|
Back Channels
With Vernon Loeb
Washington Post National Security Reporter
Wednesday, July 11, 2001; 1 p.m. EST
Washington Post reporter Vernon Loeb covers national security issues and writes a biweekly column exclusively for the Web. His newspaper column, is also carried by this Web site.
In his latest articles and columns, Loeb writes about an FBI official who admitted misleading Congress in the Wen Ho Lee investigation; Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's request for the largest defense budget increase in almost 20 years and fallout over the Bush administration's decision to abandon a bombing range on the Puerto Rican island of Vieques.
Submit
your questions and comments before or during the discussion.
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Vernon Loeb: Greetings all. I'm told there are lots of questions coming in, and I'll try to answer as many as possible. I'm kind of being pulled back and forth these days between the Pentagon and the intel world, so maybe we can talk about both, since they're both very much at play in this impending war on terrorism.
Washington, D.C.:
Mr. Loeb,
I just read your article, along with the two articles on foreign policy on the front page of the Post. Although it's coming in in trickles and splurts, I really think it's interesting that both journalists and foreign policy scholars are picking up on this major reversal of foreign policy -- including the so-called Powell Reversal sighted in Slate yesterday -- of the Bush Administration. Simply put, do you think that this is the new Truman Doctrine that will encompass FP for the decades to come?
I ask this question with both solemnity and curiosity. When Condoleeza Rice -- so nicely profiled in your paper on the Sunday before Sept. 11 -- stood up before the Republican Convention and declared that America should embrace a new doctrine of isolationism, individualism, and Hans Morgenthauish realism in their relations with other countries -- i.e., pull out of Bosnia regardless of NATO concerns, missile defense over refutes, anti-Keyoto over the rest of the world -- boy did that make good cover!!
Now, she stands in an Administration whose previous policies have been wholesale failures of rejection in the global alliance against terrorism. Do we need NATO's help? Sure we do. Are Chechen's terrorists? Works for me. Do we want to build nations, once we take out their opposition enemies? Come on down Northern alliance! The Middle East? That's their own problem. And most importantly, are tri-polar relations between the US,China, and Russia the foundations of determining our national defense strategy? Hell no, junk it all. Where is the Rice doctrine of foreign policy that Mr. Bush listened to so intently?
Is this the beginning of a new "relationship" with the globe, or something that an Administration so desperate to form a fragile coalition needs temporarily?
Vernon Loeb: I personally hope it's the former, especially if the Bush administration wants to win the war against terrorism. However, I think only time well tell. Certainly, the attacks of Sept. 11 caused the administration to re-think it's foreign policy, and its tendency toward unilateralism, very quickly. And so far it's formulation seems pretty good to me. Thanks for that most engaging question!
Kingsford, Mich.:
What is your view on pilots carrying guns?
Vernon Loeb: Don't really have one. Airport and airline security isn't really my specialty. It seems there should be a better way of securing airliners than arming pilots, but I don't really know what it would be exactly.
Roseville, Calif.:
Do you think the American people are ready for some retribution? And if so, how long do you think the American people will 'sit tight'? I personally am starting to wonder if 'those that harbor them' will be held accountable.
Thanks
Vernon Loeb: I guess most people are ready for retribution, though I'm not sure that's the appropriate instinct. Personally, I'm ready for self-defense, and justice. I hope people are willing to sit tight for a long time, because in this war, there are no really obvious targets. To me, the fact that the administration is waiting before it begins executing the military option means they're smart, not that they lack the will to take on those who harbor terrorists.
Falls Church, Va:
Mr Loeb, I find your article interesting and scary. The subject of bio/chem is certainly being actively discussed these days. I do not find, however, that discussions of the technical expertise required to accomplish an attack with these agents offers much comfort. I think for the "right" amount of money from bad guys the expertise can be acquired. I am concerned by the repeated statements I have seen referenced that there are no accurate numbers to account for inventories (for lack of a better word)of these agents and that there is "missing" or "unaccounted for" agents that were under the control of the former Soviet Union. Any comment? Thanks
Vernon Loeb: I share your sense of discomfort, though I am willing to believe those experts who say Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda probably don't have much chem-bio sophistication right now. As we've seen, this is a group that's patient and skilled, and the fact that they may not have that capability now is no guarantee, as you suggest, that they can't spend the money and hire the expertise to develop it. Unfortunately, we havn't paid nearly enough attention to safeguarding inventories of pathogens, and keeping track of what has become of the former Soviet chem-bio apparatus, partly because there wasn't any consensus--before Sept. 11--about how seriously to take threat. I don't think that's a problem now.
