense secretary's view on that issue? Would the United States accept this surrender?
MCINTYRE: Well, the United States says first of all, that it's not accepting any surrender because it only has a small number of people in the region. So in terms of anyone giving up to the United States, it's not in a position to take any prisoners. However, it says it has no objection to Taliban forces surrendering to opposition forces.
That said, however, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld said that the U.S. had no intention of allowing Mohammed Omar to leave Kandahar voluntarily. If it knows where Omar is, the Pentagon has indicated it will try to take him out. They're not interested in allowing him safe passage out of the city, no matter what kind of deal he cuts with the local opposition forces-- John.
KING: Tough talk from the defense secretary today. Our thanks to Jamie McIntyre, over at the Pentagon.
Now, if the first question we ask is where is Osama bin Laden, a second concern is what would constitute justice for the events of September 11th, not to mention the other terror attacks for which bin Laden is blamed?
Joining us now to talk about that, from San Francisco, former deputy national security adviser, Jim Steinberg. He served in the Clinton administration. And here in Washington, analyst Larry Wortzel of the Heritage Foundation.
Jim Steinberg, to you first. Dead or alive: what is in the best interests of the United States America? Would you want to capture Osama bin Laden, bring him here to the United States for a trial? Or would the United States government prefer that he be killed in a military strike?
JIM STEINBERG, FMR. NATIONAL SECURITY OFFICIAL: Well, John, I think we clearly need to get bin Laden and I certainly wouldn't want to risk American lives in doing that if we can't get him safely. But I think if he is turned over, if we have an opportunity to get him without risking American lives, then we ought to do that. We ought to apply the rule of law and demonstrate our case.
KING: Larry Wortzel, do you agree with that, or do you think better to just have him killed in a military strike?
LARRY WORTZEL, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: I think that the laws of war are very clear here. And that it allows us to pursue individual enemy soldiers and commanders with ambushes, with sniper actions, with bombings. I'd kill him the way we killed Admiral Yamamoto in air ambush in 1943. And he's the guy that planned the attack on Pearl Harbor.
KING: Jim Steinberg, what say you to the issue of would we create a martyr if Osama bin Laden were killed? Do you think that is the case? You were familiar with the intelligence during your days in the Clinton administration. If he were killed, would you create a martyr across the Arab world?
STEINBERG: I think there's the danger of that, whether he's killed in action or if we were successful in prosecuting him and we apply the death penalty. Even if we don't apply the death penalty, he'll be seen as a martyr.
And I certainly agree that we have the right to use lethal force to get him, if that's what's necessary. But I do think our case would be stronger if we have an opportunity to lay out the facts, and to make clear why it is that we think this man is deserving of the punishment he's going to get.
KING: Larry Wortzel, in either case: bin Laden captured and brought to trial, bin Laden killed in a military strike, what signal would that send to fellow terrorists? Would it encourage them, in your view, to rise up, or would it be a deterrent?
WORTZEL: I think it would be a deterrent. I think this concerted action that we're going to take is going to be a deterrent. It's going to make it very difficult for them to operate. They don't care if they die. Already he's the center of attention, and sort of a martyr. But I don't particularly want to bring him back to the United States for a trial. I think a military tribunal, in secret court, preserves our intelligence, doesn't warn the enemy of what intelligence we have, and allows us to prosecute the war against terrorism forever.
KING: And in terms of finding him, Jim Steinberg, the president just a short time ago said he is increasingly confident the United States will. But might it be next week, might it be next year, the president said he can't answer that question. To what point now should the United States go, assuming bin Laden is in a cave up in the hills in Afghanistan. To what point should the United States go, in committing and risking the lives of U.S. special forces and other U.S. military personnel, to try to find him?
STEINBERG: Well, I don't think we should pursue him foolishly or on a wild goose chase. But I absolutely think that we have to be prepared to take risks. This man has been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans. We need to show that we're going to be absolutely unrelenting in pursuing him, and that we'll take risks to do that.
KING: Larry Wortzel, any confidence that Osama bin Laden would be brought to justice, dead or alive, if the United States does not send troops into the hills, into the caves?
