Clark Proposes Joint Venture With Saudis Against Al Qaeda

[Feanorcurufinwe]

Gen. Wesley K. Clark sharply criticized the Bush administration on Wednesday for failing in the hunt for Osama bin Laden and proposed deployment of a joint American-Saudi Arabian commando force to search the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region for the Qaeda terrorist organization.

General Clark, the former Supreme Commander of NATO forces in Europe who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, said that the administration was right to go after Mr. bin Laden in Afghanistan after Sept. 11, 2001, and that "I supported them fully."

"But today," he added, "more than two years after Sept. 11, they still haven't finished the job that we started then."

<snip>

Experts in foreign and military policy also raised questions about such an idea's feasibility, saying the Saudi military has almost no experience operating outside its own country and would be of limited value in the mountainous Pakistani border region.

"It would be difficult enough to form a combined military unit with Saudi Arabia" to undertake conventional military operations, said Col. Pat Lang, a retired Army officer who served as defense attaché for the United States in Saudi Arabia and who was in charge of Middle East intelligence for the Defense Intelligence Agency. "The idea of a combined commando force deployed in that region is well beyond their capabilities."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/13/politics/campaigns/13CLAR.html?ex=1069304400&en=97b906e74bea80fa&ei=5062


Statement by John Kerry: Finding Osama Bin Laden

"I have great respect for General Clark, but his proposal to rely on Saudi commandos to go into Pakistan to find Osama bin Laden just won't withstand scrutiny. President Bush let Osama Bin Laden slip away in the first place at Tora Bora by not relying on US troops but rather on Afghan mercenaries who just one month earlier had been fighting on the other side. The General’s proposal, likewise, is flawed. Not only do the Saudis currently have their hands full finding the terrorists who are blowing up buildings in their own capital, but with their support of the Taliban and the blind eye they too often turned towards Al Qaida, I fear operational collaborations with the Saudis in Pakistan and Afghanistan would create serious intelligence and security risks.

“The Administration can and must turn up the tempo of operations against Al Qaida in Northern Pakistan by intensifying our efforts with General Musharraf, refocusing U.S. intelligence efforts on the border areas, and making better use of the existing collaboration between the U.S and Pakistan.”
http://johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2003_1112b.html

[hedda_foil]

1. For once I agree with Kerry.

Clark's idea is odd to say the least.

[wtmusic]

2. Yep

For a career soldier Clark's military strategy is wanting.

[KittyWampus]

13. Considering Pakistan Is Unable To Help

and the Saudi's have greater access than our own forces... Please elaborate.

Remember that the reason we let Osama go when we had him surrounded in Tora Bora was becasue of Pakistan.

And since you are a Dean supporter, what is his strategy?

[SahaleArm]

3. Ignoring the Saudis at our own peril.

The Saudi's have more intelligence on Al-Qaida than any other middle-east government. The choice is to either force them to play their hand or continue to let them sit on the fence. Going at it alone will not solve the problem, we're seeing the results of that in Afghanistan.

[JI7]

4. someone else said

clark's goal in this may have more to do with relations with the saudis rather than getting osama. i would like them to discuss this in the debates.

[katusha]

5. this has to do

with the fact that the saudis are the ONLY outsiders who would be allowed into the lawless tribal areas of pakistan that border afghanistan and where the taliban and al-qaeda currently enjoy support. the pakistani army is not welcome in these regions and the US is CERTAINLY not welcome here by neither the tribes or the pakistanis. the only outsiders who enjoy any measure of welcome that we can use is the saudi's based on their previous support of the maddrasses in pakistan and the tons of money the saudis poured into the region in the soviet occupation of afghanistan. Clark is right in using the saudis as they are the only ones who have any hope of gaining real time intelligence in these lawless tribal areas of pakistan.

[Bread and Circus]

6. I think Clark knows this...

I also think that by working on terrorism together,
it will force the Saudis to confront it head on....
as opposed to fund it.

Kerry has no plan so he shouldn't talk.

[JI7]

7. he does have a plan

it's just different from clark. kerry says to make better use of intelligence and our relations with the pakistani govt which he says bush has no done.

[KittyWampus]

12. Isn't Pakistan The REason We Let Osama Go

When we had him surrounded in Tora Bora?

