The terrorists were at war with us, but we were not yet at war with them
The Terrorists Were at
War With Us, But We Were Not Yet at War With Them
National Security Advisor, Dr.
Condoleezza Rice's Opening
Remarks to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
As Prepared for Delivery. Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C., April
Source: The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, April 8, 2004.
I thank the
Commission for arranging this special session. Thank you for helping to find a
way to meet the Nation's need to learn all we can about the September 11th
attacks, while preserving important Constitutional principles.
Commission, and those who appear before it, have a vital charge. We owe it to
those we lost, and to their loved ones, and to our country, to learn all we can
about that tragic day, and the events that led to it. Many families of the
victims are here today, and I thank them for their contributions to the
terrorist threat to our Nation did not emerge on September 11th,
2001. Long before that day, radical, freedom-hating terrorists declared war on
America and on the civilized world. The attack on the Marine barracks in Lebanon
in 1983, the hijacking of the Achille Lauro in 1985, the rise of al-Qaida and
the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the attacks on American
installations in Saudi Arabia in 1995 and 1996, the East Africa embassy bombings
of 1998, the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, these and other atrocities were
part of a sustained, systematic campaign to spread devastation and chaos and to
murder innocent Americans.
terrorists were at war with us, but we were not yet at war with them. For more
than 20 years, the terrorist threat gathered, and America's response across
several administrations of both parties was insufficient. Historically,
democratic societies have been slow to react to gathering threats, tending
instead to wait to confront threats until they are too dangerous to ignore or
until it is too late. Despite the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 and continued
German harassment of American shipping, the United States did not enter the
First World War until two years later. Despite Nazi Germany's repeated
violations of the Versailles Treaty and its string of provocations throughout
the mid-1930s, the Western democracies did not take action until 1939. The U.S.
Government did not act against the growing threat from Imperial Japan until the
threat became all too evident at Pearl Harbor. And, tragically, for all the
language of war spoken before September 11th, this country simply was
not on a war footing.
America has been at war. And under President Bush's leadership, we will remain
at war until the terrorist threat to our Nation is ended. The world has changed
so much that it is hard to remember what our lives were like before that day.
But I do want to describe the actions this Administration was taking to fight
terrorism before September 11th, 2001.
President Bush was elected, we were briefed by the Clinton Administration on
many national security issues during the transition. The President-elect and I
were briefed by George Tenet on terrorism and on the al-Qaida network. Members
of Sandy Berger's NSC staff briefed me, along with other members of the new
national security team, on counterterrorism and al-Qaida. This briefing lasted
about one hour, and it reviewed the Clinton Administration's counterterrorism
approach and the various counterterrorism activities then underway. Sandy and I
personally discussed a variety of other topics, including North Korea, Iraq, the
Middle East, and the Balkans.
these briefings and because we had watched the rise of al-Qaida over the years,
we understood that the network posed a serious threat to the United States. We
wanted to ensure there was no respite in the fight against al-Qaida. On an
operational level, we decided immediately to continue pursuing the Clinton
Administration's covert action authorities and other efforts to fight the
network. President Bush retained George Tenet as Director of Central
Intelligence, and Louis Freeh remained the Director of the FBI. I took the
unusual step of retaining Dick Clarke and the entire Clinton Administration's
counterterrorism team on the NSC staff. I knew Dick to be an expert in his
field, as well as an experienced crisis manager. Our goal was to ensure
continuity of operations while we developed new and more aggressive policies.
beginning of the Administration, President Bush revived the practice of meeting
with the Director of Central Intelligence almost every day in the Oval Office -
meetings which I attended, along with the Vice President and the Chief of Staff.
At these meetings, the President received up-to-date intelligence and asked
questions of his most senior intelligence officials. From January 20 through
September 10, the President received at these daily meetings more than 40
briefing items on al-Qaida, and 13 of these were in response to questions he or
his top advisers had posed. In addition to seeing DCI Tenet almost every
morning, I generally spoke by telephone every morning at 7:15 with Secretaries
Powell and Rumsfeld. I also met and spoke regularly with the DCI about al-Qaida
we also had other responsibilities. President Bush had set a broad foreign
policy agenda. We were determined to confront the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction. We were improving America's relations with the world's great
powers. We had to change an Iraq policy that was making no progress against a
hostile regime which regularly shot at U.S. planes enforcing U.N. Security
Council Resolutions. And we had to deal with the occasional crisis, for
instance, when the crew of a Navy plane was detained in China for 11 days.
