Text 3434, 1081 rader
Skriven 2006-10-16 23:31:10 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0610161) for Mon, 2006 Oct 16
====================================================

===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Tony Snow
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 16, 2006

Press Briefing by Tony Snow
White House Conference Center Briefing Room

Press Briefing view


1:13 P.M. EDT

MR. SNOW: Good afternoon. Just a quick opening note, and then I'll be happy
to take questions. I think everybody now has gotten word, first -- the
North Korean test has been concluded to have been nuclear.

The White House is continuing to receive regular updates on the Hawaiian
earthquake that struck yesterday morning. Fortunately, no deaths have been
reported at this time in Hawaii. While there are reports of structural
damage, electrical power has largely been restored on the islands. Hawaii's
emergency response teams should be commended for their excellent work.
We're going to continue monitoring the situation and keeping in close
contact with Hawaiian officials; we'll provide assistance, as needed. And
the President continues to have in his thoughts the people of Hawaii as
they clean up in the aftermath of the earthquake.

Questions. David.

Q Why did the President call Maliki?

MR. SNOW: Well, because it's one of -- the two leaders believe that it's
important to stay in regular touch, and this was a base-touching exercise.
And he'll continue to do it.

Q Is there more to it than that --

MR. SNOW: No.

Q -- the President felt the need to reassure him about the political debate
in this country?

MR. SNOW: No, actually, it was the Prime Minister who raised questions
about it, not the President.

Q Can you elaborate on that?

MR. SNOW: Yes. To the extent that it seemed -- it's important to realize,
for the people of Iraq to realize, that the President and the United States
government are behind Prime Minister Maliki's efforts to continue building
democracy in Iraq and also to do some of the tougher and necessary
business, including going after militias and terrorists. The Prime Minister
was keeping the President updated on all three aspects of the strategy, not
only in terms of security, but also political reconciliation and the
economic path.

So they had a pretty good discussion in those areas. The Prime Minister
also wanted to make it clear, for instance, that talk of giving timetables
or expiration dates, or whatever, to the government were not only
undermining the government, but also inspiring terrorists, is the term he
used. And, similarly, he dismissed the notion of partition, which he also
thought was undermining the government.

Q He also has said in USA Today, though -- you say you're on the same page,
in terms of fighting the militias -- Maliki told the USA Today that his
government will not force militias to disarm until later this year or early
next year, despite the violence.

MR. SNOW: What's interesting is that's the lead of the piece and I've read
the interview now three times and it's not in there. Let me read to you the
first sentence. The first answer of the first question: "We started to deal
with militias since the first day I took over as Prime Minister. I declared
from that day, one of my goals was to dissolve the militias. I believe
there could be no true state while armed militias are operating. This
conviction has not changed."

Then he goes into what I was talking about before, which is taking a look
at the political element, the security aspect, and the economic factor. He
talks about working on the implementation of CPA Order 91, that deals with
dismantling militias. Later on, he says that the militias may be one of the
easier problems to deal with; the more serious challenge is terrorism,
composed of the remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime and al Qaeda. He says
that although it takes time, "The most important thing is that we have
started, and started strong."

I read the piece, too, and maybe they -- they published a transcript, and
the transcript seems to indicate that the Prime Minister is actively
engaged in the issue of militias. And there is no mention -- maybe I'm
missing it here, but I've read it three times -- of saying that he's not
going to force militias to disarm until later this year or early next year.
As a matter of fact, he says he's in the process of doing it now.

Q One final point on this, if I can. One final point, which is, you say
that Maliki is concerned about talk of a timetable, when he is the one --
about the withdrawal of troops.

MR. SNOW: No, he believes in the withdrawal of troops, and in here he
expresses confidence that as the Iraqis will become more capable --

Q Right, you said he's concerned about a timetable.

MR. SNOW: There was talk that he was only going to get two months. And
there was a specific news report that had him concerned.

Q You just said a minute ago that he's concerned about setting timetables
because it encourages terrorism.

MR. SNOW: No, actually, I was being imprecise. Kelly got -- ask Kelly,
because she got it right in the gaggle. But there was a news story. He said
he was worried about a report that said that we were giving him two months.
And you're absolutely right in the fact that -- look, the Iraqis do believe
in trying to assert effective control over all of Iraq. And as a matter of
fact, he does talk about that in the transcripts of the interview with USA
Today.

Q So he is concerned about talk of a timetable for withdrawal, or any
specific --

MR. SNOW: It's not -- no, no, no, it's not a timetable for withdrawal. The
way it was portrayed is, we're giving them two months, or we'll go for
somebody else. This was a timetable for his government, not for withdrawal.
So thank you for positing that.

Q Tony, is this stuff that came out of the Warner visit or --

MR. SNOW: No, I think it's -- the answer is I'm not entirely sure, but I
believe it refers to the report that said -- that there was a rumor that
there were going to be attempts to replace him if certain things didn't
happen in two months. And the President said the rumors are not true; we
support you.

Q The President initiated the call?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q So what was the level of concern that caused the President to pick up the
phone?

