Text 4607, 530 rader
Skriven 2007-05-16 23:31:00 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0705163) for Wed, 2007 May 16
====================================================

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

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary May 16, 2007

Press Briefing by Tony Snow White House Conference Center Briefing Room

˙ /news/releases/2007/05/20070516-3.wm.v.html ˙˙Press Briefings
˙˙Audio


12:22 P.M. EDT

MR. SNOW: I am at your interrogatory disposal.

Q Is the Wolfowitz saga going to play itself out today, or is it -- what do
you know about that?

MR. SNOW: I don't know -- again, we've made our position known. We know
there are meetings ongoing. But I don't have anything new.

Q And they asked for an adjournment for some discussion. Do you have any
idea what that was about?

MR. SNOW: No, I'd refer all questions back there. I don't -- I mean, we're
led to believe they are going to be meeting further today, but I don't have
anything new.

Q Senator Chuck Hagel said that Alberto Gonzales has lost the moral
authority to lead and that he should resign. What's your reaction?

MR. SNOW: We disagree, and the President supports the Attorney General.

Q But what about that idea that --

MR. SNOW: He also does not --

Q -- that the actions laid out in the testimony seemed to undermine the
authority of the Acting Attorney General?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, Jim Comey gave his side of what transpired that day.
The President still has full confidence in Alberto Gonzales.

Q Was the President given any official notice in advance that Prince Harry
would not be going to serve with his unit in Iraq? Was there any
consultation involved?

MR. SNOW: I sincerely doubt it. It's the first I've heard, and believe it
or not, it didn't occur to us. But I'll get back to you if it did, but my
guess is, no.

Q There was a reference to the fact that there are some missing U.S.
soldiers and --

MR. SNOW: I know, and again, that's -- but the British military make their
decisions.

Q Tony, last night, Senator McCain, at the debate, said that Congress is
very close on immigration. That's the word up on the Hill today. What's the
feeling here at the White House?

MR. SNOW: Again, as I said this morning, we're very encouraged by the tone
of the talks, and as I've said the last few days, what you've had are
people working very hard on nuts and bolts, trying to pull together
comprehensive immigration reform, and we're certainly happy to hear that
and we look forward to seeing what the Senate has to produce.

Q Tony, two questions. Several churches or church groups have announced
various plans for sanctuaries where illegal aliens would be sheltered. What
message does the White House believe it sends to the nation if a church is
in actual defiance of federal law?

MR. SNOW: No comment on that, Les. Next question.

Q What is the President's reaction to the report that Congress has an even
lower poll rating than he does, and to Governor Huckabee's notation that
Congress spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop?

MR. SNOW: Pretty good line. The President -- look, the President has made
it clear that his job is to lead the country and he continues to do that.

Q Tony, I noticed on one of your press releases today about Lieutenant
General Lute that there were several quotes -- you may have done this in
the past, but there were quotes from General Petraeus saying how great he
is, and Ambassador Crocker. Are these things -- you have your press office
solicit quotes from people, particularly someone in uniform, to make
positive comments about people you know?

MR. SNOW: No, I don't know how the quotes came about. We didn't do it out
of the White House press office. But on the other hand --

Q It appears they -- it didn't have any source other than he said it
yesterday.

MR. SNOW: Yes, well, look, I think it's -- on the question, does General
Petraeus think he's a good and worthy choice, the answer is, yes.

Q And do you think it's appropriate to just send out -- or did they call
him up, or how did they solicit these quotes?

MR. SNOW: I don't know, Martha, but it's clearly a burning issue so we'll
look into it for you.

Q Following up on Lute, if he was skeptical about the President's surge
plan, do you know what changed his mind and what can he do different that
Defense and State haven't been both trying to do in terms of troops on the
ground and reconstruction and changing --

MR. SNOW: Let's see -- let's walk through a number of those. Number one, a
lot of the conversation about surge goes back to comments that were made in
2005, when we had a very different situation on the ground in Iraq. We had
just been through an extraordinary year where the Iraqi people had, with
great courage, appeared at the polls three different times to consider and
ratify a constitution, and to -- had the first elected government in that
nation's history.

