20 March 2002

U.S. Commander Impressed by Russian Anti-terror Cooperation

Russia has provided "a great deal in terms of support, equipment, and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan," General Tommy Franks told journalists in Moscow March 20.

Franks, commander of Operation Enduring Freedom and commander in chief of the U.S. Army's Central Command (CENTCOM), praised the work of EmerCom, Russia's Ministry of Emergency Situations.

He also cited a Russian-operated hospital in Kabul, tunnel-clearing operations north of Kabul, and clearance of "overflight for our necessary flights across Russia" as much appreciated and important contributions to coalition operations.

Franks said his meetings in Moscow have impressed on him "the fact that the Russian government remains a vital part of this coalition."

Regarding military operations in Afghanistan, Franks emphasized that, while the operation has been successful in terms of removing the Taliban from power, "a great deal of dangerous work remains." As remaining pockets of the Al Qaeda terrorist network are discovered, "we're going to go after them."

The destruction of the terrorist network in Afghanistan, not body counts or the hunting down of any one individual, is the way to measure the success or failure of the operation, Franks said.

Asked about Iraq, he said the subject had not yet come up in his discussions with Russian officials and that the Bush Administration has not yet come to any decision. "Saddam Hussein has been recognized by a great many nations as a problem, and he continues to be a problem," Franks said.

Franks visited Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Djibouti, Pakistan, and Afghanistan prior to his arrival in Moscow.

Following are excerpts of the interview:

General Franks: We arrived in Moscow yesterday afternoon and it's our first time. Both my wife and I are delighted to get the chance to see the city and to have a chance to visit with Russian officials. We've been on the road for about a week, starting off with a swing through the Horn of Africa, where we visited Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Djibouti, and from there we went to Pakistan, had meetings, and then onto Afghanistan for meetings and then, as I said, we arrived here last evening. At this point I would be pleased to take your questions.

Question: There has been recently lots of controversy concerning the body counts in the Anaconda Operation and it sort of ...[unclear]... a lot of what happened in Vietnam. [Unclear] ... the US bogged down? Is the criteria of success just a body count? Of course, I understand that you will say that your strategic objectives are very clear: you have to wipe out the leftovers of the Taliban...

[unclear]...?

General Franks: I think all of us have been careful to avoid discussions of body counts. It's understandable to me that people would ask this question. In the past, a body count has been used as a metric which we could use to decide the success or failure of an operation. But we don't now accept a body count as a metric, and that's the reason we have not talked about body counts. Just as a quick follow-up, what we have said all along is that the metric that we use today, and that we have used, is the destruction of the terrorist network in Afghanistan and so we're going to stay with the use of that metric and stay away from discussions of body counts.

Question: General, there are several versions of why you came to Russia. One of them is that you came here to let your Russians counterparts know about the progress (of operations) and what's going on in Central Asia. The other one is that you came to acquaint the Russians with your future plan for operations against Iraq.

General Franks: My purpose in visiting - first I want to say thank you for your question - my purpose in visiting Moscow has been to represent our Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, and those of us in CENTCOM, and part of this coalition Enduring Freedom, in discussing our ongoing operations in Afghanistan and the cooperation we have seen and continue to see in this global war on terrorism.

Question: Sir, you said that the metric of this operation would be the destruction of terrorist networks, however, the Tajiks say, talking about Central Asia, that the terrorist network in Uzbekistan, which has been very active, has not been destroyed at all.

General Franks: I think you're referring to the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan - we call this the IMU - and, in fact, a great deal of damage has been done to the IMU up to this point inside Afghanistan. But a great deal of work remains to be done in Afghanistan, and I'm sure that there may remain terrorists of Uzbek nationality, and I try to point that out, still inside Afghanistan, so the job is not yet finished.

Question: General, before Afghanistan was invaded by the Soviet Army and before it was ruled by the Taliban, we saw a lot of different tribes that came into conflict with each other. There will probably be conflicts after the US presence is finished. So my question is, whether it is possible to make them live in peace through military force?

General Franks: I think that is also a very good question. I think that the work of the international community in Aghanistan in the foreseeable future will be key to providing for the security of the 26 million people who live in Afghanistan. The history of Afghanistan certainly, as you know, is a history of competing militias within the country. As you may know, in my country we have taken the decision to assist with the training of an Afghan national army. I believe the Afghan National Army [ANA] will provide a good deal to add to security within the country. I will say that, up to this point, while we do see frictions between groups within Afghanistan, we also see some efforts at cooperation. So we do see the security situation as under control at this point, but I think all of the international community is aware of the potential for flare-up within Afghanistan between the tribes, and so we're all going to keep an eye on that.

