Text 4564, 898 rader
Skriven 2007-05-10 23:30:54 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0705108) for Thu, 2007 May 10
====================================================

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

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary May 10, 2007

Press Briefing by Tony Snow White House Conference Center Briefing Room

˙ /news/releases/2007/05/20070510-8.wm.v.html ˙˙Press Briefings
˙˙Audio


1:17 P.M. EDT

MR. SNOW: Hello. Before we get to questions, let me read out a couple of
foreign leader calls, and then we'll get to questions.

This morning the President spoke with Brazilian leader President Lula. He
called in anticipation of the G8 meeting. They were discussing the agenda.
They were also reviewing the status of discussion by trade ministers on the
Doha negotiations. And they expressed their pleasure with increasing
cooperation between the two countries, including the area of biofuels.

The President also had a conversation with Russian President Putin. They
discussed Secretary Rice's upcoming visit to Moscow, as well as a range of
important bilateral and international issues. And they talked about plans
for next month's G8 summit in Germany.

Q Did they also talk about some of Mr. Putin's comments yesterday, that
seemed pretty harsh towards the administration's foreign policy, comparing
it to the Third Reich?

MR. SNOW: The Russian Foreign Ministry has called and had conversations
with the embassy. And they've pointed out that he did not explicitly
mention the United States, and they confirmed in a phone call that there's
no intent to compare U.S. policies with those of the Third Reich.

Q What about these meetings with Republican lawmakers on the Hill? They
were here on Tuesday, and you've been saying, well, there are a lot of
other meetings that the President has with these people. But in general,
what is the tenor of these meetings, then, and what is the President taking
from them? Because he and the Vice President the last couple of days have
been saying there's been progress on the ground; the Vice President was
saying in Iraq sectarian violence is down. But somehow there's a
disconnect. Republican lawmakers are saying, we're not seeing enough
progress.

MR. SNOW: Well, a couple of things. Let me first give you a
characterization of the meetings generally, and then we can start chipping
away at specific concerns. What you end up having -- the meetings tend to
be -- they're very interactive. The President comes in -- and I'll just
describe in very general terms, because, again, I want to preserve both
candor and confidentiality -- but he'll give his take on how things are
going, and then he will invite others to give their takes. And everybody
gets an opportunity to speak, and there's a lot of interaction, a lot of
back and forth.

But without exception, the meetings have always been respectful, they have
been -- and the exchanges, look, they're interesting. The President wants
to hear what people have to say. And I think a lot of members, when they
get into a situation like that, they're excited about the prospect that
they do, in fact, have an opportunity to speak at liberty with the
President, so they do it.

I'm sorry, now the second?

Q There seems to be a disconnect, though, because these Republican
lawmakers are coming out of these meetings and saying the opposite, in some
cases, of what the President and Vice President are saying about progress.
They're saying, we're not seeing it.

MR. SNOW: Well, I'm not sure it's the opposite. I think what they're
expressing is impatience. And as the President pointed out today, yes, he's
impatient, too. And he's made this point on a number of occasions. If you
ask him the poll question, are you satisfied with what's going on in Iraq,
the answer is no. So he certainly understands the impatience. And he also
wants to hear what their specific concerns are, what ideas they may have.
And often what will happen is that they'll also have more practical
conversations about what's going on politically at the time.

But it really is wide open. And people talk about their personal
experiences, they'll tell you what they've seen. But the point is, I'm not
sure that there's a necessary disconnect, because what they want to see are
results, and the President wants to see results.

Keep in mind that last year the President ordered a comprehensive review --
J.D. Crouch over at NSC helped put it together -- a big interagency review
taking a look at all aspects of the policy toward Iraq, because the
President wasn't satisfied, and he wanted to find a better way forward. And
that included every dimension of our approach to Iraq, and every U.S.
department, government and agency involved in Iraq, including the military.
He has pointed -- he pointed out again today that General Petraeus, part of
that, is in the process of implementing a plan. You really need to give it
a chance to work before you give it a full assessment, but General Petraeus
also is going to be reporting back to people so that they know what's going
on, as well.

So I don't think impatience is new. It's perfectly understandable. And the
express desire for results is something that everybody shares.

Q One last thing about -- in connection with the Vice President's trip. On
board Air Force Two yesterday, senior administration officials said of the
trip, and the message, "We've got to get this work done. It's game time."
-- what does that suggest about the first four years of the war? Is it that
the administration is just now saying that that was a scrimmage and now
it's game time? What does that mean?

