Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Sunday

America Strikes Back: Paul Bremmer and Richard Holbrooke Discuss U.S. Strikes in Afghanistan

Aired October 07, 2001 - 17:47   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.
AARON BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: We turn now to Paul Bremmer, an official in the Reagan administration, expert on counterterrorism, and he joins us I assume from Washington. Good evening to you. I got the administration right, didn't I? It was the Reagan administration.

PAUL BREMMER, FORMER REAGAN ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes, and I'm in Washington.

BROWN: Thank you. I'm two for two here. Tell me, just tell me how we ought to look at the field of play at this moment? We'll go from there.

BREMMER: Well, I think there are two things. first, the administration has done a really extraordinary job in setting the diplomatic table for this operation. The president spoke today about having, representing the collective will of the world, and I think that's true. It's an extraordinary coalition they have pulled together.

But we are really only at the beginning of the beginning here. The operations in Afghanistan will have military and a political and a humanitarian dimension, and as president said and as Secretary Rumsfeld said, that's really only the beginning, because in the long run what we have got to do is to deny terrorists safe havens, and that's the strategic objective that goes beyond Afghanistan.

BROWN: We are talking a bit ago to former Secretary of State Kissinger, and one of things he talked about was the danger of this extraordinary coalition -- falling apart maybe is a bit strong -- but starting to see countries break off as the battle against terrorism expands beyond Afghanistan. So, there is a kind of never-ending diplomatic work to be done.

BREMMER: Well, that's certainly true, as Dr. Kissinger said, that there are risks. On the other hand, I'm sure that he would also agree that if the United States acts robustly and effectively in this first stage, that is to say dealing with the Taliban and the terrorist groups in Afghanistan, the chances of our getting support in the next stage, which is going to other countries which are providing safe haven are much higher.

People will then see that we are really serious. We will have demonstrated by our actions in Afghanistan that we mean to be, as the president said, comprehensive and relentless in our pursuit of terrorism. I think there will strains in the coalition, no question, but I think the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) for moving on is great success in this first phase.

BROWN: Let me offer a notion here. I'm not sure that -- let me just offer it up, that there is also a domestic political concern here, that the country clearly is united at this moment, New York and Washington, D.C. after all were attacked in the most vicious, evil way imaginable. But ought not the administration be concerned about a war that may extend beyond Afghanistan and the people that perpetrated this particular evil, and then when you start looking at other countries -- Iraq, or if you want you can take it all the way to Colombia and drug terrorists if you want. That's a pretty broad mandate, and do you think the political will for it is there?

BREMMER: One of problems in the fight against terrorism in the last 30 years has been the rather episodic attention to the problem by political leaders and of course by the public, but the nature of this attack on September 11 was so dramatically different than anything we have seen. Certainly what I have heard talking to Americans on talk shows and radio and television, what one reads in the newspaper suggests the American people are ready for a long struggle. I think they understand what we are getting into. They are going to be American casualties. There probably will be counterattacks by the terrorists, perhaps even here in the United States.

The president has really laid the groundwork for this, however, and I think we will find the American people are very resolute in sticking with him.

BROWN: Yeah, and you may be right. It's just...

BREMMER: Well, I certainly hope I am.

BROWN: I'm sure you do. This is one of those very complicated political questions. Once you dispensed with the people who have perpetrated this incredible evil, and you want to make the argument you ought to go on, and it's obviously a fight that needs to fought at some level and by whom is for other people to say, but it's a complicated question.

BREMMER: Yes, but the fundamental problem, which is represented by al Qaeda and its marriage of convenience with the Taliban is that terrorists must be denied safe haven and support by states. Terrorists don't exist in the ether. They are not free floating. They have their feet on the ground somewhere, and somebody is responsible for that ground, in this case the government of Afghanistan represented by the Taliban.

There are other states around where these terrorists may -- the ones that escape us may go, but as long as terrorists can find a place where they can operate freely, as they have in Afghanistan in the last decade and as they did in Lebanon in the '70s and '80s, we are going to continue to face massive problems with terrorism. So, the president is absolutely right, the consequence of starting down this path is to say that any state which supports terrorism must be considered, as he said on September 20, a "hostile regime."

Those are tough words. And if we are going to follow those to the end, it's going to tough, we are going to have a hard time keeping the coalition together, but if we are really serious about fighting terrorism, it's not just about bin Laden, it's not just about al Qaeda, it's about delegitimatizing terrorism.

