Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports

The War Room: Did Osama bin Laden Escape Afghanistan?; Tensions Rise Between India and Pakistan

Aired December 28, 2001 - 19:00   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.
WOLF BLITZER, HOST: Tonight on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS "The War Room," did Osama bin Laden buy his way out of Afghanistan? President Bush says ultimately there is no escape.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, dead or alive is fine with me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Bin Laden may have made it into Pakistan, which is now focused on its other neighbor and nuclear rival, India.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN: We do not want war. We want peace in the region, and we want peace on the borders.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: We'll go live to Afghanistan, and to Crawford, Texas. And I'll speak live with former Congressman Charlie Wilson, former Ambassador Robert Hunter and nuclear weapons expert Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment as we go into The War Room.

Good evening. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting tonight from Washington.

You may find this hard to believe. As important as the U.S. war against terrorism is, there's potentially a much more explosive story developing right now along the border between India and Pakistan. That's because both of those countries appear to be on the brink of war and they both have nuclear weapons.

We'll get to that shortly, but first let's check the latest developments.

We begin in Afghanistan, where U.S. special forces have been seen on the move in the mountains of Tora Bora. CNN's Nic Robertson is there and he joins us now live. And Nic, I understand you have some exclusive video we shot earlier today of. Tell us about it. NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, number one, it's very hard to get video here of the U.S. special forces. The local Afghan -- Eastern Alliance Afghan forces here on the mountainside appear to be under instructions to confiscate videotape and photographs taken of the special forces.

But we were able to see them as they were fully loaded up in two separate convoys headed by pickup trucks followed by these all-terrain vehicles, the four wheel-type motor bikes that are very, very good for this -- to give access in this rugged terrain here.

They appear to be fully loaded up with their equipment and appear to be moving away from the mountainside of Tora Bora.

It's not clear whether they are relocating to another area of the mountain, but when we saw them they were headed towards the city of Jalalabad, some 30 miles north of here, perhaps another indication that their operations in this particular area near Tora Bora may have scaled down.

We have heard no overflights by U.S. aircraft -- fighter aircraft, bombers or surveillance aircraft -- in the last 24 hours. That has been normal here in the last few weeks. And also overnight we didn't hear the helicopter activity that has been a signature of the special forces operations in this area.

We didn't hear them flying into the valleys around here, so perhaps U.S. special forces have moved on to another area, perhaps pulled out of this particular region of Tora Bora.

Also, in Kandahar, the Marines there are preparing to hand over their operation at the city airport to the army. Now, that will help facilitate the humanitarian supplies coming into Afghanistan and will indicate that the Marines' forward involvement in Afghanistan will be coming to an end. Now that is expected to happen by mid-January.

Also in Kandahar, we understand that an increasing number of al Qaeda detainees are now being brought to the Marine detention facility there at Kandahar City Airport, Wolf.

BLITZER: Nic, what do you take -- what's your take on these reports that we've been receiving that Osama Bin Laden in recent weeks may actually have bought his way out of Afghanistan into Pakistan?

ROBERTSON: The reports can't be ignored, Wolf. There are -- there are too many of them. But I think what one has to do is put them in perspective. There are power plays here both at national level and local level.

All the reports that we've heard coming from the national level have been coming from those commanders of the north -- who came from the from the Northern Alliance, from the interior ministry, essentially, and from the defense ministry. Those are both key Northern Alliance commanders.

We also know that a local commander here who has been implicated in helping Osama Bin Laden buy his way out of the Tora Bora area is perhaps also in a local power play with another commander, so it's very, very difficult to sort out exactly how much is -- is played for domestic consumption and is played for international consumption as well.

These same Northern Alliance leaders, the defense ministry and the interior ministry, have both been resistant to having international peacekeepers inside Afghanistan and are both at this time calling for an end for U.S.-led bombing campaigns in and around Afghanistan, to catch the last of the al Qaeda and the Taliban leaders.

So there's a lot going on here, Wolf. It's not perhaps quite as simple as it seems, but absolutely these reports cannot be ignored. We don't have -- yet -- hard information, hard sightings of Osama Bin Laden to back them up, Wolf.

BLITZER: Thank you very much, Nic Robertson, for that context. And this important note: Nic will have much more at the top of the hour and later at 11 p.m. eastern in his "SPECIAL REPORT: LIVE FROM AFGHANISTAN."