WORTZEL: I think he'll end up being found, being turned over. First of all, we do have special operations forces in those hill already, at great risk. And I think they will locate his cave, and whether they use precision munitions and field air explosives or an ambush, or someone turns him in, they'll get him.
KING: And, Jim Steinberg, when you were searching for Osama bin Laden in the Clinton administration days, and you believed him to be hiding in Afghanistan, what were the most likely scenarios where he could flee Afghanistan? Where do you think he would go?
STEINBERG: Well, there are a number of places that he might think about going. We are obviously concerned that he might go into the parts of Pakistan that have a strong support for the Taliban and for some of the things that he's done. There were concerns about the possibility of his going to Yemen or Somalia, or even Chechnya. But I think that the likelihood is he's still there, and I think we're pursuing the right course in trying to find him there.
KING: Secretary Rumsfeld today, Larry Wortzel, indicated that if he were to leave Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden, the United States would have what the secretary called "urgent discussions" with country to which it was believed he had fled to. Do you see the U.S. military chasing Osama bin Laden if he leaves Afghanistan?
WORTZEL: Let me read something from the U.S. Army field Manuel on the laws of war, manual 27-10: "The law does not preclude attacks on individual soldiers or officers of the enemy, whether in the zone of hostilities, occupied territory, or elsewhere."
So I think there will be very serious discussions with any other country, and I don't think he's going to hide.
KING: Let me move for one second to each of you, off Osama bin Laden and on to Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban. He is accused by the Bush administration of harboring a terrorist in Afghanistan.
The president says that is equal to terrorism in his view. Should the United States pursue him? Should the United States pursue him if he leaves Afghanistan? And the very same question: Better off captured dead or alive, if you are speaking for the United States government?
STEINBERG: Well, John, I think we should definitely pursue Mullah Omar. They've have had clear warning that we would hold them responsible for harboring bin Laden, and that makes this an urgent priority, not only in dealing with the problem of terrorism, but sending a signal to other countries that might be tempted to harbor terrorists, that they're going to be held responsible as well,
Again, I agree with Larry. The laws of war allow us to use lethal force if we have to. But what we need to do is make sure we get him, one way or the other.
KING: Larry Wortzel, your thoughts on that.
WORTZEL: I think Jim hit it on the head.
KING: All right. Larry Wortzel has the last word by praising Jim Steinberg. Jim Steinberg in San Francisco, Larry Wortzel here in Washington, thank you both for your time. Check back in with you in the days and weeks ahead, as the hunt for Osama bin Laden continues.
And we asked viewers in our on-line poll: Is Osama bin Laden worth more to the United States dead or alive? The majority say dead. To cast your vote, head to cnn.com. The AOL keyword is CNN.
And there are disturbing reports coming out of Afghanistan today that underscore the dangers faced by many journalists trying to cover this war. Four European reporters are missing, and reports from several sources indicate they are dead. CNN's Ben Wedeman has this report from Kabul.
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Four western journalists are reported missing, following an ambush on the road between Jalalabad, on the border with Pakistan, and the Afghan capital Kabul. The journalists include two from the Reuters news agency, one from "Corriere Della Sera," an Italian daily newspaper, and "El Mundo," out of Spain.
According to a taxi driver who was in the convoy, he saw armed men -- it's not known whether they were Taliban fighters or bandits -- stop one of the cars, pull two of the journalists out, stone them, and then, according to this unconfirmed report, they were shot on the spot.
The Red Cross in Kabul says they have no information as yet about this incident. It follows just a few days ago, an incident in which three journalists were killed, ambushed by the Taliban, while riding on a military convoy near the town of Dushtykulo (ph).
I'm Ben Wedeman, CNN, reporting from Kabul.
KING: We hear from Afghanistan that the Taliban forces remain a major presence in two major cities, Konduz in the north and the southern stronghold of Kandahar. And despite recent losses, Taliban influence still exists in other parts of Afghanistan. CNN's Nic Robertson found one such place, a town near the country's eastern border.
