Building an International Coalition Against Terrorism

First of all, let me thank you all for coming.

Second point is the obvious point that I would like to make -- and I think, for me, anyway, it really should be a main theme of our conversation today -- is that what happened on the 11th of September in New York, in Arlington, Virginia, in Pennsylvania was not just an attack on the United States of America, but really was an attack on the world.

And one of the things that I wanted to show you today was this map. I think we've passed out a small one for everybody, and if we haven't, we have them. This map -- which we had done up for us -- it seems to me, very graphically shows that although people are talking about this as some kind of attack on the United States, which it certainly was, that people from 80 different countries have either lost their lives -- confirmed -- or are missing in this attack. And that's countries all the way from Antigua to Zimbabwe. And this is a very, very important thing, I believe, as we go forward in this conversation together. It's Pakistanis. It's people from Britain. As I say, people from all around the world, as you can see, lost their lives or are still missing in this terrible attack.

So this is really, from our perspective, anyway, an attack on civilization, an attack on freedom, an attack on open societies. And that has been an important theme of the president and the secretary and National Security Adviser Rice, and it'll certainly be an important theme of mine today.

Let me talk for a moment also about the world response to this world attack, and that world response, from our perspective, anyway, has been very, very gratifying. I mean, I've been telling people that, from my perspective, my personal perspective, anyway, the only mitigating factor for what happened on the 11th of September has been the outpouring of support and solidarity from countries, from people, from organizations all around the world. Think first of the outpouring of sympathy from people around the world for Americans and, I think, for others who lost loved ones in that tragedy. To see what happened at our embassies, where people were putting flowers, lighting candles; to have seen the national anthem played -- for us, anyway -- in countries around the world; to see 100,000 people gather at Parliament Square in Canada -- these are all very important symbols to the United States that there is solidarity in the world against this scourge of terrorism.

We have received from all around the world hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of messages of condolences, and almost 200 of them from official bodies -- governments and NGOs, other interested organizations.

We've also received a very large number of offers of disaster relief. In fact, almost 60 countries have asked if they might send everything from blood to heavy equipment to specialized medical personnel. And some of those things are being used. But the important thing is how many people were quick to offer and how many people were so generous.

If I might also say that for Americans also the idea that so many people were reaching out to our citizens in trouble. I know especially in Canada, for example, where the 37 aircraft were set down on their way to New York, Canadians opened their homes, they opened their churches, they opened all of the things that people would need for three or four or five days. And I think as the president will tell Prime Minister Chretien today, this was something also very important to Americans.

A second very important group of support that has come has been from the multilateral organizations. From NATO, Article 5. From the United Nations Security Council, almost immediately after the 11th of September; from the United Nations General Assembly, the very first resolution, UNGA 56-1 talked about terrorism. And then the list goes on. The European Union. The Organization of American States. All very important regional and multilateral organizations, some of which we participate in, some of which we don't, but all of whom addressed their support to Americans and to the United States. And I believe these multilateral declarations of support will very much form the basis for the kind of coalition that we are trying to build.

Let me talk for a moment about coalition building. I think that you will have seen the response of the president, secretary of State, secretary of Defense, the national security adviser, all of the people who have been speaking to the American people have been talking about the need to capture the momentum that has built up after the 11th of September into building a coalition against terrorism. And that is something for us, anyway, that seems to us to be going extremely well.

Secretary Powell, for example, has made over a hundred telephone calls to his counterparts around the world; the president has been heavily engaged also in personal diplomacy here person to person in the United States, also on the telephone; and others, senior people in government, all trying to reach out and capture this momentum for an international coalition. Because, as the president said and everyone has said, this is not just America's fight, this is the world's fight, it's a civilization fight, and people really need to be part of that.