And there was an expectation early into 2006 that, in fact, things were
going very well and it would be possible for the United States to begin
withdrawing troops. Then, in the period between February and June, when the
government finally got in place, you had the attack on the Golden Mosque in
Samarra, you had the flaring up of sectarian violence, and an entirely new
set of facts on the ground, which led, first, to a Baghdad security plan
that did not work -- Operation Together Forward -- followed by a
comprehensive review by the administration about how to make all aspects of
the program work.

And General Lute not only supports the way forward, but he also thinks that
there is -- that we're making progress. And now it is his job to work in a
coordinating role to try to look at everything that's going on under the
auspices of the executive branch. Now, you mentioned State and Defense,
when in fact, the portfolio is a lot broader. It includes Departments of
Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, and others. You have people from many, many
departments and agencies within the federal government that work on
different aspects of this.

And the civil justice piece where you're trying to create rule of law and
help people establish constitutions and legal codes, there are going to be
Justice Department helpers. Where you have people working on agricultural
programs, you're going to have agricultural extension agents. There are
different areas --

Q They've been there all along.

MR. SNOW: But you're asking how is this "different," and what you have now
is somebody who is going to be able to coordinate with folks on the ground.
Keep in mind also that he has experience both in Central Command and with
the Joint Chiefs in operations, and therefore, has a very keen sense of
precisely how operations unfold, and therefore, I think has a very
practical base of knowledge about how to get things done, and also where
the bottlenecks are, including information.

How many times have people been in the field where somebody says, here is a
problem we have, I write notes and it never gets up to the top? Well, part
of his job is to cut through that, and to make sure that people in the
field are getting the kind of support and resources they need to get the
job done.

So it's a much broader job in the sense that, again, you have a lot of
different federal departments and agencies involved in the business, not
merely of providing security, but also reconstruction and assistance to the
Iraqi people and the Iraqi government. And his job is not only to help
coordinate those activities, but also stay in touch to make sure if they
have changing needs, as they will, and changing requirements, he's able to
stay on top of that so that we can continue to be

-- we can be as effective as possible.

Ken.

Q On the war funding bill, Senator Levin this morning pulled down his
proposal, which would have had timetables, but with presidential waiver.
Did the White House oppose that proposal?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q Why?

MR. SNOW: Because we made it pretty clear that we don't think timetables
are the way to go. What's interesting, Ken, is the Senate also today voted
on Senator Feingold's proposal, which was straight-out withdrawal. And they
voted against it by a margin of 67-29. It is pretty clear that the Senate
decided that it was not going to go ahead and vote on withdrawal with
timetables, has voted against withdrawal, and I think that sends a pretty
powerful message to those who are continuing to conduct negotiations about
the sense of the American people and the Senate, which is the idea of
withdrawal is not -- simply withdrawing on a timetable is not something
that the American people, or, for that matter, Democrats and Republicans in
the Senate support.

Furthermore, our allies think it's a terrible idea, the Iraqis think it's a
terrible idea. And the long-term consequence -- it's worth emphasizing over
and over and over again -- simply withdrawing creates a vacuum that would
lead to catastrophic consequences in terms of absolutely unacceptable
bloodshed, horrific casualties. That's what the National Intelligence
Estimate said; it's what Baker-Hamilton said. And, again -- call your
favorite democratic expert -- they agree that if you create that kind of a
vacuum, you're going to have bloodshed.

In addition, if you create a power vacuum that says that the United States
is no longer going to be a credible partner in the region, all of those
people we now depend upon for security assistance, cooperation,
intelligence-sharing and other things, they're going to cut side deals with
somebody else. Whether it's the A.Q. Khan network or whether it's Iran, the
fact is that they're going to be looking for people who are going to stay
in the region and stay engaged.

We need to send the message that we are engaged and that the goal here is
success in Iraq. Therefore, you start thinking not merely about -- and the
more you start contemplating the consequences, the more compelling it is
that we really do have to send the right message. And we're pleased that
the Senate did that today.