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is just across the border inside Afghanistan, on the road to Kandahar. Kandahar is about 2 1/2 to 3-hour's drive from here. Now, the city or town, essentially, of Spinabak (ph), perhaps several thousands of people live here. This town does appear to be in control of the Taliban. There are plenty of Taliban fighters around here.
We spoke with a Taliban -- the local Taliban commander here, as well. He says that they are in control of this city. He says that they are in control of Kandahar, as well. He said there were no problems, that spirits are high. He said he believed that, as far as he knew, there were no talks going on at this time with Pashtun leaders.
We asked them about this former close associate of Mullah Omar and Hajji Bashir (ph), a Pashtun tribal leader, who purportedly has now defected to away from Taliban. We asked him about this gentleman and he said he was very well respected in Taliban circles, and that so far up to now, he had been a friend of the Taliban.
But the picture that is being presented to us here in Spinabak (ph) is one of the Taliban being in control. The situation slightly chaotic, but the Taliban not allowing us to go further down the road to Kandahar. It is nighttime. They say they have concerns for our security. But it is impossible for us at this time to verify independently how the mood is in Kandahar, and who controls it.
But certainly, all the information we are being given here by local commanders, by passport officials when we came into the country, is that the Taliban are in control.
KING: More on the search for bin Laden in the war room at 7:00 Eastern. Former assistant defense secretary Richard Perle is among my guests. And, participate by going to cnn.com/wolf. Click on "Send Questions" and I'll pass those along to our panel.
New energy from Washington to get the Middle East peace process rolling again. That story at the half-hour.
Next, airport security. The president federalizes the workforce, but is it enough to make you confident to fly? Our expert finds holes in the security blanket when we come back.
And measuring consumer confidence as holiday shopping season begins. What can pull the United States out of recession? That, later, on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: President Bush today took a step he hopes will boost Americans' confidence in air travel. He signed an aviation security bill into law, one calling for thousands of new federal workers to screen passengers and baggage. CNN White House correspondent Kelly Wallace is at the White House now with more on the new law -- Kelly.
KELLY WALLACE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, now the federal government faces the very big challenge of hiring 28,000 federal workers, who will be responsible for screening baggage and passengers at the nation's airport, and also a new airport security chief. This will be in the hands of the Transportation Department. Aides say it will be a difficult task, but that the agency is ready.
Now, the president headed out earlier this morning to Reagan National Airport, the last commercial airport to reopen following the September 11th terrorist attacks, to sign the new measure into law. It calls for stronger cockpit doors on planes and increased presence of armed federal marshals on flights around the country.
And then, as Mr. Bush noted, the federal government completely taking over security screening procedures.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: For the first time, airport security will become a direct federal responsibility, overseen by a new undersecretary transportation for security. Additional funds will be provided for federal air marshals. And a new team of federal security managers, supervisors, law enforcement officers and screeners, will ensure all passengers and carry-on bags are inspected thoroughly, and effectively.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Now, Mr. Bush was looking to have the federal government have the flexibility to decide whether to use federal employees for these airport security screeners, or use private contractors. But he held this compromise as a good solution to protect Americans as they travel.
And, John, the way to get the Democrats and Republicans to finally agree is really this: airports around the country over the next three years -- after three years, rather -- would be able to decide whether they want to continue having federal workers carry out these security screening procedures, or opt out and use private contractors. So that seemed to be the way to get the two sides to agree.
John, back to you.
KING: And, Kelly, the event was about security. But the president had the strength of the economy in mind as well, didn't he, having all those airline CEOs behind him there?
WALLACE: Absolutely. Lawmakers, CEOs, pilots. The president saying he hopes this bill, this new law, gets Americans much more confident about flying again. And then, John, of course, giving a boost to the struggling airline industry. Obviously, if more people are flying, that will help the airline industry. That helps tourism. It really has a trickle-down effect, really, on the nation's economy.
So definitely hoping this gives a boost to the industry, but also to the sagging economy as well -- John.
KING: Kelly Wallace at the White House, thank you very much for that.
Now, there are concerns there hasn't been enough done to improve security at U.S. airports, or to look ahead to future threats to the system. Michael Boyd is president of the Boyd Group, an aviation consulting firm. He joins us now from Denver to discuss what he thinks might be missing from the new law.