MR. SNOW: I think that's simply -- it gets back to what the President is
saying. In some ways, there may be perceptions of two different clocks,
Baghdad and Washington. The President said, you've got to speed up the
clock. It is a matter of realizing that there have been a lot of efforts
now. We've been working on this joint way forward in Iraq. You are getting
results in a number of areas. We have been talking and working with the
Iraqis on political, economic, and other reform.

As the President was pointing out, there are very key things that people
want and expect to see, because you know it has to happen. If you want
success in Iraq, you have got to have political accommodation, you've got
to have the oil law, you've got to have constitutional reform, you've got
to have the elections, you've got to have de-Baathification. All of those
things are necessities; everybody knows it. It is tough to get to those
points, but you've got to do it.

And so I think that was -- that was -- Jennifer, and then --

Q The President just said that he'd empowered Josh Bolten to talk to the
Hill about benchmarks, negotiations on benchmarks and some sort of
compromise there. Is he willing to accept some sort of consequences if
benchmarks are not --

MR. SNOW: Yes, I heard you ask the question.

Q I'm asking you now.

MR. SNOW: What we're not going to do is do the negotiating for Josh, but
he's talking with people. Keep in mind, benchmarks also are not new. The
President talked about them in State of the Union. We talked about them in
Amman in November. Secretary Rice put a list of 17 together in a letter to
Senator Levin.

So you do need to have metrics, and Josh will be talking with people and we
will continue to work with the leaders in the House and Senate to come up
with something. The President, once again, expressing some confidence that
we're going to get to the right place, but I'm not going to prejudge.

Q I mean, you said yourself it's not new, so why does the President even
bother to say that he's empowered him to negotiate on this if he's not
willing to show a little leg on what that means?

MR. SNOW: Well, he shows leg, just not to you.

Q Well, tell us about it. (Laughter.)

Q Tony, we've been hearing now, Republican officeholders who are publicly
saying the President is running out of time. Does the President get that
message?

MR. SNOW: The President understands their passions. The other thing they
said is we see progress, we're with you. I mean, you've got to keep in
mind, this is -- this is not ultimatums. This is an expression of a desire
to see progress.

So you've got -- I think there's a temptation to say, by golly, do this or
else. And I don't think the "or else" is necessarily part of it. And by the
way, let me just stipulate, I'm walking a little tightrope here. I'm not
going to respond directly to the meeting, but there have been plenty of
other expressions of this publicly, as you pointed out.

The President is certainly aware of it, and it's important to get a sense
of how members feel, what they feel about it, and also to share the
President's view that, yes, of course you want to see progress, I want to
see progress. And you have to understand the impediments, you have to
understand what we think is necessary to give a sense of what we're doing,
and at the same time also, to illustrate or to discuss also the dangers of
not completing successfully the mission.

So all of those things enter into it. But the President certainly gets it,
yes.

Q But if there's erosion from Republicans, doesn't that mean that the
ultimatum is implied, or coming?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, and this is why I think it's premature to talk about
an erosion. I'll refer again to what's going on presently in terms of
politics in Washington. The President made it really clear: Any plan to cut
off funding after 30 days, not going to happen. Any plan to revisit after
60 days, not going to happen. There, you've got Republican unity. The
Republicans are united on this. And so what Republicans are saying, some
Republicans, is, we want to see more. And the President said, yes, of
course you do. And we want to see more, too.

So I think -- I think what you end up doing is, rather than speculating
about what people may be saying in two to three months, as the President
said, let the -- give the plan time to work. Give the plan time to get
fully implemented. We're not even going to have the troops fully in field
for another month. And so it's important to go ahead and do that.

And people -- look, people are going to keep a sharp eye out. There
continue to be regular briefings out of MNFI. General Caldwell does them
all the time, laying out metrics. I think it's important constantly to keep
members of Congress briefed, to keep them up to date, to let them know
what's going on. And obviously, General Petraeus, also, is tasked with
coming up with a comprehensive and objective review, as well. So all those
are important data points.

Q One last point. Aren't these public comments a sign the President is
losing credibility with his own party?

MR. SNOW: No. And if you take a look -- all you have to do is take a look
at the polling. You look at Republican support for the President, it still
remains overwhelmingly strong.