MR. SNOW: It's not a level of concern. Here you have the central front in
the war on terror, which the President has been talking about, and he's
made it clear that he wants to consult with the Prime Minister regularly.

Q Also in that article, there seemed to be a suggestion -- I thought it was
rather direct -- where Prime Minister Maliki was critical of what he called
an over-reliance on force, that perhaps the United States and the coalition
forces needed to engage in other methods -- reaching out, perhaps, to the
insurgents for dialogue?

MR. SNOW: No, that's -- actually, what he was talking about, he was saying
that in certain sectors of Baghdad, for instance, Sadr City, he did not
think that it would be appropriate to use overwhelming military forces, as
he argues -- again, in the transcript of the full interview -- that 95
percent of the people in Sadr City are, in fact, not supportive of radical
elements in the Mahdi army. He's always said that he believes in reaching
out to insurgents, and that is, in fact, a fundamental part of his program.

What they want to do is to disarm, decommission and reintegrate members who
had formerly been part of the insurgency, invite them into the political
process, and also provide economic opportunities that give them the ability
to operate peacefully and in direct support of the government. So that's
what he was referring to.

Q Okay, for the record then -- one more, just for the record.

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q Does the White House support the idea, if something was worked out or
raised, of insurgents and the United States having direct talks? Is that
something the administration would entertain?

MR. SNOW: Well, as you know, the administration has had talks with
insurgents.

Q But, I mean, in a way that seems to elevate this as a solution to what's
going on right now?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, the government of Prime Minister Maliki is --
there's a sovereign government there. And they're the ones who would be
responsible for engaging in talks. The United States has, in fact, been
engaged in efforts to reach out and talk people into following the peaceful
path. That's nothing new.

Martha.

Q Tony, does the President have total confidence -- emphasis on "total" --
in the Maliki government and that they are doing everything possible to get
rid of those militias?

MR. SNOW: I think he believes that the Prime Minister is doing everything
in his power to do it. I don't know -- this is one of these questions where
I don't think it's possible to give you a precise answer which is total,
100 percent complete. He has complete faith --

Q Do you have any concerns at this point that there is not enough being
done?

MR. SNOW: No. But, look, let me put it this way. There is more to be done.
There has to be more to be done. The violence level is absolutely
unacceptable, and it is important to make progress. One of the things the
Prime Minister was talking about in the phone call this morning with the
President is he feels confident that the steps he is taking both on the
political and economic and security fronts not only are moving forward, but
are going to yield some fruit. He also assured the President that he is and
will continue making tough decisions in terms of going after.

We have received small reports -- for instance, I mentioned it a couple of
times last week, going after at least one brigade within a police battalion
that was seen as being guilty of engaging in acts of terror. It is obvious
that more needs to be done, given the way the violence has been
perpetrated, and also a lot more needs to be done so that the government of
Iraq can, in fact, sustain, govern and defend itself. So all of those
things are key elements. The President does believe, and does support, the
Prime Minister's efforts to pursue that goal.

Q Doesn't it alarm you in some ways that Maliki is saying the biggest
problem is terrorism, not sectarian violence, when your own top commander,
General Abizaid, has testified that the biggest problem over there is
sectarian violence?

MR. SNOW: I think Prime Minister Maliki --

Q Isn't that a disconnect?

MR. SNOW: No, I don't think so. And as a matter of fact, it is not
inconceivable that when you're talking about terrorism -- notice what he
was saying. He was saying, al Qaeda and remnants of Saddam's regime. Those
are the people that he was identifying. And guess what -- they can be
involved. Also when you talk about militias, which are also part of the
problem, that also has contributed to sectarian violence. There is no
disconnect between talking about folks who have a vested interest in
fomenting sectarian violence, and that would include al Qaeda and also
Saddam remnants, and also some of the Mahdi Army. And he's going after both
sides.

I don't think he's got any delusions about it. I think what you're trying
to do is to get into a verbal dispute here, and I think probably the
premise of your question he would agree with, which is the sectarian
violence is a big problem, and he's trying to deal with it. And people he
would label as terrorists are also a key part of that sectarian violence.

Q Who would you label as terrorists?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, what he has -- I'm going to give you what he said.
I'm not the expert, and so I will simply repeat to you what the Prime
Minister said in his conversation with USA Today, which is he was
identifying as terrorists al Qaeda remnants and also those who are loyal to
Saddam. And he was drawing a distinction between them and the militias,
which, as you know, are largely Shia.

Q I know you don't want to make a timetable for anything in Iraq, but what
is the incentive for the Iraqi security forces and for the Iraqi government
to stand up those security forces and get rid of the militias? What's the
incentive? Is there some sort of push to say, if you don't do this in two
months --

MR. SNOW: No.

Q So --

MR. SNOW: Because we're not going to undermine -- the incentive is people
are getting blown up every day and they feel it keenly. You've had within
this government -- we've already talked about a Deputy Prime Minister,
Hashimi, who has had three members of his family slaughtered -- and even
though he is Sunni, the Shia Prime Minister, Prime Minister Maliki, met
with him yesterday and assured him that he's going to do everything he can
to get to the bottom of it, and will continue to fight sectarian violence.

