Bush Negotiated with the Taliban: Interview with Guillaume Dasquié
Interview by Valerie Plomb for Amazon.fr
lematin-dz.com
Translated for Democrats.com by Corinne Sinclair
One month before the New York terrorist attacks, the White House was on speaking
terms with Kabul. In this interview, Guillaume Dasquie, co-author, with Jean-Charles
Brisard, of "Bin Laden, the Forbidden Truth", reveals how the billionaire terrorist is
nothing but a product of the dangerous liaisons maintained by Saudi Arabia, the
United States and the UN with extremist movements, which led to the 9-11 terrorist
attacks. These affirmations are based on several years of investigation. Dasquie
decodes here the political and financial networks where bankers, oil companies,
diplomats and terrorists cross each others' paths.
Question:
You name a lot of people and a lot of companies in your book. Have you been
subjected to pressures during the writing and the publishing of "Bin Laden, the
Forbidden Truth"?
Answer by Guillaume Dasquie:
Investigative journalism is one of these jobs where you make yourself the least
number of friends. But we have not been subjected to any pressure. We put in a lot
of names of people and companies because it was the simplest and most sincere
way to translate all the information we had received and which was going against
everything we heard during the first weeks after the terrorist attacks. For example,
the non-specialists are under the impression that terrorism is falling from the sky,
that we can't defend ourselves against it and that it is unforeseeable. We hear
about "blind terrorist attacks". To come forward with a book full of investigations
going against this feeling, we needed solid arguments. We have been able to come
up with them because there is today a real interest for the subject. In normal times,
to publish a book relating by the detail what were the relationships between certain
members of the George W Bush Administration, oil companies and the Taliban, was
interesting only to a limited number of specialists. We have been able to reveal to
the general public a work of investigation that produced a maximum of elements.
While usually the book is only the visible part of the investigation and doesn't
mention the details. But, in this kind of event, details allow you to have a global
view of the situation. I am not a commentator, I don't do theory. My job is to
restore an information. Our first articles on Intelligence Online concerned the
contacts between the Taliban, the American administration and the UN are dated in
March 2001. The Bush Administration had just come into power at the end of
January, the UN Security Council had reinforced the sanctions against the Taliban in
December 2000, and the Taliban were banned by most nations.
Question:
Let's start with a meeting of Jean-Charles Brisard with John O'Neill, a Deputy
Director of the FBI in New York. He had led the investigation following the terrorist
attack against the USS Cole in October 2000 in the port of Aden, which resulted in
17 deaths, and which was most likely the work of Al Qaida. But, he apparently got
obstructed a lot by the State Department. Where does this American schizophrenia
come from?
Answer:
John O'Neill was in charge of all the anti-terrorist investigations. And he was the
one who, personally, and since 1998, was leading the investigations against Bin
Laden. Talk about "American schizophrenia"; it is rather a schizophrenia related to
the relationships between the big industrialized powers and the oil monarchies. Our
economies depend from the oil reserves in Saudi Arabia and in the Persian Gulf
countries. Concretely, until September 2001, Osama Bin Laden had always been
considered as being an annoying matter, not a criminal one. For a very simple
reason: the Saudi power rests on the Wahhabite clergy who considers that Osama
Bin Laden is a soldier participating in the extension of Wahhabism; it therefore never
disavowed him. The occidental countries consider, in general, that criminal matters
are "small bait" and must not strangle the strategic matters. After the Nairobi and
Dar es-Salam terrorist attacks in 1998, the Justice Department wanted to stop Bin
Laden, while the State Department considered that nothing should be done to hurt
Saudi Arabia, and that the Bin Laden case had to be solved by the Saudis
themselves. Until 30 August 2001, the person who was dealing with the capture of
Bin Laden was Turki Al-Faysal, the Chief of the Saudi Secret Services, and he is the
very same man who recruited and trained Bin Laden during the war in Afghanistan
against the soviets. That's why John O'Neill had no illusions as far as the Bin Laden
case was concerned. He knew he might be able to arrest his lieutenants on
American or Egyptian soil. Certain authors of the Nairobi and Dar es-Salam terrorist
attacks had been captured in Saudi Arabia. But when the FBI had arrived to
interrogate them, they had just been beheaded.