Q So the President has drawn a couple of lines in the sand -- 30 days, not
going to happen; 60 days, not going to happen. Attaching consequences to
progress, is that not --

MR. SNOW: I'm just -- I'm saying I'm not going to get into discussions
about benchmarks other than beyond what the President said today.

Q Let me ask you this, because the President also said -- the message
seemed to be, give the plan a chance to work. If you talk to Republicans
around town today, it seems to be the sense of, we're going to stay with
you through September, and General Petraeus' report in September.
Everything seems to be pointing to September. Isn't that a save the date
card for the terrorists, guaranteeing a report in August?

MR. SNOW: No, only if somebody decides they're going to say, September is
it. That's a very good question, because what you've highlighted, Jim, is
something the President referred to today, because if you create
expectations of cutoffs, or dramatic political shifts in the United States,
what you do, in fact, is create political incentives on the other side. And
that's why the President was talking about some of the ramifications, in
terms of American credibility, based on the way people frame this --

Q September is not the --

MR. SNOW: Again, there's going to be reporting some time in the fall. What
the President pointed out again today is, you have to base your decisions
on facts on the ground. But rather than saying, September is the date --
look, we may be awash in good news, not predicting it, not being a rosy
scenario guy, but there's a lot of news that will come to our attention
over the next weeks and months, and so rather than sort of wading back in
anticipation, and saying, we don't draw judgments, what members of Congress
need to do and what generals do and what the President does is every day
continue assessing what's going on and continue updating your view on how
things are going, based on the ongoing evidence.

If you say September is it, you're right, you create a possibility that all
the guys save up their cement trucks for August or September.

Q Tony, you mentioned the polls, and talked about the Republican support.
All the polls also show that big majorities of the American public do not
support the war. Have you heard the President talk about how difficult it
is to fight a war or prosecute a war without the public's support?

MR. SNOW: The President understands the importance of public support.
What's also interesting is that you see numbers coming up again on, do you
think we're winning or do you think -- for instance, a pretty strong
majority now, when asked, do you think we're losing, say no. That's an
important data point. When it talks about, would you like the Americans to
succeed, the answer is yes. So you always have mixed feelings.

Q They always say that.

MR. SNOW: But the point is that those, in fact, are things that reflect the
thinking of the American people. As the President said, if you ask him, are
you happy with what's going on, no. Would you like to home right away? Of
course you would. But it is a difficult situation. The most important thing
to do is to keep the faith with the people and American credibility by
following through on the plan. And again, we are still in the mid-stages of
implementing a plan, and rather than trying to -- it's like trying to grade
your paper when you're not even halfway through the exam. You've got to be
able to finish the basic work first, and let people assess exactly how the
plan is proceeding and what kind of fruits it's bearing. That's only fair,
and the President really asked people to be fair-minded. And I must say,
members of Congress are going to approach it that way. They understand.

Q Tony, was there a sense from this meeting on Tuesday -- and you say
you've had these meetings all the time -- that the tone was different?
Because certainly what we're hearing from this group of moderate
Republicans seems far more serious than what we've heard before, seems like
they really put it to the President in ways they hadn't before.

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm going to refer you back -- this is where I've got to
walk the tightrope. I don't want to get into specific characterizations of
any given meeting, for reasons I've cited before. You want to maintain
confidentiality. I'd refer you back to them, and say, was it cordial, was
it collegial, was it honest, was it constructive.

Q Well, the President said it was cordial, I believe. But was there a
different tone? That's what we're hearing. We're hearing from them that it
was, that it was a real change in that meeting.

MR. SNOW: Again, this is why -- I think this may be different from what
people had expressed themselves before the President. The President -- we
have a lot of very honest sessions. This is not a sea change, it's not
unlike anything we'd ever seen. The fact is, we get groups in -- Democrats
and Republicans, insiders, outsiders -- you've been through this before --
who express all sorts of views to the President. The President is
accustomed to hearing people being critical, also trying to be
constructive. And I think you get both of them.

So, again, I want to avoid -- but, tonally, no, this was not something
where -- people are being honest, but they are also being respectful. So I
don't think --

Q Is there increasing frustration among Republicans, that you sense?