Meanwhile, at his Texas ranch, the president is vowing to stay the course in the war on terrorism, but he's also concerned about a possible other war. Let's go live to our White House Correspondent, Major Garrett, in Crawford, Texas -- Major.

MAJOR GARRETT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, a commanding general of the war in Afghanistan, Tommy Franks, just completed a tour of the area, and President Bush summoned him to his Texas ranch to learn what he's learned about the pace of the war there. And with the general at his side, the president told reporters the war in Afghanistan is far from over.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BUSH: I imagine us being there for quite a long period of time, but my timetable is going to be set by Tommy Franks.

GARRETT (voice-over): Franks said there are still stubborn pockets of armed Taliban and al Qaeda resistance, something he experienced firsthand while flying recently over Afghanistan.

GEN. TOMMY FRANKS, COMMANDER, CENTRAL COMMAND: I have been told since I took that helicopter ride that someone took a shot at the helicopter. I didn't see it when it happened, and I -- I believe it may have happened.

GARRETT: As for Osama Bin Laden, the president said the question is not where is he, but what's become of him.

BUSH: This is a guy who three months ago was in control of a country. Now he's in -- maybe in control of a cave.

GARRETT: The president also said no final decisions have been made on military tribunals and what rules would be applied for jury verdicts. American turned al Qaeda fighter, John Walker Lindh, will face a civilian court and stern justice, the president said.

BUSH: Walker made a -- made a terrible decision, and our system is such that he'll have proper justice, but you know, I -- he's working with the enemy. And we'll see how the courts deal with that.

GARRETT: The president is also keeping a close eye on India and Pakistan, where two allies in the war on terror have been inching toward war with each other.

The president said Pakistan has moved against terrorist groups India claims launched a deadly mid-December attack on its parliament; actions, the president said, should lower tensions.

BUSH: I'm pleased to note that President Musharraf has -- has announced the arrest of 50 extreme terrorists, extremists or terrorists and I hope India takes note of that.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GARRETT: The president also said that domestic terror threats remain an ever-present threat to the country, and he praised an American Airlines flight attendant who foiled a suicide bomb mission last week -- evidence, the president said, that America's resolve to defeat terror is stronger than ever -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Major Garrett in Crawford, Texas. Thank you very much.

And tension and talk of war are indeed increasing between India and Pakistan. The root of their conflict remains the disputed Kashmir region, which has sparked previous wars.

Now both sides are massing troops along their disputed borders and for the first time in 30 years, they've severed air and land links. But the Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf says he's willing to meet with the Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and that Pakistan will not initiate war with its nuclear neighbor.

How serious is this current showdown between these two nuclear neighbors? Will the United States be caught in the middle?

Joining me here in the CNN war room, former Congressman Charlie Wilson, he was a strong supporter of Afghanistan's anti-Soviet rebels. Now he's a strong supporter of Pakistan. Nuclear weapons expert Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment, and Robert Hunter. He's the former ambassador to NATO, former member of the National Security Council.

Remember, you can e-mail me your war room questions. Just go to our web page: CNN.com/Wolf. And that's also where you can read my daily online column.

Charlie Wilson, you know this region very well. How close are these countries to war?

CHARLES WILSON, FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Well, I've got to say that -- that it -- it looks pretty grim. It looks very dangerous. I think that we are so focused on Osama Bin Laden and -- and the al Qaeda that we're losing -- that may be losing sight a little bit.

I'm very happy to hear what the president said today. I think -- I think the American public may be losing sight a little of probably the most dangerous situation in the world today, which is what war between -- between Pakistan and India. They both have nuclear weapons, they -- they both have delivery systems that will get them there.

In my judgment -- of course, I'm a little biased -- but in my judgment, Pakistan is doing everything they can to back away from a war. They have -- they have arrested the -- the head...

BLITZER: You know, the Indians say that that's a joke, the -- the steps that the Pakistani government has taken, arresting some -- some people that they say is really not significant.

WILSON: I can't think of anything the Pakistanis would do that the Indians wouldn't say was a joke. But you tell me. Or maybe one of our other panelists can tell me what Pakistan could do that they haven't.

BLITZER: Let me ask Ambassador Hunter. What else -- if anything -- should Pakistan do to defuse this crisis with India right now?

