Skip to comments.

Posted on 10/13/2001 12:58:51 PM PDT by Keyes For President

Keyes' comments following the latest Presidential press conference. October 11th, 2001

Colmes: Is America doing the right thing one month to the day after the attack? Joining us now is chairman of the Declaration Foundation and former presidential candidate Alan Keyes. Ambassador Keyes welcome.

Keyes: Hi.

Colmes: What did the president accomplish this evening?

Keyes: Well I'm not sure. I think we will see regular communications like this punctuating the effort we are making. In the immediate aftermath of something like this, as we are developing our strategy, it makes sense to keep the American people informed and assure them that the leadership is on top of things. I think that was the purpose of the press conference, and I think that purpose was served.

Colmes: One of the interesting things that came up was the issue of nation building. When asked about Iraq the President said we would have to take a wait and see attitude, and see how they co-operate. He would not commit himself into going beyond Afghanistan. Do you find that interesting at all? Do you think he should have taken a stronger stand in that direction?

Keyes: I think he did try to make the point that terrorism is a general phenomenon. What we have laid out is a principle, and the first instance of that principle is Afghanistan. These countries that play host to terrorists, and who refuse to do anything in co-operation with us to root out the terrorists will have the United States take action against them. That leaves open the possibility that others who remain in the same posture will meet the same kind of response from the United States. I think that's appropriate.

Colmes: I also thought it was interesting that he referred to the lessons learned in Vietnam and he talked about other wars and mistakes we have made in the past. Can we avert mistakes now based historically on what we have done wrong?

Keyes: I think that every war has it's own logic. In every crisis of this kind we can't fight the war worrying about the last war because we are dealing with a situation which is sui generis, and has a logic of it's own. But at the same time there are some things we have to carry from the past. In the case of Vietnam I think we learned that it's critically important to sustain the common moral understanding of the American people as to where right and wrong lay. In the immediate aftermath of an attack like this it's very easy. We can see evil. We can understand it. We can all pull together. I believe as things go on for a longer time it's going to be more a matter of articulation to continue to remember what this is about without getting confused. Already, you know, some voices have been raised in the past week, week and a half, intending to shift the blame to us, pretending that this was related to some policies of the U.S. I think all of that will continue apace, it will grow and one prerequisite will be to keep a clear focus on the deep principle of morality that is involved in our own opposition to the terrorist menace.

Hannity: Ambassador Keyes, always good to see you. Thank you for joining us again. Is there any doubt that President Bush has been able to rise to the occasion? That he now has become a President with a cause and a purpose that will truly define his presidency?

Keyes: I don't know. I think the cause and the purpose is one that faces the United States of America. I certainly don't personalize it to the president I think we have come through the period where we are responding to the blow, and I think that response has been appropriate in terms of demonstrating American resolve and sending a message to our enemies that we won't take this lying down. But we're in this for the long haul. The long haul is going to be a very different kind of conflict. We are going to have to develop the kind of special forces that are needed to destroy the terrorist assets and elements. I think that test over the long haul will be the true measure of where we stand.

Hannity: He kept defining this as a battle of good versus evil. It was quite introspective at a number of points in the speech. It may take a year or two but he says he's determined to stay the course and rid the world of terrorist for our children and grandchildren. You can look in his eyes I sensed a sincere resolve that this is now his mission.

Keyes: Well first of all you have to be careful. I myself wouldn't promise to the American people to rid the world of terrorists. I think they may still be with us in the course of the 21st century. We can't control that. I think that what we have to promise our people is that we will prepare ourselves better. That we will develop the institutional apparatus that will help us make sure that the tragedy of September 11th is never repeated. It' a challenge that we have actually been facing for the past 30 years, since the seventies in fact. In various ways we have been challenged to be more pro-active and see this in the right light. I hoped the events of September 11th have helped us to achieve that purpose.