MR. SNOW: I think -- look, frustration is something that everybody has been
sensing for a long time, including the President. So frustration is not a
new feature, at a time when you want to make sure that you're doing the
right thing and the plan is working, and they want to see data, they want
to see evidence, and we agree with them. We're doing everything we -- let
me move around because --

Q Just quickly, on Maliki. I mean, you keep talking about these benchmarks
-- or not benchmarks, but September is a progress report, and you keep
talking about David Petraeus. I mean, surely, the real brunt of this is
going to be on Maliki, and whether the political things have come together.
You say you want him to speed up. You said that before. You've used
Congress -- oh, look, we can't get things through Congress very quickly.
Then how do you think he's going to speed up if he hasn't done it yet?

MR. SNOW: Well, again --

Q We've heard this again and again. We've heard it from -- we've heard it
from the President.

MR. SNOW: I know you've heard it again and again, and -- we've had some
incremental progress, but we're not there yet: oil law, council of
ministers before the council --

Q Not even close. I mean, time is running out there.

MR. SNOW: Well, let's see what they do. I mean, it's important -- look, all
I can stress, Martha, is that I share the premise of your question, which
is, it's important to get that work done.

Q Is the political -- are those far more important at this point than
security, as a benchmark in September?

MR. SNOW: I think -- no, they're related. I think that you cannot separate
all the elements. As the President was pointing out, if you have security
you also have greater confidence for political cooperation. If you've got
an economic stake, that feeds in both the political cooperation and
security. I mean, all the pieces really are linked. You've got to address
all of them.

The political piece undoubtedly important. You cannot single it out and say
it's the most important because each and every one of these pieces really
does have important ties to all the others, and you have to be working them
all as hard and as aggressively as you can.

Q Isn't there a way that you can say in September, as you say from the
podium often, if violence -- if there's an uptick in violence, if Jim's
point comes to bear, then you can say, look, we expected an uptick in
violence because we've got all these troops there -- that you can look at
that measure in many different ways, but not the political progress?

MR. SNOW: Well, in other words, what you're saying is that the key
political benchmark is a passed piece of legislation, that's your point,
right?

Q A whole lot of stuff, yes. I mean, if we are where we are today in
September --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to -- again, let's see where we are in September.
But we want to see progress.

Jim.

Q Tony, as this meeting has been reported, some of these lawmakers did say
that if things still look bad in September, the President is going to lose
more party support. Can the President keep soldiering on here and sticking
to his own plan if he starts losing his own party's support?

MR. SNOW: You're assuming that nothing happens between now and September.
As the President also said, wait until September. The premise of the
question is nothing happens, therefore it all falls apart.

Q That's not the premise of the question -- you said that there were no --
that no consequences came up in the meeting, and apparently there was some
sort of "if, then" formulation that was presented to the President.

MR. SNOW: Again, this is -- my hands are tied in trying to get into
characterizing what people said. They're going to have to let their own --
they get to have their opportunity to characterize their comments. But I
will remind you what I said earlier: There are both sides of the coin.
There is, if nothing happens, people are going to think one way, and if you
have progress, people are going to think another way. The whole focus of
American policy is to be moving to create progress. And it has appeared in
your newspaper and others that, in fact, there have been signs of progress.
And members are also aware of this, and they want to see more.

And so what I would suggest is, rather than saying, what if, what if, what
if in September, which is a totally unanswerable question -- that is a
crystal ball question, and not being clairvoyant, I am unqualified to
answer it. However, if you do, in fact, have evolving situations that allow
you to judge the success of things, then we can talk a lot more reasonably
about this when September comes -- which, of course, is the name of a
famous rock song.

Q Is there a point when the President does become concerned with the
political ramifications for the party? As I understand it, during the
meeting there was an argument made that "our members are worried they're
going to lose their seats," and that will be bad for the war policy
overall.

MR. SNOW: What the President's main concern is, it's bad for the country if
you have a vacuum. It is, in fact, it is something that the country simply
must not permit to happen and cannot afford, which is a failure in Iraq
that would create a vacuum that would empower Iran, that would give al
Qaeda a staging ground, that would shred American credibility in the
region, that would create economic consequences --

Q Who's the cause of all that?

MR. SNOW: Well, notice again --

Q Who went into Iraq and created this chaos?