Question: Will the US Government provide advisors or specialists to send to Afghanistan in order to help the army and will the US provide equipment and arms?

General Franks: I think what we know at this point is that we will coordinate the activities of the international coalition in assisting with the training of the Afghan army. I think this is very progressive and I think that the specifics of how to equip that army, position it, and those types of technicalities have not yet been decided. I met with Chairman Karzai the day before yesterday and we had a good discussion about the building of the Afghan National Army. I've also talked to Defense Minister Fahim Khan about the construction of the ANA. As many of you know, we have begun to assess the needs and will continue the dialogue as we move forward to determine the size, the training, and the equipment requirements for that army.

Question: Sir, what do you think about the final outcome of the operations in Afghanistan?

General Franks: Does the gentleman mean Operation Anaconda, or the totality of the operations?

Question: The entire operation.

General Franks: I think we would characterize the operation up to this point as successful because the Taliban has been removed. Of course, we see the interim authority, Chairman Karzai, in Afghanistan now and I think that is also a positive development. I think we don't yet know how long this operation may take because our focus has been and will remain, as I said earlier, locating and identifying pockets of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groupings inside Afghanistan, and then we'll take those out as part of our charter and I'm just not sure how long that may take. I've said that I believe Operation Anaconda, our most recent operation, was an unqualified success in the area of Shai Khot. So that [has been the progress] up to this point, but we recognize that a great deal of dangerous work remains. As we're able to find these pockets, we're going to go after them, and it may be the way we approached Anaconda as an operation, and in other cases, the approaches may be different. Let me say, as a final point on that question, that in my meetings here in Moscow up to this point, I have been very much impressed with the fact that the Russian government remains a vital part of this coalition. I think we all agree that we don't know how long this operation will continue.

Question: How do you see Russia's role developing in the anti-terrorist operations, what concretely are you expecting and asking the Russians to contribute?

General Franks: As we speak, Russia has liaison officers at our headquarters in Tampa, Florida. The cooperation we have seen up to this point has included humanitarian operations, including a hospital in Kabul that the Russians moved in very quickly. Also, in some tunnel-clearing operations north of Kabul, Russian involvement there was much appreciated and very important to the operations ... [unclear] ... and saving peoples lives. Also the clearance of overflight for our necessary flights across Russia were immediately approved. This has also been of great assistance to our operations in Afghanistan. I really can't say enough about EmerCom [Russia's Ministry of Emergency Situations] and the work that has been done by that agency in providing support and cooperation to us in Afghanistan. I really can't say enough about the contributions that Russian EmerCom has made to our ongoing operations in providing and coordinating humanitarian assistance inside Afghanistan. I was very pleased with the meetings I had this morning with that agency and I think that cooperation will continue as well. You know, many people have talked to me and much has been said about competition and many people have asked me about that. But I guess my impression has been that there has indeed been a great deal of cooperation, so I applaud that cooperation and I expect that cooperation to continue.

Question: General Franks, I wonder if you could give us a sense of whether you learned anything today about the nature of the threat in the Pankisi Gorge and whether this training program is actually [unclear]. And one other quick question about air defence in IraQuestion: In your mind, have you come to Russia for help to staunch the flow of equipment and technology and training for their air defense systems in Iraq that both are complicating to the no fly zones and also to any potential operations?

General Franks: Let me take the latter one first. I have had no discussions with Russian officials concerning Iraq. I will meet with Ministry of Defense officials this afternoon and I'm sure that there will be discussions about the training in Georgia and Pankisi. I think, as some of you know, Georgia is actually not a part of the Central Command (CENTCOM) region. That is the responsibility of our European Command (EUCOM). I think that the only comment as the Central Command commander, and certainly as an American, is that I understand the significance of that issue and I understand the nature of the discussions that have gone on between our military and the Russian Military of Defense concerning Georgia and Pankisi.

Question: Sir, if I could return to my question about Russia's role, am I to understand that you see that Russia's contributions will remain primarily humanitarian rather than a military contribution?

General Franks: You know, up to this point, Russia has, as I've said before, provided a great deal in terms of support, equipment, and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. As I also said before, I'm sure that this type of cooperation will continue. I really don't think I'll go beyond what I already know in terms of speculating about what may happen in the future. Russia is very much a partner in this coalition and we have discussions every day. So what I know at this point is what has been done and I don't think I'd speculate about what we'll see in the future.

Question: Will there be any major new deployments after the British contingent comes in. Will the other anti-terrorist coalition partners take a bigger role? Are the discussions with the Turks... [unclear] ...?