These are the people that are taking the hits. Even though we have
increased U.S. casualties, the real casualties right now are Iraqi people,
and that kind of bloodshed I think provides plenty of incentive for trying
to suppress violence and secure the government.

Q Senator Hagel said this weekend that he agreed with Senator Warner's view
that a change of course may be needed in the administration's Iraq policy.
How can the President sustain this policy when even the top Republicans are
raising such doubts about it?

MR. SNOW: Well, as the President said last week, I think you're trying to
pick a fight that doesn't exist. As you may recall, the President told all
of you he agrees with Senator Warner that you do have to adjust. And I
think -- again, Senator Hagel does not say, we don't want to win -- I
believe. He did not say that, did he? Because I didn't see the comments.

So then you proceed along the road of trying to figure out, okay, how do
you win? And what he says is, you need to change course constantly. And
that is absolutely true. It's why the President is in regular consultation
not only with General Casey, and also with Zal Khalilzad and with General
Abizaid, but it's one of the reasons why he's holding regular talks with
the Prime Minister, and also encouraging the Prime Minister to maintain and
continue to have close contacts both with General Casey and with Ambassador
Khalilzad.

Q But Senator Hagel said specifically that the American people can't be
expected to continue supporting the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq if they
end up in the middle of a civil war.

MR. SNOW: Well, I think the President has said all along that he
understands that a war is something that is very hard for a nation. And,
furthermore, the entire focus right now is not only to prevent a civil war,
but to create a civil society.

Q Tony, you've confirmed now that there was a nuclear test by North Korea.
There's a news report -- just in the last couple of hours -- that they may
be preparing a second nuclear test. How concerned is the White House about
the nuclear threat from North Korea? And doesn't this play into the
Democrats' hands a bit when they say the President's approach has made the
United States less safe, when you have them conducting these tests?

MR. SNOW: I believe, as you know, the North Koreans were cheating long
before George W. Bush even thought about running for President. So the fact
is that what we now have is a change in atmosphere, in terms of how we
conduct the war on terror when it comes to the North Koreans. The North
Koreans have always been rewarded for bad behavior. Now you have in
Resolution 1718, a framework for all the nations -- especially those who
have the most leverage over them -- to say, no more. And you are seeing, as
Secretary Rice said yesterday, real isolation of the North Koreans in a way
that did not happen.

It is clear that previous efforts over many years -- and it goes back to
1992, when the North Koreans first said that they would renounce nuclear
weapons -- that those long efforts have not yielded the fruits we want. So
the question you have to ask yourself is, how do you become effective at
it.

The United States -- because we don't have extensive trade ties with the
North Koreans -- we don't have unilateral leverage. This is not the sort of
thing that we can do on our own. However, when you take a look, for
instance, at the Chinese and the South Koreans -- who I think together
account for something like 65 percent of all the trade and energy that goes
into North Korea -- they got some real clout. And you've got the Russians
and the Japanese involved, as well. So now you have parties who have the
ability to twist arms in a way that we can't, and we hope and expect that
it will provide a change.

Q The Chinese have clout, but within hours of the actual U.N. vote, you had
the Chinese ambassador saying flatly that they didn't think there would be
political support in China to actually inspect the cargo from North Korea.

MR. SNOW: Well, but, apparently -- I'm not going to quibble with an
ambassador, but the news reports are not only that they have begun
inspecting, but also what's going on is that Secretary Rice, as part of her
travels to the region, is actually going to be sitting down with the
government and saying, okay, what do you need to do. They are actually
going to plan the ways in which they will do the inspections. So as
Knoller, who is not with us right now, pointed out, 48 hours or so after
the passage of the resolution, there's already practical talk about how to
do those kinds of inspections, particularly at the border, and that will be
a focus of joint efforts in the next few weeks.

Brett.

Q So you're saying it's fair to say the administration is confident that
China will enforce the U.N. punishment on North Korea?

MR. SNOW: It's a Chapter 7 resolution. I mean, it's one where, again, all
parties are now committed to carrying out the provisions of the resolution.

Q Is there concern, at least, that South Korea and China, what they're
saying publicly could take some of the teeth out of the U.N. resolution as
it passed?

MR. SNOW: Actions are more powerful than words, and we expect the actions
will be powerful.

Peter.

Q Going back to Iraq, Tony. You said a couple of times that more needs to
be done to deal with the violence. What, and by whom?

MR. SNOW: Well, obviously, I don't know what, because I'm not a general.
But it is pretty clear that it's going to be important to continue going
after terror elements, especially those who are dug in, and that's in
various parts around the country. And right now it's joint operations but,
eventually, the ones who are going to have to finish the job are the Iraqis
themselves. But certainly they're going to be doing it in concert with
coalition forces.

Q Do you see any hope at all that that can happen anytime soon?

