RAND BEERS
Nightline Interview - FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER
Sat Jun 28 20:45:45 2003
208.152.73.39

# The with the Bush Counter-Terrorism Expert Who Left the White House in Fear for Our National Safety, Given the Actions of the Bush Cartel 6/29
RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER
http://dca.boozle.net/odd/beers.html

1]23:35:02 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I would have focused on al-Qaeda more than I would have focused on Iraq, if it had been my decision.

[1]23:35:08 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

He says the United States is not winning the war on terrorism.

[1]23:35:14 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

The manpower and the money that I thought were necessary for Afghanistan were simply not there.

[1]23:35:21 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

That the war in Iraq is hampering that effort. What you're charging is that the Administration, for whatever reasons, has decided to do it on the cheap. My words, not yours. But that's essentially what you're saying.

[1]23:35:33 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I am saying that, that's correct.

[1]23:35:36 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

It's so bad, he says, that he quit his job at the White House and went to work for the opposition, the political opposition.

[1]23:35:44 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I resigned because I was deeply concerned about the policy and did not see that policy changing.

[graphics: The President's Man]

[1]23:35:49 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

Tonight, "The President’s Man," a conversation with Rand Beers.

[graphics: ABC NEWS: Nightline]

[1]23:35:56 ANNOUNCER

From ABC News, this is "Nightline.” Reporting from Washington, Ted Koppel.

[1]23:36:13 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Rand Beers, whom you will meet in just a moment, has an impeccable resume. A life of government service that began with two tours in Vietnam with the Marine Corps and then more than 30 years, most of those at the State Department, working in international narcotics and law enforcement affairs, intelligence, and counter-terrorism. Most recently, until about three months ago, he served on the National Security Council at the White House, as a special assistant to the President for combating terrorism. He had also worked for the National Security Council under presidents Reagan, George Bush the elder, and Bill Clinton. Like thousands of other public servants in this city, especially those working in the field of intelligence, Mr. Beers might have left office in near total anonymity were it not for the manner in which he left his last post. He was so frustrated by what he perceives as the Bush Administration's ineffectiveness at combating terrorism, at home and abroad, that he quit. A few weeks after he resigned from the White House, Rand Beers took another step that was bound to get some attention. He signed on as National Security Adviser to the presidential campaign of Senator John Kerry, currently one of the leading Democratic candidates for President. Mr. Beers has done a couple of newspaper interviews, he has testified before Congress, but this is his first television interview since he left the government.

[1]23:37:37 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And I suppose the first question has to be, did you know when you left that you were going to be working for John Kerry?

[1]23:37:42 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

No. It certainly wasn't clear in my own mind. I was deeply disturbed about what was going on in our counter-terrorism policy. And I really needed some time and space to sort of figure out what I wanted to do next.

[1]23:37:54 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) What was it that most disturbed you?

[1]23:37:56 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I was concerned both about what was happening internationally in places like Afghanistan and what was happening domestically in the homeland security area. I didn't work on Iraq. I certainly observed what was going on in Iraq. But principally I was concerned about what was happening in Afghanistan or wasn't happening, and what was happening or wasn't happening at home.

[1]23:38:16 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) One of your previous colleagues has told me that his concern, it may have also been yours, is that long before most of us became aware of the fact that this Administration had ambitions to invade Iraq, the decision was made not to put as much money, manpower, effort, into Afghanistan because it was going to be needed for Iraq. Was that, indeed, your experience?

[1]23:38:42 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I can't say whether it was reserved for that purpose. But it was certainly clear to me that the manpower and the money that I thought were necessary for Afghanistan were simply not there. And it was a very frustrating experience for me.

[1]23:38:56 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And what do you think the consequence of that has been?

[1]23:38:59 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

Well, I think that in the early days, one of the consequences was that the attack in Tora Bora ended up using surrogate forces and standoff US forces when US combat forces involved directly in that operation might actually have captured Osama Bin Laden, who we now know clearly was there from subsequent information which he provided to us. More recently, we have ...

