Text 2868, 445 rader
Skriven 2006-06-20 23:34:48 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0606202) for Tue, 2006 Jun 20
====================================================
===========================================================================
Press Gaggle by Tony Snow and National Security Advisor Steve Hadley
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 20, 2006

Press Gaggle by Tony Snow and National Security Advisor Steve Hadley
Aboard Air Force One
En route Vienna, Austria



12:06 P.M. EDT

MR. SNOW: All right. First, just a read out. I think you're familiar with
what's going on tomorrow, but I'll go ahead and give you a read out anyway.

The President tomorrow, the public schedule begins with a meeting with the
President of Austria. There will also be a meeting with the Chancellor and
a meeting with European Union leaders. For all those we will have stills
and host TV at the top. There will be pool available for a U.S.-EU meeting;
closed press U.S.-EU working lunch; a U.S.-EU press availability tomorrow
afternoon.

Then the President will have a roundtable with foreign students, you guys
are all kindly invited, also a tour of the National Library. And then off
to the airport and to Budapest. So there you have your quick sort of line
up.

Questions.

Q Can you elaborate a little bit more of what kinds of consequences North
Korea might face if they do test fire this missile?

MR. SNOW: No. I'll restate what I've been saying the last few days, which
is it's our hope that there is no missile firing. North Korea made a
commitment back in 1999 at a summit with the Japanese that they wouldn't do
it, and certainly there are many options and we are simply not going to tip
our hand as to what the possible response should be.

The other thing to keep in mind is it's not us and North Korea. Anything
that happens is going to be part of sort of joint operations, if you will,
or joint negotiations with the other five nations, or the other four
nations that are involved with us in dealing with North Korea in the
six-party talks. So we don't want to be drawn into any perception that
somehow it's the United States responding solely and unilaterally to
anything the North Koreans may do.

Q But, obviously, you bring up the notion of consequences to try and give
them, you know, a nudge away from taking this action. So how does that
really have teeth if you don't talk about what that means?

MR. SNOW: Doesn't mean they don't hear it, just means you don't.

Q How are they hearing it, then?

MR. HADLEY: It's interesting, the Japanese have indicated publicly that one
of the things they would consider doing is sponsoring a U.N. Security
Council resolution. So it underscores Tony's point that there are a lot of
actors in this process; a lot of folks are sending messages to the North
Koreans this would be a bad idea, they shouldn't do it. And a lot of these
countries are going to have ideas about what we do should North Korea
ignore the advice of the international community and go forward with this
launch.

Q Have they, in fact, fueled this missile? What do we know about what they
have done?

MR. HADLEY: It's hard to tell. They seem to be moving forward towards a
launch, but the intelligence is not conclusive at this point.

Q Do you think they're trying to take attention away from the U.S. efforts
to contain the Iran nuclear program? What's your interpretation of their
motivation here?

MR. HADLEY: It's hard to interpret their motives. All you can do is look at
the history, and we've seen these kinds of things before in the past. There
tends to be a desire to create a sense of crisis; they seem to think that's
something that works for them. And they've done these kinds of things to
get attention before. They did a missile launch in 1998.

And what we've tried to convince them is that the kind of attention they
will get is not attention that will be constructive towards getting back to
the six-party talks, getting implementation of the September agreement, and
really not conducive to the long-term interests of North Korea or its
people.

Q On the soldiers, the missing soldiers, have we confirmed that they're, in
fact, dead?

MR. HADLEY: We have not confirmed. We believe that the two remains
identified are the soldiers. We believe that's what's been announced by
MNF-I out of Baghdad. The remains are being shipped home for positive
identification, but we can't confirm it at this point. They've announced
out of Baghdad that they believe it is the two soldiers, but we can't be
sure.

Q I just wonder what, tactically, you make of that? You know, their
abduction and their apparent death. Does it say anything about the tactics
of the insurgents and terrorist groups at this point that may be changing
in any fashion?

MR. HADLEY: No, I think it's a reminder that this is a brutal enemy that
does not follow any of the rules. It attacks civilians for political gain,
it provokes sectarian violence and it really follows no rules of warfare.
It's a very brutal enemy and it's a reminder to all of us about what we're
up against. And, obviously, any loss of life is a source of great regret.

MR. SNOW: Let me add one other point, which is, David, as you probably
read, in the aftermath of this there had been military activity. So maybe
the most significant thing is a considerable amount of actionable
intelligence has come out of it. We are seeing evidence that the Iraqi
people are also sick of this. You saw it in some of the communications that
have been aimed towards Zarqawi.