MR. SNOW: Thank you. And so, to continue -- but as Helen has pointed out,
without taking exception to any of those possible side effects, or those
possible effects, that's what the President thinks about. The President is
Commander-in-Chief, and he is President of all the American people. He
understands the political concerns of people. But as Commander-in-Chief,
his job, his solemn obligation really is one toward national security, and
that is first and foremost.

He also understands successful policy is always going to be good politics.
If you've got success, if you have things turning around, guess what's
going to happen? Public opinion will follow. And therefore, he has to do
his best -- and incidentally, it's one of the reasons why he invites people
in with widely divergent views. You've got to do that. You have got to
consider this from every angle, taking a look at as much different
information as you can so you can do it right.

Ken.

Q The Baker-Hamilton report called for a withdrawal of most troops by early
'08. Does the administration consider that setting a surrender date?

MR. SNOW: What's also interesting is the Baker-Hamilton commission has a
section in there on precipitate withdrawal --

Q And it is against that.

MR. SNOW: And it is against that, for many of the reasons I've said --

Q But it is separate from its call for the '08 withdrawal.

MR. SNOW: And the point is we -- again, I'm not going to entertain
hypotheticals, except in this way: You may recall yesterday Secretary Gates
also said that if, in fact, we get the kind of success we hope for, it is
conceivable that there will be troops moving out. You may recall that he
was talking about that. So anything that happens in terms of troop
movements is a reflection not of somebody opening up the calendar and
saying, oh, here's the day we do this, but instead, reflecting what's going
on on the ground. And the entire motivation and aim of our forces in the
field is to get us to the point where we can be moving back as a
consequence of success.

Q To follow on that quickly. There are some Republicans circulating a
letter, looking for cosponsors for legislation that would enact all 79
recommendations of that report. What would the President do with such
legislation?

MR. SNOW: We'll see it when we get it.

I'm sorry -- Helen, and then to Mark.

Q The President emphasized September and he emphasized General Petraeus'
report -- all week you moved away from September. Is it a real important
date for us to decide things?

MR. SNOW: I think what the President is saying is --

Q Does he know that we have civilian rule in this country?

MR. SNOW: Yes. Do you?

Q I do.

MR. SNOW: Okay, good.

Q I'm not waiting for Petraeus.

MR. SNOW: Well, he does understand, however, that -- oh, so you're thinking
what he's doing -- no, I'm not even going to get into that. What people
want is a detailed accounting of what's going on in Iraq. And so --

Q But you guys set the date for September, you keep --

MR. SNOW: No, I think he actually -- General Petraeus originally mentioned
that, and I don't want to try to -- he mentioned the month, and so --

Q Is it important, or not?

MR. SNOW: Look, what's important is for people to continue to take a look
-- May is important; June is important; July is important; August is
important; September is important. It's --

Q You're telling people to hold off on their opinions --

MR. SNOW: No, what I'm telling people is to keep their eyes open to the
situation as it develops.

Q Back to benchmarks, Tony. Most of the lawmakers who advocate them say
without consequences, benchmarks are meaningless, are just goals. Without
saying which consequences he might be in favor of or against, does the
President accept that there ought to be consequences?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to -- I'm not even going to bite on that.

Q You won't even say that he accepts the need for consequences?

MR. SNOW: I will leave the business of good-faith negotiating to Josh
Bolten. He's having these conversations. I don't want in any way to impede
or influence what's going on by a statement from the podium.

Q Tony, I'm just wondering, 11 Republicans come to the White House and tell
the President that they're worried about the cost of his war on the party
and on their ability to win reelection. How is that not a big deal?

MR. SNOW: What you're saying is you're surprised that the President is
having candid conversations.

Q Not at all, that's not the question I'm asking.

MR. SNOW: It is -- look, let me, again, because I am constrained by the
rules we set out not to respond to you directly --

Q But you're already in print saying this wasn't a "march to Nixon" moment.

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q So how is --

MR. SNOW: Well, I was trying to be off the record because I was called out
of bed. But, unfortunately, I wasn't completely --

Q Okay, so how -- again, but getting back to a conversation that's
unfolding --

Q Are you out of bed now? (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: I'm on the record, I'm out of bed. (Laughter.)

Q How is this not a big deal to you?

MR. SNOW: Look, it's not a big deal in the sense that it's a candid
exchange. But on the other hand, what you're asking -- for one thing,
you've making a blanket assertion that I simply cannot respond to. But you
had members of the House in, expressing themselves. That's good.