Question:
Bush Junior assumed office on 26 January 2001. Right after 5 February, negotiations
were resumed between the new Bush administration and the Taliban via the UN.
Why were these negotiations resumed and what were the objectives?
Answer:
Obviously, they are energetic objectives. Why does one negotiate with the Taliban?
The negotiations between the Taliban and the UN had started in 1999 (by the "6+2"
group, meaning Afghanistan's neighbours, the United States and Russia). The
American administration was leading parallel talks with the Taliban. The Taliban are
the product of economical interests. They were put in power by the Saudi Secret
Services via the ISI, Pakistan's Secret Services. Saudi Arabia considers that this
region of the world is strategic, because it allows it to contain the influence of the
Iranian (Shiites, while the Saudis are Sunnis). Saudi Arabia wanted a strong Sunni
regime in power; so did the Pakistani who wished to have a regime close to theirs as
a countermeasure against India. Economical considerations grafted themselves onto
these strategic considerations of the Arab-Muslim world. That is why the first
financiers of the Taliban are oil companies like Unocal (American) and Delta Oil
(Saudi). From Washington to London, it was a lucky streak, because valuable oil and
gas resources had been discovered between 1992 and 1995 in Kazakhstan and
Turkmenistan. Oil companies like Elf, Chevron, Exxon want to invest in the region,
but it is deep set in a zone under Russian influence, and gasoducts and pipelines are
controlled by the Russians, who rent them at an incredibly high price. So, one
solution is to create pipelines that would go through Afghanistan, then through
Pakistan, and end in the Persian Gulf. This strategic dimension means that the
Occidentals witness the rise of the Taliban with some satisfaction, because after
the civil war that followed the departure of the Soviets, they imposed a strong and
stable governing power in Afghanistan. But as it is often the case in modern history,
in Africa or in the Middle East, the Occidentals put in place very hard regimes,
because it is in their best interest, and these become uncontrollable. Like Khomeini
in Iran, who was supposed to counterbalance the power of the Soviets. In 1997,
European Commissioner Emma Bonino went to Kabul, and was jailed. Rapidly, the
Taliban officially became a government of outcasts. But officiously, one was still
talking to them. After the Nairobi and Dar es-Salam terrorist attacks, Bin Laden's
guilt was proved, and in 1999, the State Department's number two went to Kabul to
present the proofs of Bin Laden's guilt to Mullah Omar. For the Taliban, Osama Bin
Laden was more than just a simple criminal they were protecting. Mullah Omar and
him were trained together at the time of the war against the Soviets. Mullah Omar
was the legs, and Bin Laden, the brain. Despite that reality, the Occidentals
continued to discuss with the Taliban. Until the Clinton administration understood, in
November 2000, that it was vain to discuss with the Taliban and demanded UN
sanctions against them, just before leaving power. But, right after assuming office,
the Bush administration undid what had been done. Contrarily to the Clinton
administration, who had a global vision of this region of the world, the Bush
administration comes largely from oil companies. Therefore it considers that the
stabilisation of Central Asia is the priority. And negotiations with the Taliban started
again.
Question:
Why do the Taliban resume negotiations until August 2001?
Answer:
A proposal of international recognition and financial aid from the IMF (International
Monetary Fund?) did not interest them. They want to gain time to impose the Arab
emirate of Afghanistan and develop their influence, avoid the blocus while letting
the Occidentals think they could make pipelines go through Afghanistan. The US
State Department and the UN Security Council are looking for stability in the region.
And as they think that the Taliban are the only ones who are capable to ensure this
security, they support them. It is not the first time that the United States
supported a hard Islamic dictatorship, like Saudi Arabia. But they want to transform
them and make them more "presentable" amidst the "concert of nations". That is
why the return of King Zaher Shah is proposed to them, as soon as April 2001. If he
could impose some rules that would satisfy the occidental television networks, open
negotiations could take place again. So, it is suggested to the Taliban that they
should put in power again a king who had been chased out of the country in the
'70s on grounds of corruption - and who is, for the Taliban, the last of the Muslims -
and that they should extradite Bin Laden towards Saudi Arabia. When Bin Laden has
strong personal links with Mullah Omar! What an aberration!