ROBERT HUNTER, RAND CORP.: I think they should be working with us. Frankly, it's important for the United States to be in there, as Secretary Powell is, as the president with our big feet trying to impress upon both of these countries that they can't benefit from a war and the world itself sure can't benefit.

We have now two countries very close one another, right -- right on the border, unlike the way it was with us and the Soviet Union both with nuclear weapons, both without really knowing what they've got in terms of those weapons. And we could have ourselves one of the worst situations in years.

WILSON: I will agree complete reply with the ambassador.

BLITZER: All right. That may not continue for the rest of the show.

WILSON: It may not.

BLITZER: We'll soon find out. We have a question, an e-mail for -- we have an e-mail for Joe from Frank in Foxborough, Massachusetts. "What is the probability that any armed conflict between India and Pakistan" -- there have been some before, as we know -- "could elevate to a nuclear exchange?"

JOSEPH CIRINCIONE, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT: Well, they've had three wars before, but neither side had nuclear weapons during those wars, and that's what changes the whole calculation.

It isn't that either side would intentionally want to use a nuclear weapon. There really isn't any good military rational for nuclear weapons. But both sides have between 20 and 30 weapons. None have been deployed yet but I wouldn't be surprised if they're starting to get them ready for deployment. They could be delivered by missile or by airplane and it's really the danger of miscalculation, the situation getting out of control or an accident involving one of the nuclear weapons that the other side interprets as an attack on its territory. That is the greatest danger here.

BLITZER: You used to be an expert -- still are --in strategic -- in strategic studies. I remember from my days in academia as well. But here's a question from Charon in Cincinnati, Ohio. "Who is superior with regard to their military capabilities, India or Pakistan?"

HUNTER: Well, I think it's clear that India is superior. In fact, if it were simply a conventional war, there would be no -- no choice. That's one reason...

BLITZER: In -- in part because India has more than a billion people and Pakistan has what, 150 million people?

HUNTER: It's not a matter of people. It's a matter of the size of the military, their training, the weaponry that they have and the like. It wouldn't be a contest.

BLITZER: But that's why -- let me bring Charlie Wilson in. That's why as a deterrent, given the overwhelming military strength that India has, the Pakistanis could look to a nuclear capability to try to even the pot a little bit?

WILSON: There's no question, and I think the ambassador would agree with me there's no question that if Pakistan proper is invaded by the Indians, there's no question that the Indians will -- I mean, the Pakistanis will fight and fight hard.

And if they -- they do fight hard do and the superiority that the ambassador is talking about, which I agree with, were to begin to manifest itself and Pakistan itself were to -- were to have setbacks in -- in the war, and they've got nuclear weapons, God knows what would happen.

BLITZER: Well, Joe, on that specific point, the United States and the Soviet Union during the bad old days of the Cold War, they both had nuclear weapons. There was -- it was called MAD -- mutually assured destruction.

If one side was going to start, the other side was going to continue and both of them would pay a huge price. Doesn't that same concept work between India and Pakistan?

CIRINCIONE: Well, the Indians and the Pakistanis say that it does, and they dismiss this talk of a nuclear conflict.

But you also remember the United States had nuclear weapons to use in case of a Warsaw Pact invasion of Europe where we would be overwhelmed conventionally. And then we had this doctrine called flexible response, where we would actually be the first ones to use the nuclear weapons to stop what was then called a Soviet blitzkrieg.

That's exactly what Charlie Wilson is talking about. That's the Pakistan situation. If in fact India does go to war and starts winning that war, that's where the chance of Pakistan using a nuclear weapon as a weapon of last resort becomes most dangerous.

HUNTER: It's worse, because at least with the Soviet Union we were facing a war that could have started in Europe, a long way away from the United States. Now, we pledged to defend the allies. But this would be right in Pakistan itself, and -- and I wouldn't want to count on the stability and the confidence of leadership to say, "No, let's hold off" if the country is being invaded. This is very dangerous.

BLITZER: Ambassador Hunter, let me ask you this question. Edwin passes it along via e-mail from La Crosse, Wisconsin. "Which one will be a reliable ally of the United States for the long run, India or Pakistan?"

HUNTER: I think we have to get to the circumstance where both prove to be more reliable than they are today, and hopefully reliable partners to do what they have to do to prevent war and finally get on to resolve some of these outstanding conflicts.