But the other thing is, if you take a look at the voting records of
Republicans across-the-board on what's going on right now, it gives you an
indication of how the debate unfolds. Do you think it's important to
provide vital funding and flexibility for the forces? The answer is yes. Do
you reject the Democratic alternatives? The answer is yes. Do you stand
with the President on supplying this? Yes. If you see progress, will you
support? Yes.

So all those things indicate to me a combination of two factors, number
one, a real desire to see success, and number two, a real desire to see
results. And so I don't see that as a big moment, it's not a watershed
moment. The President had heard real criticism before. He's heard vigorous
criticism before. It hasn't all been in the press.

Q You've got to consider the source. This isn't Maxine Waters here.

MR. SNOW: As I said, we hear it from a lot of people, Jim. It's new to you
because we don't read out all these things. So I know it seems novel that
members of Congress are coming in and giving --

Q What about the fact that they're leaking it?

Q It's also their leader saying it publicly.

Q What about the fact that they want everybody to know?

MR. SNOW: Some are talking, and some are not.

Q The President today said that some people are concerned about winning
elections, with a bit of a tone of disapproval there, getting at Jim's
question about is he concerned about the legacy of the party based on this
war?

MR. SNOW: Again, the legacy -- you can't -- as a Commander-in-Chief, you
have got to base your considerations on how to succeed. Good policy success
is good politics, that's it. Your only option is to defend the national
security. That's how he looks at it. He can't look at it any other way.
That's the way he views the issue.

Q So how does the President respond when a member of his own party says in
this meeting, my constituents want out of this war?

MR. SNOW: Again, I will not -- all I'll say is, when the President hears
anybody expressing either what their constituents think or what they think,
he listens respectfully. He will ask questions. He will try to probe what's
going on, and they'll continue to talk things through.

Q What does it tell the administration when the former head of the
Republican campaign committee goes on the air and says that in this
meeting, the sense of the meeting was people saying, my constituents are
saying they don't care if we lose this war, they just want out?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, I think -- take a look, and I've been talking about
what the polls are saying -- Americans do care, and the President does
care. Still walking that tightrope, because I'm not going to respond even
to stated quotes in the papers. It's important to realize -- the Americans
really do understand, and the President does always make it clear, it is
not a -- you don't walk away and suddenly peace breaks out. As I said the
other day, you walk away, bin Laden doesn't become a flower child. You walk
away, and as the Baker-Hamilton commission said, as the National
Intelligence Estimate said, virtually every other careful study has said,
you reap the whirlwind. So what you have to do is to make sure that as a
matter of national security, you do it right. And that's why the efforts
are on doing it right.

I suspect if you said to people, would you be happy if you -- the Baghdad
security plan, or whatever, that stuff worked, the answer would be yes. As
Helen says, who could say no to that? And so the focal point of
administration efforts is, the whole aim is to make sure that we're doing
the right thing, so that we move towards success.

Let me move around to some of the others. I'll get back to you.

Q Why are you walking the tightrope when there are so many people from your
own party, on the record, saying such strong things?

MR. SNOW: Number one, I would say -- I would quibble with the number, "so
many." I think it's five. Secondly --

Q That's half the people at the meeting.

MR. SNOW: Well, secondly, I still think -- we believe it's important --
number one, I know it's tempting to try to get people squabbling, but the
fact is, on the key issue going forward, do you support the troops, how are
you dealing with the present political circumstances, there's unity.
There's also respect.

And the point here is that we really do offer those conditions. We want
their candor, we grant confidentiality. People may speak out. I'm not going
to break the terms of the agreement, no matter how weird it may seem when
you have quotations in the paper.

Ed.

Q I'm just wondering, when you said about if you pull out of Iraq, then bin
Laden doesn't become a flower child. Do you think bin Laden is in Iraq
right now?

MR. SNOW: No. But on the other hand, as General Petraeus said, al Qaeda is
enemy number one in Iraq, and al Qaeda clearly is -- and the President --

Q The intelligence estimate said that sectarian violence is actually a
bigger threat than al Qaeda.

MR. SNOW: Well, as the President -- but the National Intelligence Estimate,
of course, is dealing with intelligence from last summer. And what you have
had -- I guess last fall. Now what you're doing is you're projecting
forward. You've had a Baghdad security plan unfolding, and as the President
pointed out today again, the benchmarks -- I know you wanted specific ones
-- but he pointed out that the kind of deaths that are consistent with
sectarian violence are down. And they've been down on a fairly consistent
trend line since the beginning of the enactment of the Baghdad security
plan.

