Text 4142, 889 rader
Skriven 2007-02-28 23:31:02 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0702285) for Wed, 2007 Feb 28
====================================================

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

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary February 28, 2007

Press Briefing by Tony Snow White House Conference Center Briefing Room

˙ Video (Windows) ˙˙Press Briefings


12:40 P.M. EST

MR. SNOW: Good afternoon. Let me begin with an announcement. President Bush
will welcome Prime Minister Helen Clark of New Zealand to the White House
on March 21, 2007. President Bush looks forward to consulting with Prime
Minister Clark on common efforts in the war on terror. The two leaders also
will review efforts to advance and strengthen bilateral relations.

Also, in response to Helen's question this morning, the government of Iraq
has extended official invitations to regional neighboring countries, Egypt,
the five permanent members of the Security Council of the U.N., the Islamic
Conference Organization and the Arab League for a conference to be held in
Baghdad on March 10, 2007.

Also, just to clarify a point that came up in the gaggle this morning, if,
in fact, topics like EFPs and such like come up in that conference,
obviously we will address them. But there will not be bilateral talks
between the United States and Iran, or the United States and Syria, within
the context of these meetings. These are organized by the Iraqis and these
are on issues that are pertinent to Iraq.

As for whether the United States has changed its policy dramatically, it
has not. And I will give you a little more detail on that. There were many
contacts with the Iranians with regard to Afghanistan throughout 2002 and
2003, through the Bonn 6-plus-2 process, as they were standing up the
government in Afghanistan. And there was also an offer by the United States
to work diplomatically with the Iranians on border issues.

The Iranians were at the Iraqi Compact meeting at the United Nations last
September. Secretary Powell was in a meeting with neighbors in Sharm
el-Sheikh in November of 2004. You also know Iranian representatives
participated in a number of meetings subsequent to the Madrid Donors
Conference; that was in October of 2003. And afterwards, there were
subsequent meetings in what was called the International Reconstruction
Facilities Fund for Iraq, including February of '04 in Abu Dhabi, May of
'04 in Doha, October of '04 in Tokyo, and in July of '05 at the Dead Sea.
The meeting involved roughly 70 countries. So that is at least a glimpse of
a number of occasions on which the U.S. and the Iranians had been seated at
the same table in multilateral negotiations.

Q Why are you so defensive about going the diplomatic route?

MR. SNOW: We're not. As a matter of fact, we've been going the diplomatic
route all along. We're not being defensive. What we're trying to do is
clarify, because it's important that people understand that this
administration is serious when it comes to the Iranians about a
precondition for bilateral negotiations and also for diplomatic relations,
which is they can't be working toward a nuclear weapon.

And we've laid out very clearly -- not just us, but the P5-plus-one, the
five members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany -- in conversations
with the Iranians, they've made it clear what the conditions are. We want
to make sure those waters don't get muddied. And the Iranian people also
understand that we look favorably upon the Iranian people, but we take a
dim view of the Iranian government's activities when it comes to terrorist
activities.

Q I think that's pretty well-known, but is your muscular naval foreign
policy toward Iran boomeranging in terms of Congress and so forth?

MR. SNOW: No, as a matter of fact, I think what you're seeing is -- we have
two carrier battle groups in the region, but I think if you take a look,
for instance, at the David Ignacious piece today in The Washington Post,
what you see there is a reflection of the success of diplomatic efforts
when it comes to the Iranians.

The President has made it really clear -- and I don't know why everybody
seems determined to try to turn this into a military standoff --

Q He put a naval officer in charge of all the ground troops in Iraq.

MR. SNOW: Well, yes. No, actually, the person in charge of the ground
troops in Iraq is David Petraeus. The person -- you're talking about Fox
Fallen, of course, who is a naval officer who is the head of Central
Command. In any event, I'm just trying to clarify. These are important
distinctions to make and we tried to make them.

Terry.

Q Given that the IEDs have been so devastating to American troops in Iraq,
why wouldn't this be a big focus of this conference?

MR. SNOW: Well, it may be. I'm certainly not going to rule it out. But
again, the Iraqis are the ones who are convening the conference, and
they're the ones who are going to have control of the agenda.

Q Well, do we have no input on the agenda? I mean, we have a big investment
in Iraq.