Question:
Isn't that a very risky bet when one knows the military power of the Occidentals, as
we saw during the Gulf War?
Answer:
The Arab-Muslim world feels very bitter about it, and it is generally not well known.
The Middle East is a region under development, with weak economical resources,
totally under the grip of very hard powers that are maintained by the Occidentals,
the first beneficiaries of what lies underground. What was highly resented during the
Gulf War was that Saudi Arabia welcomed the American Army on the land of Islam's
Holy Sites, and that it remained there! There are very important military bases near
Mecca and Medina. Hence the support of the Sunni fundamentalists to Al Qaida.
Saudi Arabia has the sixth defence budget in the world and calls the US for its
security. But, the first duty of the reigning family, and what legitimates is power, is
the defence of Islam's Holy Sites.
Question:
In Afghanistan, the Taliban have already lost the power. Effectively, they have lost
the war. But has the Saudi clergy lost?
Answer:
It's not sure. The Saudi clergy heads most of the foundations that finance mosques
in the world. So the military campaign is used to radicalise the Sunnis of the world
against Occident. It is a disaster for the Taliban, But if we consider that the Taliban
were nothing more than soldiers of the Saudi clergy, it is a very relative disaster.
What counts is that the new power in Kabul still be Sunni orthodox and continue to
counter the influence of Iran.
Question:
What are the links between the Bin Laden family, Osama Bin Laden himself, the
reigning family and Saudi businessmen like Khaled Ben Lahfouz?
Answer:
Khaled Ben Mahfouz is the son of the founder of Saudi Arabia's first bank, and one
of the richest men in the kingdom. But, not only is he Osama Bin Laden's
brother-in-law, from 1991 onwards, they conduct business together. This is the
testimony of these links against nature between people who are close to the Saudi
government and the soldiers of fundamentalism. Thanks to these links, Bin Laden
has been able to build a financial empire of several hundreds of millions of dollars,
including an agro-alimentary holding and a bank. This financial power will allow him
to federate the fundamentalist movements. In the '90s, all the movements converge
towards Khartoum, at first because they are chased elsewhere, for example in
Egypt, and also because Bin Laden receives funds from the Saudi clergy.
Question:
What is the role of the national governmental organisations financed by the Saudis?
Answer:
They are the demonstration of the activism of the Saudi clergy behind Al Qaida. The
clergy gathers funds estimated at ten billion dollars a year. Then this money is given
to national governmental organisations everywhere in the world. These associations
sometimes do a real field work helping out needy Muslims, in Kosovo or elsewhere.
But sometimes, they aid terrorist organisations. The IRO, based in Great Britain,
finances entities close to Al Qaida while distributing food to under-nourished
populations. These actions come from a same intention, which is the expansion of
Sunnism.
Question:
Would the arrest or the death of Osama Bin Laden change something?
Answer:
The neutralisation of Bin Laden would mean the neutralisation of a hearty soldier of
the Muslim fundamentalism from 1996 to now. In a movement there are always
different entities. Here, one is trying to solve the problem of the military entity. But
if one does not negotiate with the Saudi clergy, if one does not obtain a change of
attitude, sooner or later the same problem will resurface.
Question:
You detail in "Bin Laden, the Forbidden Truth", the composition of a number of
boards of companies having a link more or less close with Al Qaida. But, one can
identify structures were people close to Bin Laden and George W Bush himself were
seated next to each other!
Answer:
There is this revealing case, but which remains anecdotic, of a small oil services
company in the '80s named Harken Energy, whose main shareholder was George W
Bush. Like all the sons of big Texan families, GW Bush headed a small oil company in
which was also Khaled Ben Mahfouz, Osama Bin Laden's brother-in-law. One should
not draw conclusions too hastily because at the time, Bin Laden had no political
existence. But this is an interesting indicator because it is an example among so
many of these links between the religious power, the financial power and the oil
interests. These links partly explain the complex situation that the Occidentals have
partly created when deciding to support the Taliban, and the difficulty in solving it.
democrats.com
Privacy Policy
Copyright 2001 Democrats.com. All rights re |