And you see in the aftermath of an episode like this that the Iraqi people
are also stepping forward to try to be of assistance.

Q Mr. Hadley, how does the administration feel about the Japanese
announcement today about the self-defense force?

MR. HADLEY: The Japanese ground force, self-defense force was in Muthanna
province. As you know, what is happening in Iraq is as the Iraqi security
forces get trained up and can take more security responsibility, the
coalition has been turning over the lead to Iraqi security forces in
increasing portions of the country. That's sort of step one.

Step two is then getting various governance of the 18 governance [sic]* in
a position where the provincial governments there are in responsibility to
take political responsibility for security in the province. So it's a
two-step process. And what we're seeing is that process move forward.

Yesterday the Iraqi government announced that Muthanna would now be
returned from the coalition to provincial control of security. That means
that the mission of the forces there, the Japanese forces there have been
successfully completed. So the Japanese now are doing what we'd all be
doing over time -- as the Iraqis stand up, we can stand down -- they're
transitioning to a new way of contributing to success in Iraq.

And the Japanese have talked about maintaining and, indeed, expanding their
air activities there. They're going to look at providing C-130 service up
to Baghdad and elsewhere in support of MNF-I and also in support of an
expanded U.N. role. They continue to be very active. They've pledged over
$5 billion to Iraq.

So what we think is useful is it's an indication, it's a measure of the
progress, it's an example of what it means, Iraqis stand up, we can stand
down, and then our mission then begins to transform and how we can support
the government transform. So we think that this is a positive step.

Q I see your point. Do you worry, though, that eventually we're going to
become a little lonely there?

MR. HADLEY: No, because as the Japanese have made clear, they're staying in
with a mission. They're actually expanding their air role. We think there
is going to be a lot of opportunities for countries to change their
missions. As you know, we're developing provincial reconstruction teams;
some of those are going to be led by the United States. Some of those
allies have indicated they're interested in leading, as they've done in
Afghanistan. And some of them, of course, Iraqi forces are going to be
taking the lead on.

So I think what you're seeing is a transformation, if you will, of various
ways where we can adapt the support we provide, we all provide to the Iraqi
government, to the requirements of the government as the situation on the
ground changes.

MR. SNOW: Mike, let me add one other point. I don't know if you saw Mr.
al-Rubaie's piece in The Washington Post this morning, but he talks about
three other provinces where he thinks they're going to be ready -- Maysan,
Irbil and Sulaymaniyah -- all of which may follow Muthanna's lead in
allowing the Iraqis to take over primary responsibility very soon.

So this is not a bailing out on the part of the Japanese. It's, in fact,
responding to conditions on the ground and helping in other ways.

MR. HADLEY: Can I say one other thing about some of the debate that's been
going on, on Capitol Hill? I read some of the press coverage today about
that debate.

One of the things that's interesting about what we've just been discussing
is there's been sort of a suggestion out there that somehow there's an
open-ended commitment by the United States to Iraq. And, of course, the
President has talked about stand up/stand down so our men and women can
return with the honor they deserve. So I don't know what people mean when
they say an open-ended commitment of our forces.

Secondly, there's this notion that somehow the Iraqis have to be pressured
to take responsibility for their own security. And I think what's
interesting about the editorial that Tony talked about is it's further
evidence -- and there's been a lot of them -- that the Iraqis want to take
responsibility for the security of their country when they're ready to do
so. And their concern is that we will move, draw down our forces too
quickly, before they're ready. But I think there is no question that the
Iraqis want to be able to take responsibility for their security.

And I think, finally, on that report that Tony talked about, what we have
is an opportunity now for MNF-I to talk with the Iraqi government -- we
have a new Minister of Interior, new Minister of Defense -- and talk about
how this process of stand up/stand down can proceed going forward.

Q I want to ask you about Vice President Cheney's remarks yesterday. How
can the White House justify him standing by his remarks that the insurgency
is in the last throes? Can you just explain that, how that could --

MR. HADLEY: The Vice President explained it yesterday.

Q Well, then I didn't --

MR. HADLEY: You can talk to him about it; I thought it was a good
explanation.

Q Why do you think it's a good explanation?

