Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

"Daily Beast": Al Qaeda Cell "Went Dark" In Syria; ISIS Supporters Behead French National; Can Airstrikes Alone Beat ISIS?

Aired September 24, 2014 - 15:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: New details now on the other target of U.S. airstrikes in Syria.

The Khorasan group, it's a faction of very experienced al Qaeda members in Syria and parts of the United States who were, the Pentagon says, in the final stages of planning an attack against the West, that is until the bombings by the U.S. west of the city of Aleppo.

These images reportedly show the aftermath of that bombing. The Daily Beast reports the U.S. recently had lost track of Khorasan. A senior U.S. intelligence official told The Daily Beast -- quote -- "We had some information on their plans that did not pan out over the summer. They shut it down and went dark."

CNN cannot independently confirm that report.

Joining me now, a former CIA military analyst, Tara Maller, currently a research fellow in the National Security Studies Program at the New America Foundation. Appreciate you being with us. Tell us why a terror group goes dark. Exactly how does that work? What does that mean?

TARA MALLER, NATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: Well, in this case again, it's not being confirmed, but I did read Josh Rogin's piece in "The Daily Beast" and what may happens is that there may have been a stream of intelligence or reporting or information about an upcoming plot or attack.

It might have been fairly vague. It might have been general. It may have been based on signals intelligence. It might have been based on imagery intelligence and then a channel might have been sort of stopped and no new information was coming through and this could be for a variety of reasons.

It could be because the attack itself was no longer in the planning stages. It could be because they got better about their communications. Again based on "The Daily Beast" report, it's hard to say exactly why this may have been the case. So it's too early to say the specifics, but those would be some reasons that that could occur.

COOPER: But when a group decides -- when a group goes operational prior to an attack, is it traditional that chatter dies down and they go dark to use that phrase?

MALLER: Well, let me just make one thing clear, it's not clear from this actual report whether or not it was a very specific attack with a time and a location and a place.

If you look -- if you think back before 9/11 and you remember what the content in that was, it's now public, that talked about Bin Laden using planes not determined to strike the U.S. But it didn't talk specifically how the attack would be carried out.

So it's possible that they had a stream of reporting, generally reporting about certain types of attacks. It's not clear if they had specific intel on a specific plot with a specific target and location.

There's been talk about toothpaste being used in terms of explosives, special non-metallic explosives devices and clothing being used, but again we don't know how specific and credible the specific information was about an attack.

COOPER: It's also interesting because traditionally over the last couple years when U.S. officials have talked about sophisticated bombmaking abilities, it's really been in reference to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula specifically a bombmaker believed to still be in Yemen.

There's been some reports that perhaps and again this has not been verified, perhaps that bombmaker has trained others and that knowledge has now spread to this group in Syria. How likely do you think it is that an individual bombmaker trains others who then spreads that to other countries?

MALLER: Well, in terms of Khorasan itself, I mean, there's a few reports that are out there about connections in special bombmaking capabilities. That's one side of the story, but the other thing is that they were sent to Syria to work on the campaign in terms of helping -- put together and remedy the risk between ISIS and the al Nusra front that we've seen in Syria.

So there may have been multiple agendas to this group. They also seemed to be operating with a focus more on catching fighters with western origins and that seemed to be the special focus of this group.

Again, it's likely that terrorist tactics can be passed on from group to group whether through learning online, through internet manuals and magazines, whether that's through actual contacts with affiliates of other groups.

I mean, that's a common phenomenon that we see in terrorism is adaption of tactics either taught to them by other groups or learned about through other groups perhaps unintentionally by the bombmaker himself through magazines and jihadist internet forum.

So both of those can be possible, but again there's not confirmation on those actual reports in this case just yet. At least not in the press.

COOPER: Tara Maller, appreciate you being with us. One of the things U.S. officials have not clarified exactly is how big they believe this group Khorasan really is. Indications seemed that it's a relatively small number of active personnel in it. But again there's been no confirmation publicly at least about the size of this group. Several westerners have been beheaded at the hands of ISIS in Syria as air strikes continue what is being done to keep other western hostages alive. We'll discuss that as we get word another hostage has been beheaded by Islamist militants coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Welcome back. We're getting word that a fourth hostage has been beheaded by militants highlighting the growing concern about how many captives are actually in the hands of ISIS and other terror groups.