MR. SNOW: We do, and part of that investment is to allow the Iraqis to take
much-needed steps toward building capacity not only on the military and
economic front, but the diplomatic front. And the idea that the United
States will dictate terms to them seems contrary to our stated purpose,
which is to help them build it. We're going to consult with the Iraqis, of
course, but they're going to do what they think is important. Perhaps the
topic will come up. Again, I'm not going to rule it out; I'm just not going
to rule it in.

Q Tony, is he to be anxious to dissuade anybody from interpreting this as
some change in policy.

MR. SNOW: Yes, because I think a lot of the press accounts yesterday just
got it wrong, and I think it's important to get it right.

Q What is wrong with saying -- well, why are you hesitant to embrace this
sort of school of thought here that the administration has heard what the
Baker-Hamilton group suggested, they've heard the calls from the Hill, as
Secretary Rice talked about yesterday, and you're open to engaging on all
fronts in a way that is you're embracing something that you were pushing
away before? What's wrong with that --

MR. SNOW: We were so good that we pre-heard it. As a matter of fact, we
pre-heard it as early as 2002 if you want to take it that route, Jim.

Q I'm not sure I follow.

MR. SNOW: Well, what you're saying is -- this is not a response to the
Baker-Hamilton commission, although it does comport with one of the
recommendations.

Q -- Secretary Rice bring that up on the Hill yesterday, then?

MR. SNOW: Because what she was doing is everybody uses Baker-Hamilton as a
talking point. She said, here, here is something Baker-Hamilton recommended
that's --

Q Well what's wrong with saying, yes, we're flexible, we're going to try it
on all these different fronts, as opposed to going out of your way to knock
down any impression that perhaps you're flexible diplomatically?

MR. SNOW: No, we're not -- that's -- here's part of the problem we're
having, is that you are applying labels that don't really seem to apply to
the situation. We -- "flexible diplomatically"? I mean, what exactly do you
mean, "flexible diplomatically"?

Q I don't understand what the problem is, why you're going so far out of
your way to say, what we're doing now shouldn't be interpreted as reaching
out diplomatically to Iran and Syria.

MR. SNOW: Because we don't want it to be seen as a --

Q Why?

MR. SNOW: Because this is an Iraqi initiative, and the one thing -- you do
not -- you know, Jim, one of the things they want is diplomatic
recognition. They need to deliver. They need to deliver. You do not
strengthen your hand by showing "flexibility" in the absence of activity on
the part of those parties, especially when you have taken a public
negotiating position on it.

It is -- what is going on is of a piece with what has been going on for
years. You and I had a conversation about this and you, to your credit, had
a readout of a number of these occasions in the past where there had been
the presence of Iranians and U.S. negotiators at multilateral forums. This
is no different in principle than those.

On the other hand, what you're defining as flexibility is -- I think what
you're saying is, if the U.S. gives up on the precondition that has been
agreed upon in an international forum -- then, yes, absolutely --

Q That's not what I'm saying.

MR. SNOW: Well, I'm telling you what the real effect is. Because if you're
saying that you want to throw away the conditions that were laid down by
the P5-plus-one in dealing with the Iranians, and also the conditions that
were negotiated with members of the Security Council in putting together a
Chapter 7 resolution against Iran --

Q He didn't say that.

MR. SNOW: Yes, he did, because that would be the practical effect of it.
The practical effect --

Q I'm not smart enough to come up with all that, Tony.

MR. SNOW: Well, then I'm trying to school you. I'm just trying to school
you because -- see, what you're saying, Jim, what you're saying, "Why can't
you be flexible?" -- because to meet your test of flexibility --

Q No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, why are you so invested in
being -- in talking about --

MR. SNOW: -- in principle?

Q No. No. Let me finish the question. Why are you so dug in on talking
tough while you're going to do something in the next month or two that you
have clearly stayed away from embracing up to this point?

MR. SNOW: Wait a minute. This is where you've got it completely -- what do
you mean we've stayed away? I have just read for you a whole list of
occasions on which the United States --

Q The Secretary of State is going to sit down --

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q -- and I know that some of those --

MR. SNOW: And she sat down --

Q -- and didn't even shake a hand or acknowledge in some of those
situations.

