Text 2472, 742 rader
Skriven 2006-04-12 23:36:10 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0604124) for Wed, 2006 Apr 12
====================================================
===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
April 12, 2006

Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
James S. Brady Briefing Room

Press Briefing view


1:05 P.M. EDT

MR. MCCLELLAN: Good afternoon, everyone. The President looks forward to,
here shortly, going to Annandale, Virginia, and participating in another
conversation on Medicare. We continue the remind seniors that the open
enrollment period ends on May 15th. We are pleased by the response so far.
We now have some 29 million seniors who are enrolled in the new Medicare
prescription drug benefit. Seniors are realizing substantial savings on
their prescription drug cost. The average senior is realizing 50 percent or
more in savings on the drug cost, some $1,100 or more a year. We are also
pleased that the overwhelming majority of those who are enrolled in the
program are expressing their deep appreciation for how well the program is
working. And we will continue to reach out and travel across the United
States, administration officials and the President, to talk about the
importance of learning about what options are available if you choose to
sign up for that new drug benefit.

And with that, I'm glad to go to your questions.

Q Scott, the administration has been talking to Iran and laying out in very
clear language that they need to suspend all enrichment activities. And
yet, out of Tehran today is the announcement that they want to build 54,000
centrifuges, certainly enough to build a nuclear weapon. A, what is your
concern that what the administration and the international community is
saying is not being heard? How is the message going to be sharpened and
toughened? And where to now?

MR. McCLELLAN: A, let me correct you, first of all. It's not the United
States that is saying that the regime needs to fully suspend its enrichment
and reprocessing activities, it is the international community that is
saying to the regime, you must suspend your enrichment and reprocessing
activities. This is a regime that has a long history of hiding its
activities from the international community when it comes to its nuclear
program. And --

Q Well, when the Secretary of State spoke today, she was speaking as much
to the U.N. as she was to Iran. So, clearly, there can't be a great deal of
comfort with how the international community is being heard.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the international community is united in our goal of
preventing the regime from having a nuclear weapons capability, or the
knowledge of how to make nuclear weapons, or nuclear weapons. The President
spoke to that earlier this week. The announcement by the regime only
underscores its defiance of the international community and the united
message of the international community. The international community,
through the United Nations Security Council and through the IAEA -- the
International Atomic Energy Agency Board passed resolutions in a statement
saying, you need to fully suspend your enrichment and reprocessing
activities. That's in order to start building some confidence with the
international community.

Now, this announcement by the regime is only further isolating the regime
from the world. And that's why Secretary Rice made clear earlier today that
it is time for action at the United Nations Security Council, time for
action on the diplomatic front. And we have continued to consult with the
Security Council members and with our friends and allies, including
Germany, about how to address the threat posed by the regime. And those
conversations will continue at the Security Council. The Director General
of the International Atomic Energy Agency is looking at where the regime
stands in terms of its nuclear programs and will be reporting back to the
Security Council at the end of this month. But it is time for action. And
what the Secretary was expressing earlier today. The President wanted to
make sure she made that very clear to all who were listening.

Q Does the administration doubt at all anything that -- any of Iran's
claims, as far as what it's managed to produce and put together by way of
centrifuge --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not in a position to make a technical assessment of the
announcement that they made yesterday --

Q But is the feeling among the administration that --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- but it does show the continued defiance of this regime of
the demands of the international community.

Q Scott, one the President's senior foreign policy advisors is quoted today
as saying that, with regard to Iran, the problem is that our policy has
been all carrots and no sticks, and the Iranians know that. Is that the
administration's assessment? And if that's so, why are you content to stay
with that?

MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, this is an effort by the world to stop the
regime from developing nuclear weapons or having the capability to develop
nuclear weapons. So this is a world that is united in our message to the
regime. And this regime was given an opportunity by the Security Council,
in a very strong presidential statement, to come clean and make a
commitment to complying with its obligations. And it was very clear in that
statement, as well as the resolution of the International Atomic Energy
Agency -- this is a 35-member board saying, you must fully suspend your
enrichment and reprocessing activities, you need to return to the Paris
Agreement. The announcement by the regime is in clear violation of the
Paris Agreement, which they made with the Europeans.