BLITZER: You know, in recent -- in the recent past, Congressman Wilson, the Indians, the world's largest democracy, were the favorites of the United States.

There was severe strains between the U.S. and Pakistan; a military government, especially, of course, during the final years of the Clinton administration. All of that of course has changed since September 11th.

WILSON: Well, and I think we should look at a -- a little more history than that, and I think that -- that certainly the ambassador would agree with me that -- that throughout the Cold War, throughout the Cold War, for 50 years, Pakistan was our absolute reliable ally and India of course was allied with the Soviet Union.

Ms. Gandhi was -- seemed to be very comfortable in the Kremlin and they opposed the United States in every -- every single contest we had with the -- or disagreement we had with the Soviets, India was on the other side. So I think we need to consider that history.

BLITZER: You're going way back. But I think...

WILSON: I'm not going way back.

BLITZER: But at this particular point -- at this particular point, who is a more reliable ally?

WILSON: Well, at this particular point Pakistan has done exactly what the United States has asked them to do at great expense and at great risk to Musharraf, to the government.

BLITZER: Go ahead.

HUNTER: Reliable to do what? Pakistan has stood with us in the war in Afghanistan, but as we look to but we don't really have a dog in this fight and we don't want either of them really to do very much except not to go to war with one another and to try to build stability within the region. So if we get in a position of choosing, we'll end up being the loser.

BLITZER: You've -- you've studied...

WILSON: I again say he's right.

BLITZER: Well, you've studied the nuclear capabilities of both of these countries. God forbid if they have a nuclear exchange. How much fallout to the rest of the world?

There are a lot of U.S. troops not very far away right now in Afghanistan. How much danger, potentially, radioactive danger could there be?

CIRINCIONE: Right. This is a good opportunity for people to go out and get their atlases open and take a look at this region of the world. Some of the artillery duels yesterday, for example, happened about 50 miles outside of Islamabad, about 300 miles from Kabul. This is all very close proximity.

The kinds of weapons we're talking about, they're the Hiroshima- size weapons. That is in the tens of kilotons, not the hundreds of kilotons that the U.S. and the Soviet Union had. So the fallout would be significant, but not a global catastrophe.

A nuclear war would be an unimaginable disaster, but it would be primarily a regional subcontinent disaster.

BLITZER: Much more of a disaster than Chernobyl was, what, 15 year ago.

CIRINCIONE: Absolutely. There's no -- depending on the wind patterns, there's no question that radioactivity from even a small blast would spread quickly around the globe.

BLITZER: So the whole world has a huge stake in this right now. We're going to take a -- we're going to take a quick break. We've got a lot more to talk about: India, Pakistan, nuclear weapons, the war on terrorism. We have a little time, but stay with us.

When we come back, we'll also get into this issue: has Osama Bin Laden bought his way out of Pakistan -- out of Afghanistan, excuse me, and into Pakistan?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome come back to our CNN War Room. Joe Cirincione wanted us to take a look at the map. We've got a map. We're going to show you what the issues are right here.

Let's take a look at the map. First, this is Pakistan right over here. Islamabad the capital, Kabul over here, not very far away from Islamabad. But the issue of the disputed area right up here north of Pakistan in the Himalayas north of India, not far from New Delhi, Kashmir.

I was there last year, Ambassador Hunter, and at the time then- U.S. President Clinton used to say "I wake up every morning and say Kashmir, the most dangerous spot on earth." Is it still the most dangerous spot on earth?

HUNTER: Well, that's what we've been talking about. We've been talking about fallout. I think the fallout is less from the -- the nuclear material than it is politically. We've gone since 1945 without the use of a nuclear weapon in anger.

Now, if nuclear weapons were used here, a lot of countries around the world are going to start reassessing whether they need to get them and the kind of role they can play. I suspect we'd see an awful lot more nuclear powers in the world and a lot more danger.

And we don't even know what China is going to do. I haven't even mentioned about China. I don't think it would sit by and watch Pakistan being dismembered without getting in the act.

BLITZER: India has always maintained it needed a nuclear arsenal because of China, which they see as a potential threat.

CIRINCIONE: Right. And what you have in this region is -- is an Asian nuclear reaction chain. Actions that one country takes -- even though they're targeted against a specific other country -- rebound around the region and affect all the countries. A military conflict, even non-nuclear, would have a terrific impact on Asia.