MR. SNOW: She was in the meetings with them in September. Colin Powell was
with them in Sharm el-Sheikh and through the Bonn process. So you --

Q Apparently, they didn't talk to each other and didn't shake hands hello.
There was no -- this sounds like -- the tenor of what's about to happen
sounds entirely different. And I'm just wondering --

MR. SNOW: I don't think it is. The Iraqis are putting together a meeting
and it's going to be a businesslike meeting. If you're expecting suddenly
new chummy relations, you've created a scenario that is not justified by
the facts on the ground or the precedence.

Q One more follow on this. Could it be that you're concerned -- if you are
seen as embarking on a new policy, is the concern that the old policy was
wrong?

MR. SNOW: No, the concern is you guys are getting it wrong and I don't know
how to get you to get it through your heads that it's not new. I mean, it's
not new. What's going on here is something that has a long-seated
precedence. There are multilateral forums where, if the Iranians are there,
we're not going to walk out. The Iraqis -- we have always said if they
invite us to this regional forum, we will be there. They invited us; we're
going to be there.

There's going to be a follow-up at the ministerial level, which likely will
include key diplomats from those countries, as well as from G8 countries,
and Secretary of State Rice and Mr. Larajani and others will probably be in
attendance. But this does not mean that there are going to be sidebars
where we're having one-on-one talks with the Iranians. It doesn't mean that
there's going to be any departure from past practice. It does mean that if
issues come up that are going to be of interest, like EFPs or so on, then,
yes, we'll certainly discuss them in the open forum.

Q You're not saying we didn't put a stamp of approval on this with the
Iraqis --

MR. SNOW: Of course, we did. We're very happy that this is going on.

Q We pushed it, didn't we?

MR. SNOW: We have encouraged it.

Q Will the President ask the sovereign government of Iraq to put EFPs on
the agenda?

MR. SNOW: I don't know -- the President is not going to make a request. The
government of Iraq --

Q Well, why not? The President says he doesn't believe in meeting just to
meet, so what's the point of it then?

MR. SNOW: Well, the point of it is this is a meeting, actually, where
you've got the Iraqis who have real challenges in dealing with the
neighborhood -- as you can tell, the Iranians and Syrians have not been
uniformly friendly, and it is important to try to build better relations
with those on matters of security, economy and other things.

This is not a meeting just to meet. There are very serious pieces of
business to do on the economic front and on the security front, especially,
and if this issue does come up -- and this is a --

Q EFPs are high on your security agenda.

MR. SNOW: Absolutely.

Q That's eminently clear, so --

MR. SNOW: High on our security -- they're an important -- they are an
element. But also you don't want to overstate, there are plenty of
challenges in Iraq. You've got al Qaeda challenges, you've got sectarian
violence challenges. So we're trying to keep this in proportion. But is it
a concern of us with the fact that the Quds forces, it's traceable to Quds
forces? Yes, sure.

Q Tony, yesterday the President's new Director of National Intelligence
testified on Capitol Hill for the first time, and said, U.S. intelligence
believes that Osama bin Laden and his number two are alive in Pakistan and
reestablishing training camps. If you really have bin Laden on the run, how
is he reestablishing training camps?

MR. SNOW: Well, that's a question -- that's an intelligence matter that I'm
not going to be able to go into.

Q But how can you continually say the leadership is on the run and --

MR. SNOW: Well, you take a look also at statements that have been made by
generals in recent days -- General Schoomaker the other day had a comment
that I was asked about, which is he thought bin Laden had been
marginalized. The question is whether al Qaeda -- I think the bin Laden
question may be separable from the al Qaeda question. It's clear that al
Qaeda is trying to gain strength --

Q But isn't he the leader of al Qaeda?

MR. SNOW: Well, I don't know. It's a real question about who assumes
operational command. One of the things we've found is that the command
structure has been degraded significantly and that remains the case. But in
terms of trying to characterize precisely how the command structure looks
or how it operates, it would be inappropriate to comment from the podium.
But certainly, if you take a look, over and over you've had key members
taken out, and also reports in the press that the leadership had become
much more decentralized, as had the activities of al Qaeda. Indeed, you had
the correspondence between Ayman al Zawahiri and Abu Musab al Zarqawi where
you had Zawahiri basically asking for money from Zarqawi, when he was head,
and also begging him -- it looked as it al Qaeda in Iraq in some cases at
least had some leverage over al Qaeda leadership, wherever it was hiding.

