NSC Briefing for Foreign Media

3:04 P.M. (EDT)

Real Audio of Briefing 

Copyright (c)2002 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045, USA.   For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202) 824-0520.

       MODERATOR: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's my special pleasure today to welcome in the audience some of our colleagues who work in American embassy information sections abroad, as well as our usual friends. And it gives me, again, pleasure to welcome back to our podium Mr. Sean McCormack, the spokesman for the NSC.

       As usual -- (to Mr. McCormack) -- Will you open up with a statement?

       MR. MCCORMACK: (Off mike.)

       MODERATOR: No. He'll take your questions. Wait for the mike. Introduce yourself by name and organization, please. Thank you.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Actually, I did need one moment to welcome all of our FSN colleagues here to Washington. I'm a Foreign Service officer. I've had tours overseas in Turkey and Algeria. And just let me say that we couldn't do our jobs without you. So we very much -- I very much appreciate the work of all the FSNs that I've worked with, and I know all of my colleagues do as well.

       I'm happy to take your questions now.

       MODERATOR: You had your hand up first.

       Q (Name inaudible) -- the Daily Times, Lahore, Pakistan. I'll ask you the question which I expect you'll expect me to ask. What is the situation, as we speak, vis-a-vis -- in the sub-continent? Do things look more secure and less dangerous than they did a few days ago? Thank you.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think that in terms of the situation, it's been well reported, and I'm sure your newspaper has covered it quite a bit. I really don't want to get into doing kind of a daily reading of what the temperature in the region is.

       What we're focused on -- we, the U.S., along with our partners in the international community are focused on, is working with both sides; working with the Indian and Pakistani governments to try to de- escalate the situation; work with each side and try to arrive at solutions to issues that will allow us to try to de-escalate the situation. It's very important. It's a very serious situation. I think that any time you have two countries with a history of periodic animosity between the two of them, with significant armies, as well as the types of weapons that they have, it's a serious situation. And the first step that we're working on is to try to de-escalate the situation.

       The secretary -- Deputy Secretary Armitage will be leaving tomorrow to go to the region. He'll be visiting New Delhi and Islamabad. He'll be followed on quite closely by Secretary Rumsfeld, who will be leaving, I believe, tomorrow. And he'll be making stops in Europe, as well as other places in the region, and he will also visit India and Pakistan. And the focus of their discussions will be, again, facilitating communication between the two sides, ensuring that there are no misperceptions, miscalculations, misunderstandings between the two sides; work on ways to de-escalate the situation.

       It's extremely important that both sides think very carefully about the situation as it exists and work on a solution to resolve this current situation.

       MODERATOR: Right here. From India.

       Q Parasuram with the Press Trust of India. (Inaudible) -- that the first -- very first step that has to be taken is to stop the Line of -- the infiltration across the Line of Control, and Secretary of State Colin Powell -- (inaudible) -- permanently. And in fact this has been promised from January. It's a long time since January 15th, and it has not taken place. Do you have any means of ensuring or at least watching and observing that what you want done is being done?

       And secondly, there's a gift for you. It's a poem by the prime minister of India, Mr. Vajpayee, on the dangers of a nuclear war, and you will find it useful.

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'll -- if you don't mind, I'll read this after the briefing.

       Q (Off mike) -- read it loud. (Laughs.)

       MR. MCCORMACK: (Chuckles.)

       As you pointed out, the very important issue to resolve are the alleged incursions over the Line of Control. President Musharraf has said and has pledged that Pakistani territory will not be used for terrorist acts. He has pledged to take steps to ensure that incursions do not happen and that Pakistani territory is not used for terrorist acts or used to originate terrorist acts.

       In terms of verifying that incursions have stopped, we'll certainly work with the Pakistani government and the Indian government to determine when and how these -- to determine that these incursions have in fact stopped, which, as you pointed out, is very important. But it's also important that if there are steps taken on the Pakistani side to de-escalate the situation, that those steps be reciprocated on the Indian side. And as I pointed out in my previous answer, that's what we're working very closely with the parties right now on.

       Q Giampiero Gramaglia, Italian News Agency ANSA. Could you define the differences in the mission of Mr. Armitage and Mr. Rumsfeld? And why did the president choose to send two different envoys so close one to the other?