And so what the world is saying to the regime is, we are not going to
tolerate it if you continue to defy us. And that's why it is -- that's why
the Secretary was making very clear that it is time for action on the
diplomatic front.

Q But is there no stick, it's all carrots?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we're consulting with the international community
about how we move forward and the appropriate steps to take to address the
threat posed by the regime. The Secretary made it clear today, earlier,
that the Security Council needs to act.

Q What does she want them to do? Sanctions?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I'm not going to get into speculating about what steps
we'll be taken, but you can be assured that it needs to be more than just a
presidential statement at this point.

Q Well, what's in your arsenal? I think we ought to know. Why should it be
a secret?

MR. McCLELLAN: Because we're consulting with our friends and allies in the
Security Council about the next steps to take on the diplomatic front.

Q What do you have -- what do you have in mind?

MR. McCLELLAN: There are a lot of options available. If I start speculating
about options, then you all are going to go run out there and start saying,
well, the White House said this option or that option. So I'm not going to
-- I'm just not going to do that.

Q I think you're obviously very limited in what you can do.

MR. McCLELLAN: The international community has a lot of options available
on the diplomatic front.

Q Like what?

MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, Steve.

Q Karl Rove, in a speech in Houston today, said that the President of Iran
is not a rational human being. Is that a view that's shared by the
President?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think we've spoken out about the President of Iran
and some of the outrageous and offensive statements that he has made. We
have a number of concerns about the regime's behavior. It's not just on the
nuclear issue. But because of their behavior on other issues, it only
increases the concern of the international community when it comes to their
nuclear program.

Certainly, the statements that the President has made have only increased
the concerns of the international community, particularly when it comes to
the idea of that regime possessing a nuclear weapon, know-how, or
capability. This is a regime that -- leader that has spoken about
destroying an ally of ours. And the President has made very clear what our
views are when it comes to that.

Q So you're -- you don't think he's rational either, then?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I haven't seen what Karl said earlier today, but
you've got his comments.

Q Scott, were you surprised by the announcement yesterday and the clearly
political nature of it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the regime has certainly been signaling that they're
continuing to move in the direction of defiance instead of cooperation and
negotiation. So I don't know if I'd describe it that way.

Q How would you describe it? And when did you first learn about the
announcement? When they made the --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, they were making -- they were certainly signaling some
of their intentions.

Q You've gone to great length to say this is an international pressure
being put on Iran. Do you think that if it is viewed, especially by those
in Iran, as the U.S. putting pressure on that government to stop what it's
doing, that that would be, in effect, harmful to the process because of how
the U.S. is perceived there?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, it's not about whether or not they have
the right to civilian nuclear power. We've made that very clear. In fact,
the international community has provided them a way to move forward with
civilian nuclear power, provided they put in place some objective
guarantees that they're not developing nuclear weapons under the cover of
that civilian program. And the President has talked about the Russia offer.
But again, this is a problem the regime has with the world. It's not about
the regime and the United States. It's about the concerns of the
international community when it comes to this regime's continued defiance.

Q Do you think the U.S.'s role in that part of the world, though, given
what it has done in Iraq and the way it's perceived in that part of the
world, is in any way shaping --

MR. McCLELLAN: I think the way we are perceived is that we are a country
that stands for the universal value of freedom for all. And we stand with
the people of Iran who want to live in greater freedom. That is our policy.
We stand with them. We have a number of concerns about the regime -- their
support for terrorism, their continued defiance when it comes to the
nuclear issue, their support for groups like Hezbollah, their destabilizing
behavior in the region. This is a regime that is moving in the complete
opposite direction of much of the rest of the region, which is moving
toward freedom. And by advancing freedom in the broader Middle East we are
laying foundations of peace for generations to come. A free Iraq will help
inspire reformers in Iran.