In a time of war -- I've made this argument before -- there are going to be
times when -- you know, al Qaeda right now, as the President said, al Qaeda
is surging. You've got al Qaeda trying to do what they can to foment
sectarian violence again. They were able to light the fuse back in Samarra,
February a year ago. They want to do it again. And so they're trying to use
acts of violence to do it.

Fortunately, there has been some success in getting Sunni and Shia and
others to step back from recriminations and to get the focus back on those
who are trying to break the peace.

Q Bringing bin Laden into it, there have been a lot of security experts who
have said that focusing on Iraq pulled you away from bin Laden, they've
made that charge, and that you might actually have a better shot of
catching bin Laden and more al Qaeda leaders by not focusing so much on
Iraq now --

MR. SNOW: Well there -- this -- boy are we --

Q You just said, if you pull out of Iraq, he doesn't become a flower child
all of a sudden --

MR. SNOW: I'll revisit -- it's an old question, but I'll revisit it, it's
worth it, which is, we're doing more than one thing at a time. And there
are considerable resources deployed in Afghanistan and in other missions.
It is not an either/or situation. It is also the case that bin Laden
understands that the economic and political benefits of having a staging
ground in Iraq are considerable. Not only geopolitically does it help, it
helps in terms of access to oil, and a lot of resources that are not
available in Afghanistan --

Q But the President, himself, was talking about al Qaeda today in Iraq.
Isn't it -- you're saying if you pull out, there will be a staging ground
for al Qaeda in Iraq. Aren't you -- isn't the administration suggesting
that you have a staging ground now?

MR. SNOW: Exactly, which contradicts your earlier question about why aren't
you going after bin Laden. We're talking in circles. So I mean, the fact
is, al Qaeda has made Iraq its central staging ground. We're taking them on
there. And meanwhile, for those who say, well, why aren't you in Tora Bora
or Waziristan, I'm not going to talk about operational matters, but it's
not as if there are not -- we do not have the capability to pursue multiple
military missions.

Q Well, what do you think would shift the President's opinion on the war?
Is it just General Petraeus? Because when we talk about polls, and the
majority of the American people, you say, well we don't govern by polls.

MR. SNOW: When you say shift his opinion on the war, do you mean, what
would make him say, let's come home without victory?

Q What would lead him to that point?

MR. SNOW: I don't think the President finds it's acceptable. The President
doesn't think, I want to figure out how to get out if we lose. In fact, his
view is, I want to figure out how we return when we win. That is how you
think about it.

April.

Q Tony, this war is not popular in Britain at all. The President is losing
his number one ally. What is this administration going to do to keep
British soldiers in the southern part of Iraq? What is he going to do --

MR. SNOW: First, the British have already made commitments in terms of
their troop levels. And those are decisions for the British government. The
British government is not a subsidiary of the American government, it's a
sovereign government, and they will make their decisions.

But what's also the case is that -- you may recall -- well, let me back up.
You may recall that when the President came to power, there was some, wow,
Tony Blair can't work with George Bush, he was such good friends with Bill
Clinton. Well, in fact, they work very well together.

And as the next Prime Minister takes over, that Prime Minister will be
faced with a series of real-world facts about security that are based on
British national interest. And he will have to make the proper decisions.
And there -- you find quite often in periods of transition that there is
enormous continuity between governments, precisely because the facts
automatically lead themselves to certain policy conclusions.

But I don't want to get into the position of prejudging what the British
government is going to do. The President has mentioned that he's met Gordon
Brown who, presumptively would become the PM, but we don't, certainly, want
to be leaping to conclusions. He looks forward to working with him, and you
can't really go much further than that.

Q But this administration likes to talk about lessons learned. Is there a
lesson from what happened to Tony Blair and the Brits? They do not like the
war, and he ultimately is leaving because of that.

MR. SNOW: I think Tony Blair is one of the great and most consequential
Prime Ministers, and also longest serving Prime Ministers in the history of
the U.K.

Q Longer maybe if it weren't for the war.

MR. SNOW: I think at this point, what you do is you not only celebrate his
courage and his vision, but you also -- there's also a lesson that courage
and vision serve the national interest, and I think rather than trying to
leap to any further conclusions, you have to let a new government come --
basically, a new government come in, find its feet, and make its decisions
based on the facts.

