From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subject: [R-G] Paris reporters say Bush threatened war last summer


http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0201/ridgeway.php

The Village Voice                   January 2 - 8, 2002

The French Connection

Paris reporters say Bush threatened war last summer

     by James Ridgeway

Far from the American media machine, two French authors have released a
report outlining U.S. attempts to finesse the issue of Osama bin Laden long
before Al Qaeda struck on September 11. Based on extensive firsthand
reporting, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasqui� write in their book,
Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth, that the Bush administration went so far as
to consider waging war against Afghanistan's ruling Taliban last summer.
Brisard and Dasqui� argue the U.S. cared more about getting access to the
region's oil than about getting the head of Osama bin Laden.

Now thousands of U.S. citizens are dead and Al Qaeda is on the run. Dasqui�
tells the Voice he doubts the group will last "more than a few weeks." The
journalist describes bin Laden's military leaders as mostly former members
of the Egyptian special forces who joined with the Saudi exile in 1992 and
1993 during fighting in Sudan. Al Qaeda commanders and troops are "the
military product of a religious deviance," he says, warning that ending the
network "won't solve anything because the Saudi charities and other
organizations tied to the clerics will go on pumping out the money. The
problem is their fundamentalism."

Brisard, who has run Vivendi International's economic intelligence service,
prepared the West's first report on Al Qaeda back in 1997, at the request of
the French government. Along with Dasqui�, he now argues the FBI's efforts
to get to the bottom of bin Laden's terror outfit -- which bombed two
American embassies in Africa in 1998 -- were blocked by the Saudi royal
family and the big oil companies, which were hungry for the region's crude
reserves. 

The FBI press office had no comment on the book, and the State Department
has steadily denied having any negotiations with the Taliban, which had no
diplomatic standing in the U.S. But the two authors think highly of the FBI
agents who were working on counterterrorism, saying they often had excellent
informants. 

That's not to say progress was great. When an FBI agent would turn up to do
an interview, the Saudis would step in with their own bizarre behavior. "We
uncovered incredible things," Dasqui� tells the Voice. "Investigators would
arrive to find that key witnesses they were about to interrogate had been
beheaded the day before." In the end, he says, the West "always considered
Saudi Arabia as a partner that we absolutely and systematically had to
protect." 

The book also reveals a portrait of U.S. policy toward the Taliban that
differs sharply from the one usually held up for the American public but
coincides with that of the Taliban's unofficial emissary in the U.S., Laili
Helms, the niece of the former CIA head (see "The Accidental Operative,"
Voice, June 19, 2001). Helms described one incident after another in which,
she claimed, the Taliban agreed to give up bin Laden to the U.S., only to be
rebuffed by the State Department. On one occasion, she said, the Taliban
agreed to give the U.S. coordinates for his campsite, leaving enough time so
the Yanks could whack Al Qaeda's leader with a missile before he moved. The
proposal, she claims, was nixed. The State Department denied receiving any
such offer. 

Helms also related an incident when Prince Turki, then the head of Saudi
intelligence, flew to Kabul to negotiate bin Laden's arrest. Turki,
according to Helms's account of the story, wanted bin Laden murdered on
Afghan soil. If he were killed there, then the Saudi royal family needn't
face the embarrassment of airing their dirty linen in an open trial. The
Taliban refused, and Turki returned home empty-handed.

Brisard and Dasqui� characterize the U.S. as playing a clumsy footsie with
the Taliban, with diplomacy unfolding in a series of bizarre fits and
starts. By the late 1990s, the writers claim, diplomacy was run on different
levels. One channel went from the UN Security Council to Kabul. Meanwhile,
the State Department conducted its own bilateral negotiations. From the
start, the U.S. favored a sort of covert support for the Taliban, in hopes
that sooner or later the one-eyed Supreme Leader Mullah Mohammed Omar could
be prevailed upon to break ties with bin Laden so the West could get on with
its pipeline and other business interests.