Now, Michael, you have a handful of concerns. I want go through them one at a time. For starters, you say this law falls short because it has no accountability. What do you mean by that, sir?
MICHAEL BOYD, THE BOYD GROUP: Well, there's no accountability to the people who oversee it. Remember, it's the FAA and the Department of Transportation that has had ultimate oversight up till now. And no one has gone back to them and said, you know, why have we gone two months with enhanced security, and still have the problems we have?
Putting the Feds in charge of it is one thing, but who is going to oversee the Feds? And when something is wrong, who takes action then? Right now, it's an untouchable organization.
KING: And you also say this new measure, touted by the president today, has no specific requirements for new security measures. Is that true?
BOYD: No. They talk generally about the secretary can do this, the secretary can do that. What we're basically doing is responding to the last security threat. And good security is not responding to the last move, it's anticipating the next one. And this really doesn't do that. We don't really focus on things like the chain of command or the chain of supply, of goods going to and from airplanes. We're just looking at you and me, mostly, and we're not all the problem.
KING: You don't think the big threat is box cutters?
BOYD: Not at all. The big threat now is no longer box cutters. Doors to cockpits have been fixed. The real threat now is someone who wants to create mayhem through other portals, through catering. And just checking the screening of those people isn't it. It has to be something that's done all day.
Good security is not following compliance with rules. Good security is vision, and that's what this bill misses.
KING: Well, that brings us to the next point. You make the point in your criticism that federalization does not mean the Marine Corps. What exactly do you mean by that?
BOYD: What we're saying here is, we've been led to believe we federalize it, we'll have better screening. Well, the new legislation requires the Department of Transportation to have a 40-hour training program before these people hit the screening devices. Forty hours does not make a professional screener.
So we're not dealing with a really professional organization, we're dealing with very much like we have now, maybe with a little more training. But if you go back and take look at how the FAA and the DOT have done training in the past, it hasn't worked very well.
KING: Let's take that point. You say it's only a 40-hour training program, and you also say no supervisory structure here in this bill. Let's take -- if I come to my bosses with a complaint, they say don't give me a complaint. Give me a solution. What is your solution to those problems?
BOYD: Well, the solution is, No. 1, it is outrageous that Congress thinks that the current system can stay in place for another year until they figure out what to do with federal employees. That system should have been eliminated immediately, replaced in the near- term with law enforcement officers, while they train people under a strict curriculum, like they do in Europe. We're a long way from that.
And while that's being done, the rest of the portals to the airport, including the perimeter of the airport and everything going on in the airport, we need additional security there. Because that's where we're open to additional mayhem.
KING: And this bill allows the government to revisit this argument. In three years, if this is not successful, the airlines and the airports can say nevermind, we want to go to private contractors. Do you think that is a wise approach, test the federalization? Or do you think that just invites confusion and chaos down the road a bit?
BOYD: I take the last point, it invites chaos. If federalization is what they want, stick with it. But I think what they did, that was a nod to the lobbying groups from the security companies. And this bill was full of pork. For example, one part of it basically now requires airlines to carry baby chicks on board. They gave into the poultry lobby.
The problem is, we've got a security bill that's a compromise. We can't compromise my safety, yours, and flying public's.
KING: And do you think the American public is prepared for the more drastic steps that you think should have been in this bill to begin with?
BOYD: Well, actually, if they're done right, those drastic steps would have give better security and the kind of throughput we really needed. The point is, you don't just shut an airport down to have good security. The two are not mutually exclusive.
What we've been doing under the enhanced direction of the FAA for the past two months is taking tweezers away from people, and putting National Guards standing doing nothing, when they could be doing something. So we got much better security, get good throughput, and have airline efficiency. It can be done.
KING: Michael Boyd, we will check in with you again as this new law takes effect, and we see whether or not it works, and other people, like it or not. Thank you very much for your time, sir.
BOYD: Thank you, sir.
KING: More on this issue later. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and American Airlines CEO Donald Carty are among the guests on "LARRY KING LIVE." That's 9:00 p.m. Eastern tonight, 6:00 Pacific.