BROWN: Mr. Bremmer, thanks for joining us. Very interesting and provocative comments today about where the country ought to be looking right now, and the breadth of the war that unfolded just after noon today, beginning as we have said a number of times.

In Washington now, Judy.

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: Aaron, I believe -- do we have joining us now Richard Holbrooke, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. First of all, Ambassador Holbrooke, we have been talking a little bit earlier about the European support for this, but I want to go straight to, if you will, maybe the soft underbelly here of this whole operation, that is the support among some of the nations in its region. So far, we have not heard from Egypt, we have not heard from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the UAE -- some of these countries saying they want to wait and see what happens. How much does continued success depend on the reaction of these countries?

RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: Judy, I would agree with what Henry Kissinger told Aaron Brown a few minutes ago, and that is that they are not going to be as enthusiastic in public as they are in private. Every one of governments you just named understands that the success of the extreme Islamic leaders like the Taliban and Osama bin Laden is a direct threat to them.

If Osama bin Laden had a chance, he would kill Yasser Arafat, President Mubarak of Egypt and the house, the ruling house in Saudi Arabia in a second. So they naturally are going to hope that our attacks will be swift and effective, but the key word here is effective. If they don't succeed, they will lead to mass demonstrations against American attacks on Islamic populations, and that will backfire. So, in the end, the key thing in term of this phase of the crisis is how successful the attack themselves are.

WOODRUFF: And how do you define success here?

HOLBROOKE: First of all, two points. Number one, even if the attacks eliminated Osama bin Laden and drove the Taliban from power -- and I take those two as goals we will achieve -- Taliban after all is a motley group of mullahs and militia and not a real government, and they are not going to stand up to this kind of stuff, and lot of Afghans are fed up with them. And Osama bin Laden is going to be man on the run, and I hope fairly soon he will be eliminated, one way or another, or captured.

And I think those will happen, but the most important thing we need to bear in mind here is that the actual threat against the United States will continue regardless of what happens in Afghanistan, because it's part of a network within -- with money crossing international borders, sympathizers and cells in places like Hamburg, Germany and 10 miles from where I sit in New York now and 10 miles from where you sit in Washington, there are sympathizers, and they need to be tracked down.

And therefore, the law enforcement part of this in Europe and the United States is critical. Yesterday, I had a long talk with the secretary-general of Interpol, Ron Noble, the former -- an American who is a former undersecretary of Treasury, and when he described the total lack of international coordination between the major law enforcement agencies, I came away feeling that these military strikes -- while they are completely justified, and like all Americans I support President Bush, and I look forward to their success -- are only a fraction of the struggle that we have began.

WOODRUFF: Just to be very clear here, when you say these countries, their support in the future for what's going on will depend on how effective this first stage is, you are talking specifically about whether the United States and its allies are able to remove the Taliban from power, is that at very base?

HOLBROOKE: Yes. The Taliban no longer has any international support. The Pakistanis have abandoned them, the other two countries, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates that have supported them, have gone. There isn't any international regime, government, that would want them to survive of any consequence.

But it is vital that they be removed rapidly so we can get on with the more urgent tasks. A protracted struggle for power for the city of Kabul, a city which has been -- you know, it doesn't control the rest of the country and it's been controlled by a dozen or more different regimes over the last generation, is not where the United States' national interest lies. So, a quick and successful change of regime in Kabul is only a very first step.

And the Arab countries, the moderate Islamic countries you mentioned, plus I would add Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim state, want us to succeed there. So, a protracted struggle for power in Afghanistan would be very disadvantageous for us. And I would also remind you and your viewers that this administration, all of whose leaders participated in Desert Storm, have repeatedly said that air strikes are not sufficient to achieve an objective. So I think what we are seeing today is the important beginning of what is going to be a very difficult struggle, and I hope the Afghan part of it is relatively swift.

One other point, Judy. Prime Minister Blair talked about the humanitarian issue, and I would like to stress that isn't just humanitarian. If those refugees are not taken care of, Pakistan could come apart, and then we would have a much more serious situation.

WOODRUFF: All right. Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke joining us on the telephone from New York, making a very important point at the end, Aaron, about humanitarian assistance, which is, as the president and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld have stressed very much an important piece of this whole operation. BROWN: It's going on right now, as best we know, two C-17s dropping food aid into Afghanistan, as the attack was being carried out in other parts of the country.

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