Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

U.N. Should Authorize But Not Assemble Peacekeeping Force for Afghanistan

Aired November 15, 2001 - 09:09   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: As the Northern alliance takes control of more territory, there have been reports of a lot of atrocities during the fighting, but it's not clear exactly who committed them. Factions both in and out of Afghanistan are wondering if the Northern Alliance is really fit to govern.

Joining me now, Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke. Good to see you again. How are you doing this morning?

RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UNITED NATIONS: Hi Paula. I'm fine.

ZAHN: We have talked so much this morning about the drama of the return of these eight aid workers, but perhaps something more dramatic is going on at the U.N., as various nations are trying to figure out what sort of inter government can lead -- interim government can lead in Afghanistan. Give us some insights into...

HOLBROOKE: Well, first of all, on the -- first of all on the eight aid workers, it's wonderful they've been freed, but there's a point that hasn't been made on the air this morning, which is critically important. Their freeing means that they're not a potential hostage trading opportunity for the Taliban. They can't negotiate for them, and it clears very dramatically, it clears the decks for larger latitude of action by the United States and the Alliance.

In regard to the situation of the U.N., they gave some backing yesterday, the international force but, in my view, not enough. Now that a vacuum is being created in Kabul, and eventually in the rest of Afghanistan -- because the Taliban is collapsing, there's no question in my mind that they are beginning a full-scale complete collapse -- people who fought for them are going to switch sides because they weren't terribly loyal to the Taliban's extreme philosophy and so on. Now that the Taliban is collapsing, a vacuum is being created.

The last time this happened, in 1989, the United States and the West turned its back on Afghanistan, and the vacuum was filled by the Taliban. We can't let that happen again. The U.N. has to now have full authority to do what it did in East Timor and Kosovo in the last few years: create and virtually impose a coalition political structure in Kabul, because the Northern Alliance itself can't run the place, because it only contains some of the tribal elements in Afghanistan, which don't include majority Pashtun.

And -- and, secondly, there has to be an international security presence; that is, international armed peacekeepers. Those can't be Americans, and they shouldn't be Americans. The American job is to track down Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network, and that's what they should do. And they should do it in commandos. But security will need to be preserved, just as it is in East Timor, in Kosovo and Bosnia by international troops, and the U.N.'s resolution yesterday was a step in that direction, but it did not go far enough.

ZAHN: Yeah, you wrote quite forcefully about that in the "Washington Post," and I wanted to put up on the screen, a small part of that editorial, which basically tracks with what you were saying. You said, and this was the idea of what would constitute the makeup of a security force in Afghanistan. "To me this is fantasy. The Afghans have been fighting among themselves too long to form an integrated security force right now. The only real options are a U.N. peacekeeping force or a multilateral force that is sanctioned by the U.N. Security Council but run separately from the United Nations."

Now you went on to say, that a U.N. Peacekeeping force is not the solution, and proposed this multilateral force that you're talking about. What is the distinction between the two?

HOLBROOKE: Right, right. First of all, the quote is significantly out of context, because the reference to a fantasy is to the preceding...

ZAHN: Was to the Afghan soldiers, right.

HOLBROOKE: And let's make clear to your viewers, the fantasy is the fact that the U.N. special representative, and some people in Washington have talked about an Afghan security force, that's crazy. But what I think we should do is follow the model that was followed in East Timor and the Indonesian archipelago two years ago. And that is, the U.N. authorizes an international force but doesn't assemble it. That force is then led by national units of a lead country -- in East Timor it was neighboring Australia. In Afghanistan, the lead country should be Turkey, the only Muslim country in NATO, and it should be backed up by Bangladesh, Morocco, Jordan, majority Muslim countries, with some non-Muslim elements in it.

And I think that is the quickest force that can go in, and the U.S. -- and we have to be -- we have to recognize this -- the U.S. will have to help pay for this -- but that's in our national interest.

ZAHN: I need about a 15-second answer, because I'm up against a commercial break. If you were General Musharraf right now, and you've seen the Northern Alliance go in and take Kabul when, in fact, they were instructed not to, what are you thinking?

HOLBROOKE: Well, he -- they knew it was going to happen. I don't understand why United States officials even said publicly the Northern Alliance shouldn't go into Kabul. It was self-evident when they were 10 miles away and the Taliban imploding, that the Northern Alliance would go in. I think it's a very good thing they went in, because the Taliban were awful, odious people. Now, there's been some looting in both sides, but that goes with the territory. As far as Musharraf's reaction? He can live with this as long as the future government reflects security interests of Pakistan, which means Pashtun must be in it. That's what he's really concerned about.

ZAHN: Thank you very much for your briefing here this morning. Richard Holbrooke. Always good to see you. And I think we've put your quote in the "Washington Post" in context there. Always good to have your insights.

You can put your questions directly to Former Ambassador Holbrooke. He will be at CNN.com for an on-line chat this morning. It gets under way in just two hours, that's at 11:30 a.m. Eastern time, 8:30 a.m. Pacific. Again, the address is CNN.com, AOL Keyword: CNN.

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