Q Scott, there were reports this morning that in late May of 2003 there
were questions raised about whether or not the trailers were bio-weapons --
mobile bio-weapons in Iraq. When did the administration come to understand
that those trailers were not mobile bio-weapons labs?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think that's a new issue. I mean, I saw the report.
This is nothing more than rehashing an old issue that was resolved long
ago. I cannot count how many times the President has said the intelligence
was wrong. The Robb-Silberman Commission, which was the independent
bipartisan commission that looked into this intelligence, said that the
intelligence community's assessment of Iraq's biological weapons programs
was almost entirely wrong.

Now, you bring up an issue that goes back to a time period when the
intelligence community had assessed -- the CIA and the Defense Intelligence
Agency -- that a couple of mobile laboratories that were found in Iraq were
for the production of biological weapons. That was the assessment of the
intelligence community that stood for some time period. And this was widely
covered at the time. People looked at it; there were questions raised about
-- some of those that raised questions about that intelligence. But the
intelligence community's assessment stood for some period of time.

Now, we know that the Iraq Survey Group, which we had go into Iraq to
search for the weapons of mass destruction, looked into this issue, and it
was September 2004, I think, that they concluded that certainly this was
not for biological weapons production. And what we have done since that
time period is move forward on implementing important reforms so that the
executive branch and the Congress have the best possible intelligence as
they move forward to deal with the threats that face this country and face
this world.

And that's very important. We appointed the Director of National
Intelligence, restructured the intelligence community. We've taken a number
of other steps to make sure that the intelligence-gathering process is
better and that it's the best possible intelligence that is coming to the
White House and coming to the Congress, so that they can make decisions.

Q So, insofar as in May there was a 122-page report filed by DIA that said
that these trailers were not bio-weapons, but it was -- or bio-weapons
labs, and then we heard from the Vice President and Colin Powell after that
period suggesting that they still were -- that information hadn't --

MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, intelligence is -- when an assessment is made,
it looks at a lot of different intelligence and it takes time to vet that
intelligence, go through it, debate it, discuss it with the intelligence
community, look at all the different intelligence coming in, whether it's
human intelligence or signals intelligence or open-source intelligence. And
they pull that all together and the intelligence community makes the
assessment. The White House is not the intelligence-gathering agency. And
the assessment that the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, which is
the arm of the Pentagon, made initially was that those -- in this report
that was released on May 28, 2003, was that the labs that were found were
for producing biological weapons. And that assessment remained in place for
quite some time, as you just pointed out.

Now, I will point out that the reporting I saw this morning was simply
reckless and it was irresponsible. The lead in The Washington Post left the
impression for the reader that the President was saying something he knew
at the time not to be true. That is absolutely false and it is
irresponsible, and I don't know how The Washington Post can defend
something so irresponsible.

Q Scott, two questions. One, going back to Iran, one. As far as diplomacy
is concerned, it has been going on for a long time. And second, according
to the State Department, now we know that A.Q. Khan was the one who helped
Iran to this point, but at the same time, so far, international community
never had any access to A.Q. Khan, and also A.Q. Khan cannot run this big
project on his own without the knowledge of somebody in --

MR. McCLELLAN: You're talking about which project?

Q Iran -- Iranian --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, the A.Q. Khan network has been broken
up. We worked with the international community and made some significant
progress in stopping the proliferation of nuclear programs and weapons of
mass destruction. That was a great success story of the intelligence
community that we're talking about now -- working with others. And we saw
the announcement made by Libya and the direction they chose to take. They
made a strategic decision that they were going to get rid of their weapons
of mass destruction program and send a message to others that they can
realize better relations if they make that strategic decision.

But in terms -- I don't know what your specifically asking about Iran. I
mean, we're well aware that there was involvement there of the A.Q. Khan
network. But what's your question?

Q My question was really, how do we know how much they have it now, because
since we don't have any direct access to A.Q. Khan?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we work very closely with Pakistan and we will
continue to do so when it comes to intelligence matters.

Q Do you have any insight into this Scottish plane diversion this morning?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I don't have any more information. I've seen the
reports.