Q There was also a report this morning that two Army combat brigades are
being sent to Iraq without desert training -- the Associated Press has a
story out today -- and that it's because they're being rushed to Iraq to
help get the surge in place.

MR. SNOW: Again, let me stress, what happens is, a lot of times you will
also do training in theaters, as well as equipping in theater. The generals
have made it very clear, and military commanders have made it clear, nobody
is going to go into combat activity without proper equipment and training.
Period. So if things --

Q But the story flatly says that two brigades are going in without desert
training in California. So that doesn't sound like --

MR. SNOW: All right, I understand.

Q -- they're getting the training.

MR. SNOW: Well, but they can get desert training elsewhere, like in Iraq.

Q Tony, what's the upshot on your talks on the senior administration
official transcript?

MR. SNOW: I have spoken with the Vice President's office, and the ground
rules that were laid out are going to remain in effect. (Laughter.)

Terry.

Q Why?

Q Why?

MR. SNOW: Well, I will direct that to them. They said that the opinion is
that everybody on the plane had agreed to ground rules, and they were not
inclined to change them.

Q But didn't the Vice President change them in his comments?

MR. SNOW: I don't think so. I mean --

Q -- when he identified himself?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, I will not comment on a senior administration
official briefing. I will simply tell you that that is the opinion of the
Vice President's office. And for further -- if you wish to go back and get
them to referee it, you may do so.

Q While we're on this -- can I just continue? Can you explain --

MR. SNOW: Please. This is riveting.

Q -- on the topic of senior administration officials, why -- explain why
that device is ever used, and why the public isn't entitled to know who's
talking when the people they pay them do what they're paid to do?

MR. SNOW: Well, as you know, sometimes, for instance, when we have senior
administration officials who will brief in this room, it is important for
matters of confidentiality, in terms of -- they're able to be more open
with you, as senior administration officials, and also it denies people an
opportunity perhaps to -- in any event, I'm not going to get -- look, I'm
not going to get myself stuck in the endless sort of spin cycle of trying
to deal with rules on senior administration officials. If you would like
those briefings to cease, we could probably make that happen, but I think
you would be poorer for it, and we would, too.

You've been around this town long enough to know, Ken, that there are times
when it is deemed appropriate to do so. And people do participate in those,
as you did. So, I mean, it was a question that may have been posed at the
time, but apparently no objection -- the objection was not made at that
time and venue.

Q Tony, does the President's economic team believe yesterday's market dive
was an anomaly?

MR. SNOW: I don't think there's any use at this point in trying to
characterize from this podium what happened in a market on any given day.
It is worth reiterating what I said before, which is if you take a look at
the trend lines, you've got the strongest international economy maybe ever.
China's stock market has doubled in value over the past year. You have a
number of vigorous and growing economies. The most vigorous and growing of
which is the United States of America, growing more rapidly than any
industrialized country, for now I think 42 consecutive months of growth.
And, furthermore, the economic fundamentals remain sound and it's one of
the focuses of administration policy to keep it strong and keep it growing.

So there is always danger in trying to do spot characterizations of what
happens in a market because that then becomes a factor as investors take a
look -- administration officials says, X. I would rather not give them
something to react to. I would rather have investors remarking to --
reacting to market fundamentals, rather than Press Secretary remarks.

Q Understanding that, is the thought here at the White House that there's
no conclusive reason for the decline yesterday?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not going to --

Q The main point of discussion, will it be at the lunch today with his
economic team?

MR. SNOW: Okay, this is -- thank you. The President's economic team meets
every Wednesday for lunch. The President is not there. The President is
having lunch right now with an author, and I read that out earlier. But
what happens is the economic team, which includes the National Economic
Council Director, it includes the head of the Council of Economic Advisors,
the Budget Director, the Chief of Staff, the Deputy Chief of Staff, the
Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of Commerce -- that's kind of the basic
team. Once a week they meet.

There is also -- the President also has a working group. That involves
Treasury, the Fed, the SEC and the CFTC -- the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission. At a sub-ministerial level, a sub-cabinet level those guys talk
every day, so there are sort of normal communications between them. As far
as the President's working group, the general practice is for them to meet
at least once a month; they quite often do so more frequently. But the
President is not doing a sit down today with economic advisors.