moved to develop a new and comprehensive strategy to eliminate the al-Qaida
terrorist network. President Bush understood the threat, and he understood its
importance. He made clear to us that he did not want to respond to al-Qaida one
attack at a time. He told me he was "tired of swatting flies."
strategy was developed over the Spring and Summer of 2001, and was approved by
the President's senior national security officials on September 4. It was the
very first major national security policy directive of the Bush Administration -
not Russia, not missile defense, not Iraq, but the elimination of al-Qaida.
this National Security Presidential Directive was originally a highly classified
document, we arranged for portions to be declassified to help the Commission in
its work, and I will describe some of those today. The strategy set as its goal
the elimination of the al-Qaida network. It ordered the leadership of relevant
U.S. departments and agencies to make the elimination of al-Qaida a high
priority and to use all aspects of our national power - intelligence, financial,
diplomatic, and military - to meet this goal. And it gave Cabinet Secretaries
and department heads specific responsibilities.
directed the Secretary of State to work with other countries to end all
sanctuaries given to al-Qaida.
directed the Secretaries of the Treasury and State to work with foreign
governments to seize or freeze assets and holdings of al-Qaida and its
directed the Director of Central Intelligence to prepare an aggressive program
of covert activities to disrupt al-Qaida and provide assistance to anti-Taliban
groups operating against al-Qaida in Afghanistan.
* It tasked
the Director of OMB with ensuring that sufficient funds were available in the
budgets over the next five years to meet the goals laid out in the strategy.
* And it
directed the Secretary of Defense to - and I quote - "ensure that the
contingency planning process include plans: against al-Qaida and associated
terrorist facilities in Afghanistan, including leadership,
command-control-communications, training, and logistics facilities; against
Taliban targets in Afghanistan, including leadership, command-control, air and
air defense, ground forces, and logistics; to eliminate weapons of mass
destruction which al-Qaida and associated terrorist groups may acquire or
manufacture, including those stored in underground bunkers." This was a change
from the prior strategy -- Presidential Decision Directive 62, signed in 1998 -
which ordered the Secretary of Defense to provide transportation to bring
individual terrorists to the U.S. for trial, to protect DOD forces overseas, and
to be prepared to respond to terrorist and weapons of mass destruction
importantly, we recognized that no counterterrorism strategy could succeed in
isolation. As you know from the Pakistan and Afghanistan strategy documents that
we made available to the Commission, our counterterrorism strategy was part of a
broader package of strategies that addressed the complexities of the region.
our counterterrorism and regional strategies was the most difficult and the most
important aspect of the new strategy to get right. Al-Qaida was both client of
and patron to the Taliban, which in turn was supported by Pakistan. Those
relationships provided al-Qaida with a powerful umbrella of protection, and we
had to sever them. This was not easy.
Not that we
hadn't tried. Within a month of taking office, President Bush sent a strong,
private message to President Musharraf urging him to use his influence with the
Taliban to bring Bin Laden to justice and to close down al-Qaida training camps.
Secretary Powell actively urged the Pakistanis, including Musharraf himself, to
abandon support for the Taliban. I met with Pakistan's Foreign Minister in my
office in June of 2001. I delivered a very tough message, which was met with a
rote, expressionless response.
al-Qaida policy wasn't working because our Afghanistan policy wasn't working.
And our Afghanistan policy wasn't working because our Pakistan policy wasn't
working. We recognized that America's counterterrorism policy had to be
connected to our regional strategies and to our overall foreign policy.
these problems, I made sure to involve key regional experts. I brought in Zalmay
Khalilzad, an expert on Afghanistan who, as a senior diplomat in the 1980s, had
worked closely with the Afghan Mujahedeen, helping them to turn back the Soviet
invasion. I also ensured the participation of the NSC experts on South Asia, as
well as the Secretary of State and his regional specialists. Together, we
developed a new strategic approach to Afghanistan. Instead of the intense focus
on the Northern Alliance, we emphasized the importance of the south - the social
and political heartland of the country. Our new approach to Pakistan combined
the use of carrots and sticks to persuade Pakistan to drop its support for the
Taliban. And we began to change our approach to India, to preserve stability on
were developing this new strategy to deal with al-Qaida, we also made decisions
on a number of specific anti-al-Qaida initiatives that had been proposed by Dick
Clarke. Many of these ideas had been deferred by the last Administration, and
some had been on the table since 1998. We increased counterterror assistance to
Uzbekistan; we bolstered the Treasury Department's activities to track and seize
terrorist assets; we increased funding for counterterrorism activities across
several agencies; and we moved quickly to arm Predator unmanned surveillance
vehicles for action against al-Qaida.
reporting increased during the Spring and Summer of 2001, we moved the U.S.
