Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Target: Terrorism - Pakistan Government Claims to Have Evidence to Indict Osama bin Laden

Aired October 04, 2001 - 08:15   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.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to head to Islamabad, Pakistan where our own Walt Rodgers is standing by with some new information to suggest -- and correct me if I'm wrong, Walter -- that the Pakistani government now says it has enough evidence -- actually enough proof to indict Osama bin Laden.

WALTER RODGERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: First, Paula, you're never wrong. But Pakistan -- the Pakistani government has, indeed, given the United States an enormous endorsement as the U.S. tries to build a case against the perpetrators of the terrorism in the United States last month.

Pakistan, as you know, is pivotal in this region of the world. It has a 1,500-mile-long border with Afghanistan -- terribly important in the U.S. effort to build a coalition here. But it is a Muslim country in which there has been considerable doubt and skepticism, publicly and privately, about the case the U.S. has against Osama bin Laden.

Now, however, a short while ago, Riaz Kahn, the foreign ministry spokesman here in Islamabad, seemed to suggest that Pakistan is convinced the United States has sufficient evidence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RIAZ KHAN, PAKISTAN FOREIGN MINISTRY SPOKESMAN: We have seen the material that was provided to us by the American side yesterday. The material certainly provides sufficient basis for indictment in a court of law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RODGERS: Pakistan, of course, has been a major sponsor of the Taliban over in Afghanistan. It, indeed, may have helped spawn them. That being the case, however, in recent days they have been pulling further and further back from the Taliban. And the significance of that statement from the foreign ministry here in Pakistan is, of course, that here you have a major Islamic country saying that they -- the evidence they have seen suggests the United States, indeed, has a case against the perpetrators of the terror -- Paula.

ZAHN: So, Walt, given that news, is there any suggestion, then, that the next step might be attempting to sever diplomatic relations with the Taliban?

RODGERS: Those reports are circulating around Islamabad at this point. It's a good question. There's no confirmation of it, but increasingly as you look across the border into Afghanistan and you see elements of the Taliban's infrastructure crumbling, there are people who are defecting from the Taliban in some quarters reportedly.

We are also told that -- or we're hearing in Pakistan at least that the Taliban is moving its headquarters out of Kandahar fearing a U.S. bombing attack. That suggests something of a retreat or at least a regrouping. There is disaffection in eastern Pakistan, areas the Taliban used to hold. Now, disaffection there with the Taliban.

Things are moving so quickly in this part of the world it's difficult to predict, but we should note that President Musharraf of Pakistan said within the past several days that he thought the Taliban's days were limited. That is a serious vote of no confidence from what used to be the Taliban's best friend -- Paula.

ZAHN: Walt Rodgers, thanks so much for that update.

Right now, we probably have one of the best people on hand to comment on this latest development. Joining us now is Shamshad Ahmad, the Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations here in New York -- welcome.

SHAMSHAD AHMAD, PAKISTAN AMBASSADOR TO UNITED NATIONS: Good to be here.

ZAHN: Help us understand what this means. If your government is saying that it now has sufficient evidence to actually indict Osama bin Laden, will you cut relations with the Taliban?

AHMAD: Well, I think the focus on this aspect of the situation, in my view, is misplaced. I think Pakistan now is the only window to Afghanistan and to Taliban for the outside world. And one has to understand the implications of cutting off diplomatic relations by Pakistan with Afghanistan at this critical stage.

Of course, if the world community was to ask us that, yes, you sever relations with Afghanistan, we'll abide by the verdict (ph) of the international community. But the fact is that this window that we are keeping open with Afghanistan helps the world community to communicate with the government of Taliban.

It also helps the world community to keep an eye on the impending humanitarian disaster that is building up in the face of the imminent displacement of millions of Afghans from their homes and the fear of the prospect of war.

And then above all, Pakistan is home to more than two-and-a-half million refugees, and in the world it is normal for diplomatic and consular missions to remain available in the countries wherever foreign nationals are located to look at their consulate and other problems. But as I said earlier, that if Pakistan's diplomatic relations with Afghanistan is a problem for the international community, we'll go by the verdict (ph) of the international community. But in our view, we are doing a great service to the international community by maintaining this channel of communication.

ZAHN: So what you have just told me, then, you will continue to maintain relations with the Taliban until someone from the international community says they must stop. Isn't that what perhaps Prime Minister Tony Blair is going to be asking you guys to stop?

AHMAD: Well, I think the situation is not understood in its correct perspective. Our relationship is extremely limited. We do not have any diplomatic personnel or staff in Kabul now. We have withdrawn all of our diplomatic personnel. Our ambassador is back in Pakistan and a very limited number of Afghan personnel in their embassy in Islamabad. And that, as I said, is a necessity to provide consular assistance to millions of foreign nationals who are refugees in our country.

But again, I think this whole emphasis is misplaced. The seriousness of the crisis lies elsewhere. It is not in the presence of Afghan embassy in Pakistan. I think we should focus on the overall magnitude of this tragedy -- the crisis, which has struck not the World Trade Center, but the world itself.

So we need to put up a response -- a resolute response as a world community, as humanity as a whole. And our response should not be based on retribution alone, not on emotion of anger. It should be motivated by a long-term need (ph) to treat the disease at its roots.

ZAHN: We are getting word from Islamabad that the Pakistani government may, at this hour, be considering cutting off relations with the Taliban.

AHMAD: Well, I have said...

ZAHN: Can you confirm -- I know you said until you get international pressure to do so. But what are you aware of that's going on in your country?

AHMAD: I -- well, I (UNINTELLIGIBLE) word so far. But I just wanted to tell you that in case it is the verdict (ph) of the international community and the verdicts (ph) of international community are pronounced in the United Nations, and within the framework of the Security Council Resolutions that we have until now there is no such demand in Pakistan for us to sever diplomatic relations

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: Mr. Ambassador, if you'd be kind enough...

AHMAD: (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

ZAHN: ... we need to take a short break here. Go to a commercial break, and we'd love to continue this conversation on the other side.

AHMAD: Oh. Uh-huh.

ZAHN: Mr. Ambassador, thanks.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.