US Refusal of 2001 Taliban Offer Gave bin Laden a Free Pass
When George W. Bush rejected a Taliban offer to have Osama bin Laden tried by a moderate group of Islamic states in mid-October 2001, he gave up the only opportunity the United States would have to end bin Laden’s terrorist career for the next nine years.
The al-Qaeda leader was able to escape into Pakistan a few weeks later, because the Bush administration had no military plan to capture him.
The last Taliban foreign minister, Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, offered at a secret meeting in Islamabad Oct. 15, 2001, to put bin Laden in the custody of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), to be tried for the 9/11 terror attacks on the United States, Muttawakil told IPS in an interview in Kabul last year.
The OIC is a moderate, Saudi-based organization representing all Islamic countries. A trial of bin Laden by judges from OIC member countries might have dealt a more serious blow to al Qaeda’s Islamic credentials than anything the United States would have done with bin Laden.
Muttawakil also dropped a condition that the United States provide evidence of bin Laden’s guilt in the 9/11 attacks, which had been raised in late September and reiterated by Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan Abdul Salam Zaeef on Oct. 5—two days before the U.S. bombing of Taliban targets began.
There had been sketchy press reports at the time that the Taliban foreign minister had made a new offer in Islamabad to have bin Laden tried by one or more foreign countries. No Taliban or former Taliban official, however, had provided details of what had actually been proposed until Muttawakil’s revelation.
Muttawakil, who was detained at Bagram airbase for 18 months after the ouster of the Taliban regime and now lives in Kabul with the approval of the Hamid Karzai government, told IPS he had also offered a second alternative—a “special court” to try bin Laden that Afghanistan and two other Islamic governments would establish.
Muttawakil was believed by U.S. officials to have had the trust of Taliban leader Mullah Omar. A December 1998 cable from the U.S. embassy in Islamabad said he was “considered Omar’s closest adviser on political issues” and that he had become Omar’s “point man” on foreign affairs in 1997.
The new Taliban negotiating offer came almost immediately after the U.S. began bombing Taliban targets on Oct. 7, 2001. The fear of the bombing—and what was likely to follow—evidently spurred the Taliban leadership to be more forthcoming on bin Laden.
But Bush brusquely rejected any talks on the Taliban proposal, declaring, “They must have not heard. There’s no negotiations.”
Bush rejected the Taliban offer despite the fact that U.S. intelligence had picked up reports in the previous months of deep divisions within the Taliban regime over bin Laden. It was because of those reports that Bush had authorized secret meetings by a CIA officer with a high-ranking Taliban official in late September.
Former CIA director George Tenet recalled in his memoirs that the CIA station chief in Pakistan, Robert Grenier, met with Mullah Osmani, the second-ranking Taliban official, in Baluchistan province of Pakistan.
But Grenier was only authorized to offer Osmani three options: turning bin Laden over to the United States; letting the Americans find him on their own; or a third option, as Tenet described it, to “administer justice themselves, in a way that clearly took him off the table.”
Osmani rejected those three options, as well as a subsequent proposal by Grenier on Oct. 2 that he oust Mullah Omar from power and publicly announce on the radio that bin Laden would be handed over to the United States immediately.
On Oct. 3, Bush publicly ruled out negotiations with the Taliban. They had to “turn over the al-Qaeda organization living in Afghanistan and must destroy the terrorist camps,” he said, adding “There are no negotiations.”
Milton Bearden, the former CIA station chief in Pakistan during the mujahideen war against the Soviets, observed to the Washington Post two weeks after Bush had rejected Muttawakil’s new offer that the Taliban needed a face-saving way of resolving the issue consistent with its Islamic values.
“We never heard what they were trying to say,” Bearden said.
The Bush refusal to negotiate with the Taliban was in effect a free pass for bin Laden and his lieutenants, because the Bush administration had no plan of its own for apprehending bin Laden in Afghanistan. It did not even know what level of military effort would have been required for the United States to be able to block bin Laden’s exit routes from Afghanistan into Pakistan.