American Airlines said it's inspected the tail sections of its fleet of 34 Airbus A-300 planes, detecting no problems. Investigators are looking at the tail which sheared off as a possible cause of last Monday's crash of American Airlines flight 587.
Still ahead, another major effort facing the Bush administration. Secretary of State Colin Powell on what the United States will do to promote peace in the Middle East, and what former President Clinton told students at Harvard University about the efforts of the current administration.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: I will be back in a moment with the Bush administration and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- first, the latest news developments from Catherine Callaway in Atlanta.
CALLAWAY: Thank you, John.
The Pentagon says that the hunt for Osama bin Laden now includes more American ground troops. In fact, a spokeswoman says that more commando units entered Southern Afghanistan Friday. And Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld cautioned today that bin Laden's whereabouts are still unknown. President Bush indicates the hunt is getting warmer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We are hunting him down. He runs and he hides. But, as we have said repeatedly, the noose is beginning to narrow. The net is getting tighter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CALLAWAY: Air strikes today against Taliban targets in the northern city of Kunduz -- the U.S.-allied Northern Alliance says that thousands of hard-core Taliban fighters are now trapped in that city and they are fighting back fiercely. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld says that the United States would oppose any surrender agreement that allowed Taliban fighters to flee that city.
And President Bush today signed the newly passed airline security bill. Among other measures, the bill makes airport-baggage screening the job of the federal government. Despite the government's efforts to reassure travelers, AAA is predicting a sizable drop in holiday travel this Thanksgiving.
Also today in Washington, the Federal Trade Commission said it will shut down sites on the Internet that market bogus treatments for anthrax and other biological weapons. In an e-mail sent to certain Internet marketers, the FTC said that claims of cures for anthrax must be provable. The spokesman said that fraudulent claims may be met with prosecution.
And that's the headlines. We're going to turn it back now to John in Washington.
KING: Thank you, Catherine.
Secretary of State Colin Powell will send a retired Marine Corps general to the Middle East to work with Palestinians and Israelis on a new cease-fire. Powell called on Israel to recognize the need for a Palestinian state and for the Palestinians to make -- quote -- "a 100 percent effort to end violence and terror."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: The solutions to these challenges will come about only through hard work, common sense, basic fairness and a readiness to compromise. They will not be created by teaching hate and division. Nor will they be born amidst violence and war. To help America recognize this positive vision, we will stay engaged. America wants to recognize this positive vision and help all in the region to achieve this positive vision.
America will continue to strongly support expansion of economic opportunity in the region, political openness and tolerance. We will support efforts to find regional solutions to security challenges. And we will conduct serious diplomacy aimed at resolving regional conflicts.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: To look now at some of the steps the United States might have to take to get the peace talks moving in the Middle East again and how that ties into the war on terrorism, we're joined here by CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider.
Not much new in the secretary's speech today, so why give it?
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: They gave it because the opportunity was right.
This speech was supposed to be given in September. If it had been given in September, I don't think it would very newsworthy. But it's being given now when the constellation of forces in the Middle East has changed because of September 11. There is a real opportunity here for a peace breakthrough. The U.S., the Palestinians, Israel are all on same side on the war on terrorism, which they never have been before, because the Palestinians supported Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War -- the Europeans, particularly Tony Blair.
The Russian are allowing the United States to take the initiative. And there are signals from many Muslim states, including Iran and some Arab states, that they are willing to entertain ideas, like saying, "We will recognize Israel if the Palestinians can make a deal," things they have never said before.
KING: Things they have never said before, yet this president does not seem terribly optimistic -- when he came into office after an intensive effort by his predecessor, President Clinton, Mr. Bush said: I will get involved, but first the parties need to demonstrate they want to make peace with one another.
Let's listen into the president a few moments ago. He sounded like he was saying very much the same thing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: Our objective is to convince both parties to make a conscious decision to come to the peace table. And when they do so, we are more than willing to help. But first thing firsts is to convince the parties that peace is necessary.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: It did not sound from that like this president believes the parties have made much progress. And, indeed, many in the administration would say things have gone backwards in terms of the parties agreeing that it is time to make peace.
