Search Asia Times

Advanced Search

 
Front Page

Terrorism 'not a major White House focus'
By Andrew Tully

WASHINGTON - From his inauguration in January 2001 until the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania seven-and-a-half months later, US President George W Bush's public focus on national security was to establish a missile-defense shield.

Russia and China objected to the program, as did many of the United States's allies, on the grounds that it could trigger an international arms race similar to the one that ended with the Cold War. But Bush argued that his concern was not Russia or China, but so-called rogue states - such as Iraq and North Korea - that might soon be capable of attacking the US and its allies in Europe and Asia.

Richard Clarke - who served as a counterterrorism expert under three presidents - recently told an independent commission investigating the September 11 attacks that if Bush had given terrorism a higher priority during the first seven months of his administration, it might have been able to prevent the attacks, which have been blamed on the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

Clarke quit his post in the White House a year ago because he believed the Bush administration was not taking the threat from al-Qaeda seriously enough.

In addition to Clarke's accusations, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill has said Bush was preoccupied by Iraq - not al-Qaeda - from the very first days of the administration. And Bob Woodward, the author of a book on the Bush presidency, says Bush once told him that he didn't feel "a sense of urgency" about al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan was asked last week about Woodward's comment. "The threat of terrorism was broader than any one person," he said. "We needed to go after this Al-Qaeda network and have a more aggressive approach to eliminating al-Qaeda. The threat from al-Qaeda and terrorism was a high priority for this administration prior to coming into office. It was a threat we took very seriously, and September 11 is a day that the terrorists declared war on the United States of America, and war is exactly what they got," McClellan added.

But that approach is not borne out in a speech that White House National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was to have delivered on the very day of the attacks. The address - which was never delivered - promoted missile defense as the focus of the administration's national security strategy. It mentioned terrorist groups only as weapons clients of irresponsible governments.

Coincidentally, the day before the attacks, Senator Joseph Biden (Democrat, Delaware) - then the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - delivered a speech in which he criticized the Bush administration for putting too much emphasis on missile defense and too little on the threat from terrorism.

Leon Fuerth served as national security adviser to Al Gore, the vice president under former president Bill Clinton, Bush's predecessor. Fuerth noted that, in his book, Clarke wrote that Bush aides found it "quaint" that the Clinton administration had taken terrorism so seriously. And he pointed to a passage in Clark's book in which Bush asked him to see whether then-Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was behind the September 11 attacks, despite Clarke's assertion that it was al-Qaeda.

Ultimately, Fuerth said, the Bush White House would pin the blame for September 11 on Iraq, whether it deserved it or not. "9/11 was converted immediately into further justification to carry out an objective that came into office with the [Bush] administration, which was - deal with Iraq," according to Fuerth.

Fuerth said the Bush administration was focused on Iraq and the missile defense shield but is now trying to convince the public that terrorism was one of its top priorities. "The record shows that the [Bush] administration's other priorities were dominating its attention right up until the day the thing happened to us [on September 11]," Fuerth said. "And so, in effect, they have been trying to mislead people into visualizing their agenda in a manner other than it actually was at the time."

Marina Ottaway studies the Middle East and terrorism at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a private policy center in Washington. She, too, said the evidence does not support the White House's insistence that it never took its eye off the terrorist threat.

"There is plenty of evidence that the Bush administration was more concerned with the rogue states and the missile issue and so on than it was with terrorism as such," Ottaway said. However, she added, "even if they had given it a high priority, that does not mean that they would have found evidence of what was being prepared for September 11."

Ottaway said the effort put into establishing a missile defense system - and the related attention to states such as Iraq and North Korea - says less about whether the Bush administration was prepared for September 11 and more about its response to the attacks.

"It is important in terms of the response to September 11 because the fact that they were more concerned with rogue states and weapons of mass destruction than they were with terrorists explains why they immediately targeted Iraq," Ottaway said. "This mindset is important not so much in terms of explaining September 11, but in terms of explaining what happened next."

In late 2001, the US toppled the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which had been sheltering al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. And one-and-a-half years after the September 11 attacks, the US led an invasion of Iraq, which it accused of possessing weapons of mass destruction.

The independent commission investigating the September 11 attacks is due to deliver its final report on July 26. The original deadline was extended after complaints about alleged lack of cooperation by the White House.

The chairman of the commission, former Republican New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean, said he believes the public will be surprised by some of the panel's findings.

Washington correspondent Andrew F Tully has more than three decades' experience in journalism. He has worked as a reporter and an editor in both New York and Washington for several news organizations, primarily the Associated Press and United Press International.

Copyright (c) 2004, RFE/RL Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington DC 20036


Apr 7, 2004



Rice: No end to controversy
(Apr 1, '04)

Bush's rare reversal
(Apr 1, '04)

Toothless commission: Holes in the investigation
(Apr 1, '04)
 

 

 
   
       
No material from Asia Times Online may be republished in any form without written permission.
Copyright 2003, Asia Times Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd, Central, Hong Kong