I believe the answer to that one is YES!

According to Sy Hersh.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

14. The reason we let Osama go is because Bush didn't want American casualties

He doesn't care about casualties in Iraq, because his buddies are getting richer off the Iraqi oil fields. There was no profit in getting Osama.

[KittyWampus]

15. Not According To Sy Hersh

His take was we let Osama go because the Pakistanis demanded it.

He was interviewed by Bill Moyers on NOW.

Although he didn't explicitly say that Osama was in the Al Qeada leadership that escaped.

Anyhow, what Clark suggested seems to be towards changing the dynamic with the Saudis and the ME>

[Feanorcurufinwe]

16. Who's Sy Hersh and why should I care what he says? He's wrong.

[Andromeda]

19. I agree...

Clarks plan sounds solid as stone because the Saudi's have unlimited resources so if they wanted to finance such an endeavor they could well afford it. They do have a good Air Force so building an effective military shouldn't be difficult for them. The Saudis have been hammered by terrorists lately and in the past and they do need American goodwill especially since 9/11.

Since Wesley Clark was Supreme NATO Commander and brought the war in the Balkans to a successful conclusion he has a lot of credibility and his opinion should carry a lot of weight.

And you're right about Kerry.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

10. Of course the US isn't welcome among those sheltering Osama.

We weren't welcome in Berlin in 1945 either.

[ajacobson]

8. The bigger picture

The Saudi royal family has kept a hold on absolute power (bearly) by tolerating religious extremists and allowing them to do their thing as long as they don't challenge for political control in the Kingdom. I believe what the General is trying to achieve with this proposal is to get the Saudi royal family to visably be involved with the fight against al-Queda and challenge this "arrangement." The Saudis are in an increasingly tight bind. The extremists are forcing their hand anyway with the recent developments. The extremists aren't willing to go along with the previous arrangement any more, they're feeling powerful and see the Saudi royal family as weak, which they are.

So I think Clark's approach, while looking somewhat limited, actually is fairly significant. And also shows much more fluency in the details of the Mideast situation than anyone is giving him credit for.

[JI7]

9. the saudi thing is very complicated

while i support kerry, i am willing to listen to clark and try to understand what he has to say. it seems like a good thing to discuss in the debates. but if some media whore is moderating the debates they will probably not discuss this .

[democratreformed]

11. A different perspective

This is a portion of what is posted here:
http://wesleyclarkblog.us/



Speaking from his considerable experience as a commander of military
and intelligence resources, Gen. Clark recently proposed: "I would
press Saudi Arabia to join US forces in creating a US-Saudi commando
force to work the Afghan-Pakistani border where bin Laden is thought
to be hiding." Why WKC's efforts to innovate foreign policy are so
easily dismissed by many the in chattering class while Howard Dean's
arrogant stereotyping is hailed as just what the doctor ordered is
puzzling. However, highly respected blogger Mark Kleiman gets it.

Kleiman writes: "Diplomatically, the idea strikes me as rather
brilliant. It's a no-lose proposition. Either the Saudis come with
us, thus committing themselves against al-Qaeda, or they don't, thus
making the hollowness of their asserted cooperation against terrorism
clear.

". . . In domestic political terms, there is obvious value in
reminding the country that the president's promise to bring in bin
Laden "dead or alive" has been conspicuously unmet, and is no longer
being seriously pursued. . . What do we have to lose? If we tried
Clark's idea, and the Saudis leaked, we wouldn't catch Osama bin
Laden. Just how does that leave us worse off than we would be not
taking up Clark's idea, in which case we certainly won't catch Osama
bin Laden."

Kleiman concludes: "Clark hasn't been getting much ink of late, and
much of the ink he has been getting hasn't been good. But his ability
to get press coverage for an actual policy proposal rather than a
political maneuver makes him stand out from the field.

"With Bob Graham out, of all the candidates still in the race for
president Clark alone is capable of discussing national security
issues at a professionally respectable level. That's worth
considering, whether you like his individual ideas or not."

[eridani]

17. Yeah, right

The major fundraisers for Al Qaeda are going to help hunt their buddies down. Sure.

[democratreformed]

18. The point is

to call their hand and make them show their true colors.