[1]23:39:25 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Let me stop you, when you say "he," you mean Osama Bin Laden provided information? In what fashion?

[1]23:39:31 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

No, I mean, he's publicly spoken about his presence at Tora Bora and his escape from Tora Bora after the Americans' attack.

[1]23:39:39 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And why did we stand back? Why were our forces not used at that time?

[1]23:39:43 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

It was my impression, and I was not present at the time, but certainly what I have understood to be the case was that we preferred to use surrogate forces because it was an easier way to run the operation, there would be fewer casualties, that would be US casualties.

[1]23:39:59 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And you think that was what, a political decision?

[1]23:40:03 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I'm not in a position to say whether that was a political or a military decision.

[1]23:40:07 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Well, I mean, if it had been a military decision, the assumption would have to be that indigenous forces would do a better job of capturing Osama and his fellow leaders than American forces, right?

[1]23:40:18 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

That's one way to put it, yes.

[1]23:40:20 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And that doesn't seem very logical, does it?

[1]23:40:22 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

No, it does not.

[1]23:40:23 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

So, one is left then with the conclusion that it, if it wasn't done for military reasons, then it would've had to be done for political reasons.

[1]23:40:33 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I'm simply not in a position to confirm that.

[1]23:40:36 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) You also said, a moment ago, that you were more concerned about, or also gravely concerned about, what was being done or not being done in the area of counter-terrorism here at home. There's certainly been a lot of "harrumphing" about what's being done here at home. I mean, a lot of attention paid to Governor Ridge's new department, to the money that has been allocated by Congress. What more could have been or should have been done, you think?

[1]23:41:08 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

Well, I think, firstly, there is an inadequate amount of funding. There was a report about the House passing the fiscal year 2004 budget, yesterday. And the main point of the article is that most everybody, expect for the Administration, believes that there was an inadequate funding level in that budget. People voted for it because the alternative was not acceptable, to have no budget. That has been, to my knowledge, a continuous perspective that the Administration has had. They've been unable or unwilling to ask for sufficient funds to actually do the job. And then, they haven't followed through with the programs that actually would turn that money into activities in as rapid and forceful a -fashion as I think that it should. One of the phrases that is used often within Washington is "business as usual.” And I'm really concerned that this Administration, despite its rhetoric, has given the homeland security function a "business as usual" mantra.

[1]23:42:20 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

There's another aspect to this, which I want to get into in a moment. and another place where money is being spent to this day, in large measure, and that's the war against Iraq. The degree to which defense against terrorism here at home came into conflict with that war, that subject when we come back.

[graphics: Nightline]

[1]23:42:41 ANNOUNCER

This is ABC News "Nightline.” Brought to you by ...

[commercial break]

[1]23:45:11 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And I'm back once again with Rand Beers, who until just a little over three months ago, was a special assistant to President Bush for counter-terrorism. You indicated that, that Iraq was not part of your brief. Is it your impression, however, that because the decision was made to go to war against Iraq, and because that has already cost billions of dollars and will cost billions more, that that is also one of the reasons that we're not spending enough on counter-terrorism here at home?

[1]23:45:40 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

It's certainly true that the costs of fighting a war in Iraq as well as Afghanistan and homeland security, all together represent an enormous cost on the treasury. It's part of the national security function. And in some ways, yes, that's exactly right. Those costs crowd out one another in some people's minds.

[1]23:46:01 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) So, it becomes a question, then, of the competing interests of the United States. You can't do everything with limited resources. This Administration, prior to the war against Iraq, was making the point that there was a strong feeling within the Administration that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. And that one of the reasons cited for going to war against Iraq was precisely the reason of counter-terrorism. Was that a legitimate charge?

[1]23:46:33 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

The intelligence that I saw, and I'm not going to comment on it specifically, certainly didn't move me to come to the same conclusion.