The sit-downs that he's done in the past -- again, yesterday he called Hank
Paulson, the Treasury Secretary, and said, how do you read what's going on.
I will allow that conversation to remain confidential between the two. But
Hank Paulson is not only the top economic policy-making official in this
administration, but somebody who has long and considerable experience with
China, as well. So the President wanted to get his opinion on it.

Q Did you not talk with him today to get an update on how he felt the
morning was going?

MR. SNOW: I don't know if he's talked to him today or not. It looks as if
markets have rebounded -- at least the Chinese market today. And who knows
what's going to happen? Again, I don't want to try from the podium to make
a guess about how the Dow Jones Industrial Average will --

Q Just to follow, the other day the former Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan,
said it was possible the U.S. economy could slide into a recession by the
end of the year. What do you say to that?

MR. SNOW: Actually, if you take a look, there's a follow-on story on that
and I think Chairman Greenspan has questioned that characterization. If you
take a look, Ben Bernanke today, the new Fed Chairman, was on the Hill, and
repeated basically what I said, which is the fundamentals look very strong.

Q So you disagree with that assessment from --

MR. SNOW: I think Mr. Greenspan characterizes what -- that assessment of
what he said.

Q Tony, I've got a domestic question, but I wanted to just follow up on one
thing on the Iran story. You gave a real quick response a couple minutes
ago and you said something about a meeting on the sidelines. Are you ruling
out any sidebar-type meetings with them at all?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q How about the Syrians?

MR. SNOW: Yes. I mean, again, let me -- that is barring action on things
that we've said to both you need to do. If between now and the 10th of
March, the Iranians suspended reprocessing and enrichment, then you'd have
a different ballpark. If the Syrians had changed their attitude toward
Hamas and Hezbollah, okay, then -- you see what I mean. So there are a
number --

Q I have a domestic question.

MR. SNOW: Okay, I'm sorry, yes.

Q On the President's trip tomorrow down to the Katrina zone, what's your
assessment of the pace of the recovery? There's one study out that says
that it has stalled out.

MR. SNOW: Well, I don't want to get into trying to assess. The President
led the charge to get $100 billion appropriated by the Congress. And that
money has been put together in grant packages so that state and local
officials, who should have the most expertise in where the money ought best
to be used and how best to use it, it goes to them. They have to fulfill
certain requirements in order to have that money available. But there are
still billions unspent available.

As I did note, there seems to have been a very significant increase in
activity in terms of housing loans being granted in New Orleans just within
the last few weeks. But I think rather than grading it, the most important
thing is the President wants to see progress on all fronts --
reconstruction, and also dealing with social services.

You know, it's important to have law and order and good schools, and one of
the things he's going to do tomorrow is visit a charter school. As you may
recall, Peter, when he went to Wall Street, he had a talk about income
differences, the income gap. And one of the things he pointed out is that
there is a significant earnings difference, on the average, based on
people's educational attainment levels. He feels very strongly about that
-- that's one of the hallmarks of No Child Left Behind -- and insistence
not merely that people get diplomas, but the diplomas mean something, that
people get an education. And when he is in the region tomorrow, he will be
looking at economic reconstruction efforts, but he also will be looking at
education, which is a key part.

Q Why are there billions unspent? Where's the roadblock in the pipeline?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm going to leave that -- I will direct that to people
who are more directly involved. You can talk to Don Powell, or you can
refer it to state and local officials, because frankly, there's a lot of
controversy down there and people are busy swapping charges. The most
important thing is, work it out and get help to the people.

Q One more on this. You put out a fact sheet on the first anniversary, and
the President said, over $77 billion of the $110 billion has been
dispensed, or was available for the states to draw from. What is that ratio
now?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. I know we put together some numbers about a week
ago. We can get those for you, because we do have an update.

Q Okay.

MR. SNOW: Dispense or available -- although a significant amount has, in
fact, been dispensed at this point. We do have numbers on that. We'll get
them to you.

Q To get back to the markets, do you know if there was any outreach to the
Chinese government beginning yesterday into today?

MR. SNOW: No, I don't.

Q What about any discussions with either Chairman Bernanke or Greenspan?

MR. SNOW: You mean between the two?

Q No, no, between the administration and either Chairman Bernanke or
Chairman Greenspan?

MR. SNOW: No. Again, I think what the President -- we're taking a look at
what's going on, and what we do see is a strong global economy with strong
fundamentals, and the importance is to build on those fundamentals.

