WASHINGTON – While admitting that the war in Afghanistan had “serious problems”, CIA Director Leon Panetta gave little chance to a political reconciliation process succeeding in that war-torn country.
In an interview with the ABC programme “This Week”, he said the Taliban and their allies would only take part in the process if they believed they faced certain defeat.
“We have seen no evidence that they are truly interested in reconciliation, where they would surrender their arms, where they would denounce al-Qaeda, where they would really try to become part of that society,” Panetta said amid reports that Pakistan was trying to promote a political settlement that would incorporate the Taliban into a power-sharing arrangement with President Hamid Karzai.
The CIA chief, who rarely gives interviews to news media, also defended the widely criticized CIA drone strikes in the Pak-Afghan region, insisting that claims they violate international law are “dead wrong.”
“We have a duty, we have a responsibility, to defend this country so that al-Qaeda never conducts that kind of attack again,” he said while justifying drone attacks, which have also been condemned by a United Nations human rights expert.
On the Afghan war, Panetta said the US was making progress, but “This is going to be tough. This is not going to be easy.”
“We’re dealing with tribal societies. We’re dealing with a country that has problems with governance, problems with corruption, problems with narcotics trafficking, problems with a Taliban insurgency.
“It’s harder, it’s slower than I think anyone anticipated,” he added.
The CIA chief said the problems in Afghanistan he had cited were the major challenges to the goal of “making sure al Qaeda never finds another safe haven from which to attack this country.”
“Is the strategy the right strategy? We think so,” he said. “I think…the key to success or failure is whether the Afghans accept responsibility, are able to deploy an effective army and police force to maintain stability. If they can do that, then I think weÂ’re going to be able to achieve the kind of progress and the kind of stability that the President is after,” Panetta said.
Panetta also said that al-Qaeda is probably at its weakest since the Sept 11 attacks because of US-led strikes, with only 50 to 100 militants — mainly in Kandahar — operating inside Afghanistan and the rest hiding along Pakistan’s mountainous border region.
The CIA director said the US hasnÂ’t had good intelligence on Osama bin LadenÂ’s whereabouts for years and that the terrorist network is finding smarter ways to try to attack the United States.
“He obviously has tremendous security around him,” Panetta said of the al-Qaeda leader sought by the United States in connection with the September 11, 2001 attacks.
With further efforts to disrupt al-Qaeda operations and kill al-Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan, “we think ultimately we can flush out” Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, the group’s second-in-command, Panetta said.
However, he acknowledged it had been years since the US had any good intelligence on the precise location of bin Laden.
Of greatest concern, he said, is al-QaedaÂ’s reliance on operatives without previous records or those living in the US.
“We are engaged in the most aggressive operations in the history of the CIA in that part of the world, and the result is that we are disrupting their leadership.”
“Noting increased violence against US and NATO forces in Kandahar and Helmand provinces, Panetta said the “key to success or failure is whether the Afghans accept responsibility” for securing and governing their country.
With further efforts to disrupt al Qaeda operations and kill al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan, “we think ultimately we can flush out” Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, the group’s second-in-command, Panetta said. However, he acknowledged it had been years since the US had any good intelligence on the precise location of bin Laden.
Panetta also made clear that the threat from al-Qaeda remains the nation’s main concern, noting the group’s use of people who lack any terrorism record — such as the suspect in the botched bombing attempt of a US airliner on Christmas day — as a way to infiltrate US safeguards. He also mentioned sleeper agents already in the country, and people who “self-radicalize” such as Maj Nidal Hasan, the suspect in the Ft Hood, Texas, shootings.
“Those kinds of threats represent I think the most serious threat to the United States right now,” Panetta said.
“Winning in Afghanistan is having a country that is stable enough to ensure that there is no safe haven for al Qaeda or for a militant Taliban that welcomes al Qaeda,” Panetta said.
On Iran, Panetta said the Tehran government continues to develop the capability to build a nuclear weapon, but that debate exists within the country on whether to actually do so.
“We think they have enough low-enriched uranium right now for two weapons,” Panetta said. “They do have to enrich it, fully, in order to get there. And we would estimate that if they made that decision, it would probably take a year to get there, probably another year to develop the kind of weapon delivery system in order to make that viable.”
Regarding North Korea, Panetta said the question of who will succeed leader Kim Jong Il is likely behind recent military acts such as the alleged sinking of a South Korean navy ship.
“I think that could have been part of it, in order to establish credibility for his son,” Panetta said of a likely successor, adding: “His son is very young. His son is very untested. His son is loyal to his father and to North Korea, but his son does not have the kind of credibility with the military, because nobody really knows what he’s going to be like.”
However, Panetta said he doubted there would be further escalation, noting that “in the end, they always back away from the brink and I think they’ll do that now.”
Monitoring Desk adds: When asked as to how can a company allegedly responsible for killing 17 unarmed civilians in Baghdad in 2007 continue to get State Department and CIA contracts, Panetta said there is ‘not much choice’ because few companies have the capabilities of Blackwater.
“Since I have become director, I have asked our agency to review every contract we have had with Blackwater and whatever their new name is now – Xe – to ensure first and foremost that we have no contract in which they are engaged in any CIA operations. WeÂ’re doing our own operations. ThatÂ’s important that we do not contract that out to anybody,” Panetta told ABC.
“But at the same time I have to tell you that in the war zone, we continue to have needs for security. You’ve got a lot of forward bases. You’ve got a lot of attacks on some of those bases. We’ve got to have security. Unfortunately, there are few companies that provide that kind of security,” Panetta continued.
“State Department relies on them. We rely on them to a certain extent. So, we’ve bid out some of those contracts. They provided a bid that underbid everyone else by about $26 million and a panel that we had said that they can do the job, that they’ve shaped up their act,” he said.
“There was really not much choice but to accept that contract,” said Panetta. “But having said that, I will tell you that I continue to be very cautious about any of those contracts and we’re reviewing all of the bids that we have with that company,” he concluded.