Q Also, with Holy Week here and the influx of tourists in Washington, is
there any particular terrorism alert going out?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't have any announcement beyond what the Department of
Homeland Security has made or shared with appropriate officials.

Q Can I just follow up on what Carl was asking about sort of the time line?
When did the President know -- after that intelligence was vetted and
debated, when did he know --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, as I held out a short time ago, the
intelligence assessment was provided by the CIA and Defense Intelligence
Agency on May 28, 2003. The President was asked a question on the very next
day, and the President's statements were based on the joint assessment of
the CIA and DIA that was publicly released the day before. So this was
publicly provided to the American people, it's what the White House had.
That was the assessment of the intelligence community. So I think it's
important to keep that in mind.

And the suggestion, or impression that was left by some of the reporting
was that the President was saying something he knew not to be true. No, the
President was saying what the intelligence community assessed to be right,
based on their intelligence-gathering. And so that was the very next day;
it was in response to a question. I saw some reporting saying he had gone
out and given a speech about it, and that's not true. In fact, the very day
that he was talking about it, numerous papers were reporting on the
briefing by the intelligence community. The intelligence community said
that they were "highly confident" that they had discovered a "mobile
biological production plant."

And in terms of your specific question in terms of if and when the White
House became aware of this particular issue, I'm looking into that matter.
I've asked the -- the White House has asked at CIA and the DIA to go and
look into that issue. But it's not the point. The Washington Post even
acknowledges in their article that the intelligence community continued to
stand by that position for quite some period of time.

Q Can I ask just a follow-up? The President said earlier -- just in talking
about the rest of his presidency, that he intends to charge hard in his
final two-and-a-half years --

MR. McCLELLAN: Absolutely. He's a hard charger.

Q -- and sprint to the end. But when you have to come up here and
acknowledge and discuss front-page reports that --

MR. McCLELLAN: Acknowledge and discuss something that has been stated for
quite some time, Elaine? No, no, this is a media issue that you're getting
into. Go ahead, though.

Q Well, this is exactly what I'm trying to get at. When you're having to
discuss stories which focus attention once again on how the President took
this country to war, does that make it more difficult for the President to
--

MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, the President is focused on victory in Iraq,
because a free Iraq will be an example for the rest of the Middle East and
it will help lay the foundations of peace for generations to come.

You know, I saw some reporting talking about how this latest revelation --
which is not something that is new, this is all old information that's
being rehashed -- was an embarrassment for the White House. No, it's an
embarrassment for the media that is out there reporting this. I brought up
with some of you earlier today some of the reporting that was based off
this Washington Post report, and I talked to one network about it and they
have publicly -- well, they've expressed their apologies to the White
House. I hope they will go and publicly apologize on the air about the
statements that were made, because I think it's important, given that they
had made those statements in front of all their viewers. And so we look
forward to that happening, as well.

Q Is it a distraction, though, to have to come up and talk about this,
answer questions about how the U.S. went to war when these kinds of stories
do appear?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think that's where the debate is now. The debate is
on how do we succeed in Iraq. And the President is focused on victory.
That's what the American people want. They want to see our troops succeed.
They want to see our troops achieve victory, and then return home with the
honor that they have deserved and that they earned.

Q Do you think in any way, shape or form, his credibility has been --

MR. McCLELLAN: We'll continue to press it -- no, I think the credibility of
those who are making these wild accusations has been affected. And, in
fact, the President of the United States has spoken very clearly to these
issues multiple times, as have other administration officials over the
course of the last couple of years.

Q Going back to Iran for a moment. The problem in Iran is not the nuclear
weapons program. Everybody agrees that -- on the intelligence that they
clearly are working on weapons and not peaceful nuclear use. The problem is
--

MR. McCLELLAN: Iran is a non-transparent society.

Q The problem is the existing government, the mullahs and the President.
And that government is probably going --

MR. McCLELLAN: You said "elected"?

Q No, I --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry -- oh, existing. My apologies.