What do we mean when we talk about this coalition? For me, from my perspective, anyway, what it's about is having people stop, countries stop and say that there are no more excuses about terrorism, that they have to choose what side they're on in terms of terrorism, and that countries then will have to take actions, as they will see fit, and I think as Dr. Rice has so well put it, against terrorism, against terrorism internationally, against terrorism in their own countries. So that so some countries, for example, might be interested in sharing information, sharing intelligence, other countries doing more than that, other countries perhaps participating actually in military action.

Also there's the question of in the open, not in the open, I think as the president said when he was sitting with Prime Minister Megawati. Some countries might want to do this overtly, some countries might want to do it covertly. And that is a choice, really, we leave to others. But we believe that the time has really come for people to stand up now, make this choice, and do something about terrorism.

Let me make one other point as well, as I talk about the coalition. I think the coalition absolutely proves that from our perspective, this is not about Islam, it's not about Moslem countries, it's not about Muslims. This is about a desire on the part of the United States and like-minded countries to say to terrorism wherever it is, terrorism whomever it's against, terrorism against the United States and the world in this way really now has to cease.

And so I think as President Bush did when he visited the mosque here in Washington, as he did when he made a speech to the joint session of Congress the other day, has tried very hard to be clear that this isn't about culture, that this is about freedom; and this isn't about what religion you belong to, this is about whether you are on the side of openness and freedom or on the other side.

Let me talk for a moment about recent U.S. actions. I think, as I say, that you all saw this morning at 9:30 the president announced the executive order so that we might now press more effectively, focus in on questions of financing of terrorism, which seem to be extremely important. As the president said today, we want to use every tool at our disposal, whether that's diplomatic tools or financial tools, intelligence tools, to make this case as best we can and to make it impossible for terrorism to continue in this world as it has for so many years.

So we've signed this executive order. I hope that other countries will do the same or take it as a model, or if other countries do more, they will be able to inform us of what else can be done. But I think we took a very important step this morning at 9:30.

If I could leave you with this thought, as the president and the secretary did this morning, I think the key thing here is, is that this campaign against terrorism really has started. It has started in the minds of Americans. It's started in the minds of people around the world. It's started in these multilateral organizations. It's started as we start to change our own laws and rules and regulations, as we did this morning in the executive order. It started really in a conversation around the world. And we do intend to use all the means at our disposal to see what we can do to combat this scourge.

So this campaign has begun. I think it's fair to say that every country has a role to play; that it really is time to choose for people; and that, I would say, anyway, given the fact of the tragedy on the 11th of September, that we've made quite a lot of progress so far. And we should never really take our minds or our hearts off this map in remembering why it is so important to succeed on the course on which we've set ourselves.

So, Peter, thank you very much. And I'd be glad to take a few questions.

MR. KOVACH: As usual, please wait for the microphone, and tell us your name and organization.

Q Mr. Grossman, I'm Aziz Hannifah (ph) with India Abroad. Last week you met with congressional leaders, both in the Senate and the House, regarding the lifting of sanctions on India and Pakistan, which was done over the weekend by the president. Could you tell me if there was sort of overwhelming unanimity by congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle regarding the lifting of the sanctions, because in fact there is an irony here. Earlier there was a decision that had been made in principle for the lifting of sanctions against India, and Pakistan was going to ride on it. But now it looks as if it was the other way about with sanctions being lifted on Pakistan with India riding the Pakistani wave.

Was there unanimity in terms of Congress and the leaders regarding the lifting of sanctions on Pakistan, because there has already been the sense that it is, after all, a military regime in Pakistan.

MR. GROSSMAN: Well, I actually was going to agree with most of your question right up until the end.

Q Okay.

MR. GROSSMAN: So -- no, let me step back, because I think the facts are very important here. We had taken the decision long before the terrible events of September the 11th to lift -- not to "lift" -- and I think it's very important -- to waive the sanctions, the nuclear sanctions, post-1998 sanctions, on India and Pakistan. And indeed, as you will know, sir, the request for my consultation and the date that was set for the consultation was in fact set three or four weeks ago. So this is not a result of what happened on the 11th of September. We had taken the decision that the time had come to waive these sanctions, or to recommend that the president waive the sanctions. So I did that.