Q But where is the room for agreement between the President and Congress
with that message and the predominant Democratic message of "we've going to
change the direction of this war"?

MR. SNOW: Well, the President actually has been changing the direction of
the war for quite some time. You take a look at what has been going on, and
we take a constant look at the facts on the ground. The most important
thing to do is when you make changes, make sure they're based on the
realities on the ground. When General Petraeus comes in, listen to what he
has to say. It will be useful to figure out what the facts are.

When people are coming in to brief you, and they want to let you know
what's going on, it's important to ascertain the facts, and then also,
since you support the military, and everybody says they do, give them the
funding and flexibility they need to respond to changing facts, whether it
be new tactics employed by al Qaeda, new efforts among insurgents -- all of
those things -- you have to have the ability to respond just like that so
that you save lives and also you discourage bad behavior.

Mark.

Q So is negotiation continuing on funding with benchmarks, is that the
goal? And has any progress been made toward that?

MR. SNOW: Again, we are not going to categorize any of the particulars, but
negotiations are ongoing and they do continue.

Q On foreign policy in Iraq, you talked this morning about the challenge of
getting the neighbors to engage and support stabilization. And you said
that despite these countries being Sunni-dominated and trying to get them
to support a Shia-led government in Iraq, they all agree that Iran is the
major threat. The problem with that, though, is that Iran is a Shia
government, and so they're afraid --

MR. SNOW: But, again --

Q -- they're afraid of the Maliki government being a proxy for Iran. How
much of a problem is --

MR. SNOW: Well, Prime Minister Maliki has made it clear that he is a proxy
for the Iraqi people, not for another government, including the Iranians.
The second thing is, take a look at what happened at Sharm el Sheikh, and
you had Sunni governments making commitments to the total I think of --
well, I don't want to recite a figure off the top of my head, but it was a
significant financial commitment to that government in Iraq. Yes, you have
-- Prime Minister Maliki is a Shia, but you also have Sunni and Kurdish
elements within the council of presidents, and you have all of those groups
represented in the parliament, as well as within significant political
blocks in the parliament. They're also all represented within the cabinet.

So I would push back a little bit against the narrative by simply directing
you to take a look at what happened at Sharm el Sheikh, where, in fact,
Sunni governments did step up in support of the government of Iraq. And we
welcome that and we look at that as a basis for further progress.

Q Back on Lute. Why did it take so long, now into the fifth year of the
war, to come up with somebody of his seniority and stature?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. I think what happened is, again, as you're taking a
review, it became clear to us that this -- as you develop -- as you move
into a new phase of the war -- keep in mind, we are still in the process of
deploying people in this new way forward, as the President called it, and
therefore, it seems proper at a time like this also to task somebody with
the job of keeping an eye on all the different players who are involved in
it.

What we do have is a different set of policies governing what's going on in
Iraq. It is something that is government-wide in its scope, and therefore,
it is appropriate to have somebody coming in, in a new position, in support
of a new philosophy and a new way forward in Iraq, not only to monitor
progress, but to do everything possible to assist those on the ground to
help them succeed.

Q So you think this is a new need and you did not need someone to do this
for the previous four years?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, I'm not going to try -- I don't know. I don't have
an answer for you. I'm telling you that's what he's here to do now.

Q After Prime Minister Blair leaves office, does President Bush believe
that the United Kingdom contribution and involvement in Iraq will remain
constant? Would he advise them not to reduce their presence in Iraq?

MR. SNOW: Right now, what -- I'm not going to speculate on what happens.
Tony Blair still has -- is going to remain an active Prime Minister, and
what is going to be discussed between the President and Prime Minister are
things before them right now. Certainly, the war on terror is going to be
the central issue. In addition, they're going to be talking about the G8;
they'll be talking about things like Darfur and the Middle East -- again,
the issues that they constantly converse about. So what you're having
tonight is a working dinner with the President and the Prime Minister.