Government at all levels to a high state of alert and activity. Let me clear up
any confusion about the relationship between the development of our new strategy
and the many actions we took to respond to threats that summer. Policy
development and crisis management require different approaches. Throughout this
period, we did both simultaneously.
essential crisis management task, we depended on the Counterterrorism Security
Group chaired by Dick Clarke to be the interagency nerve center. The CSG
consisted of senior counterterrorism experts from CIA, the FBI, the Department
of Justice, the Defense Department (including the Joint Chiefs), the State
Department, and the Secret Service. The CSG had met regularly for many years,
and its members had worked through numerous periods of heightened threat
activity. As threat information increased, the CSG met more frequently,
sometimes daily, to review and analyze the threat reporting and to coordinate
actions in response. CSG members also had ready access to their Cabinet
Secretaries and could raise any concerns they had at the highest levels.
reporting that we received in the Spring and Summer of 2001 was not specific as
to time, nor place, nor manner of attack. Almost all of the reports focused on
al-Qaida activities outside the United States, especially in the Middle East and
North Africa. In fact, the information that was specific enough to be actionable
referred to terrorist operations overseas. More often, it was frustratingly
vague. Let me read you some of the actual chatter that we picked up that Spring
"Unbelievable news in coming weeks"
* "Big event
... there will be a very, very, very, very big uproar"
will be attacks in the near future" Troubling, yes. But they don't tell us when;
they don't tell us where; they don't tell us who; and they don't tell us how.
context, I want to address in some detail one of the briefing items we received,
since its content has frequently been mischaracterized. On August 6, 2001, the
President's intelligence briefing included a response to questions he had
earlier raised about any al-Qaida intentions to strike our homeland. The
briefing item reviewed past intelligence reporting, mostly dating from the
1990s, regarding possible al-Qaida plans to attack inside the United States. It
referred to uncorroborated reporting from 1998 that terrorists might attempt to
hijack a U.S. aircraft in an attempt to blackmail the government into releasing
U.S.-held terrorists who had participated in the 1993 World Trade Center
bombing. This briefing item was not prompted by any specific threat information.
And it did not raise the possibility that terrorists might use airplanes as
fact that the vast majority of the threat information we received was focused
overseas, I was also concerned about possible threats inside the United States.
On July 5, Chief of Staff Andy Card and I met with Dick Clarke, and I asked Dick
to make sure that domestic agencies were aware of the heightened threat period
and were taking appropriate steps to respond, even though we did not have
specific threats to the homeland. Later that same day, Clarke convened a special
meeting of his CSG, as well as representatives from the FAA, the INS, Customs,
and the Coast Guard. At that meeting, these agencies were asked to take
additional measures to increase security and surveillance.
this period of heightened threat information, we worked hard on multiple fronts
to detect, protect against, and disrupt any terrorist plans or operations that
might lead to an attack.
Department of Defense issued at least five urgent warnings to U.S. military
forces that al-Qaida might be planning a near-term attack, and placed our
military forces in certain regions on heightened alert.
* The State
Department issued at least four urgent security advisories and public worldwide
cautions on terrorist threats, enhanced security measures at certain embassies,
and warned the Taliban that they would be held responsible for any al-Qaida
attack on U.S. interests.
* The FBI
issued at least three nationwide warnings to Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies, and specifically stated that, although the vast majority
of the information indicated overseas targets, attacks against the homeland
could not be ruled out. The FBI also tasked all 56 of its U.S. Field Offices to
increase surveillance of known or suspected terrorists and reach out to known
informants who might have information on terrorist activities.
* The FAA
issued at least five Civil Aviation Security Information Circulars to all U.S.
airlines and airport security personnel, including specific warnings about the
possibility of hijackings.
* The CIA
worked round the clock to disrupt threats worldwide. Agency officials launched a
wide-ranging disruption effort against al-Qaida in more than 20 countries.
this period, the Vice President, DCI Tenet, and the NSC's Counterterrorism staff
called senior foreign officials requesting that they increase their intelligence
assistance and report to us any relevant threat information.