Q That government is undoubtedly going to be impervious to any kind of
international U.N. sanctions. It took 13 years to come up with a strong
sanction against Saddam Hussein. So how long is the President willing to
wait and allow Iran to continue to build nuclear weapons before conducting
a surgical strike to take out those weapon sites and weapons?

MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you for trying to get me into all this wild
speculation that's come up over the last couple of days, but we've made
very clear we're pursuing a diplomatic course. The President responded to
some of those news reports the other day. But it's time for the United
Nations Security Council to act on the diplomatic front.

Q But even with that -- trying to pick up on what Helen said, but I mean,
if you look at what the --

MR. McCLELLAN: You can pick up on what Helen said. She doesn't mind.
(Laughter.)

Q I consider it an honor to pick up on what Helen says. But, anyway, the
Security Council is limited in what it can do. And if you look at the
possibilities, without you having to enumerate them, it is seemingly
without any kind of real basis for success that the diplomatic effort is
going to work. And in the meantime, Iran will continue to build nuclear
weapons. So how long will the President run out this diplomatic --

MR. McCLELLAN: That's a speculative question. We are working with the
international community to prevent the regime from developing nuclear
weapons capability or developing nuclear weapons. We're pursuing a
diplomatic course. There are a number of steps that are available to us,
and that's what we're discussing.

Les.

Q Scott, a two-part.

MR. McCLELLAN: What words of wisdom do you have today?

Q Thank you very much. Virginia's Congressman Moran has called for making
legal citizens out of those who are illegals, to which Sarah Laurie, an
immigrant who was legally naturalized, wrote The Washington Post this
morning, "It is unfathomable that the Senate would consider assisting those
who have ignored U.S. laws." And my question: Does the President believe
she's wrong? And if so, why?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'll have to take a look at it -- I haven't taken a look at
the specific report you're referring to. Maybe I missed it this morning.
But if you're getting into the whole immigration discussion, let me make a
couple of points. The President -- I'll come to your second question.

Q Good.

MR. McCLELLAN: Got plenty of time. I'm not rushing off. The President last
week spoke about the promising agreement that was reached by a bipartisan
group of senators on comprehensive legislation. But you have the Senate
Minority Leader Harry Reid using procedural gimmicks to prevent the will of
the American people from being heard. The American people have said, we
want comprehensive immigration reform. We want to see our borders
strengthened, which we're acting to do, and the American people, I think,
have clearly said that if we're going to fix this system, you've got to
have a guest worker element to that, as the President has called for.

So the Senate Minority Leader is signal-handedly using procedural gimmicks
to thwart the will of the American people and stop this legislation from
moving forward -- comprehensive legislation. There is a bipartisan
agreement. He is stopping the will of a bipartisan group of senators from
moving forward on legislation that is important and that will help us fix
our immigration system.

Q In the same week as your strongly specific answer to my question about
Homeland Security Brian Doyle's arrest, Newsweek reports another Homeland
Security sexual violator, Frank Figueroa, charged with exposing himself to
a 16-year-old girl. And my question: What is the President's reaction to
this latest very bad news from Homeland Security?

MR. McCLELLAN: My reaction would be just the same as it was for the first
gentleman that you brought up if it is true. And I don't know the specifics
on that matter --

Q -- any change can be done about this? This is Homeland Security --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- I don't know the specifics on that matter.

Go ahead, Roger.

Q The Assistant Secretary of State in Moscow today said that Iran, in
developing its centrifuges at the current pace or at the industrial scale
that they say they're going to, they could have a nuclear bomb within 16
days. Is that right?

MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't seen what the Assistant Secretary of State has
said in Russia today. I'll have to take a look at it. I'd refer you back to
what our intelligence community has said about that assessment. That is the
standing assessment of the United States government. And I'm not going to
speculate -- I've told you, I don't have a technical assessment of the
latest announcement by the regime, so I'm not going to engage in that kind
of speculation.

Q Okay, more broadly, how will you --

MR. McCLELLAN: More broadly speculate.