Q Was the working group working yesterday?

MR. SNOW: Look, again, these guys consult every day, so I'm sure that there
were conversations among members of the working group. I don't -- I can't
tell you whether the principals had a conference call or anything to that
extent.

Q Tony, on the New Zealand announcement -- go Kiwi -- it's been ages since
the New Zealand Prime Minister has been invited here. Does this mean the
U.S. can resume an allied relationship with New Zealand, despite the
nuclear and the environmental policies? And will President Bush hold a
lunch, or a dinner, or a press conference with her?

MR. SNOW: My goodness, Connie. We just announced it. Get to us when we're a
little closer to the day.

Q Could you look into it, please?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to -- I mean, at this juncture I daresay we haven't
finished scheduling things. So when it comes to dinner or luncheon, bowling
on the lawn, we don't have that stuff.

Q Is it a state or official visit?

MR. SNOW: Again, I've read to you what I have, and that's all I have. I
have these sentences that are on this here sheet of paper and no more. But
we will endeavor to get you more.

Q I appreciate that. They appreciate that, also.

Q Tony, as far as bombing in Afghanistan was concerned, yesterday Taliban
claimed responsibility, that Vice President was the target. And my question
is that was there any -- they were trying to give any message to the leader
or to U.S., or also if there is any plan of expanding NATO or -- any other
countries are joining as far as more forces are concerned in Afghanistan?

MR. SNOW: That's a good question. As I pointed out, we do know that the
Danes are going to be increasing their participation somewhat. I don't know
what the readout is going to be. You know, we are committed to having more
resources in Afghanistan, as the President has said. But as far -- and
going back to the Taliban question, we don't know. I mean, somebody has
made a claim; I don't know whether it's legit or illegit. But the point is
that we're working with NATO to make sure that we have the right
capability, once again, like in Iraq, to help the Afghans be able to stand
up for their own, for themselves.

So, for instance, in recent announcements you've seen that there have been
very vigorous targets in terms of increasing the number of people in the
army and in the police forces who are getting trained up and made capable.
And you're seeing more joint operations and interoperability and that sort
of thing. So, again, I think at this juncture I can't give you any specific
numbers on what's going to happen.

Q On China, has the President has been briefed? Because in recent days Vice
President Cheney and also Dr. Rice and also congressional leaders on the
Hill, they are worried about the Chinese threat, the emerging threat. And
recently the Vice President also spoke about this. This week, during the
hearings on the Hill they were worried about the Chinese building up --

MR. SNOW: Well, we're aware. Look, China is a nation that clearly has
ambitions. The most important thing we are working with them on right now
are the six-party talks. They have been important allies. We also are
working with them on a number of other fronts, including economic and trade
fronts. The problem with that is it is such a vague question that it leads
only to mischief, and I would rather avoid mischief on that.

Q Back to Katrina. The President took a lot of flak for not mentioning
Katrina in the State of the Union speech. In hindsight, was that a mistake?

MR. SNOW: It's not -- you know what? "In hindsight," I'm just not going to
play the "hindsight" game.

Q Well, but, plenty of people thought it meant he was downgrading the
issue.

MR. SNOW: Yes, but he wasn't. It's hard to argue that somebody who has put
on a push to spend $110 billion on a problem, as ever downgrading it; who
gets very regular briefings on it as downgrading it; and somebody who has
people report to him directly as downgrading it.

We understand that somebody can take a non-mention in a speech and try to
use it for their own political purposes. But the fact is that the President
is committed and he's done it. I mean, $110 billion, it speaks for itself.

Q Tony, on Iran and Syria and Katrina.

MR. SNOW: Whoa. Is that separate questions? (Laughter.)

Q They are. They're not linked.

MR. SNOW: Good.

Q Does the meeting, this Iraqi meeting with Iran and Syria, does this
constitute the fulfillment, partial fulfillment of the Baker-Hamilton
commission report?

MR. SNOW: To the extent -- again, this is done because the Iraqi government
-- the Iraqi government has been involved in a number of activities like
this. I mentioned before the Iraq Compact. That is economic outreach. It
involves the neighbors and it involves a neighborhood. And, in fact, the
Iranians and Syrians were part of that, along with the United States. So
this is certainly not unprecedented.