There's no question, though, since I don't want to be disingenuous here, no question at all that the events of the 11th of September made that question much more urgent, and made it possible, I think, when I did do the consultations, to get a quick response from the House and from the Senate.

I would say -- and really, it's not for me to say; I mean, I'm not a senator or a congressman -- but we were certainly able to report to the secretary of State, and through him to the president, that as a result of the consultations, we believed that Congress would support the president's decision to waive those sanctions.

You then talked about another set of sanctions, because I've been only talking about the nuclear sanctions so far. You then raised the question of the democracy sanctions, which I think are called Section 508 of the law. We've not really taken a decision about that yet, sir. But what I can tell you is that a number of members of Congress, both in the House and in the Senate, urge that we look at that question as well, and we're certainly doing so.

MR. KOVACH: The gentleman in the back.

Q My name is Nayyar Zaidi and I represent the daily Jang in Pakistan. And I have lots of questions, but I'll only ask one. (Laughter.)

MR. GROSSMAN: Okay. In about two hours from now, we can come back to you and do another one.

Q (Chuckles.) Well, during the last 50 years, Pakistan has come to U.S. assistance during the Cold War, after the Cold War, and of course, during the Afghan war, each time to find that it was abandoned when the U.S. objectives were achieved.

Once again, you have come to Pakistan. Whether it has a democratic regime or a military regime, you want Pakistan. So as an undersecretary for Policy -- for Political Affairs, are you proposing some kind of long-term policy towards Pakistan, since it has been so crucial to the U.S. national security objectives during the last 50 years, and this is not, just, you know, use them, throw them away, or discard them away type of operation again?

MR. GROSSMAN: Well, I must say I really do not only object, I think I slightly resent the premise of your question. I don't think that the facts would really hold that up. And you know, we can sort of debate the past, and we can have the reminisce of the past, but I think, sir, that you put too much of this on us.

I mean, don't forget that I think this administration came into office looking not only to have a better relationship with India but also to get the relationship with Pakistan right. And I would say that from my perspective, anyway, we were extremely lucky that in the United States just before the terrible events of September 11th we had General Mahmoud (sp), the ISI chief, and he was here to do what? To talk about more that we could do between Pakistan and the United States.

And I also say that we have for many, many years been in a conversation with Pakistan about the Taliban and about Afghanistan.

So here's what I would say. I would say that General Musharraf made the decision he made for the interests of Pakistan. He didn't make it for the interests of the United States, he made it because he had a choice to make between what was happening in Afghanistan, the fact that Osama bin Laden is the prime suspect for what happened on September the 11th, and the fact that around the world, as I said, momentum had developed against terrorism.

So I think General Musharraf made a courageous decision. He made a decision for Pakistan, and it's something we would like to support him with. And I think, as the previous gentleman said, one of the reasons that there was this increased interest in doing something about sanctions, one of the reasons there is increased interest now, I think, in doing more for Pakistan, is precisely because General Musharraf made a very courageous decision.

MR. KOVACH: (Off mike.)

Q Imet Engensul (sp) with Turkey's NTV Television. What would you like to say about the cooperation levels promised by Turkey and Central Asian republics for America's war against terrorism? Would they have major operational value for you?

MR. GROSSMAN: Well, let me try to respond in a couple of ways. First, again, let me just come back to a basic fact here. Although CNN and other networks seem to scroll "America's New War," "America's war against terrorism," as you just did, I don't think that's right. And again, I would just beg you to take a look at this map. This is not America's war against terrorism; this is, I believe, a war that everybody needs to be involved in. This is a campaign now against terror.

So when you ask me, "What about this country, what about that country," I say that countries who look at that map and -- ought to recognize that terror is not something that should be excused anymore, that terror is something that should be fought.

