1

MR. BRINKLEY: Coming next, Michael Ledeen, formerly a consultant on terrorism to the National Security Council and now a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. And, shortly, Senator Claiborne Pell, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State. In a moment.

(Announcements.)

MR. BRINKLEY: Mr. Ledeen, thanks very much for coming in today. Pleased to have you here with us. Here with us in the studio are George Will of ABC NEWS, and Sam Donaldson, ABC NEWS White House correspondent. Now, Mr. Ledeen, you have been involved in the past with some negotiations with Iran. It seems to have some control of the Shiite crazies who say they have done this most recent kidnapping. What do you think of this? Is it just another random kidnapping? Or would you guess it has some specific purpose?

MR. LEDEEN: Well, I don't know. If I had to guess, I would guess that it's a response to the Hameidi, in Germany, and the imminence of his transfer to the United States and his trial here. But, again, I don't know that. And it could well be just part of an ongoing internal struggle between the various elements that are running around in Lebanon.

MR. BRINKLEY: Well, if it is aimed at Germany, it seems to be working. The Germans are saying they're going to be very slow to hand him over.

MR. LEDEEN: Well, the Germans have said that leading up to the election. And I hope very much that once these elections are over today that the government is going to find it easier to be tougher with these terrorists, because it really has to.

MR. WILL: In a long piece in this morning's Post, looking at the entire sweep of our dealings with Iran, you said it is arguable that -- and indeed, in the Administration, was argued that -- the United States should negotiate with the holders of hostages if, but only if, there's evidence that the United States can influence events. We've seen this now for 18 months. Is there any evidence whatever that the United States can influence events?

MR. LEDEEN: Well, yes. And I just want to put in there that I

[2C]

2

myself do not share that theory. I think it's a legitimate theory, and
it's one that has to be decided. It's not mine. But in the specific
Iranian case, from the moment that we started talking to representatives
of the government of Iran, to the present, so far as I can tell, there
has not been a single act of Iranian-sponsored terrorism against an
American target in that period, which is quite a long period of time.
So if you think that you can eventually come to terms with these people
in one way or another --

MR. WILL: How do you know that, Mr. Ledeen? You say it's not
Iranian sponsored. But part of our premise has been that the Iranians
have some kind of attachment to or control over some of these groups.

MR. LEDEEN: Yes. Well, the only case that's been argued to day
which could be an Iranian-sponsored attack against Americans in that
period is the one where, what, three hostages were taken in September
in Beirut, or in Southern Lebanon. Most of the experts I know who have
looked at that believe that that was done by people who were trying to
blow up this whole deal, were trying to sabotage the deal between Iran
and the United States.

MR. WILL: Well, why wouldn't it be excellent American policy
regarding terrorism to say that people captured in Beirut are damn
fools for being in Beirut, to put it bluntly, and the United States
feels no obligation to amend or alter its public policy in any way to
get them out of the mess they volunteered to get into?

MR. LEDEEN: I think that's an excellent policy, but I think we
should go further. I think not only should we say that people who get
captured in Beirut have gotten what they deserved and they're crazy to
be there, but also, if we find a connection between the people who are
taking Americans hostage and any government, we're going to try to
come to terms with that government and deliver blows to it, whether it
be economic sanctions or military attacks or paramilitary action or
whatever. And lastly, that we are going to go after the specific
individuals who take Americans hostage and who kill Americans under
these circumstances. And we're going to go after them all over the
world, wherever they may be. So I think you have to do all these things.

MR. DONALDSON: Well, three more Americans have been captured two

3

days ago. What do we do?

MR. LEDEEN: If we know who did it, then I think we just go to them and say, either you release these people or there's going to be a terrible price to pay.

MR. DONALDSON: Well, now wait a moment, we knew for a long time that Iran was behind, in the sense of controlling Hezbollah, which has been holding hostages. We got three hostages out by trading arms to Iran. Of course, three more Americans were captured during that period. And now three more Americans have been captured, so they're ahead. We've known about Iran's complicity. We didn't do anything but sell them arms. You're suggesting that policy change?

MR. LEDEEN: Yes, that's right. I think it was a mistake to get involved in an arms-for-hostages business. And I've been saying for ten years that I thought anybody who launched terrorist attacks against the United States ought to be attacked by us in turn.

MR. DONALDSON: Well, are you suggesting we bomb Tehran and the holy city of Qom?

MR. LEDEEN: No, I think we can safely leave that to the Iraqis. But I do think it's quite legitimate to go after terrorist training camps in Lebanon, in the Bekaa Valley, that are run by Syria and are run by Iran. And I'm all for going after specific Iranian targets as well.

MR. DONALDSON: But what does the President do in the short run? There's one news report that this group that has captured the three additional Americans say that by 5:00 o'clock this afternoon, if Hameidi has not been turned over by the West German government, one of these Americans will die?

MR. LEDEEN: The President isn't really in a position to do anything about that.

MR. DONALDSON: Nothing?

MR. LEDEEN: Nothing. The President should say, and should carry it out, that if this is done, there's going to be a retaliation by the United States of a most violent sort. But again, you see, we are still paying the price for 10 to 15 years of strong rhetoric on terrorism and very little in the way of action. In the last 10 years, the sum total of American action against terrorism, so far as I can figure out, is

4

one bombing raid against Libya, and one night of imaginative action
against the hijackers of the Achille Lauro. And that's it. So most
terrorist groups, most state sponsors of terrorism around the world
still believe that they can safely take Americans hostage, and they can
gain from it.

MR. WILL: Well, suppose you were called in to the White House,
not as a diplomat in general, but as a counter terrorism expert. And
they said, Mr. Ledeen, we want to extradite this gentleman from Germany.
Would you recommend that they do that?

MR. LEDEEN: Yes, I would.

MR. WILL: Why?

MR. LEDEEN: Because it is our burden -- this is a man who has
probably murdered an American citizen, was involved in a hijacking that
led to the murder of an American citizen, and he has to stand justice
in the United States. We have to try him. It's our obligation. We
cannot ask all these countries around the world, which we often do --
Italy, Germany and so forth -- to be tough against terrorists who are
attacking their people, and then refuse to assume the moral obligation
that we have of trying people who attack ours.

MR. WILL: You said that our record on terrorism had been that for
15 years, 10 or 15 years, strong rhetoric, no action. Has there ever
been a lower ebb in American policy against terrorism than that reached
during the middle of the Reagan Administration now?

MR. LEDEEN: Yes, the Administration just prior to it. Because at
least the Reagan Administration did bomb Libya, and did go after the
people who took the Achille Lauro. Prior to that, nobody had done
anything. So this is the first time anything had been done.

MR. WILL: Yes, but at the same time there was really -- can't we
simply call it an attempt to appease Iran?

MR. LEDEEN: I think it's more complicated than that, in fairness.
What I think happened was that an important geopolitical initiative got
hopelessly muddled with a desperate desire to get American hostages
out. And that the arms, while they were an effort to get American
hostages, also played a role in the other thing. So it's not quite
that simple.