And to the extent that the Baker-Hamilton commission had said that they
wanted to see vigorous regional involvement, yes, sure. But this is not
done so that the Iranians could say, okay, check, we got Baker-Hamilton
satisfied. They're doing it because it's the right thing to do and it's
good for them. And they've done it on the economic front. It's important to
continue on the security and political fronts.

Q So how long has this administration known that this was in the works to
possibly have this meeting?

MR. SNOW: Don't know for sure. But it's certainly something -- again, we
have not discouraged it. They've been discussing it for some time. It's
been mentioned any number of times from here.

Q The reason why I ask is because Congressman Elijah Cummings, who was part
of the CBC meeting, as well as a member of the Armed Services Committee, he
said when the CBC met with President Bush, President Bush said, let's let
the surge work, and then we will implement Baker-Hamilton. And my question
is, is this considered part of what he said --

MR. SNOW: Okay, let me -- first, I'm going to be clever about this for
reasons --

Q No, be truthful and straight.

MR. SNOW: I'm going to be truthful, but I'm going to be truthful and
indirect, for the following reason: We do not comment directly on
behind-the-scenes confidential meetings with members of Congress. So let me
tell you why the President --

Q This Congressman said it --

MR. SNOW: Let me tell you why the President, on a number of occasions, has
said he would like to get to Baker-Hamilton. That is the way he has phrased
it in any number of occasions.

When he talks about getting to Baker-Hamilton, what he's really talking
about is what he calls the over-the-horizon presence, where the Iraqis are
able to provide basic police and military support and stability for
provinces and at the city level, so that the United States forces can back
away from those areas and engage primarily in support and border
enforcement -- border integrity activities.

And the President has always said that -- well, not always, but he has said
frequently, that he thought that at this juncture -- a year ago, he and
most of his military advisors thought we would be at "the Baker Hamilton
point" right now. But obviously, sectarian violence flared up, and we are
not at that point.

So when he talks about trying to get to Baker-Hamilton, that's what he's
discussing. He's not talking about the particulars about whether you have
direct negotiations with Iran and Syria, or whether Iraq has -- none of
that. He's talking about the overall emphasis of Baker-Hamilton, which is a
U.S. presence that is lighter, and that has succeeded in the task of
enabling the Iraqis to build that capacity to take care of their own basic
police work and security operations, and also that they've made the
political deals that are necessary for long-term stability, and you've
begun to get economic growth so that the United States can get back --
again, use the term of art -- over the horizon, deal with some border
security issues, and eventually bring its folks home. So that's what he was
referring to.

Q All right. Now on Katrina. This is a significant trip -- six months since
the President has been down there; major disparities between Mississippi
and Louisiana. Is the President --

MR. SNOW: Disparities of what sort?

Q Check disbursements.

MR. SNOW: That's a function of state or local government, at the state and
local governments.

Q When is this administration going to stop saying it's a function of the
local and state, and finally say, look, let's work this out, to help,
because people are still out of their homes, people are still wanting to go
home. When do you say when?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, what you're saying is that we, in fact, should say
-- because, number one, you need to express not only faith, but also
recognize the solemn responsibilities of state and local governments do. If
you are, in fact, trying to assume those responsibilities, I guarantee you
there would be plenty of complaint. But as I just pointed out, and I'm sure
you're aware of this, there has been a dramatic change in the check-cutting
pace. Now, I gather that there is a much higher goal for New Orleans than
there has been in the past --

Q Four-hundred versus thousands -- that's a --

MR. SNOW: No, I think the number is now in the thousands in New Orleans,
and rising rapidly. Double-check with Don Powell, but the numbers are
changing. We certainly think it's important and imperative -- when you
have, again, billions of dollars unspent that could be used for housing and
to reconstruction in New Orleans, it's important to get that money in the
pipeline, so the people who do want to get their homes rebuilt, and people
who do either want to live in New Orleans or return to New Orleans get the
help that Congress has appropriated for them.

Paula.

Q Well, another aspect of revitalization in a Katrina-hit area is
insurance. There's a congressional hearing today on that. To what extent,
or is the President at all planning to address this issue, as far as the
affordability of insurance, or even availability of insurance in this area
now?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. I'm not even going to try to fake it.

Q Does he acknowledge it's a problem?