SCHNEIDER: I think the president does not want to fall into the trap of Bill Clinton's administration of pushing very hard for a peace process and then seeing the whole thing fall apart.
He doesn't want to place his prestige, his stature as a new president on that particular bet. On the other hand, everyone is saying to this administration: You have got to act and you have got to act now. This is a real opportunity. It doesn't come around very much, because of the war on terrorism. And you can't let this opportunity pass by.
So they are taking advantage of it, but I don't think, from what we just heard, with an enormous amount of enthusiasm.
KING: So they sent the new diplomatic envoy over. To the current diplomatic envoy, Ambassador Burns, now they add General Zinni. When do they have to show any progress? Or is it the calculation of this administration that just by trying harder, perhaps they quiet some of the criticism in the Arab world that they are focusing on the war in Afghanistan, but not on peace in the Middle East?
SCHNEIDER: Well, look, peace in the Middle East is part of the war in Afghanistan, because it's a way to hold the coalition together in Afghanistan. That's the danger.
I think basically they have get to the point where the parties are talking, where they can say the Mitchell peace plan, which we're still betting on -- the Mitchell peace plan is in place. It's in progress. The Israelis have resisted that without a seven-day cooling-off period. The Arabs want to go -- the Palestinians want to go directly to that peace plan. If they get to the Mitchell plan, then this administration can say: Look, we have done our part. We have brought them to the table. They are talking. Let's see what happens.
KING: If -- if we can get to the Mitchell plan.
SCHNEIDER: If -- if they get to the Mitchell plan.
KING: Bill Schneider, thank you very much for your thoughts.
And while the Bush administration works on the issues of terrorism and world peace, a previous president -- a previous resident, excuse me -- of the White House spoke today. Former President Bill Clinton was at Harvard University speaking on global issues.
CNN's Ann Kellan joins us now from Boston on an ex-president trying to stay relevant without getting in the way of the man who now has the job -- Ann.
ANN KELLAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, we have a lot of cleaning up going on around here. A little while ago, this place was full with about 2,500 students and faculty. He got three standing ovations, the former president. And he spoke for about 45 minutes. His topic was on globalization.
He basically said the United States has benefited from a global economy, with an obvious dark side, speaking in light of the World Trade Center attacks and anthrax scares. But he also said -- and defended his administration's stand a terrorism.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAM J. CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: In the years that I served as president, career law enforcement officials worked very hard in the hope that a day like September the 11th would never come. They prevented many terrorist attacks from occurring and successfully brought to justice many perpetrators of terrorism.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KELLAN: Now, during his administration he says terrorist attacks were stopped at the Lincoln Tunnel, the Holland Tunnel, LAX Airport; an assassination plot against the pope was stopped. He did have one jab against the Bush administration. He basically -- he talked about universities using the word "endowment." He said if the government used it instead of surplus -- quote -- "we would be on our way to a debt-free America because we wouldn't have had those tax cuts." Harvard students got even, though, since they are undefeated in football and Clinton being a Yalee, they presented him with a Harvard football jersey -- back to you, John.
KING: Ann Kellan, following the former president in Boston, thank you very much.
And this footnote: Tomorrow morning in Boston, Mr. Clinton gets a little bit more political, raising $500,000 at a fund-raiser for the Democratic National Committee.
Coming up: Military successes in Afghanistan prompt up-arrows on Wall Street. But is the economy really improving, or will the bears make a comeback? We'll talk with an economic forecaster.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Welcome back.
It was another good day on Wall Street, with both the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq gaining ground. But the recent gains haven't cheered up any U.S. businesses, which are still expecting tough times ahead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALAN LACY, CEO, SEARS ROEBUCK & CO.: Prior to the 11th, we had expectations that the holiday season this year would be comparable to last year, perhaps, which, if all that was down from the year before, was still a reasonable level of business activity. But with the events of the 11th, we see it as down period for us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Joining us now from Atlanta to talk about the state of the economy is Rajeev Dhawan, the director of the Economic Forecasting Center at Georgia State University.