Baltimore, Md.:
As Washington builds its anti-terrorism coalition, the Bush administration has stopped short of presenting its case against Osama bin Laden to prominent U.S. allies. Some of this probably stems from an American reluctance to reveal the full extent of its knowledge--lest it provide another set of "lessons learned" to the alleged culprits. At the same time, however, key figures abroad such as German Defense Minister Sharping are asking for evidence on which to act. How do you see the U.S. administration reconciling this apparent tension between building a prima facie case against bin Laden and effectively shielding its sources and methods?
Vernon Loeb: I think the administration will soon come out with an unclassified "white paper" to document bin Laden's responsibility for the Sept. 11 attacks. I also think that it will produce a classified document--perhaps it should be called a black document--for sharing with friendly countries, like Germany, that will contain the most sensitive intelligence, and probably be far more convincing. But I'm not sure complaints from other countries about the insufficiency of U.S. evidence and intelligence are going to matter all that much, in terms of what the Bush administration ends up doing militarily.
Gladstone, New Jersey:
The question that should be answered by the executive office is "Why did this happen?" The enormity of this tragedy is that our government allowed this to happen. This has been the greatest blunder the greatest failure of national security! Heads should roll from the national security advisor all the way down to they immigration dept. What has happened is the politics of this country has everyone standing with the American flag, avoiding to ask the question, WHY DID THIS HAPPEN? WHO WAS IN CHARGE AND FAILED TO PROTECT OUR PEOPLE? I believe the rise of patriotism in the U.S. will eventually be replaced with a resentment by the people. We were let down by government officials who failed!
Vernon Loeb: Clearly, the government failed on many levels. At the same time, I am of the opinion that terrorism is a very hard thing to stop all the time. It is asymmetric by nature. The government has to defend 1,000 targets. Terrorists have to hit just one, or two. Should the CIA and the FBI be able to pre-empt all terrorist attacks? Should the FBI be able to foil all bank robberies? That's a tall order. Evil, determined people will find ways to do evil things. History tells us that. Having said that, inquiries will be conducted at some point, and people will be held accountable, to some degree. My bet is that far fewer than would satisfy you will end up being fired or disciplined.
Bethesda, Md.:
Hi Vernon,
What might be the logistical difficulties in switching the roles of National Airport and Andrews Airforce Base? It seems this topic was broached but never seriously considered, as it appears to have died down.
Vernon Loeb: That's an interesting question that I don't know the answer to but what to acknoweldge so that it's out there and other people can think about it. Making National Andrews and Andrews National makes a certain amount of sense to me.
Newton, Mass.:
We seem to have one intelligence failure after another coming from the CIA and NSA - from the collapse of the USSR, the nuclear and missle programs of India and Pakistan, the attacks on embassies in Africa, the USS Cole, and now these recent terrible events even though they've had billions to spend to watch Bin Laden & co. What makes us think giving more billions to the same people in the same structures will help.
Vernon Loeb: Good question. I'm not sure the intelligence community's inability to stop bin Laden, or do any of the other things you mention, was a failure of money. We spend about $30 billion a year on intelligence. That ought to be enough to get good intelligence. I think some parts of the intelligence community probably work better than others. And in areas like counterterrorism, maybe we do need to think outside the box and start over somehow--create a small, super-clandestine service focused just on terrorism that resides outside the CIA. We certainly do need to start thinking in entirely new ways about collecting intelligence on, and infiltrating, terrorist organizations. But it is an enormously difficult problem--and just as military solutions can't be the only response, neither can intelligence options work by themselves.
Virginia:
How many intelligence analysts can speak and read Arabic? Pashtu? Urdu?