And when you say, for example, about Turkey, I mean, we've been very, very pleased with the response that we've received from Turkey. And again, like I tried to answer the gentleman from Jang's question, this is not something that Turkey does for the United Sates, this is something that Turkey does because it's right and that Turkey does in Turkey's interests. So, Friday, President Bush spoke to President Sezer. Turkey has been in contact with us.

Again, I mean, you know my history; the many, many friends I've had from Turkey, from Greece, from all across the Mediterranean who have called to express their solidarity, these are things that are very important.

So this is not America's war against terrorism, this is a campaign in which we all need to participate against terrorism.

Q And Central Asia?

MR. GROSSMAN: I would say exactly the same thing to them.

MR. KOVACH: This gentleman here.

Q Lasotat (ph) from Television Novi Sad (ph), Serbian television. Do you foresee that this coalition might become -- or get strength to form by formalizing the coalition by some agreements or some conferences between the participants of the coalition, or just bilateral talks, which might during certain period to -- the intentions of these governments to be washed away or I mean to lose the strong intentions to fight terrorism in the course of time. Or do you foresee a stronger, formalized coalition, something maybe similar to NATO, on a worldwide scale?

MR. GROSSMAN: No, sir, I don't. This is just a personal opinion. I see this coalition as a campaign in which countries, as Dr. Rice and the president and the secretary have said -- in which countries do a certain number of things, and countries have a minimum. For example, we've asked countries to ratify the 12 United Nations Conventions against terrorism, two of which the United States has not yet ratified. We've asked countries now to increase their work with other countries in terms of law enforcement, in terms of finances, in terms of immigration controls. And these are things I think that there are plenty of bodies around the world to do.

So no, sir -- and, again, I mean, who knows what the future will hold? But I don't see a coalition forming up and then everyone goes to Geneva, you know, and has four days of consultations and, you know, a learned diplomatic piece of paper is put out to which everyone agrees. I think this is a question of take a stand, take a choice, and then do what is required in your own country and in your neighborhood to put an end to this business.

Q Judith Snyderman (sp) for Africa Journal.

What has --

MR. GROSSMAN: Where are you? Where are you? Okay. Sorry.

Q What has the response been from the Africa Union and the African nations? And also, how can you build solidarity when the definition of terrorism seems so argumentative?

MR. GROSSMAN: Well, I think the definition of terrorism doesn't have to seem so argumentative. And clearly, we're asking people to look into their own consciences now. There's no excuse for what happened on the 11th of September. There's no way, it seems to me, that you can define that away. And there has to be some minimum commitment on people's part that this kind of activity, the financing of this kind of activity, the support of this kind of activity ought to end. And so one of the things that I keep saying to people is, you know, no more excuses about this. And people have to look into their own consciences, I think, and decide to stop kind of defining this away from them as their problem.

I think we've been very pleased so far with not just the statements of African countries, but also the fact that many of them offered assistance, many of them have taken very substantial steps to protect our people, both official and private, in African countries. And don't forget, it was in Nairobi, it was in Dar es Salaam that one of these predecessor attacks took place. So, Africans, of anyone, not only lost people on the 11th of September but they lost people with us in those two embassy bombings, I think and know very well what Osama bin Laden is capable of.

MR. KOVACH: A question over there.

Q Hi. I'm Javier Rindis (ph) with the El Espectador newspaper from Colombia. What will be the direct impact on this whole campaign in Colombia and Latin America? And also, I wonder if at this time the U.S. has proved that any of the Colombian characterized terrorism groups has any account in the U.S. that has been frozen as the executive order by President Bush said.

MR. GROSSMAN: On your second question, I don't know, but I don't believe that they were on the list that was issued this morning. But I think as I think Secretary O'Neill said this morning, this is something that, you know, we will continue to look at.

In terms of Colombia, let me first of all, like I have here on a number of occasions -- you know, a number of Colombians were killed and are still missing in the World Trade Center bombing, and so our condolences to Colombia, as to the other 80 countries who have lost people in this.