Q More broadly, how immediate is this threat of a nuclear weapon?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think the intelligence community has spoken to it,
and so I would leave you, in terms of -- but this is a threat that the
international community must address and must act on through the diplomatic
front. That's what the Secretary of State spoke about earlier today.

Rick, go ahead.

Q Scott, going back to -- on the Iran question, given China's --

MR. McCLELLAN: We're still on it. We didn't go off it.

Q Well, there you are. Given China and Russia's reluctance for imposition
of sanctions and tougher diplomatic methods in dealing with Iran, to what
extent does the administration believe this has been playing an
encouragement factor in Iranian behavior --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, those countries you bring up have been
part of a united message and have expressed concerns about the regime
having a nuclear weapon. And so I think we're united in our message and our
objective of preventing the regime from having the know-how or the
capability to develop nuclear weapons. And we are continuing to discuss how
we move forward. There is -- there have been consultations that have been
ongoing since the last Security Council meeting on this subject. Secretary
Rice just returned from Europe recently. She had a number of high-level
discussions there. I know that our Under Secretary of State has continued
those discussions at that level with his counterparts. So those continue,
and they continue with the countries that you bring up.

Go ahead, did you have a follow-up?

Q But it's pretty well seen across-the-board that both countries are
reluctant to impose sanctions or stricter diplomatic language when dealing
with them, at least in the past. And I'm wondering how much does that
actually encourage the Iranians? They know they have the Chinese --

MR. McCLELLAN: I think the concern of the international community only
grows at the regime continues to defy what we have all called for it to do.
So that's why we're going to continue to consult with them about it.

Ken, go ahead.

Q Scott, you said the President remains focused on victory in Iraq. What is
the current definition of "victory in Iraq," and does the President expect
to see that before he leaves office?

MR. McCLELLAN: Sure, and he's talked about victory in Iraq. Victory in Iraq
will be when the terrorists and Saddam loyalists can no longer threaten
Iraq's democracy. He's talked about it as being when the Iraqi security
forces can provide for the defense of the Iraqi people. And he's also said
that victory will be achieved when Iraq will not become a safe haven for
terrorists. The terrorists have made it clear that this is the central
front in the war on terrorism. They recognize how high the stakes are in
Iraq. So the President has spelled out when victory will be achieved.

And we are making important progress, despite the violence. There are a lot
of difficulties and challenges that remain, and we've got to continue to
adapt and adjust to circumstances on the ground, and that's what we're
doing. But if you look at where things are, the Iraqi people -- just in
December, some nearly 12 million Iraqis showed up, 75 percent of the
registered voters, to say, we want to chart our own future. And they
elected a representative government under a constitution that they had
approved previously.

And the Iraqi security forces -- there are more than 250 [sic]* Iraqi
security forces now -- they are assuming more and more of the lead in the
fight and they are controlling more and more territory. So we've got a very
clear strategy for how we move forward. And we are going to continue to
stand with the Iraqi people as they move forward on building a lasting
democracy.

Q Does he expect to see this victory before he leaves office?

MR. McCLELLAN: Ken, the President has never put a timetable on achieving
our objectives. We will stay there as long as necessary, not a day longer,
is what we have always said. But we will succeed. We will prevail. The
terrorists want to shake our will, and they think that we will lose our
nerve. The President will not. We will complete the mission and our troops
will return home with the honor that they deserve.

Q The issues that you just spoke of are very noble and ambitious. However,
the kidnapings, the random violence and bombings of women and children, of
civilian officials in Iraq seem to be getting worse, they seem to be
escalating to create more chaos. Is there any --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what do you base that on? I mean, I think the military
--

Q -- news reports --

MR. McCLELLAN: I mean, there are certainly dramatic images when those
things take place, and they rightly should be covered. And that's part of
the tactics of the terrorists and Saddam loyalists. That's part of their
tactic for trying to shake our will. But I think the military has spoken to
the level of violence, and I would look at what they have said.

I mean, there continues to be violence. That's why it's so important that
the Iraqi leaders continue to move forward and get a government of national
unity in place as quickly as possible, because that will help derail some
of the efforts of those who want to stop the transition to democracy.