Vernon Loeb: Somebody asked the same question last week. I don't know. The answer is a state secret. Clearly, not enough. My guess is that the CIA probably has only a couple of dozen people who can speak and read Arabic fluently. I hope I'm wrong, and I stand to be corrected by anyone at the CIA who knows.
Monroe Twp., N.J.:
Do we have a Master Plan for what we intend to do? Or is this effort going forward piece by piece?
Vernon Loeb: Clearly, we have no master plan. Almost by definition, this thing has to proceed slowly, piece by piece. First, we have to figure out where bin Laden is. That alone could take time. Probably most of the people in his inner circle are long gone from Afghanistan by now. This engagement is going to take a long, long time. Don't expect Operation Desert Storm.
Maryland:
About the DIA Cuban expert who was arrested, when will she goes to trial? And is CI more active now than it was during the Clinton administration?
Vernon Loeb: I haven't hard a trial date, but if she goes to trial it would probably be sometime in the first half of next year. Usually, alleged spies don't go to trial, preferring to cut deals by trading information about what they compromised in return for some form of leniency. FBI spy Robert Hanssen, you may recall, bargained away the death penalty. As for counterintelligence activities, they probably are running at about the same level. I was never one who believed that the Clinton administration was a counterintelligence disaster.
Washington, D.C.:
Does CIA Director Tenet have any operational experiences?
Vernon Loeb: Good question. He is not a career CIA operations officer. From that standpoint, the answer is no. For that, he will forever be suspect in the eyes of some, perhaps many, agency operators. However, the man is definitely not stupid, and he has been director of the CIA for more than five years now, and in that time has overseen lots of operations. So he's clearly got some on the job experience. He will never be Jack Downing, or Richard Helms. But that shouldn't necessarily make him suspect as one who oversees operations. I only wish I knew more about his performance on that front.
Austin, Texas:
Let's leave behind the leftist effort to twist words in Condoleeza Rice's mouth before they're even warm, and talk about today's subject, Bin Laden's Bio and Chem warfare capacity and tendencies.
I used Google to search the internet last night for Israeli NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) gas masks. Every site is sold out and has no indication of when they'll be available.
A search of EBAY today indicates that Israeli gas masks which normally retail for about $29.99 are going for up to $250.00 each, and still bidding up.
Clearly, many, many people know what's coming, it's just a matter of when. Yet, unlike in Israel, the USA appears to be making no efforts to equip Americans with the tools we will need to have even a chance of surviving the war on terrorism.
Where do you suggest we go for our Israeli NBC gas masks, sir?
Vernon Loeb: I wish I knew how to advise you. Clearly, it's a seller's market. I was in Tel Aviv during the Gulf War, and had my Israeli gas mask, but I feel no need to go out and get one now. I just don't want to live that way. But if having one makes you feel more comfortable, I agree you should be able to get one without being gouged.
College Park, Md.:
In response to the comment by the person from Gladstone, NJ, concerning whose "head should role" in the U.S. government for the Sept. 11th attacks, this is a government of the people. In the last several Presidential elections, we citizen have had very, very little interest in national security issues. Our elected leaders over the past decade have to a great extent reflected this lack of interest, and in that sense we are all a bit responsible for not working to defend ourselves as much as we should have.
Vernon Loeb: I agree with you completely. We're all responsible, to some extent, for the "failure" to stop the attacks, by not being better civic citizens, and paying more attention, and demanding more from our government.
Olney, Md.:
The DCI established centers which bring together law enforcement and intelligence agency personnel to facilitate information exchange, analysis, operations and to better become accustom to the respective "cultures." What is the outlook for the centers? What role if any will they play with the naming of a Homeland Defense cabinet position and an enhanced NSC terrorism staff?
Vernon Loeb: well, before Sept. 11, in any event, the centers you mention were seen as highly successful. The melding of cultures and agencies was seen as the way to go--and probably still will serve as a model as the governmnt creates its homeland defense infrastructure. The best known CIA center is the Counterterrorist Center. It's definitely now in the eye of the storm.
Woodley Park, D.C.:
Hi Mr. Loeb-
What do you think will happen w/ National Airport? When, if ever, do you expect it to open?