MR. SNOW: If you look at the briefings that General Caldwell has been
giving in recent weeks, you do find that there are targeted efforts within
neighborhoods in Baghdad where they are making some progress. Prime
Minister Maliki today, in the phone call, expressed some optimism that we'd
be able to see it. I can't tell you when. My guess is that we'll be able to
see it.

We also understand that at a time when you do have increased military
pressure on some of these groups, that they're going to fire back. You
know, you're stirring up the hornet's nest right now, and you're going
after some of the problems. It is bloodier, it is more difficult. That,
unfortunately, is to be expected. In addition, we also expect an increase
in casualties and violence during Ramadan. But on the other hand, there is
no reduction in the determination to finish the job.

Q Just one more on this. You just touched on it, Tony -- can you
characterize the level of concern here about the scope of the U.S.
casualties? Almost -- probably 60 by now, with some of the casualties that
have come in, in the last couple of days, have died in October alone.

MR. SNOW: The President has said many times, each and every casualty, a
death or an injury, is something that he feels keenly, and the American
people should. On the other hand, you also understand that there are lots
of Iraqi casualties, and the most important thing to do is to finish the
job.

This happens in war. There are going to be times when you have spikes in
violence. And the response to that is to thank those who have served their
countries nobly and to express your condolences and love to the families
and those they left behind, and to redouble your commitment for getting the
job done.

Q One on Iraq again. Sorry. Just the simple question: Are we winning?

MR. SNOW: We're making progress. I don't know. How do you define "winning"?
The fact is, in taking on the war on terror -- let me put it this way, the
President has made it obvious, we're going to win. And that means,
ultimately, providing an Iraq that is safe, secure, and an ally in the war
on terror. And at any given time, as you've seen in previous wars, there
are going to be spikes in violence. And it is natural for Americans who
have -- really are probably the most empathetic people on the face of the
earth, to feel deeply the loss of those who have given their lives in
battle.

But on the other hand, there's also the absolute determination to make sure
not only that those lives are not lost in vain, but also that a noble
purpose is served, and that noble purpose continues to be and will be the
establishment of an effective and secure democracy in Iraq.

Q Can I just -- a couple more on that. The Baker plan, or the Baker group
-- how do you view that? Is this the definitive answer for you? Do you take
their advice --

MR. SNOW: No, and I talked to Jim Baker -- I talked to Jim Baker the other
day. He said, look -- because this was in response to your question, as a
matter of fact -- he said that we have people from a broad spectrum of
opinions; Congress put together this panel, and you have people who are all
over politically, in terms of their philosophies of things. Some of the
working papers have been leaked out, but they are by no means definitive,
nor do they reflect the conclusions or even the finished work of the panel,
let alone, in some cases, even the smaller groups for which they work.

This is something you listen to seriously, but we are not going to
outsource the business of handling the war in Iraq. The President has
welcomed lots of differing advice. People agree and disagree, and we'll
continue to do that, and I think that this is going to provide a valuable
source of insight and data. We're going to look at it carefully, but I also
-- Baker told me, just -- and I did not go into specific ideas with him,
but he said that the news stories that have been knocked around are just
flat wrong.

There are papers that are coming out, and people are producing papers --
but to characterize these as conclusions of the Commission would be false
and they would be inaccurate. The Commission will, in fact, draft up
recommendations after the election. He said he wants to keep it out of
politics, and so does Lee Hamilton. We'll have to see what they have to
say. We will read with interest.

Q But your strategy for victory is the same, and could you articulate that?

MR. SNOW: No, the tactics for the strategy -- victory is the strategic aim
at which we -- that we are trying to accomplish.

Q And how do you plan to accomplish that?

MR. SNOW: Well, you plan to accomplish it by continuing to work in concert
with the Iraqi government to do a number of things, and also with other
multinational forces. One is, to continue to build strength and competence
among the Iraqi military, and also within the government -- for instance,
in everything from agriculture to energy to economic ministries. When Prime
Minister Maliki was here with his cabinet, most of the conversation had to
do with more mundane pieces of government, because even though you do have
heavy violence in places like Anbar and around Baghdad, you also have a
number of provinces where there is peace and people are trying to build new
lives.

So what you have is a multifaceted approach that works with building an
Iraqi government that is going to have, ultimately, the means within its --
well, the means and capabilities of providing security, to have an Iraqi
people who support that government, to have suppressed terror so that these
people can live their lives freely, to have created the conditions for a
better life. The President often talks about, for instance, the importance
of oil as a national asset that can be shared by all the Iraqi people and
build a sense of unity.

So there is -- when you talk about something as big as this issue, it is
not a one-sentence answer because you have to deal with economics, you have
to deal with politics, you have to deal with geopolitics, you have to deal
with the military issues. And in each one of those areas, not only are we
constantly assessing and reassessing what's going on, but we're doing it in
consultation with the government.

Q Sounds more like an end state, Tony, than how to get there.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, as I've tried to explain, I don't think there's a
simple answer to it simply because you do have a lot of moving parts, and
it is an end state. The end state is to continue developing that.