However, this approach came to a screaming halt in September 1997, when
European Union commissioner Emma Bonino paid an official visit to Kabul,
where the Taliban arrested her for filming the conditions in a women's
hospital. Their outrageous actions made it difficult for the West to appear
at all friendly with the Taliban. In reality, since they had all the power
in this Stalinized regime, nobody ever stopped dealing with them. It's just
that the trail became more submerged. Bin Laden then began his potent
offensives, attacking the diplomatic posts and the USS Cole.

In general, according to the authors, the U.S. line on the Taliban had gone
something like this: "OK, they are officially a bit wild, but let's not go
overboard. Eventually we can make them acceptable." Under Clinton, few
thought they could ever deal with the Taliban, and some wanted to pile on
sanctions. But under Bush, talks started up once more. The purpose was
legitimate at the start, Brisard notes. "It was for the U.S. to negotiate
that bin Laden be given to them," he says. "Then it shifted to the point
where advisers thought that the economic arguments would make the difference
with the Taliban and accelerate the negotiations. They started to put the
oil subsidies that would be given to the Taliban on the table. At the end of
July, the negotiations broke down, because the U.S. threatened to go to war
with the Taliban if they didn't accept the deal."

Dasqui�, too, notes the role of the oil industry in this conflict. "Most of
the big names of the Bush administration have a political culture developed
in Big Oil-Cheney with Halliburton, Rice at Chevron," he says. "Donald Evans
also came from a big oil company." This shift from the Clinton era took
effect quickly. In March 2001, a personal representative of Supreme Leader
Omar came to Washington. In his mission to the nation's capital, he was
accompanied by Helms.

It should be noted here that the Taliban, through a policy of coercion, had
stopped farmers from growing opium poppies-a major goal of both the Clinton
and Bush drug wars. In certain quarters this was taken as a sign of their
coming around to deal with the U.S. What nobody seemed to know, or at least
appreciate at the time, was that bin Laden had put so much money into
Afghanistan that he virtually owned the regime. "We must understand that
Mullah Omar was a peasant and illiterate," says Brisard, "so the person
giving substance to the religious message of the Taliban regime is Osama bin
Laden. He is the person who brings life to and finances the Taliban
economy." 

The way the French writers see it, the most significant factor in Central
Asia is not a revived cold war between Russia and the U.S. over influence in
the former Soviet republics, but the rise of Iran. Here the irony is that
the U.S. embraced Saudi Arabia as a counterbalance against the Shiites in
Iran. Now the tables are turned. FBI investigations showed the connection
between the Saudi clergy and the September terrorist attacks. Gradually the
U.S. has begun to distance itself from the Saudis. And at the same time, it
has begun to warm to Iran, whose help the U.S. suddenly needs.

"During the dark years of Taliban power, their principal opponent in western
Afghanistan was Iran," Dasqui� says. "It played a very important part in
supporting the Afghan resistance." Indeed, it was Shiite Iran that financed
dissidents against the Taliban. When the crisis started, the Swiss Embassy
in Tehran organized meetings between American State Department officials and
Iranian president Mohammed Khatami's government.

In the end, the authors say Al Qaeda was a special case in that it was set
up to be a nexus for other fundamentalist networks. Through bin Laden, it
provides the financing to attract such groups as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad
and the Ramata I Islamya. "There are a lot of fundamentalist movements
around the world, but no one like Al Qaeda, because it was meant to be a
kind of central point, a crossroads, the focus of fundamentalist movements,"
says Dasqui�. "But if tomorrow Al Qaeda disappears, many little movements
can replace it. All that is necessary is to get the support and benediction
of the Saudi clergy."

Additional reporting: Michael Ridley
Paris interviews and translation by Sandra Bisin




_________________________________________________
 
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki
Phone +358-40-7177941
Fax +358-9-7591081
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
 
General class struggle news:
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
subscribe mails to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Geopolitical news:
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________


Reply via email to