Vernon Loeb: I don't know. I'm no expert on airports. But I can't believe it's not going to reopen. In fact, Newt Gingrich wrote a column that appeared somewhere today--I read it this morning--saying National should be reopened as a sign that we're not going to cower to terrorists.
Plano, Texas:
Since Bin Laden and the Taliban were created or at least trained and assisted by the USA at their beginings how great is the risk that they have agents in the CIA and Military? It would seem to be as vital to look for connections between current and past US Government Officals with the Taliban and company as it is to look for connections to other countries.
Vernon Loeb: I'm not sure I agree with your premise that bin Laden and the Taliban were trained and/or assisted by the U.S. Certainly, we should be wary of al Qaeda or Taliban agents in th US government or military, particularly since we know that Ali Mohammed, a bin Laden lieutenant who pleaded guilty in the embassy bombings case, served as a U.S. Army sargeant. But I have a hard to imagining that the Pentagon is crawling with bin Laden agents.
Washington, D.C.:
Prior to Monday's hearing on measures to improve counter-terrorism, Senator R. Shelby called the IC a "legacy of the Cold War" and stated that the IC's failure to modernize
"is a direct result of nearly a decade of inaction and neglect." He also said that IC agencies "often refuse or are unable to share info with each other." No kidding! Within the U.S. gov't, the word
"intelligence" basically means secrets that won't be shared. If Shelby and others are
serious about this, would you agree that changing the IC's culture of excessive secrecy must be a top priority?
Vernon Loeb: On some levels, getting rid of excessive secrecy would clearly help reform the intelligence community. In terms of penetrating terrorist organizations, I think total secrecy is an operational imperative. I don't agree completely with Shelby's assessment that the intelligence community is a legacy of the Cold War. It has evolved quite a bit since then. Shelby knows that. I find it a little hard to swallow that shelby is now shocked--shocked--that there are problems with the intelligence community. He's overseen the community for the past four years, and if the problems are so deep, he and his colleagues on the Senate intelligence committee should have been demanding reforms long before Sept. 11. I'm told the Senat committee voted to cut funding for human intelligence just days before the Sept. 11 attacks.
Arlington, Va.:
Seems like there would be many short-term obstacles to swapping National with AAFB. Andrews doesn't really have the necessary infrastructure, i.e. terminal building, gates, transport links to make it viable as a commercial airport. Likewise I suspect that National really wouldn't be suitable as an airforce base. It's probably in too public a location and the runways are pretty short. You couldn't land Air Force 1 there or any sort of big cargo plane. Plus Andrews' location isn't much farther from downtown which is apparently the biggest obstacle to National right now. I just hope they do the right thing and reopen National with the necessary extra security. No place is ever going to be 100% safe, but that's no reason to single out National for closing while every other airport operates.
Vernon Loeb: Thanks. You obviously know far more about the National-Andrews issue than I do. But I agree that there's no reason to permanently close National.
Monterey, Calif.:
Vernon,
You might point out to people who are buying gas masks that without warning of an attack, they are not much use, unless you plan to wear one 24/7. They make sense in Israel, where the main threat is missiles armed with CW or BW agents. There can be at least some warning of such attacks. But since our threat is terrorists, who can potentially release agents that are virtually undetectable without warning, it's not clear that a gas mask offers any real protection, expect as a psychological crutch.
Vernon Loeb: Thanks for pointing that out.
Sacramento, Calif.:
What can ordinary citizens - who are neither in the military or in the intel community - do about terrorism? It seems like we are simply supposed to hope for the best protection from our military and our government agencies. But is there anything constructive and positive we can do to help or to protect ourselves and others? I think one thing we should do is to promote and financially support the study of the more difficult foreign languages in our local schools and colleges. At least then we can begin to develop young people who have those skills. But that would take years before we saw any benefit. What do you think?
Vernon Loeb: Well, I think we can all start by paying attention to foreign affairs and insisting that our elected officials make the United States a respected world leader that does not need to be creating hostility on the part of 2/3s of the rest of the world's population.
Vernon Loeb: Well, I've gone a little over the appointed hour and have got to run and write a story for tomorrow's paper. Thank you all for participating. Your questions were, as usual, superb.
|
|
© Copyright 2001 The Washington Post Company | 