As far as trying to do speculation about what lies ahead, I'm not going to
do it. I will point out something I mentioned yesterday, is that Gordon
Brown, one of the first things he did -- one thing he did recently is he
made a point of coming here and talking to American national security
officials, which is -- again, a British Prime Minister is going to do what
he or she thinks is necessary and appropriate for defending British
interests. And it is appropriate to let them make those judgements. I'm not
going to do any speculations.

Q Well, if the United States forces are involved in a surge, would it
matter whether the U.K. contingent decreased in size?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, the British have already discussed what they've been
doing down south, which is that they are retooling the way in which they do
it -- in which they have their force structure. But on the other hand,
there is still a firm commitment to maintain their presence there.

Q Tony, two questions. I know what you've been saying about Wolfowitz in
the past, but it's gotten more serious overnight. Is the administration
concerned at all that the World Bank loses further prestige, that it might
lose money and influence while this continues to go on?

MR. SNOW: Again, what we've talked about is we don't think this personnel
matter is a firing offense. We also think it's important that the World
Bank build -- maintain its integrity as an institution, and they're going
to have to have talks about how to achieve that going forward.

Q I have another question.

MR. SNOW: All right, yes.

Q Well, first, there's a follow-up. Don't you think that it has any effect
at all on the World Bank?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not going to -- I really don't -- I don't even know
how to answer it, because it's a notional question that is not something
where I can think of a single metric that would be useful that will allow
me to answer that question in a manner that I could defend.

Q I have another one. In view of your --

MR. SNOW: Okay, well, let's hold it at three. Three will be your - three is
your quota.

Q In view of your stunning success the other night at the battle of the
bands --

MR. SNOW: Oh my goodness.

Q -- did you get a record contract? (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: No, I did not. I got a lot of advice to keep my day job.
(Laughter.)

Q Also on Wolfowitz, there are international reports that the U.S. was
asking for more time to deliberate at the World Bank.

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not commenting on anything going on in terms of
deliberations over at the World Bank. I'd have you call them.

Q Also, will the President be rallying for support with the U.K. when he
speaks with Tony Blair?

MR. SNOW: Again, I've already laid out what I think is likely to be the
topics of conversation. But I don't know -- the fact -- whenever you sit in
on a meeting with those two guys, they talk about what's top of mind for
them. And I'm not going to prejudge because they tend to be very
wide-ranging conversations, free-wheeling, interesting. Unfortunately, none
of the rest of us are going to be in the room tonight, so they're just
going to have to have the interesting time all by themselves, but I'm sure
they'll do just fine.

Paula.

Q You don't expect global warming to come up? I mean, that's an issue --

MR. SNOW: It very well may. It very well may. The President -- look, a
couple of things on global warming. Number one, let's make it clear about
the U.S. commitment to climate change, which is unparalleled in the world
in terms of financial resources, in terms of support for science, in terms
of advocacy, in support for new technologies. And the President has made it
clear that his view on this is, global warming exists; it has human
contributions. And what we need to do is to figure a way forward that is
going to enable economies around the world to grow, and at the same time,
to pursue the laudable and necessary goals of cleaner air and a cleaner
environment.

Therefore, you have the 20-in-10 program; therefore, you have the program
to reduce greenhouse gas intensity by 2.5 percent -- actually, by
considerably more. We cut it by 2.5 percent in 2005 and we have a much
better track record, frankly, than anybody else in the rest of the world.
Furthermore, it's clear that Kyoto, as originally written, was not
something that was economically sustainable. Very few countries actually
met its goals.

So the question is how do you move forward toward these shared goals of
reducing greenhouse emissions, creating the basis for widespread global
prosperity, including in the developing world? And that means looking for
technology -- clean coal, nuclear, biofuels and that sort of thing. So my
guess is that they are going to have some conversations about it, but I
can't pre-judge what they're going to be.

Q Tony, on the newly created Lute position, is the President adding a new
layer of bureaucracy in an attempt to cut through the bureaucracy?