Sir, what say you? Is the economy rebounding, as many in the Bush administration hope? The president's top economic adviser, Larry Lindsey, said today at that conference in Chicago he expected positive growth sometime next year. He wouldn't be specific. Then he pointed to the recent progress in the auto industry and the home industry as his signs of confidence. Do you share that confidence?
RAJEEV DHAWAN, ECONOMIC FORECASTER: Some good news has come in the last few weeks. People are feeling a little bit OK. The war effort has been going much better than expected.
The dangers, however, are still there, especially on the downside. What if it spills over to the other side? What if Iraq is the next target, as people presume it to be, and the losses are bigger? What if we have some more other problems with the terrorism? So those basic problems have not gone away.
What we have had is a rally in the Wall Street market. We have had some more car sales, because the carmakers basically said: hey, 0 percent financing, no payment for a year. Take the car away.
So they basically borrowed from the future demand, so there will be a little bit of a dip down the road.
And if you look at convention, tourism, hotel business, they're not doing so well. So there are still a lot of negatives in the economy. The thing is that the Kmarts and the Wal-Marts are doing better. But if you ask the Tiffanys, the high-end stores, they are not doing that so good.
KING: Well, I went to pick up a cup of coffee on the way to work this morning and they were playing Christmas music already. I haven't had my Thanksgiving turkey yet. What should we look for between now and, say, Thanksgiving -- very close by -- and then from Thanksgiving to Christmas as indicators as to whether consumers are more confident, whether they are spending, whether they're traveling, whether they are buying more or less than last year when it comes to the holiday? How do we gauge that?
DHAWAN: It is going to be a little bit tough because the weekly indicators are not going to tell you those things very quickly. But say a few weeks down the road, if we hear that the sales have been pretty good in the Thanksgiving season, there is a good chance that the Christmas won't be as bad as I may be saying.
But I just want to comment on Lawrence Lindsey's thing about recovery next year. Yes, we are all seeing a recovery next year. The issue is, is it the first quarter, second quarter or later? And that's where the difference comes in. And, you know, things will be a little bit tough down the road. And things are already a little bit bad with the layoff news and all those people being laid off.
And so I think what I'm trying to say is, the downside risks are still there. And some good news has come in. But that doesn't really make picture very different.
KING: Have we redefined the terms of the economy here: 10 or 11 Fed interest rate cuts in the past year; the big Bush tax cut making its way into the economy and yet no signs of growth? You mentioned you didn't know what to look for in the short term? Can we safely predict what we should be looking for?
DHAWAN: Oh, that's going to be really tough because the Fed has done its job, but it seems like the fundamental problem is lack of demand in the front of the producers. You see, what I'm saying is, there are not too many people standing in front of the stores saying: We need your product.
So how do you do that? First and foremost, you need to have some clarity on the war front, how it is going down the road? What do we expect? What I'm asking for is a nice resolution in our favor without too much casualties and cost. The second thing you need after that point is -- what I have been advocating is some kind of a radical kind of a tax cut. What I mean, it could be a tax holiday on the personal income tax for a while, or it could be some kind of a big payroll tax cut, something like that which really jump-starts the economy by putting money into the people's pocket.
And the fastest way of doing it. Any other way, government spending, it may take six to nine months or even a year before it comes into play.
KING: Rajeev Dhawan, Georgia State University, thank you very much for your time and your thoughts today, sir.
DHAWAN: Thank you.
KING: Another story we must track in the weeks ahead: the state of the economy as well.
And now a quick break, but when we come back, the president pays tribute to the Muslim holy period of Ramadan with a special event at the White House.
Stay with us. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Good evening. Welcome to the White House.
I'm so honored to welcome such a distinguished guest of ambassadors during the holy month of Ramadan.
America is made better by millions of Muslim citizens. America has close and important relations with many Islamic nations. So it is fitting for American to honor your friendship and the traditions of a great faith by hosting this iftar at the White House. I want to thank our secretary of state for being here, as well as members of my administration.
I want to thank the ambassadors for taking time in this holy month to come to join us in this feast.