MR. SNOW: Well, I think what happens is a lot of times when you have a
disaster, you do have, in fact -- look, a lot of times you've got to take a
look at the ways states and localities handle insurance issues. That also
tends to be one where you have differing rules and regulations. But I
think, Paula, it is a lot more complicated than simply saying that it is a
federal problem. It has many layers. And that's why I am wary of trying to
give you an answer that has not been fully researched and thought out. We
will do some homework, but I think you deserve better than having me try to
make it up.

Q Tony, in the spirit of spring training, I have somewhat of a curve ball
for you. A Massachusetts Congressman today is calling for repeal or
overturning of "don't ask, don't tell" in the military. Does the President
favor the policy?

MR. SNOW: The President supports the military policy. We will see what
happens if Congress comes up with something.

Q Tony, thank you. Two questions. Since the President's one-time election
opponent is the only Vice President ever to win the Academy Award's Oscar,
did the President send him congratulations?

MR. SNOW: I'm not aware that he did. But I will send mine.

Q Is this because -- the fact that you don't know that he sent him
congratulations due to the fact that the President believes the award
should have been for science fiction?

MR. SNOW: No, I don't. But that was very clever. That was a good one.

Q Thank you very much.

Q No, it wasn't.

MR. SNOW: Front row disagrees.

Q Did the President watch the movie?

MR. SNOW: I doubt it.

Q As far as the March 10th regional conference goes, is there a particular
reason why it's happening in March, that it didn't happen six months ago,
or a year ago? Were there events that precipitated it happening --

MR. SNOW: No, I think what you've had is a period of time where, for one
thing, you had an Iraqi government that really first started forming up
last May, and they've had a series of challenges. They have already had an
Iraq Compact meeting in September at the United Nations. I can't tell you
about the precise timing, but what you have seen is an Iraqi government
that is getting more and more deeply involved in some of the preconditions
that people think are necessary -- much more vigorous security operations
and revamped security operations in Baghdad and Anbar. You have the
announcement now of the framework oil law. There is continuing
conversations about political reform, deBaathification reform, election
reform, and so on. So I don't want to guess exactly why, but they're doing
it, and we think it's a good thing.

Q This regional conference, is it something that the administration has
been urging the Iraqi government to put on, to do over the past year?

MR. SNOW: I don't know, but we've had conversations about it, and we
certainly encourage them in trying to do this sort of thing. But, again,
Iraq has got a sovereign government. We talk about a lot of stuff with
them. But certainly, we are very happy that this is going to take place. We
think it's a positive step.

Q Thanks, Tony. If security is going to be the main issue on the agenda of
this regional conference, and if the United States still sees Iran and
Syria as part of the problem, not a solution, why do you believe the United
States should be present at this meeting, with the exclusion of any
bilateral meetings?

MR. SNOW: Because the Iraqis invited us.

Q And that sovereign country just said they could take care of their own
interests.

MR. SNOW: But again, the -- what?

Q They could still defend their own interests with their neighbors. Why
does United States --

MR. SNOW: We're not defending their interests. They asked us to
participate. And we said, if they asked us to participate, we would. Are
you suggesting that we say, now, we don't want to? I mean, I think it's an
important sign of our respect and support for this government that we are
going to attend the conference. And the follow-up conference, you have G8
countries, too.

Look, the Iraqi challenge, obviously, you've got folks in the neighborhood,
but also Iraq is trying to develop capacity politically, diplomatically,
economically. Doesn't do that by itself, and it does need interaction and
support from a wide variety of nations. We've seen it with the Iraq Compact
on the investment side. And you want to make sure what they build is strong
and vigorous a capacity on the diplomatic side as possible, as well. They
invited us and we're coming.

Q How do you feel about sitting with Iran, and just recently, President
Bush accused them of threatening the security of U.S. troops?

MR. SNOW: No, I think the President was pretty clear about it. As far as we
can tell, these weapons have come from Iran, but we've also said, we do not
know who signed off on it, and that sort of thing. But we've been there
before. Look, the President referred to Iran as part of the "axis of evil,"
and we've sat down with them any number of times in multilateral forums
since then.

The point is that we think the Iranians can do a lot that will be conducive
to peace in the region and good for them and good for their people. We're
going to continue doing whatever we can to encourage them to do it. And if
they want to have bilateral relations, it's up to them.

Thanks.

END 1:17 P.M. EST

===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070228-5.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)