John.

Q Thank you, Tony. Turning to the Fort Dix six, are they going to be tried
as criminals or enemy combatants?

MR. SNOW: That's not a question for me. Direct it to the U.S. Attorney.

Q All right. The other thing about them, given their arrest and their
background, is this going to in any way impact on the visa waiver policy
that the administration is --

MR. SNOW: Again, the President's visa waiver -- that is a separate debate,
obviously. The President has noted all along that when it comes to matters
of border security and visas, you take a good hard look at national
security, national security interests, and we continue to do it. What he's
also trying to do is to come up with metrics that are going to permit us to
have tamper-proof IDs, so you can know who's in the country, you can track
them. So there are a whole series of things that are embedded in this, but
-- and that debate is ongoing in the United States Senate.

Q I have a question about the phone call this morning with Mr. Putin. Did
the President and Putin discuss the Estonian situation?

MR. SNOW: I don't think so. I'm not aware of it. I was not in on the call.
I've got the points that have been read out. I don't know. It was a pretty
short conversation. My sense is based on -- what I see here is the list,
but I don't want to grant you an assurance that I can. I don't know.

Q Is the President aware of what the Russians are doing to Estonia?

MR. SNOW: The President is aware of significant developments around the
globe.

Q Tony, two questions. One, today President will celebrate the issue of
Pacific Heritage month, in East Room this afternoon. Is he going to talk
about the contributions of Asians as far as fighting in Afghanistan and
elsewhere and --

MR. SNOW: No, I think what he's going to be doing is celebrating public
service.

Q Second, can you confirm that President has spoken with the Prime Minister
of India and there's a problem as far as U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement
also, because --

MR. SNOW: No, Goyal, I read this out the other day. He did have a
conversation the other day with Prime Minister Singh. And

they talked about working forward to conclude the deal. They're both in
support of it and -- look, it's important for us, it's important for the
government of India and we're determined to make it happen.

Q Is the President going to invite the Prime Minister to the White House
sometime this year or next year?

MR. SNOW: I will not get into any sort of personal conversations of that
nature.

Q Supposedly a letter has been sent by the Foreign Relations Committee to
the Prime Minister of India, as far as this deal is concerned. If President
is aware of this letter?

MR. SNOW: He may be; I'm not. Les.

Q Tony, thank you. The President of the Catholic League for Religious and
Civil Rights said it was "reprehensible for the Reverend Al Sharpton to
say, 'As for the Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God
will defeat him anyways.'" And my question, does the President agree or
disagree that this Sharpton statement was reprehensible?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. It probably came as news to Harry Reid.

Q Wait a minute. The Christian Newswire reports that some American Indian
leaders have described Jamestown as "an invasion that led to a holocaust
and an atrocity." My question --

MR. SNOW: Right, yes, I know --

Q -- does the President intend in any way to apologize for these
allegations and to refrain from any mentioning of his and the Jamestown
founders' Christianity when he speaks there on Sunday?

MR. SNOW: No, he doesn't. Let me back up a little bit on the Sharpton sort
of bait, simply because I think -- let's be clear about what the President
does believe in, which is respect for people's religious views and
religious freedoms. So let's be clear about that -- other than trying to
jump into an argument with Al Sharpton, which we're not going to do. We
will go no further than that.

Q One more?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q No?

MR. SNOW: You gave me two.

Q He had 10, up there on the front row. He had 10.

MR. SNOW: And most of them were topical.

Q On immigration reform, it's being taken up next week in the Senate. And
the Majority Leader has said he'd really like to use the bill that was
passed last year -- with bipartisan support as the starting point. What is
the White House view of doing that?

MR. SNOW: It's kind of a placeholder, but we appreciate the fact that the
Majority Leader is working with Democrats and Republicans to try to create
an opportunity for a bipartisan bill to make its way to the floor. So there
are -- this is one of those cases where, you know, you want to talk about
the fact that both parties really are working together on working hard on
something that is not only of mutual interest, but national interest. As a
procedural matter, that's what he's really trying to do -- he's trying to
create a placeholder so that those involved can have the time to be able to
drop that other bill, and we appreciate it.

Q Thank you.

END 1:57 P.M. EDT
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070510-8.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)