The absence of any military planning to catch bin Laden was a function of Bush’s national security team, led by Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, which had firmly opposed any military operation in Afghanistan that would have had any possibility of catching bin Laden and his lieutenants.
Rumsfeld and the second-ranking official at the Pentagon, Paul Wolfowitz, had dismissed CIA warnings of an al-Qaeda terrorist attack against the United States in the summer of 2001, and even after 9/11 had continued to question the CIA’s conclusion that bin Laden and al-Qaeda were behind the attacks.
Cheney and Rumsfeld were determined not to allow a focus on bin Laden to interfere with their plan for a U.S. invasion of Iraq to overthrow the Saddam Hussein regime.
Even after Bush decided in favor of an Afghan campaign, CENTCOM commander Tommy Franks, who was responsible for the war in Afghanistan, was not directed to have a plan for bin Laden’s capture or to block his escape to Pakistan.
When the CIA received intelligence on Nov. 12, 2001, that bin Laden had left Kandahar and was headed for a cave complex in the Tora Bora Mountains close to the Pakistani border, Franks had no assets in place to do anything about it. He asked Lt. Gen. Paul T. Mikolashek, commander of Army Central Command (ARCENT), if he could provide a blocking force between al-Qaeda and the Pakistani border, according to Col. David W. Lamm, who was then commander of ARCENT Kuwait.
But that was impossible, because ARCENT had neither the troops nor the strategic lift in Kuwait required to put such a force in place.
Franks then had to ask for Pakistani military help in blocking bin Laden’s exit into Pakistan, as Rumsfeld told a National Security Council meeting, according to the meeting transcript in Bob Woodward’s book Bush at War.
But Rumsfeld and other key advisers knew it would a charade, because bin Laden was a long-time ally of the Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI, and the Pakistani military was not about to help capture him.
Franks asked President Pervez Musharraf to deploy troops along the Afghan-Pakistan border near Tora Bora, and Musharraf agreed to redeploy 60,000 troops to the area from the border with India, according to U.S. Ambassador Wendy Chamberlin, who was present at the meeting.
But the Pakistani president said his army would need airlift assistance from the United States to carry out the redeployment. That would have required an entire aviation brigade, including hundreds of helicopters, and hundreds of support troops to deliver that many combat troops to the border region, according to Lamm.
Those were assets the U.S. military did not have in the theater.
Osama bin Laden had been effectively guaranteed an exit to Pakistan by a Bush policy that had rejected either diplomatic or military means to do anything about him.
In an implicit acknowledgment that the administration had not been
seriously concerned with apprehending bin Laden, Bush declared in a
March 13, 2002, press conference that bin Laden was “a person who’s now
been marginalized,” and added, “You know, I just don’t spend that much
time on him.”
(Inter Press Service)
Read more by Gareth Porter
- US Hard Line in Failed Iran Talks Driven by Israel – May 25th, 2012
- Was Afghan Massacre Linked to IED Attack? – May 23rd, 2012
- IAEA Parchin Demand Puts Iran Cooperation Pact at Risk – May 14th, 2012
- US Treasury Claim of Iran-al-Qaeda ‘Secret Deal’ Is Discredited – May 10th, 2012
- The Truth Behind the Official Story of Finding Bin Laden – May 3rd, 2012





Jamal
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:58 pm
As we said before…, He was killed military style.., a shot into his left eye and a shot to his heart.., this is a execution done by military.., that is to say.., the mission is kill you not.., capture you or injure you but to kill you is my mission.., they didn’t want him taken a life.., simply they would have forced to put him through a trial process and he would have said few things here and there and exposing few people here and there.., now there is no evidence and there is no one to be trialed for whatever.., so the war must go on. There we go again.., he would have exposed names and names again.., one of them would be one or two or three of the Bush family memebers.