This is a
brief sample of our intense activity over the Summer of 2001.
Yet, as your
hearings have shown, there was no silver bullet that could have prevented the
9/11 attacks. In hindsight, if anything might have helped stop 9/11, it would
have been better information about threats inside the United States, something
made difficult by structural and legal impediments that prevented the collection
and sharing of information by our law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
attacks came. A band of vicious terrorists tried to decapitate our government,
destroy our financial system, and break the spirit of America. As an officer of
government on duty that day, I will never forget the sorrow and the anger I
felt. Nor will I forget the courage and resilience shown by the American people
and the leadership of the President that day.
Now, we have
an opportunity and an obligation to move forward together. Bold and
comprehensive changes are sometimes only possible in the wake of catastrophic
events - events which create a new consensus that allows us to transcend old
ways of thinking and acting. Just as World War II led to a fundamental
reorganization of our national defense structure and to the creation of the
National Security Council, so has September 11th made possible sweeping changes
in the ways we protect our homeland.
Bush is leading the country during this time of crisis and change. He has
unified and streamlined our efforts to secure the American Homeland by creating
the Department of Homeland Security, established a new center to integrate and
analyze terrorist threat information, directed the transformation of the FBI
into an agency dedicated to fighting terror, broken down the bureaucratic walls
and legal barriers that prevented the sharing of vital threat information
between our domestic law enforcement and our foreign intelligence agencies, and,
working with the Congress, given officials new tools, such as the USA Patriot
Act, to find and stop terrorists. And he has done all of this in a way that is
consistent with protecting America's cherished civil liberties and with
preserving our character as a free and open society.
President also recognizes that our work is far from complete. More structural
reform will likely be necessary. Our intelligence gathering and analysis have
improved dramatically in the last two years, but they must be stronger still.
The President and all of us in his Administration welcome new ideas and fresh
thinking. We are eager to do whatever is necessary to protect the American
people. And we look forward to receiving the recommendations of this Commission.
We are at
war and our security as a nation depends on winning that war. We must and we
will do everything we can to harden terrorist targets within the United States.
Dedicated law enforcement and security professionals continue to risk their
lives every day to make us all safer, and we owe them a debt of gratitude. And,
let's remember, those charged with protecting us from attack have to succeed 100
percent of the time. To inflict devastation on a massive scale, the terrorists
only have to succeed once, and we know they are trying every day.
That is why
we must address the source of the problem. We must stay on offense, to find and
defeat the terrorists wherever they live, hide, and plot around the world. If we
learned anything on September 11th, 2001, it is that we cannot wait
while dangers gather.
September 11th attacks, our Nation faced hard choices. We could fight
a narrow war against al-Qaida and the Taliban or we could fight a broad war
against a global menace. We could seek a narrow victory or we could work for a
lasting peace and a better world. President Bush chose the bolder course.
recognizes that the War on Terror is a broad war. Under his leadership, the
United States and our allies are disrupting terrorist operations, cutting off
their funding, and hunting down terrorists one-by-one. Their world is getting
smaller. The terrorists have lost a home-base and training camps in Afghanistan.
The Governments of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia now pursue them with energy and
confronting the nexus between terror and weapons of mass destruction. We are
working to stop the spread of deadly weapons and prevent then from getting into
the hands of terrorists, seizing dangerous materials in transit, where
necessary. Because we acted in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will never again use weapons
of mass destruction against his people or his neighbors. And we have convinced
Libya to give up all its WMD-related programs and materials.
And as we
attack the threat at its sources, we are also addressing its roots. Thanks to
the bravery and skill of our men and women in uniform, we removed from power two
of the world's most brutal regimes -- sources of violence, and fear, and
instability in the region. Today, along with many allies, we are helping the
people of Iraq and Afghanistan to build free societies. And we are working with
the people of the Middle East to spread the blessings of liberty and democracy
as the alternatives to instability, hatred, and terror. This work is hard and
dangerous, yet it is worthy of our effort and our sacrifice. The defeat of
terror and the success of freedom in those nations will serve the interests of
our Nation and inspire hope and encourage reform throughout the greater Middle
aftermath of September 11th, those were the right choices for America
to make -- the only choices that can ensure the safety of our Nation in the
decades to come.
Now I am happy to answer your questions.