If it were nuclear, we don't know how to calculate this. It would affect immediately China, Japan, even Indonesia, Malaysia, and as the ambassador just pointed out, affect decisions in countries such as Iran and Iraq about whether they in fact need to break out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and develop their own nuclear weapons.

BLITZER: Enormous ramifications, indeed, for the whole world. Charlie Wilson. All right. We've got another e-mail questioner. Tom in Michigan wants to know this answer. I know you know the answer and you're going to give him the straight story right now. "Could al Qaeda be the force behind the attacks on the Indian parliament?"

WILSON: Of course. Of course they could. The answer is yes.

BLITZER: What about Pakistani intelligence?

WILSON: The -- that's a more complicated question. The ISI, I think, is generally accepted has in the past had some -- of course, they had a relation with the Taliban and they probably have a relation with some of the Kashmir -- the Kashmir terrorists that have found -- that have found refuge in Pakistan. But they've spun on a -- on a dime, pretty much. They're -- the -- the ISI has -- has new leadership. It has leadership that is more satisfactory to President Musharraf, that wants to -- that want is to pull the fuse on this, that wants to step back from it. They're trying hard to step back on it.

What Pakistan has accomplished so far in being able to step -- to change positions and to -- to support the West and to oppose terrorism in Afghanistan, they will try to do here. But whether they can do it this fast or not is -- is another question.

BLITZER: Ambassador Hunter, what do you make of these reports that Osama Bin Laden may -- may -- have bought his way out of Afghanistan into Pakistan and is now hiding someplace, perhaps under with -- some sympathizers there who are protecting him?

HUNTER: Well, I'm not one of the people who believe that Osama is going to go down in flames, you know, for -- for his perverted beliefs and that he would have a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to get out of the country, whether he had to pay for it of it was just done by people who are ideologically attuned to him.

I suspect he's somewhere else by now, whether we'll ever get him I don't know but we have to continue to have that as a goal.

BLITZER: The assumption always was that he had a good escape and evasion plan, given all the money, the resources, the time he had to get ready.

CIRINCIONE: That's right, unless we've actually blown up his back door. That's -- that's the factor he might not have considered, that our bombing would be so precise, so overwhelming, that that escape route no longer exists.

BLITZER: Is this potential conflict between India and Pakistan going to undermine President Musharraf's efforts to help the United States in finding Osama Bin Laden?

WILSON: It -- it certainly will, if it continues. It will be very reluctant on his part. He'll only do it if he thinks he has to. But he has troops -- imported troops -- that are on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan trying to arrest the al Qaeda and trying to find Bin Laden.

Of course, if he has to move those troops to the other border, then it naturally dilutes the effort.

HUNTER: This supports the argument -- I agree with the Congressman -- that al Qaeda could very well have been behind the bombing of the -- of parliament in -- in Delhi. They're the ones who gain from it by distracting attention and causing destruction.

BLITZER: And they were on a suicide mission, which fits their modus operandi. Robert Hunter, Charlie Wilson, Joseph Cirincione, thanks so much for joining us.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.

BLITZER: Have a happy new year as well.

CIRINCIONE: You bet.

HUNTER: You, too.

BLITZER: And when we come back, a day in court for the man accused of trying to bring down an American Airlines plane with explosives hidden in his shoes. The latest on the case, right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Here are some of the latest developments we are following right now. No bail for the man accused of trying to detonate explosives hidden in the shoes of an American Airlines flight.

Richard Reid appeared before a federal judge in Boston today. She ordered him held for more hearings.

There's been a sharp rise in the number of World Trade Center victims identified: 58 in the last two weeks. Officials credit increased DNA testing along with the discovery of 12 intact bodies found below ground zero.

And a very happy follow-up to a story we brought you last night. 24 hours ago, we reported that 16-month-old girl that was abducted in Chicago had been found safe in West Virginia. Jasmine Anderson was reunited with her mother Marcella earlier today. The accused kidnapper is in custody.

And that's all the time we have tonight. Please join me again Sunday on "LATE EDITION." Among my guests: Senator Bob Graham and Richard Lugar of the Intelligence Committee. That's Sunday at noon eastern. Until then, thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. "CROSSFIRE" 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