Jamal
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:01 pm
CORRECTION..,
As we said before…, He was killed military style.., a shot into his left eye and a shot to his heart.., this is a execution done by military.., that is to say.., the mission is kill you.., NOT capture you or injure you but to kill you is my mission.., they didn’t want him taken a life.., simply they would have forced to put him through a trial process and he would have said few things here and there and exposing few people here and there.., now there is no evidence and there is no one to be trialed for whatever.., so the war must go on. there we go again…, he would have exposed names and names again.., one of them would be one or two or even three of the Bush family memebers.
JAMIE
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:44 pm
Bush and Obama are criminals,They killed him because he would have shown the world 9/11 did not involve him as much as he would have wanted to be responsible after all even before 9/11 they were giving Israel money and vetoing thing that could have stoped the mass killing of Palisinians and the robing of there land.He new things about thje US expesialy the Bush familly that would have been brought to the publics attention.They would have found a reason to kill him even if he surrenderd.T5he last thing they want is there lie proved to the entire world.The US government not all but most have sold there sole to the devil and have become the biggest criminals in the worlds history.All Americans need to do is study 9/11 and they will no without a dought there government did it along with a pattern ofd fause flag attacts for many years.If it was not a faulse flag it would go against there normal way they lie Americans into war.After all it's mostly poor soldiers that they could care less about dieing it's not there kids.Bush was a coward when in the military.
JAMIE
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:50 pm
His daddy made sure he was never in harms way.But have orderd many Americans to there death with lies GOOFS need to be put on tril and killed or spend the resat of there lifes in jail by themselfes because no inmate would pass on the chance to kill them.
keltrava
May 4th, 2011 at 3:24 am
The Taliban were never engaged in attacks on the USA.
Shortly after the invasion of Afghanistan a team of New York Times reporters went into Afganistan and scoured the remains of the Al Qaeda and Taliban training camps. Their reports ran in a series of about a dozen articles in the Times.
The conclusion of all the reports was that all participants in the camps were focused on the war with the Northern Alliance and not engaged in training for terrorist activities against the USA. Those findings were crucial but were never elevated to the importance they deserved and indeed the rumour was that the White House at the time asked that the reports be taken down.
These reports if reexamined would make into a newsworthy story almost 10 years after 9/11 to debunk the idea that the Taliban were responsible for the event.
Bruce Richardson
May 4th, 2011 at 5:53 am
While in Kandahar in 1997 I had the opportuntiy to meet with Taliban Foreign Affairs Minister, Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil. He advised that "the guest is burning down the guest house." A reference to the heat Osama bin Laden had brought to bear upon the Taliban while in residence. He also said that the "U.S. wishes war with Afghanistan." This comment was in reference to numerous Taliban offers to surrender Osama to U.S. authorities all of which were rejected. Mullah Omar was at odds with Osama bin Laden and refused to allow him to mount any operations against the U.S. or any other country from the soil of Afghanistan, according to Mullah Zaeef, Taliban Ambassadior to Pakistsn. They were world's apart ideologically. On another point, while Osama has been identified as only with the Taliban, it was the Northern Alliance that granted him permanent residency status following his U.S.-induced and hasty departure of Osama from the Sudan.
JAMIE
May 4th, 2011 at 5:57 am
Even the real Osama had nothing to do with 9/11 or why did he say he was not responsible when he would have loved to do that attack on America.THEY made vidioes of some person claiming to be osama but most on it was a lie and just propogada.Sadam had many body doubles like the US could not make someone look like Osama.But you could still tell it was not him look into it and see for youself.
Shootist66
May 4th, 2011 at 6:10 am
In my opinion, the reason the Cheney administration let OBL slide at Tora Bora is because taking him out so soon could've negated the casus belli for the GWOT in the eyes of Boobus Americanus. The Israeli-firster neocons and the military-industrial-congressional complex couldn't take a chance on letting that happen.
juvanya
August 21st, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Osama died in 2001. http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/13/osama-bi…
juvanya
August 21st, 2011 at 11:33 pm
hahaha cheney administration