What are we doing? We're continuing to train the Iraqi military. There have
been efforts to train and professionalize the police. The Prime Minister
has already talked about taking efforts, and these we support, to go into
the Defense and Interior Ministries to make sure that everybody working
those ministries is contributing to security and not to terror. So we can
start breaking it apart, but it will be a very long conversation because it
does have a lot of different pieces to it.

Okay, let me get past the front row because -- and then I'll get back to
you guys.

Sheryl.

Q Tony, you just said that the Baker report would be a valuable source of
insight and data, we're going to look at it carefully, we'll have to see
what they have to say -- all statements seeming to suggest that you're not
necessarily going to accept their recommendations. What is the point of
having a high-level, independent commission of experts analyze your policy
if you're saying beforehand that you're only going to look at it carefully?

MR. SNOW: They're doing so pursuant to an act of Congress, and we think we
ought to take it seriously. I mean, I don't -- on the other hand, the
President is the Commander-in-Chief. And simply because you have a blue
ribbon panel, it does not mean that he hands it off to them. The President
has greater access to intelligence than the commissioners have. He also has
the responsibility of conducting U.S. operations, and therefore understands
that it is his responsibility. And simply just as we do not expect the
commission to rubberstamp what the White House does, surely you should not
expect the White House to rubberstamp what an independent commission
recommends. On the other hand, you take a look at it.

Q To what extent are White House officials aware of the deliberations and
the various options that are now under consideration? Zero? You didn't ask
Jim Baker about --

MR. SNOW: Baker has wisely refused to talk about it. He won't do it. And
that's the right thing to do.

Q He's been in to see the President recently.

MR. SNOW: He has been in to see the President. He's made a point --

Q But they don't talk about it?

MR. SNOW: No, they don't.

Q What do they talk about?

MR. SNOW: Because Baker understands that to talk about that would not only
compromise him, but also what's going on within the commission. It's
supposed to be an independent commission. It has to be able to operate
independently. And Jim Baker understands that in order to fulfill that
mission, he cannot be sitting around and chat about it with the President
of the United States.

Victoria.

Q So in not talking about what the commission is doing, did he also not
talk about specifically the options, such as (inaudible) first and redeploy
and containment --

MR. SNOW: Again, what he said is that things that have been in the press --
and I did not go into any further detail with him because, again, it would
be inappropriate -- he said that there are papers that are being drafted by
various members, and there are a lot of different working groups within
those, and that these are not, in fact, illustrative of the final
conclusions, or even the conclusions of the commission itself. They are
working drafts of people -- again, a very broad spectrum of people -- who
have differing views on how to proceed in Iraq, and they'll try to put
those together at the appropriate time.

Q And my other question, going back to Senator Chuck Hagel, on this thing
yesterday on CNN. He also said, so we need to find a new strategy, a way
out of Iraq because the entire Middle East is more combustible than it's
probably been since 1948, and more dangerous because we're in the middle of
it. But he seems to be talking about finding a way out of Iraq. But I also
would like to know your view of whether you think that the Middle East is
more dangerous than it's been since 1948?

MR. SNOW: No, I think what you do -- in fact, what you've begun to see is
the assertion of democratic forces throughout the Middle East, where you
have had a movement toward free elections in a number of places. You also
have ongoing efforts -- and we understand that there are going to be a lot
of people opposed to them -- we are still committed, and we've been the
first administration to commit ourselves to the goal of an independent
Palestinian state.

You understand that when you are challenging an ideology that is absolutely
anti-democratic, that they're going to fight. But on the other hand, what
you also have are a number of people who have demonstrated their own
immense courage, and these people far outnumber the terrorists in saying,
we want a democratic life, and committing themselves to it, and risking
their lives for it. So, yes, I would challenge that notion.

David.

Q You've made the point here that more needs to be done in Iraq to deal
with the violence right now. Given the level of violence, that Peter said,
this month, did the President put some pressure on Maliki in the phone
conversation as to what to do?

MR. SNOW: No, no. In fact, what Prime Minister Maliki was doing is, he
acknowledges what the problems are and he was stressing how determined he
is to go after the sources. The Prime Minister also understands that you
have to proceed -- number one, the Iraqi government is a sovereign
government. And it is determined, rightly, to take control of the
situation.

Number two, the Prime Minister does understand the difficulty of it, but he
also believes that it is important to have all the pieces in place, and
this, again, is something that appears in the transcript of the USA Today
interview, which is, you don't proceed simply militarily, you also have to
have the ability to lure people into the political process -- invite them,
"lure" is a bad word; invite them into the political process -- and also
provide the economic opportunities that are going to give them a reason to
become literally and metaphorically invested in the success of the Iraqi
government.

Q Just so we understand, why would that not come up, given the level of
violence we've seen, in a conversation between the President and Prime
Minister?

MR. SNOW: Because the President is -- the United States is assisting the
government of Iraq, it's not handing out orders. And it would be
inappropriate.

Helen, you've had your hand up, sorry.

Q I wanted to talk about the bill the President will sign tomorrow.

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q It makes him a final arbiter on torture.

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q Does he have any guidelines, does he have any advisory group? And how
will he know?