[1]23:46:40 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Since we already have questions, now, I mean, you don't have to comment here in terms of intelligence. Weapons of mass destruction have not yet been found. If, indeed, weapons of mass destruction have not been found, we have to come to one of two conclusions. Either they weren't there to begin with or they were there to begin with and they have disappeared, perhaps even fallen into other hands. Do you consider the, the danger that those weapons might now be in the hands of the very people we were trying to prevent them from reaching, could have happened?

[1]23:47:14 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I think we have to consider that as a real possibility. And it is what is most disturbing to me about not having located the weapons of mass destruction.

[1]23:47:25 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Say it in terms of your own words, if you would. What do you think, I mean, are you convinced from what you did see or what you -did hear that there were weapons of mass destruction to begin with?

[1]23:47:36 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I thought there were weapons of mass destruction to begin with. I understood that there were certain caveats, as we say in the bureaucratic framework, but that there was so much information about the size of the arsenal that there must have been weapons of mass destruction there.

[1]23:47:58 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) So, they have either been hidden so cunningly that 140,000 troops, thus far, haven't been able to find them. It's a possibility they will find them.

[1]23:48:06 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

Yes, it is.

[1]23:48:07 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Or, what?

[1]23:48:09 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

Or they were destroyed by Saddam immediately before the war, or a short period before the war, and we simply didn't know that. Or, as you indicated, they've fallen into the hands of people that cause us even more problems.

[1]23:48:24 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Did you, did you resign, ultimately, because you were just exhausted or because you really felt that you were unable to convince the people that you had to convince that they were moving inadequately or in the wrong direction or however you want to phrase it?

[1]23:48:45 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I resigned because I was deeply concerned about the policy and did not see that policy changing. And because I was exhausted trying to make the policy work.

[1]23:48:54 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) If I ask you straight-out, do you think that prior to March of this year, Iraq as it existed, Saddam Hussein and his Baathist party as they existed, represented more of a threat to the United States than whatever other terrorist threats are out there? What would you say?

[1]23:49:15 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I would have focused on al-Qaeda more than I would have focused on Iraq if it had been my decision.

[1]23:49:21 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) Because?

[1]23:49:22 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

Because I believe that al-Qaeda is a fundamental threat to the United States. And it is not clear to me whether Saddam had that same degree of threat and imminence.

[1]23:49:33 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) I mean, what you're saying, to use my own phraseology now, and I'm trying to get you to respond to it in that same way. You're saying you think al-Qaeda, what's going on in Afghanistan, was, remain, a greater threat to the national security interests of the United States than Saddam Hussein, as he existed prior to the war? Is that fair?

[1]23:49:56 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

I'm saying that, but I'm also conscious that we're talking now in a post-conflict environment. And we certainly know more than we did then.

[1]23:50:05 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) But ...

[1]23:50:06 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

But I still have that same conclusion.

[1]23:50:08 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) I mean, what we have learned since the war, does that make you any less concerned than you before then?

[1]23:50:13 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

No, not at all. In fact, far from it, in the other direction. I think that what we have learned since the war is suggestive that Saddam was less, even less imminent a threat to us than it appeared that he was in the lead-up to the war.

[1]23:50:29 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) We're going to take another short break. Back with Rand Beers in a moment.

[commercial break]

[1]23:53:58 TED KOPPEL (ABC NEWS)

(OC) And I'm back once again with Rand Beers. Mr. Beers, you must have realized that in deciding to become part of the Kerry campaign, you sort of undermined the purity of your resignation. You will raise questions in people's minds whether that was done, at least in part, for political reasons. Is that a fair question?

[1]23:54:23 RAND BEERS (FORMER BUSH COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER)

It's certainly a fair question. And my answer to the question is that I have been part of a number of administrations, which I have served -loyally under my oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. I came to

• Interview....w/ Rand Beers Cont'd — RAND BEERS, Sat Jun 28 20:49