Ramadan's a time of fasting and prayer for the Muslim faithful. So tonight we are reminded of God's greatness and his commandments to live in peace and to help neighbors in need.
According to Muslim teachings, God first revealed his word in the Holy Koran to the prophet Mohammed during the month of Ramadan. That word has guided billions of believers across the centuries, and those believers built a culture of learning and literature and science. All the world continues to benefit from this faith and its achievements.
Ramadan and the upcoming holiday season are a good time for people of different faiths to learn more about each other. And the more we learn, the more we find that many commitments are broadly shared. We share a commitment to family; to protect and love our children. We share a belief in God's justice and man's moral responsibility. And we share the same hope for a future of peace. We have much in common and much to learn from one another.
This evening we gather in a spirit of peace and cooperation.
I appreciate your support of our objectives in the campaign against terrorism. Tonight that campaign continues in Afghanistan, so that the people of Afghanistan will soon know peace.
The terrorists have no home in any faith. Evil has no holy days.
This evening we also gather in the spirit of generosity and charity. As this feast breaks the Ramadan fast, America is also sharing our table with the people of Afghanistan. We are proud to play a leading role in humanitarian relief efforts with air drops and truck convoys of food and medicine. America's children are donating their dollars to the Afghan children.
And my administration is committed to help reconstruct that country and to support a stable government that represents all of the people of Afghanistan. We are working for more opportunity and a better life for the people of Afghanistan, and all the people of the Islamic world. America respects people of all faiths, and America seeks peace with people of all faiths.
I thank you for your friendship, and I wish you a blessed Ramadan.
KING: President Bush at the White House, paying tribute to the Muslim holy period of Ramadan, all part of the administration's effort to make the case that the war on terrorism is a war against terrorists and not, as Osama bin Laden says, against Islam.
Coming up: back to another White House event where a guest snaps at President Bush.
First, let's check the other stories from our "Newswire."
Former Vice President Al Gore has a new job. He's been named vice chairman of a Los Angeles-based financial services firm. But Gore isn't giving up his new career in education. He's keeping his professorships at UCLA, Middle Tennessee State University and Fisk University.
New research suggests you shouldn't close your eyes on how sleeping habits affect your life and your relationships. A University of Minnesota professor says sleep time is when couples have the most time together. In a study, he found men seem to snore more, while women usually don't fall asleep right away. Another finding: What happens at work shows up a lot in bed.
And, as expected, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" shattered box office records. The movie grossed $93.5 million in its first weekend, the best debut ever. Cameras are already rolling on further adventures of the young wizard.
A check now for what's up next on CNN -- to New York, where Jan Hopkins is sitting in for Lou Dobbs and "MONEYLINE" -- January. JAN HOPKINS, "LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE": Thanks.
Coming up on "MONEYLINE": the last Taliban stronghold under attack today -- U.S. air strikes pounding the town of Kunduz. We will have a live report from Afghanistan.
In Washington, President Bush signs a new airline safety deal into law, as travelers gear up for what is typically the busiest travel weekend of the year. We will have a special report on the unusual expectations for travel this holiday weekend.
And a solid rally on Wall Street: But can the markets sustain recent gains? I will talk with economist Lakshman Achuthan.
John King will be right back after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: A 53-pound turkey has earned the first pardon of the Bush presidency. In a White House Rose Garden ceremony this afternoon, the president granted clemency to the bird and an alternate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: By custom, an alternate is always on hand to fill in if needed. This one right here, his name is Liberty. And the other turkey, the alternate, his name is Freedom. Now, Freedom is not here because he's in a secure and undisclosed location.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: We'll see if the vice president liked the joke. The president seemed to ruffle the turkey's feathers a bit when he tried to pet it. He had to dodge a few nervous pecks when the glare of the spotlight proved to be too much for the gobbler. The lucky bird is now free to spend the rest of its days at a farm in the Washington suburbs.
I'll be back in one hour with more on the hunt for Osama bin Laden in the "War Room." Among those joining me: Richard Perle. I'm John King, in for Wolf Blitzer.
CNN's coverage of America's new war continues with "LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE," which begins right now.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