MR. SNOW: What I've actually -- Helen, in response to your question, I
called White House legal counsel --

Q Can you repeat the question?

MR. SNOW: Yes, how will the President know when it's torture and when it's
not, and avoid having torture.

Q And how will he approach these cases?

MR. SNOW: And how will he approach the cases.

The White House Office of Legal Counsel is actually putting together a
paper so that -- I knew that this would come up. What they will do is help
me describe to you, as accurately as possible. It's a very complex series
of issues, but there are definitions that outline what constitutes torture,
and I will be happy to share those. And I'll get them for you tomorrow.

Q When are you going to release those?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to release it. I'll share it with you tomorrow.
It's not like a formal release, it's just me trying to do my homework, and
I don't have it done yet.

Q Following up on the signing ceremony tomorrow. How quickly is the
administration going to move ahead on the military commission, the trying
of the high-valued --

MR. SNOW: Well, it still takes time, because once you have the commission
process in place, you still have to arrange for representation for all
involved, you have the gathering of evidence. Now in terms of getting
moving toward that goal, that will start immediately; but in terms of
having trials, for good and obvious reasons, you don't do that overnight.
You do have to make sure that the defense is going to be able to do its job
properly, and the prosecution the same.

The estimates I've heard in the past, and I will double check again before
tomorrow, is that it may take a month or two, really, to get these things
moving toward a trial phase.

Q One other question about the signing. The CIA interrogation program which
the President formerly confirmed in the process of asking for this
legislation, at that time he said there were no high-value detainees then
in custody. Is that still the case?

MR. SNOW: I do not know. I don't believe there are any others.

Q Can you tell us by tomorrow?

MR. SNOW: Probably not, because, frankly, when there are detainees, it is
not the practice to start telling when or where you have high-value
detainees.

Q Because, I mean, the President made a point of saying, we need this, we
need this right away, it's got to be done before Congress adjourns, and I
guess --

MR. SNOW: I understand that --

Q -- it would be nice to know if it were a moot point.

MR. SNOW: It would be nice to know lots of pieces of classified
information, but there's a reason they're classified.

Q Tony, just to follow on that -- or is it possible for you to tell us,
once this bill is signed, should there be a need to house high-level
detainees in this CIA program, will you be able to immediately, upon
signing the bill, or are there other steps that have to happen before you
can start that program up again?

MR. SNOW: The program has never ceased, it is merely dormant.

Q Well, before it can resume?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, that's a very cagey way of saying, have you got
anybody?

Q No, it's a way of saying, do you --

MR. SNOW: Well, if a program is dormant because there are a lack of
occupants, and it suddenly ceases to be dormant, then it does tell you
whether they're occupants.

Q We can go at it later.

MR. SNOW: Okay. And I mean, Sheryl, if there's a specific legal point I can
help with, I'll work it through legal counsel. I don't want to pretend to
have the expertise to be able to parse all this stuff.

Q On another subject, Tony, if I may, two questions. Since I believe that
most of us were very impressed with this morning's top of page one review
of you, as well as a similar rave about you last week in another daily
newspaper, I hope --

MR. SNOW: Stolberg wrote a rave? Thank you. (Laughter.)

Q It's all in the eye of the beholder. (Laughter.)

Q I hope you will be congenially receptive to my first question. The
President has affirmed many times that the U.S. cannot deport millions of
illegal immigrants. And my question, why not? And, if not, how can you
explain a decision to disregard the law?

MR. SNOW: Well, number one, the President does not disregard the law. And,
number two, when you have the inability to determine who is here illegally
or not, it significantly hampers your efforts. As part of eliminating catch
and release, we have, in fact, been deporting people, Les. And so I'm
afraid you're going to have to reexamine the question.

Q What is the President's opinion of a request by Republican leaders in the
House to launch an investigation of Sandy Berger's involvement in the
removal of classified documents from the National Archives?

MR. SNOW: There were questions last week. I believe Paula asked them about
investigations involved Republican members. Members of Congress have their
own oversight obligations. They may proceed as they wish. They are a
separate and co-equal branch of government, and I'm not going to tell them
what they can and can't do.

Q Tony, is there going to be a substantial and detailed signing statement
with tomorrow's signing?

MR. SNOW: There will be no signing statement.

Q Tony, on North Korea, since it's now confirmed that it was, indeed, a
nuclear weapon that was tested, what is the concern about the possibility
of another weapon being tested? Then on top of that, if sanctions are,
indeed, upped a level to protect the survival of those in North Korea, what
is the thought about China participating at that level?

MR. SNOW: Two things. Number one, the sanctions that have been discussed
are designed carefully not to place at risk the people of North Korea who
are already, themselves, victims of starvation and grotesque and ghastly
and inhumane poverty themselves. It is more designed to go after the people
who are themselves the key figures in the government that's responsible for
that.

As far as further nuclear tests, I think all it's going to do is strengthen
the commitment, especially of those in the neighborhood to make it clear to
Kim Jong-il that, again, bad behavior no longer will be rewarded, it will
be punished, and that if his government wishes to remain credible, and he
wishes to have any credibility, they need to come back to the six-party
talks and renounce nukes.