I don't know the impact, exactly, on how it's going to be, impact on Colombia. I had the chance to meet with the Colombian foreign minister on Friday afternoon, who was here for a meeting ing of the Organization of American States. We had a chance to talk about Colombia. We had a chance to talk about the peace process there. I think as I said in Colombia a couple of weeks ago, the peace process is something that we support. We also recognize, however, that the FARC, the ELN, the AUC are terrorist organizations. And I think it's possible to hold these two ideas in your head at the same time. There's an important decision that Colombians have to make, and you'd have to ask them. But I think the events of September the 12th will have -- I'm sorry, of September the 11th will have an impact.

MR. KOVACH: The gentleman here.

Q Mr. Grossman, I am Mathe Schurtz (sp), National Network from Slovenia. First, could you be more specific on how administration is going to cooperate, if any, with European Union? And a second, very simple question: Does -- Bush's administration has any intention to change or at least rethink its policy towards Israel? Thank you.

MR. GROSSMAN: On your second question, the answer is no. I think that we have pursued a principled policy in the Middle East for many, many years. It is not something subject to change. I don't think there can be anyone in this country and anyone in the world who can doubt the fact that -- doubt the amount of effort and time that the president of the United States and the secretary of State have put into trying to bring the right kind of peace, a just peace, to the Middle East, just as their predecessors did. This is a huge effort and a huge amount of time.

And so I don't want this and I don't believe that this question of a world attack -- attack on the world should be put into the framework of the Middle East. That's not what this about.

On your second question -- I'm sorry -- on your first question, about the European Union, I must say we have thought, from America's perspective, anyway, the solidarity that has come from countries of the European Union and the European Union itself has really been astonishing. I think the very first remarkable statements from the European Union, if -- I think I'm quoting him properly, and if I'm not, I apologize in advance -- Mr. Prodi saying that the United States stood with Europe in its darkest hour, and it's now time for Europe to stand with the United States -- are very telling and very important to Americans, I also think to Europeans.

Secretary Powell had the good fortune last week -- I think it was Thursday or Friday -- to have lunch with the troika and European Union commissioners, including Chris Patten, Javier Solana, Belgian representatives, and others. And I think what got decided there was remarkable.

And then if you take it to Friday, where European heads of state and government meet, and you see what they decided on finance, on transport, on immigration, on law enforcement, on intelligence cooperation, I think you can see that there's a very great commitment on the part of the European Union.

MR. KOVACH: The gentleman here.

Q My name is Choi (sp). I am from South Korea's Embassy Television. And the South Korean government said that it is willing to join the international coalition against terrorism, and I could say the South Korean special troops are accustomed to the cold, the rugged terrain in the fight against North Korea. And do you expect South Korea to send special troops or land forces to the coalition? And if you want, when is the right and exact -- the proper time, and what is the range of the number of troops?

MR. GROSSMAN: I'm not sure who would be more astonished if I was to answer that question, you or me. (Laughter.)

I mean, that's -- let me say that we absolutely, 100 percent appreciate everything that the Republic of Korea has done here. Statements have been very strong. Commitments have been very strong.

But I certainly am not going to go anywhere near the kinds of operational requirements we might or might not need in the future. But I appreciate the -- I appreciate the sentiment behind your question.

Q Ambassador, a two-pronged question. Richard Downs (sp) --

MR. KOVACH: Would you identify yourself?

Q Richard Downs (sp) from Irish Radio and TV. The first thing is that you mentioned the FARC, and it can't have escaped your attention that there has been a lot of speculation about links between the IRA and the FARC. What do you have to say about that? Do you believe that there are strong links between those terrorist organizations?

And secondly, in relation to the U.N. Security Council, what are you expecting from them in the future? Are you expecting not just solidarity, but action from them? And do you expect them to get involved in whatever actions you're going to take abroad?

