Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Saturday Morning News
America's New War: President Seeks Cooperation of States Neighboring Afghanistan
Aired September 15, 2001 - 10:28 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: Right now, we're going to go back to Miles O'Brien, and I am sure your next guest, General Wesley Clark, has a very strong reaction to some of the words coming out of the White House this morning. Good morning again, Miles.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning again, Paula.
Yes, General Clark, who is our military adviser here at CNN, our military analyst I guess would be more accurate, former supreme commander of NATO, head what the president had to say, and let's just give folks the caveat first of all here, because General Clark is sensitive to this. We are at CNN are sensitive to the realities that we don't want to aid, or give comfort or harbor or in any way assist the enemy. Tell us what you're thinking right now.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK, FORMER NATO ALLIED COMMANDER: Well, we don't want to do anything that's going to assist the enemy, we don't want to make -- do anything that is going to make it harder for the president and his team to make these terrible decisions that they are confronting right now.
But this is the time where the diplomatic work has got to be done. We are dealing with a probable organization that's headquartered in a landlocked country, and to get to it, to affect it, is going to require assistance and support from allies.
So if we take a look at the map then, what we've got is the country of Afghanistan, completely cut off from access from the ocean. On the east, there's Pakistan, and we've talked to the leader of Pakistan. He's pledged full cooperation, and Secretary Powell explained that to us this morning. We've got -- on the west, we've got Iran -- no relief there, pretty hostile. In the north, we've got the former states of the Soviet Union, it's pretty tough. So when we look at this landlocked country, we realize it's diplomacy first right now.
O'BRIEN: How difficult will that be, the diplomacy? It seems as if the administration is making some inroads in Pakistan, at least by public appearances.
CLARK: Well, I think that we are making inroads -- the United States is making inroads there towards diplomacy. But I think, also, that Musharraf is in a difficult position, because he's got strong Taliban supporters, perhaps even within his armed forces. And he's got to weigh off his own domestic political situation as he provides us with support.
Hopefully, he's got the control, and he's got the will to provide the support that the world needs to cut off all assistance to the Taliban, and to direct us to Osama bin Laden.
O'BRIEN: All right, but let's -- without getting too far ahead on the military options here, an air campaign and an air campaign alone -- in other words, bombing Afghanistan, let's say, where those dozen camps linked to Osama bin Laden are purported to be. That would not necessarily be an effective way to go about this, would it?
CLARK: Probably not, but I wouldn't want to prejudge it, because there may be information that we just don't have access to. I think the national command authority is going to make the kinds of decisions based on up to date information. If they feel there is a purpose in going after -- a military purpose, a significant purpose in disrupting this network by going after their camps, they'll do it.
I don't think we're looking at a symbolic strike. The president has said he doesn't want that. So, whichever way they go, I think we're going to see a strike based on hard information.
O'BRIEN: Now when I talked to you the other day about this, I said, would this be pinpricks then? Was that an appropriate way to describe it?
CLARK: No, I don't think we should think in terms of pinpricks versus massive, because, really what's happened to military technology over the last 30 years is, that we can strike precise targets but with enormous force. And so, I think what we should be looking here are precision strikes.
O'BRIEN: What about the intelligence then now? Because it will ultimately come down to our ability, to the U.S. ability to define locations. How good is that ability right now, without violating any security clearances here?
CLARK: Well, we always know what the locations are, but we don't always know what is there, or where any person is going to be at a particular time. So, if we are talking about individuals on the ground, unless there is something that gives us an indicator that they are going to arrive at a specific point, it's pretty tough to predict where they might be. So there is always a bit of hit and miss in an operation that would be directed at a specific location.
O'BRIEN: And often times in those operations, the intelligence information doesn't get to the military planners in a timely way, does it?
CLARK: Well, it depends, my guess is that in this case it will get here in a very timely -- as quick as we got it, I'm sure they'll wire it straight in.
O'BRIEN: All right, General Wesley Clark, thank you for your insights once again.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