Q But wouldn't sanctions (inaudible) the survival of North Korea's people?

MR. SNOW: I just made the point --

Q I understand --

MR. SNOW: For instance, when you're talking about luxury items, which were
one of the things under discussion, that's not --

Q I'm talking about food.

MR. SNOW: I know, but that's not one of the things under discussion.

Q Can I follow on Ken's question? Why no signing statement? Is there any
kind of change in policy?

MR. SNOW: Because there's no signing statement. You have signing statements
sometimes, and sometimes you just sign it. And possibly to frustrate you
guys, because everybody has been waiting for one.

Q What about an executive order?

MR. SNOW: An executive order does not need to be coterminous with the
signing. I believe there will, at some point, be need for one. And that
one, I'll also get the White House Office of Legal Counsel to give me a
precise --

Q But there will at some point?

MR. SNOW: I'm not -- let me find out for sure.

Q Tony, was there any agreement with Congress that there would not be a
signing statement?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q This just seems like the kind of bill where there are a lot of things to
be interpreted and take a look at.

MR. SNOW: They did a really good job this time.

Q Wow. (Laughter.)

Q Tony, does the U.N. resolution on sanctions preclude the United States
from using a military option against North Korea?

MR. SNOW: We have always maintained all options pursuant to our treaty
obligations with those in the neighborhood. But right now, we are not
contemplating military options. We are pursuing diplomatic options.

Jim.

Q Can I just go back to the study group, a second, because there's a sort
of conventional wisdom in Washington which --

MR. SNOW: There is?

Q -- which often isn't very wise. Even Republicans that I've talked to,
high ranking Republicans close to the White House, are saying, look, after
Election Day, there's going to be a significant change in the way we do
business in Iraq. And the Baker group is simply giving the White House
cover for that.

MR. SNOW: No, that would require -- that insinuates a kind of collaboration
that not only does not exist, but I think would be inappropriate, and casts
Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton and a lot of others as mere stooges for the
administration. I don't think they'd share that characterization either.

As we've said all along, we continue to take as fresh a look at what's
going on and try to be brutally honest with ourselves. This is -- Congress
mandated the commission. We appreciate the efforts, and we certainly look
forward to hearing what they have to say, because it is important -- look,
these are people who have long and significant experience. I'm sure that
they're going to have some valuable insights.

Q After months and months, though, the President is saying very clearly
that he was committed to doing business a certain way and he wasn't going
to change his mind no matter what kind of criticism he had. Suddenly last
week in the Rose Garden, he was very open to change.

MR. SNOW: No, it's interesting because, if you recall, that entire prior
week, and some weeks prior to that, I was making the point from this podium
that we constantly adjust. I understand people listen to a President more
than a press secretary, but we've been talking about this for some time.
And the fact is that the strategy has always been the same. I know Martha
is going to say, you know, you've got to win. That's -- there is a
commitment to winning, there's a constant reassessment of what's the most
effective way to get there.

Q Tony, when you were talking before about the Iraqi military being trained
more, they have -- it does seem that more police, more Iraqi military have
been trained in recent months, over the last couple of years. But the White
House had repeatedly said that as they stood up, we'd stand down. Does that
principle still hold? Does the White House still believe, as they stand up,
we're standing down?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q Because it doesn't appear like we're standing down.

MR. SNOW: Well, we're not standing down because everybody is needed in the
fight right now. Also, when it comes to police, both sides -- I mean, the
Maliki government -- and Prime Minister Maliki, in his USA Today interview,
acknowledged they've had some real problems, and they've -- the matter of
professionalizing the army -- I mean, the police still remains undone. The
army training has been more effective, but at this time, with these levels
of violence, you still have to work together to help go after the people
whose vested interests are in destroying Iraq. When those levels of
violence wane, and when we believe that the Iraqis are secure and able to
stand, then we will be prepared to move, but we're not going to do it under
the present circumstances.

Q So they are standing up, but we're not standing down. So is that
principle no longer operable?

MR. SNOW: Well, let's see, they stand up, and also, in standing up, you
quell the violence and you also deal with some of the root causes of the
difficulties.

Q That's the proposition that the White House put out there, that as they
stood up, violence would come down, and we'd stand down.

MR. SNOW: As part of our constant adjustment, let me just add that
apparently, the terrorists have also decided not to stand down. They've got
to stand down.

Q Right, so that's my question. So is "stand up, stand down" no longer the
principle, or --

MR. SNOW: Well, it depends on how you -- how you want to cast it. It seems
to me that we're playing -- this is kind of a fun verbal game, but --

Q No, but that's what the President said, stand up/stand down.

MR. SNOW: But, yes --

Q We're standing up --

MR. SNOW: Well, you know, then you get into, what does he mean by, "stand
up," and "stand up" means you have the ability to assert effective control
within Iraq so that you have peaceful, secure neighborhoods. We're not
there yet.

Q Tony, more on North Korea.

MR. SNOW: Okay, sure.