France's Foreign Ministry confirming that a video showing a mountaineer's death is authentic. He was killed in Algeria. This followed brutal slayings of three other hostages, American Steven Sotloff and James Fooley and Britain's David Haines.

CNN's senior international correspondent, Nic Robertson joins us now from London. Do we have a sense of how these airstrikes impact the hostage situation with ISIS and other militant groups? Because this group in Algeria they are pledging allegiance to ISIS, but they are not directly controlled by ISIS.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's right, Anderson. It's a new development. I mean, (inaudible) was captured on the 21st of September. This group, the Caliphate Army in the Land of Algeria is new. It only just recently this month split off from al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the north of Africa branch of al Qaeda, if you will.

And on the same day that they captured this Frenchman, that was the day that the ISIS spokesman said that supporters should kill the French so there's almost a direct response.

This new group, the Caliphate Army in the Land of Algeria pledged allegiance to ISIS earlier in the month and then they respond to the spokesman from ISIS and within a few days then going ahead and beheading this man on the strength of the fact that the French had joined the coalition to target ISIS in Iraq. There does appear to be a very, very direct coalition there -- Anderson.

COOPER: Is it clear, Nic, at this point how many others are still being held hostage?

ROBERTSON: It's not precisely clear, but there are believed to be potentially a German, a New Zealander, a couple of Americans, at least two British people. I mean, one of the reasons we don't have accurate information is that when some of these people have been captured, it's been kept very, very quiet.

And it's only when they are publicly displayed with the case of the British taxi driver who was the latest a week ago was threatened by ISIS that he was going to be the next one to be killed. We didn't know anything about him essentially until the video and the parading of him on camera by ISIS happened.

But around half a dozen -- the question right now is what is ISIS going to do? They have been using these people in a way as extreme bargaining chips. They know they're not winning in stopping the coalition growing against them by beheading. What tactic will they take now, Anderson?

COOPER: Bargaining chip, propaganda tools and also recruitment tools as well. Nic Robertson, appreciate that.

Coming up, the U.S. has conducted hundreds of airstrikes against ISIS targets in Iraq, fewer in Syria. Are they enough to actually defeat the terror group and if not, what is that actually going to take? You'll hear both sides of the debate ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Hillary Clinton is giving her backing to President Obama's decision to launch airstrikes against ISIS targets in Syria. During a panel discussion a short time ago at the Clinton Global Initiative, the former secretary of state called Obama's response to the ISIS threat very robust.

Is it robust enough? ISIS targets have been on the receiving end of more than 200 airstrikes in the week since the United States started bombing the terror group in Iraq.

So far there have been at least 198 U.S. airstrikes across Iraq and another 20 by the U.S. and its allies across Syria. And they've had an impact on ISIS according to Secretary of State John Kerry in an exclusive interview with CNN. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: What we've done is we've stopped the onslaught. That was what we were able to achieve with airpower. They were moving towards Erbil. They were moving towards Baghdad. Baghdad could well have fallen. Erbil could have fallen.

They could have control of all of the oil fields. We re-secured the Mosul Dam. We've protected the Haditha Dam. We broke the siege at Amerli. We broke the siege at Sinjar Mountain. So airpower has been effective.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: The statement by Secretary Kerry that Baghdad itself could have fallen is quite stunning. Certainly no officials publicly were saying that months ago when ISIS was on the move whether or not it's accurate is still certainly a big question on that.

The question is does the U.S. have to do more to defeat the terrorists? Is Iraq or so-called moderate Syrian rebel forces up to the task? Here to talk about the role of airstrikes and other in the fight against ISIS, Michael Shank, associate director of Legislative Affairs with the Friends Committee on National Legislation, which was founded by the Flakers in 1943, and Jack Goldstone, director of the Center for Global Policy at George Mason University.

Jack, do you believe these airstrikes are actually working?

JACK GOLDSTONE, CENTER FOR GLOBAL POLICY, GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY: They're working in the way that Secretary Kerry indicated. They are blunting the offensive operations of ISIS. They are not going have much effect in moving ISIS out of areas that it already holds.