MR. GROSSMAN: On the first, it did not escape my notice that there were these allegations. I had the good fortune to be in Colombia a couple of weeks ago. I think the Colombians are very, very concerned about this, as everyone should be. I know there's an investigation ongoing. I know what the allegations are. And I'm sure the Colombian authorities will come to some conclusion. But if these allegations are true, you know, it's obviously a sad matter. And it's exactly these kinds of connections that we don't need around the world. But as I say, there's an investigation ongoing. We did notice the reports, and as I say, if it were true, I think it would be quite a serious thing.

On the second, in terms of the United Nations Security Council, we believe that -- and again, you have to help me, whether it was Wednesday or Thursday -- that the Security Council resolution that was passed in the immediate aftermath of this tragedy is tremendous. I mean, it talks about "all necessary means." It talks about the need to fight terrorism. And we think that it is a very, very good resolution and gives not just the United States, but the international community things -- enough to go on.

I think on a specific answer to your question, it may be that as you're pursuing the finances of terrorists that it may be that some countries around the world need more help from the United Nations to be able to get at financial flows and other capital flows. And it may be that there will be more conversation in the United Nations there specifically. I can't tell you, but I tried to answer that question as honestly as I can.

MR. KOVACH: The gentleman here.

Q My name is -- (inaudible) -- I represent Aaj Tak news channel of India. I would like to know that -- America has always said that it's a global fight against terrorism and it should not concern only one country or one terrorist. And yes, we have seen terrorism for the last one decade in Jammu and Kashmir, and they have lost almost 3,000 lives in that. Will America investigate that who is behind promoting that terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir?

And my second part of the question, India has always said that Pakistan is behind this whole promoting terrorism and giving funds and arms to the militants. So what is America's view on that?

MR. GROSSMAN: Well, I think our view on all these things is, is that, as we've said over and over in the last few days, at the State Department press briefing, our policy on Kashmir hasn't changed. What has changed here is, is that we are very focused on what has happened on that map. And I think as Secretary Powell, as the president, and as Condi Rice have said over the weekend, we are looking now to develop this international coalition, and the focus is al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, the networks, and the training camps. That's our focus, and that's what we intend to do.

MR. KOVACH: This may have to be the last question.

Q Andrei Sitov from TASS from Russia. President Putin has just made an announcement that Russia will provide corridors for air traffic to the United States, I understand, if need be; but he made a caveat saying that only humanitarian cargo will be admitted. And some of the Central Asians also -- the Central Asian countries made similar announcements about their bases. Is it enough? Is it something that you were looking for?

And also, President Putin said that there were other things they were looking for. One of them, as everybody mentions this, Chechnya, for instance; is Chechnya now on the plate in the fight against terrorism throughout the world?

And he also said that mechanisms at the United Nations should be employed more forcefully. You have just said that enough is enough, the resolution is enough. What could he have meant?

MR. GROSSMAN: Well, first of all, I apologize, I was probably on my way here when President Putin was speaking, or perhaps when the reports came out. I think as the president said this morning at the Rose Garden ceremony, he had been in touch with President Putin over a number of occasions, and as early as, I think, today was the last time. They had a very good conversation. I think they agreed on a number of the things that Russia and the United Stats could do together, the Central Asians and the United States, Russia could do together. And I think as we go forward, we're going to find ways to cooperate. And on a long list of anxieties that I have, our cooperation with Russia, our cooperation with the Central Asian states is really not very high up on that list of anxieties.

As I tried to explain to the gentleman from the Irish Times, I mean, from our perspective, anyway, the United Nations was among the very first and most effective of all the multilateral and international organizations to speak. And if you go back and take a look at that text, it couldn't be any clearer. And so we believe it was the right thing to do, it happened very quickly, we appreciate it. The United Nations has spoken in this in very clear terms.

Anyway, I thank you all very much. As I told Peter, I'd be very glad to do this from time to time. Thanks.

MR. KOVACH: Thank you very much, Undersecretary Grossman.

END.

Copyright (c)2001 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202)824-0520.