MR. HADLEY: It's a good explanation, it speaks for itself. I think it
points to the fact the significance of what has happened politically over
the last two years, that as he said, we are at a point where we have a
duly-elected government, a constitution drafted and ratified by the Iraqi
people, that is a unity government that has a plan for going forward. And I
think you've seen in the last two weeks a lot of efforts by that new
government to provide leadership. They're moving forward with a security
initiative in Baghdad. They've talked about their objectives going forward,
in terms of electricity and security. We are making great progress on this
international compact, which you've been writing about.

I think what the Vice President was saying is things are happening that
give in evidence, as our prior discussion does, that this new Iraqi
government is stepping forward and taking responsibility. That's a good
thing.

Q I'm sorry, how does that comport with the insurgency being in its last
throes, all of what you just said?

MR. HADLEY: The Vice President talked about the significance of what we're
talking about and what it will mean over time for the insurgency. It's what
I think Tony showed, the fact that the Iraqi people are tired of it,
they're ready for peace, they're talking about a reconciliation process,
but a reconciliation process in which people lay down their arms.

They've also got a government that's stepping forward, taking
responsibility for security and the leading of that reconciliation process.
I think that's a big development of 2005, 2006, very important as we look
forward in Iraq.

Q Just to be clear, the President would agree with the Vice President that
the insurgency is in the last throes?

MR. HADLEY: What I said was the Vice President has explained his comments
yesterday, and I have tried to provide a little bit more context for that
explanation.

MR. SNOW: Let me add another point. He's not saying the war is over. You
need to be clear about that. But, again, Steve is just pointing out you're
seeing increasing evidence of assertiveness on the part of Iraqi citizens
and the Iraqi government. You've got Operation Forward together, it
involves 50,000 Iraqi police and military forces going into Baghdad. You've
got other operations around the country.

You do have -- and our military commanders have talked about it --
increasing intelligence. We had another key al Qaeda operative who was
taken out, I believe it was yesterday or today. General Caldwell was
briefing on that this morning. The fact is that we're getting intelligence
at a level that continues to increase and continues to be useful in going
after them. Are they gone? No, of course not. But on the other hand, it
does -- you do have a very clear sense that the Iraqi people are speaking
not only at the ballot box, but also in cooperation with U.S. forces. And
now that you've got Iraqi forces, they feel an even greater comfort level
in talking with Iraqi forces and saying, [to their security forces] okay,
you can find them [insurgents] over here.

Q The President said a couple weeks ago that he expected Iran to reply to
the incentives package in weeks, and not months. Do you get any -- are you
concerned at all that this is going to just drag out and they're going to
stall and we're going to get into this, you know, kind of extended period
of a cat-and-mouse game? And is there something that the U.S. and EU can do
tomorrow, you know, some sort of message to be sent that this -- you know,
Iran needs to come forward and accept this deal?

MR. HADLEY: Well, I think you've heard it from U.S. spokesmen and also
others involved, that it is weeks, not months. And why do you say that, why
do you get that out early? And we got that out pretty early. It was to set
a marker down that we need to hear from the Iranians a response to this
offer. And I think that's been something that has been clear by statements
we've made, and others made, and it was one of the things that Secretary
Rice talked about and got an understanding that the EU3 - U.K., France and
Germany, and also Russia and China -- in the meeting she had in Vienna.

Q Are you confident that all the Europeans are with you on this demand that
the Iranians must completely shut down their centrifuges before?

MR. HADLEY: Yes, we are, actually. And they've been good on it. One of the
things -- people forget about it is, of course, the suspension was part of
the Paris agreement from November of 2004, that the Iranians subsequently
walked away from. And the requirement for return to suspension is actually
a EU3 requirement, not ours. It was a requirement that was affirmed by the
board of governors of the IAEA -- the International Atomic Energy Agency --
and also is reflected in the U.N. Security Council Presidential Statement.

So this is something that reflects not just our position. In some sense,
we've adopted and followed the lead of the EU3 on it. And so far, in terms
of what we've seen publicly and what we hear privately, people are pretty
firm about it.

Q And when the President talks about progressively stronger sanctions,
could you elaborate a little bit on that? Will he use this trip to try to
build support for that?

MR. HADLEY: Well, we've already got an understanding, as we've said, that
if Iran does not accept this offer, then we return to the U.N. Security
Council. So I think that's all a part of the way forward.

What we want to emphasize, though, and what the President tried to
emphasize yesterday is the opportunity for the Iranian people, if their
government will take this offer that is before them it can result in
avoiding this crisis, it can result in strengthened relations and economic
relations that will have a real benefit for the Iranian people. There's a
terrific opportunity here. And what we've been focusing on is urging the
Iraqi [sic] regime to take advantage of the opportunity before it.