COOPER: In terms of actually doing that, though, in terms of moving ISIS out of those areas, it really is at least in Iraq up to Iraqi security forces to Peshmerga forces and so far neither of those groups have been up to the challenge.

SHANK: That's right. You have to think of ISIS as a state in the making. It's an ideological group that controls a large territory. It's controlling that territory by force. It's acting as the government in that place where it controls the authority. Even if you bomb some of the installations and kill some of the

fighters, all you do create is a local power vacuum. Other ISIS fighters move back in. There's no way to dislodge ISIS without fighters going in on the ground following up the airstrikes and depriving ISIS of territory.

And that will take time to arrange and time to execute. This is not going to be a short fight accomplished by airpower.

COOPER: Michael, the U.S. is talking about it 12 to 18 months to vet and train some Syrian rebels and some 5,000 Syrian forces. Also obviously the Iraqi military has got to be taught how to fight or a new officer corps vetted. Do you believe, Michael, these airstrikes are making America any safer? Are they working even to stop offensive capabilities by ISIS?

MICHAEL SHANK, FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL LEGISLATION: To your point, Anderson, about nation's states ability to governor Iraq's military being inadequate. If we couldn't build up their military in 12 years, I doubt we can do it in 12 to 18 months.

If we want to prevent violence in Syria, Iraq, or even Yemen, you mentioned Yemen earlier. What we would focus on -- Syria is a great example. In 2008, 2009, the Syrian agriculture minister reached out to the world noting economic and social fallout if the drought, the water crisis wasn't dealt with.

U.N. reached out to us. Red Cross societies reached out and even our NOAH said the worst drought in the Middle East. We did very little then. Same problem with Yemen.

They'll run out of water in a couple years unless we're able to help these nation states deal with political crisis, economic cris and increasingly the environmental crisis, we're going to see more of this violence spread throughout the region.

COOPER: But Michael, what is environmental crisis have to do with ISIS?

SHANK: Well, great question because they've taken over oil and water resources in the north. They are aided and abetted by Sunni moderates that we didn't politically and economically integrate into Baghdad after the 2006, 2007 awakening in the Anbar Province.

So our missteps along to really focus prioritize political, economic, environmental solutions in Syria, Iraq or even Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Pakistan is backfiring in terms of further violence.

COOPER: Jeff, it wasn't really the U.S. That failed to integrate Sunni populations. It was really the al-Maliki government which stopped funding Sunni groups, which had broken away from the group al Qaeda in Iraq. He's the one who chose to stop funding those groups and the one who chose to favor Shias over Sunnis and basically let them turn back to extremism.

GOLDSTONE: That's right, Anderson. And I wouldn't focus on what Mr. Shank says about the length of - time it takes to train the Iraqi forces. The forces were trained. The problem is they had nothing and no one to fight for. Our problem is going to be helping governments stand up in the region that embody ideals that people are willing to fight for.

Lacking that, ISIS will have a free pathway to go to Baghdad or wherever it wills. So it's really that political issue creating a situation where people feel they're fighting for a society that they want to be part of, a leadership they believe in.

We can somehow help the Iraqi and Syrian people put those kind of governments in place then there won't be any problem with the forces being able to go against ISIS and be effective.

COOPER: Jack Goldstone, I appreciate you being on. Michael Shank, as well. Up next, "The New York Times" editorial board ripping President Obama as well as Congress for not debating this war before it began. Hear reaction from one senator who is at the U.N. today trying to recruit Arab countries to join the coalition. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: We're back with our special coverage of the coalition strikes in Iraq and Syria. The discussions here at the United Nation today. Here with me now is Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican of Wisconsin. He's a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. First of all, just tell us why you are here, who you're talking to here?

SENATOR RON JOHNSON (R), WISCONSIN: Well, I am one of the representatives for this general assembly from the United States. President Obama appointed me as confirmed, but what I'm primarily here to do is talk to as many of the coalition partners and potential partners. And convey to them that the only way we'll have the public support in America for the action that will be necessary to defeat ISIS is they've got to be all in and fully committed both militarily and financially with this battle.