General Franks: I've had discussions with Chairman Karzai certainly, and our own people, and I think the Turks are moving forward with respect to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). The current US strength inside Afghanistan is about 6000, perhaps a few more, and the coalition strength, including ISAF, is about that same number, 6000 to 6300. And, of course, the United Kingdom has made the offer of the increase of the commando marine force. Since we started the operation in Afghanistan, we have in fact brought in forces of a variety of coalition nations and we will continue to do that. I think it's interesting to understand the way our forces come and go inside Afghanistan. As you know, we have added forces to Afghanistan and we have also removed forces from Afghanistan. Our practice has been to match the forces that we apply to a given mission against the tasks that we see as needing to be performed for that given mission. Troop rotations into Afghanistan by the coalition can be because we want to rotate forces, to remove some for rest and replace them with others. That's one reason that we will see forces come into Afghanistan. We also rotate forces in order to perform needed maintenance and recovery of equipment. And we'll continue that practice. I wouldn't at this point say whether I think the force levels I mentioned to you a minute ago will go up or come down because at this point, we don't know. I think the most instructive point would be that we'll just continue to match the level of forces and the types of forces with the missions we see and I wouldn't read any more into it than that. As you know, I think today we have between fifteen and twenty nations represented in Afghanistan and one of our principal partners and associates in the coalition has been the United Kingdom and I think this offering that you made a reference to a minute ago is an example of the commitment that the United Kingdom continues to provide to Operation Enduring Freedom.

Question: Since you said we are not ... (unclear)... to complete this operation ...(unclear)... can you tell us about the US military presence in Central Asia and how long will the forces be deployed? Some people see it as an attempt on the part of the US to gain a foothold in the area.

General Franks: I've seen great cooperation up to this time between Russia and each of the individual states in Central Asia. The bases and the staging areas that we use in Central Asia are tied to Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Of course, Russia has security cooperation relationships with each of the states in Central Asia, as do we, in the United States. And I've been impressed up to this point with the cooperation that has gone on involving each of the Central Asian states and my own country, as well as other coalition countries, as well as Russia. So, once again, when people ask me about competition, my response is more to the issue of cooperation because that's been my experience, that's what I've seen up to this point. I'll even do something that I almost never do: I'll make a prediction. I predict that Russia will continue to have security cooperation agreements, being the great nation that Russia is, with the states of Central Asia. I predict that my own country, and, in fact, many of the countries in the Enduring Freedom coalition, will continue to have security relationships with these countries in Central Asia. I'll further say that the bases that we see, the Enduring Freedom bases that we see in Central Asia - for example in Manas, Kyrgyzstan, as well as in ... (unclear) ... Khanabad, Uzbekistan - are bases that were put in to be temporary bases to support Operation Enduring Freedom. Beyond that, I don't think I'd make any more predictions.

Question: General, you know that the Russians have been seized with the connection between Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Chechnya and the terrorist connection. What have you learned? Has Russian intelligence been helpful in understanding that and what is your assessment of the interplay between the Chechen movement, independence movement, or whatever you want to call it, and Al Qaeda?

General Franks: I think the number of nationalities represented in the detainee population at the Kandahar detention facility in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay - I think the number is about 35 nations represented. To be sure, the Chechen nationality is represented among those 35 nations. So, I'm really not in a position to discuss this at a political level, but as I've said, this variety of nationalities is represented in the terrorist networks that we associate with Al Qaeda, and I think that's instructive. Inside Afghanistan, we see a great many nationalities represented and our effort is against Al Qaeda, so that's the reason that I operationally have an interest in both the Uzbeks that we see associated with Al Qaeda and the Chechens whom we see associated with Al Qaeda. But what I've seen up to this point is that the terrorist organization, and terrorism, knows no religion and it knows no nationality.

Question: General, this is a somewhat sensitive question. You know that the United States and members of the coalition have sent a large number of special forces to Afghanistan in order to find Bin Laden, but that up to this point, he has not been found. Can you tell us about that and does CENTCOM know where he might be now?

General Franks: We do not know where Bin Laden is now. And I will say the forces deployed to Afghanistan have been for the purpose of destroying the terrorist network Al Qaeda rather than the purpose of hunting down an individual person. I will say also that they are doing a great job. With respect to Mr. Bin Laden, I will repeat that it's only a matter of time. He may be alive or he may be dead. If alive, he will be brought to justice, or justice will be brought to him.

Question: [Unclear]

General Franks: I don't think any decision has been made with respect to Iraq, and I wouldn't want to speculate one way or the other. Saddam Hussein has been recognized by a great many nations as a problem, and he continues to be a problem. ...