Q Well, the statement on North Korea also said today that the explosion
(inaudible) was less than a kiloton. Since the amount was given, I'm just
wondering if you have any analysis on what that means?

MR. SNOW: It means it was less than a kiloton.

Q I know, but before -- it seems like a relatively small amount for a
nuclear test, and there was speculation before that it was a dud. So I'm
wondering if this suggests that they may have successfully tested exactly
what they intended to do?

MR. SNOW: Well, that would require discussing intelligence matters that we
are not going to discuss.

Q Tony, on signing statements, as you know, the administration has received
some criticism for putting out signing statements that include
interpretation by the President of sections of the law. So I'm just
wondering why, in this instance, you are not putting out a signing
statement to explain your interpretation of Article III of the Geneva
Convention.

MR. SNOW: Because we believe that the law, in fact, has its own way of
addressing that, and we're satisfied with it. As you know, Paula, last week
we had a signing statement. Signing statements quite often involve trying
to figure -- there are often questions about whether Congress, in putting
together provisions of an act, has been fully consistent with the
Constitution and whom it charges with executing those laws. And, therefore,
we look for ways to maintain fidelity of the Constitution and to the intent
of the laws that have been drawn up. We don't think there's such a conflict
in this case.

Q And I have a second question.

MR. SNOW: Okay, yes, sure.

Q It's related to your interpretation of another law. As you know, there's
several state ballots right now, like there were a few years ago, related
to gay marriage bans. Some of them extend to equal benefits for domestic
partners in civil unions. What is the White House's position on those two
issues?

MR. SNOW: We're going to let the voters of the states decide.

Q Okay. And as far as state rights go, we won't go there as far as how
that's been (inaudible), but what I do want to ask about is your rationale
with respect to gay marriage in terms of sanctity of marriage.

MR. SNOW: I think it's pretty -- what part needs explanation?

Q In relation to your rationale as to how this applies to common law
marriage, because that's outside of a civil union or a marriage, and is
that not a threat to the sanctity of marriage?

MR. SNOW: That's a good question; I don't have an answer. I'll try to come
back with one tomorrow.

Q Is the figure accurate that you'll be doing 16 fundraisers --

MR. SNOW: Sheryl asked that. I'll go look it up. I'll find out what the
total number is.(*)

Q Why is it that the President is still out there doing fundraisers for
candidates? Has he not been asked to campaign in open campaign rallies for
members of --

MR. SNOW: Yes, he's going to be doing that, too. As a matter of fact, I
think there are quite a few still -- I mean, that's basically what we're
going to be doing.

Q But he will eventually be campaigning in open rallies, as opposed to --

MR. SNOW: And he's also doing open fundraisers, as well, as he did last
week.

Q I don't mean open for coverage. I mean a fundraiser is where people pay
to come. Campaign rallies are --

MR. SNOW: Yes, right. Oh, yes, there are going to be a lot of campaign
rallies.

Q Why is it so late in the season that he hasn't been doing that? Has he
not been invited to do any of them until now?

MR. SNOW: No, no, no, no, no. The President also believes -- look, we've
got a tough race and it's important --

Q -- come down so far? I mean --

MR. SNOW: I honestly don't -- let me put it this way, Ann. He's done more
than he did in a comparable stage in 2002. He may even be doing more than
he did in 2004 --

Q More events, or more fundraisers?

Q -- but that's fundraisers.

MR. SNOW: More events -- you know what, we'll -- more events and more
fundraisers.

Q Really?

MR. SNOW: Yes. Plenty of people want the President to come campaign with
them for them.

Q More campaign events -- not invited, where you have to pay to get in
fundraisers. He's done more actual campaigning --

MR. SNOW: Let me find out. I'm listening to my staff, who I'm sure are
right, but we will try to parse it out for you because the political office
has the correct answers to this.

I'll get back to the front row.

Q Are we doing anything to stop Japan from going nuclear? Apparently, it's
been sending --

MR. SNOW: We want the region to remain non-nuclear.

Q How do you decide, of those invitations that you accept, how do you
decide which ones you're going to pick up and which ones you're not?

MR. SNOW: Actually, I don't sit around and do the vetting. The political
office does. They ask me to do events.

Q How do they do it? Have they been --

MR. SNOW: I haven't inquired.

Q When you go into a district where the Republican candidate is either way
ahead or way behind, do you --

MR. SNOW: Again, that's a question for the political office. They'll ask me
if I'll do something to help the President and I say, yes.

Q -- have them brief?

MR. SNOW: Will I have them brief? Oh, my goodness. I'll get answers for
you.

Q A question on the economy. Michigan has the highest unemployment rate in
the country, at 7.1 percent. And who is to blame has become a major issue
in the gubernatorial and Senate races, with Democrats blaming the White
House for weak trade policy enforcement that has hurt the auto industry and
other manufacturers. I'm wondering, what does the President think is the
culprit for why Michigan and similar states have not enjoyed economic
recovery? He and his economic team cite tax cuts as leading to economic
recovery, but why not in Michigan?

M