MR. SNOW: That's an interesting way of putting it. What he's doing, I
think, is adding -- what he's doing is he's just creating an action officer
who can actually deal with the people involved on the ground, to make sure
that you've got the proper kind of information flow, you're getting the
inputs you need to make the proper judgments about what's working and
what's not -- if something is not working, you adjust, and if people need
additional assistance in order to get their mission done properly, you try
to provide it.

Q Tony, to coordinate and facilitate is great, but doesn't he also need
some kind of power to jerk chains, light fires, to actually get things done
among competing and sometimes jealous agency turf battles? Will the General
be given any special powers? Or what will the administration do to
facilitate his authority?

MR. SNOW: I think when you have somebody calling who is an Assistant to the
President, dealing directly on -- first, let me step back. The members of
the President's Cabinet are committed to the success of these things. Those
certainly can serve as points of contact; they are the ones who are going
to be responsible for making sure that their departments and agencies
function properly. He's going to have the ability to communicate with them.
And at the same time, you have to be respectful of chains of command and
responsibility.

So I am not -- although there sometimes are turf wars and jealousies and
that sort of thing anyplace in government, the real goal here is to
understand that the people at the top all have the same not only goal, but
responsibility, which is to figure out how to make these programs work, and
he's going to be there to assist them.

Q Did the President watch the television thing with the Republicans last
night?

MR. SNOW: I'm almost certain he did not, but I don't know.

Q This is the second time -- isn't he interested in Republican gatherings?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q He is. But why -- this is the second time in a row. A lot of other people
watched it. Why didn't the President?

MR. SNOW: Do you watch every episode of "American Idol"? (Laughter.)

Q No, I do not. I never watch it. That's television, the junior electronic
venue. (Laughter.)

Q This morning you said there were a lot of conversations going on
regarding Wolfowitz.

MR. SNOW: Regarding what?

Q Wolfowitz. Are administration officials involved in those negotiations?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm just -- you're going to have to -- look, let me put it
this way -- we do have a representative on the board of governors, it is
the Treasury Secretary. But beyond that, I'm not going to get into anything
that may be transpiring.

Q Are you denying, then, that the administration is negotiating some kind
of a deal --

MR. SNOW: I'm not discussing it, yea or nay. What I'm saying is, number
one, we support Paul Wolfowitz; and, number two, the issue of the day,
which has to do with personnel, it is -- he's said he's made mistakes, but
on the other hand, he, in good faith, made offers to try to recuse himself.
He got what the World Bank itself admits is confusing guidance from people
running the ethics, and therefore it is certainly a mistake, but it is not
a firing offense. And we stay by that. We also stand by our support of Paul
as the World Bank President.

Q If he wanted to resign would you --

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not -- the moment you start entertaining that, that
becomes the headline, and I'm not going to --

Q What I'm saying is, do you think that your argument that those issues
should be separated, the conflict of interest question and Wolfowitz's
overall leadership of the Bank should be separated -- do you believe that
that argument is gaining ground on the board of directors?

MR. SNOW: Again, I don't know. I'm not sitting in on that, and, frankly,
I'm not -- as people have pointed out, there are meetings ongoing today,
and I'm not inside the room and I'm not keeping close enough tabs to know
precisely what people are talking about or where they stand on it.

Q On Falwell, I don't know if this was asked at all, but anybody from the
White House going to go to the funeral when it's announced?

MR. SNOW: I don't know.

Q Just one more thing. I think your original quote about Wolfowitz was, "We
don't think it's a firing offense, but think that the Bank should maintain
its integrity."

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q If there's some problem between those two, how do you resolve the Bank
maintaining its integrity if the Bank --

MR. SNOW: Well, what I was really talking about as its integrity, is its
ability to serve as a vehicle for helping provide prosperity for poor and
developing nations. That is the mission of the World Bank. And when I talk
about the integrity, I'm really talking about the integrity and
effectiveness of the mission. Again, this is a case where we do not think
that what is being discussed rises to the level of being a firing offense,
nor should it be something that compromises the Bank's ability to do its
central mission.

Q Thank you.

MR. SNOW: Thanks.

END 12:45 P.M. EDT
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070516-3.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)