COOPER: Do you believe that they are? Because we saw the resolution today passed at the Security Council that President Obama was chairing. They've made significant promises on paper and you have Qatar, Saudi Arabia promising to make it illegal to fund terror groups, to trap citizens who might be trying to fight overseas.

JOHNSON: And five Arab states participated and we are willing to do it publicly in those airstrikes. Is that enough? No, but it's a good first step and we need to continue to draw them into complete commitment and involvement.

COOPER: How do you go about making sure that they are in for the long haul? Because the United States is talking about -- I mean, this is a multi-year operation with no end in sight.

JOHNSON: For my part, as elected official I'm trying to convey to them that the only way to support the long-term effort in America, let's face it, it's an existential threat to Arab regimes, it's a threat to America, but an existential threat to them.

That they expect America and Americans to support that effort, they've got to be fully committed and hopefully they'll understand that's true and they will step up.

COOPER: The new prime minister of Iraq was interviewed by Christiane Amanpour yesterday and he said the U.S. needs to do more and need more air strikes. I was surprised by that. This is a country that has some 250,000 people. Even if only half of that military can actually stand up and fight, it's stunning that they have not been able to retake really any of the territory that they've lost to ISIS. Do they get it?

JOHNSON: It's depressing. I think we've already seen certain division of the Iraqi secure force and there are special operations that are there and in the refinery and Mosul Dam operations. I think there are, but again, Maliki basically got rid of the professional corps, putting his cronies and his military. That's obvious.

COOPER: They had guys paying to become generals in the Iraqi military under Maliki so that they can essentially rake in a lot of money. It's a very lucrative position.

JOHNSON: Anderson, I keep going back to is in 2007 in that surge there were about 6,000 to 8,000 members of al Qaeda in Iraq. That was a successful organization. We had 100,000 Sunnis working with us, 100,000 Iraqi security forces and 160,000 American boots on the ground.

Now about 35 or 40 of those were actually involved in combat operations and that's what it took to defeat 6,000 of al Qaeda in Iraq and now we have 31,000 ISIS members. They're better trained. They're better equipped. They hold territory. They're financed.

We have a big problem on our hands here and I think what -- President Obama, I think he's saying the right things here in New York today. I think we're seeing the Arab states doing the -- taking the first steps and this will be a long-term effort. And I think the most important thing that we have to convey to the

American public is the truth. We have to be forthright and let them know this is what the threat is and this is what they'll take and we ought to be doing it in a step by step process and this isn't a two- week battle and ISIS is defeated. This will be a long-term battle and ISIS is only one group that threatens America.

COOPER: If we had ten years of training Iraqi security forces with tens of billions of dollars and many billions of dollars and again, thousands of U.S. forces helping to train them and equip them, and still they weren't able to stand up and fight. Are we going to be able to help this process?

JOHNSON: Here's where we made a big mistake by not leaving a stabilizing force to force that coalition to remain in place. In the end, it is a governing solution here. You need the Sunnis. You need the Shia and the Kurds.

You need these people, given the time to govern together and to work together and start developing the level of trust, which obviously they didn't have. They came together in the surge, but then that trust was utterly broken.

COOPER: But with a stabilizing force of even 10,000 U.S. troops have been able to basically force the prime minister of Maliki to do something which you think clearly was opposed.

JOHNSON: Maliki needed a larger force. We were talking about 24,000 and Maliki needed a large force from his standpoint to protect himself against the Sunnis. They needed a large stabilizing force to protect themselves from the Shia.

So it was in the able to trust building process to go forward. When we pulled out, trust was broken. Maliki broke it and so we'll have to rebuild that trust that took a long time in 2007 to build.

We're right back to ground zero and probably worse because the trust was broken once and it will take a long time to rebuild that trust, but if we step back.

COOPER: Can you do this without U.S. forces on ground?

JOHNSON: I just don't see how that's going to --

COOPER: Do you think it's inevitable --

JOHNSON: If the goal to defeat ISIS.

COOPER: It will take years.

JOHNSON: I don't see how we can do it any other way. COOPER: Senator, I appreciate you being with us. Thanks very much, Senator Ron Johnson. "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts now.