Hannity: But there's a greater threat here. No one is doubting what your saying. But the events of September 11th show that there's a greater threat than ever before. I don't think anyone in America has any doubts today that those who would kill 7,000 men, women and children would [unintelligible] and if they had the capability to kill 70 or 700 they would use whatever weapons they had available to them, and that threat is getting closer and closer every day.

Keyes: Sean maybe I've been a little to close to the problem, having worked directly on this issue several times in my career in the government. I do not believe it's greater than it's ever been. The success of the threateners is greater than it's ever been. Yet the success of the threateners implies a failure in our national security apparatus. I think we have to think through that carefully. It's like having a shark net that didn't work. We need to go out and find out what the gaps were and make sure we correct what we were doing wrong, not pretend that the threat was larger because the result was larger. Maybe the result was larger because we didn't handle the threat competently.

Hannity: Ambassador, I want to be clear about this first; let me concede a point. The world has always been evil, and dangerous place and governed by military force. With that said we look at the instability of Pakistan, President Musharaff has had to re-shuffle his cabinet three times in as many days. They have nuclear weapons. Saddam Hussein has used biological weapons against his own people. He's been searching for nuclear weapons as well. That means the timing now is very important especially as it relates to some of these smaller countries.

Keyes: I think it's very critical, but the fact is we have come to an understanding of a greater sense of our own vulnerability. We live in a dangerous world. Some of us have said that for a long time. We can't pretend that the threat you just mentioned (in terms of nuclear capabilities) should not lead us to a swift development of a strategic defense. But I still hear folks in congress dragging their feet, acting like we should be moving slowly. I don't understand it. Apparently some people aren't getting the message and still don't understand that we have to prepare for life in a dangerous world.

Hannity: I thought Jim Angle had a great question tonight when he talked about nations that once supported and sponsored terrorists, allowed them to have a place to train, and are now joining the coalition. Do we grant them amnesty if you will? Are we making a mistake ignoring their past of history?

Keyes: I'm not sure it's past history that the problem. Because they are not involved with this set of terrorists doesn't mean that they're not involved with their own set of terrorists. It's like drug dealers competing with one another in an urban area. Sometimes they are willing to finger the other guy because it will help their operations to grow. I think we need to base our stance on actual facts and behavior. That is, by the way, what the President was getting at this evening. We have to look at what people do. If they are in fact co-operating with us, destroying the bases, turning over the terrorists and so forth, we can take them as real, but we can't take them at their word.

Colmes: When you were running for president morality was a very big part of your message. Just to pick up on what you and Sean were talking about, we are now having to have strange bedfellows with nations with questionable moral histories, except we have to play political ball with them. The Northern Alliance has a terrible human rights record. How will it endanger us morally to be in bed politically with these forces around the globe?

Keyes: You have to be careful. I have always made the case that when dealing with national security you should work with forces that are going to serve your security. The issues of morality are first and foremost those issues, which govern our conduct, our own policy, our own actions and activities. These are the things we are responsible for. The fact that circumstances force us together with other nations in the world doesn't compromise our moral stance unless we let it influence or degrade the quality of our own actions. I don't think that's happened.

Colmes: You have President Mushareff saying that this better be a short campaign. They are a shaky alliance mate. Other countries like that won't be on board too long if this is a protracted campaign. Keeping the coalition together is going to be tricky.

Keyes: Well first of all I think we'll make a mistake if we think a coalition is absolutely essential to the job. What is essential to the job is our resolve, and our willingness to understand the task in front of us. I also think we shouldn't pretend this is going to be something that requires constant large-scale military activity. I believe in fact that the terrorist threat is going to have to be dealt with in a more flexible way, in terms of developing instruments that target individual terrorists and terrorist assets, and moves against them in ways that may not require the full mobilization of our military powers. Over time we need to develop these instruments so we can deal with this terrorist threat over the long term, because we are going to be dealing with this despite what Pakistan or anyone else may say.

Hannity: Ambassador, always good to see you. We appreciate your time tonight.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.