Q My question is do you think that the random violence right now is
escalating or subsiding?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'll leave that to the military to talk about, in terms of
what the latest assessment is on the ground. They're in there best position
to do that, and they've spoken to that repeatedly.

Q Scott, a different topic, Italian elections. Do you have any reaction to
the victory by the center left party?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, my understanding is that the election is
being contested -- we've seen that here in our own country, I remember.
But, look, Italy is a strong partner and good ally, and that's not going to
change. We will work closely with the government once it is in place,
whatever government that may be. But we're not going to get into commenting
on the results until everything is official and it's gone through that
process.

Q A further point on The Washington Post report, which I know you're
agitated about today. This final --

MR. McCLELLAN: It's reckless reporting. Everybody should be agitated about
it.

Q They describe the final technical engineering exploitation report on
Iraqi suspected biological weapons associated trailers as still being
classified. And given the fact that the President and you have said that
Mr. Bush has declassified other reports -- namely, the NIE, which had
historical content -- in order to further public debate, and you said it
was in the national interest, would it make sense to declassify this report
--

MR. McCLELLAN: Kelly, this issue has been looked at by an independent
bipartisan commission. They've looked at all these issues. They have looked
at the intelligence that was used as the basis for all the different
aspects that were talked about. And they determined that the intelligence
was wrong. This is rehashing something that is very old. But the lead of
that article is just reckless reporting, and it's irresponsible.

Q But that specific report is still classified?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, look at the intelligence community report on these
very matters, and look at the recommendations they made, and look at the
progress we're making on their recommendations. That's where --

Q But would the President consider reclassifying --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- that's where our focus is.

Q I just want to clear up one thing. Iran has signed the Nonproliferation
Treaty. Does it have the right to do what it's doing, to enrich fuel? I'm a
little unclear about -- legally, are they on solid ground --

MR. McCLELLAN: Here's the problem -- that's a very good question. Iran may
be a party to --

Q I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?

Q You said it was a very good question. (Laughter.)

MR. McCLELLAN: You have a few.

Q Can you repeat that, please.

MR. McCLELLAN: For a new guy. (Laughter.) You sound like what I do to my
wife when she says, you're right. "Huh?" (Laughter.)

Q She's right often.

MR. McCLELLAN: More than I am. (Laughter.)

Going back to your question, Iran may be a member to the -- or be a party
to the NPT, but let's look at their history. For some 18 years, the regime
hid their nuclear activities from the international community. They failed
to comply with their obligations. And so it became an issue of trust with
the rest of the world. The regime showed that they cannot be trusted. And
that's why the world is concerned that they are developing nuclear weapons
under the cover of a civilian program.

So we supported the efforts of the European 3, to enter into negotiations
with the regime to resolve this matter. And what they said was that there
needs to be an objective guarantee in place to show that you are not
developing nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian program. And
remember, the 35-nation IAEA Board of Governors passed resolutions calling
on Iran to reestablish suspension of its uranium enrichment efforts, and
formally found the regime in noncompliance with its international
obligations. So this is a matter of the regime restoring confidence with
the rest of the international community.

And then, of course, the Security Council, on March 29th, adopted a
presidential statement unanimously calling on Iran to reestablish full and
sustained suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities,
and to resume cooperation with the IAEA under the additional protocol. And
so that's where things stand at this point.

Q But, Scott, hasn't that battle been lost? If Iran is now enriching
uranium, all of these resolutions become academic. The battles -- they have
marched forward, and yet the administration is still talking about
diplomatic resolutions to a major step that, as of a few days ago, wasn't
accepted --

MR. McCLELLAN: There are options at the disposal of the international
community. And that's why it's time for the international community to act.
That's why Secretary Rice said it's time for the Security Council to act on
the diplomatic front. And we're talking about the appropriate steps to take
in response to their continued defiance.

Thank you.

END 1:38 P.M. EST

*more than 250,000 Iraqi security forces

===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060412-4.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)