Q Iranian regime.

MR. HADLEY: Iranian regime, sorry. Thank you.

Q Steve, you talked last week about the meeting tomorrow being sort of a
chance for the President to shore up, make sure that everybody is on the
same page. And I don't remember your exact words when you were talking
about --

MR. HADLEY: I talked about -- people were asking whether there was going to
be big news coming out of this. And I think my answer was that the
framework that we're operating under is already fixed. I mean, the
President will obviously have conversations about it. But, one, remember,
this is with the President of the EU Commission and the President, if you
will, of the Austrian presidency as the leader at this point of the EU. The
French, the Germans, the U.K. are not there. So the parties with whom we've
been doing this Iranian initiative are really not going to be there.

So I think sure, there will be some discussion about it, but the framework
is clear. What is missing is a positive Iranian response. And that's, of
course, what we're looking for.

Q You make it sound like Iran really isn't a big piece of the discussion
tomorrow.

MR. HADLEY: I think that's correct.

Q Can I ask you a quick question about your earlier comments about the
open-ended commitment in Iraq? What's the furthest you've gone, or what's
the most you've said about the likelihood of bases in Iraq for as long as
we can foresee?

MR. HADLEY: I'm sorry?

Q Permanent military bases in Iraq, do you expect those?

MR. HADLEY: We haven't talked about that. What we've really been focusing
on is this process of training, turning over responsibility for security at
the military level, and then the taking of responsibility by political
authorities in Iraq. That's what we really need to be focusing on, and
that's what we focused on, and the progress, we hope, that that will afford
in dealing with the security situation there. That's really what we've been
focusing on.

Q I could be completely wrong about this, I think there was a New York
Times story about bases not too long ago, and I don't think you guys have
ever tried to dissuade us of the idea that there likely will be troops of
some sort in Iraq for as long as we can foresee.

MR. HADLEY: We're going to have a relationship, we would hope, with a free
and democratic Iraq for a long time. Iraq has an opportunity to come and be
part of the family of nations, as the President -- of the democratic family
of nations, as the President said, the example in the region and an ally in
the war on terror. Does that mean that we expect to have good relations
with Iraq going forward for a long time? You bet. Obviously, over time, it
will become the kind of normal relationship we have with countries.

Q Can I ask you a question about trade? Is the President bringing any new
-- anything new to advance the Doha talks to the table? And, if not, what
can you expect to accomplish there?

MR. HADLEY: Well, he will of course underscore the importance of Doha and
the opportunity we have to close out this round by the end of the year.

You know, the great beneficiaries of the Doha round are the developing
countries, and what trade can contribute to raising people out of poverty.
This is why it's the development round of Doha. And we will want to keep
focusing on that.

The President made a very bold offer, with respect to agricultural
subsidies that you all know about. It was an effort to jump-start the
negotiations. And what we really need to see is a response from the G20,
the group of 20 countries, and from the Europeans that is comparable to
this offer. If they can move in that direction, we're going to be in the
zone of getting an agreement by the end of the year. And I think you will
see the President encourage everyone he talks to on this trip not to miss
this terrific opportunity to advance trade and advance development and help
raise people out of poverty.

Q Which countries have not followed through on their pledges to help the
Iraqis, the monetary pledges?

MR. HADLEY: Look, I don't want to get into specific names, but it is
something we --

Q Are they European countries?

MR. HADLEY: You know, if you go through the list, there are countries in
every region of the world that have made pledges.

Q They know who they are. (Laughter.)

MR. HADLEY: Some of them have done better than others, and some are clearly
lagging. And we will remind countries if they have forgotten about their
pledges, and the importance to get this money to this new government now.
Because the opportunity this government really has is to show for the Iraqi
people that it can make a difference in their daily lives. That will
strengthen this government in a way as few things will. And these resources
getting to the government now can make an enormous contribution and we will
try and remind people of that and urge them to seize this opportunity we
all have.

Q Do you want to set up the Hungary speech now, or are you going to brief
tomorrow?

MR. SNOW: We'll brief on it tomorrow.

Q You were nice to do this. It was very interesting and helpful.

MR. HADLEY: Nice to see you.

Q Can you just tell us on background what some of the names of some of the
countries --

MR. HADLEY: I don't want to do that.

END 12:29 P.M. EDT

* provinces
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060620-2.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)