       MR. MCCORMACK: First, let me back up and make one point that this is entirely a diplomatic effort. And Secretary Powell has the lead in working with the Indian and Pakistani governments on ways to de-escalate the situation. And he has decided to send his deputy, Deputy Secretary Armitage, to the region for that purpose. And in our efforts to work towards the goal of de-escalating the situation, to resolving some of the underlying issues between India and Pakistan, Secretary Rumsfeld will also be travelling to the region. He was going to be -- he was on a pre-scheduled trip. He was going to be taking a pre-scheduled trip to Europe and there was also a possibility of other travel as well. And the president and Secretary Powell wanted to use every available resource, diplomatic resource, that we had available in our efforts. And the president, as a result, has asked Secretary Rumsfeld to also visit with leaders in India and Pakistan. So, this is really part of our overall diplomatic approach to trying to resolve the situation. And really, the goals of both of these missions are the same, and that is, as you've heard me repeat very often, to de-escalate the situation and to try to resolve some of the underlying issues to ensure that there is greater transparency and that there is no opportunity for miscalculations or miscommunications between the two sides.

       Q This is -- (name inaudible), Turkey's NTV television. Briefly, a different subject. Are you concerned over Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit's deteriorating health? Has the president been in touch with him recently? And do you think his health, the prime minister's health situation, it hurts Turkey's stability? Thank you.

       MR. MCCORMACK: I don't recall the last time President Bush spoke with Prime Minister Ecevit. Certainly, Turkey is a valued friend and ally, close NATO ally. They're making important contributions to the war against terrorism in terms of the cooperation on the diplomatic front. They also have taken up the lead on the international security assistance force -- international force in Afghanistan. Those are all very important areas of cooperation for us. We certainly wish all the best to Prime Minister Ecevit, and look forward to working with him in the future. But I don't have any further comment beyond that.

       Q (Name and affiliation inaudible) -- Azerbaijan. I have a question on another conflict, Azerbaijan-Armenia. Just today the reports came from the front-line in the region that an Azeri civilian was shot dead with seven bullets while fishing from the Armenian side in the front-line. And the Ministry of Defense of Azerbaijan has confirmed this information. The bellicose statements have been heard from both sides of the conflict recently more often, though both presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan committed themselves to the peaceful resolution.

       My question is, does the United States, as one of the mediators of the negotiations, see the danger of violence escalation today in the conflict, and if yes, what are the measures taken by you? Thank you?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'm afraid my answer is going to be a lot shorter than the question. I'm going to have to -- I'm going to have to leave a response to that to my State Department colleagues. I haven't heard about this report. I know that certainly the State Department is participating in negotiations between the two sides, but I don't really have a status report for you.

       MODERATOR: In the back.

       Q I'm Choi (sp) from Korean Broadcasting System. Many people are wondering why U.S. delegation's visit to Pyongyang is delayed so long. And today, Washington Post reported that North Koreans asked the Bush administration for a delay in early May, saying they needed more time to get organized. Is it true? And is it one of the reasons of the -- for the delay?

       MR. MCCORMACK: A couple of things. I guess, one, I would -- this idea of getting organized, I would take issue with that characterization inasmuch as that implies that we are not organized with regard to our policy towards North Korea and talks towards North Korea. Certainly we laid out very clearly, after a long policy review, the issue areas that we want to discuss with North Korea; we laid those out last year, as a matter of fact, and we were waiting for a response from the North Korean side.

       In terms of delay, there was never a set date that we were going to have these discussions. We laid out the possibility of having discussions, as well as the desire of having discussions, with the North Korean side, and it was just in late April that we received a response back from North Korea indicating their willingness to talk.

       And so we've begun working with regard to the modalities -- you know, the timing and other details for the discussion. We are -- you know, we're focusing on those preparations. Another thing that we're also doing in advance of these discussion with North Korea is, we're consulting very closely with Japanese and South Korean allies. And as a matter of fact, we're going to have some trilateral discussions in the so-called TCOG. Those will take place later this month.

       Q Hi. Wei Jing (sp), Phoenix TV of Hong Kong.

       Back to India-Pakistan: The Chinese president is going to meet separately with the two leaders. What role can China play in this situation? Secondly, the Pakistanis say this is a Kashmir problem, and India is saying this is a terrorism problem. What's the United States' take on this?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Certainly, we've been working very closely with the international community to help Pakistan and India resolve the issues that are between them. And you properly point out that there are long-standing underlying issues that have led to disputes concerning Kashmir. The Pakistani side has, as you mentioned -- have focused on the issue and the status of Kashmir, and the Indian side is talking about the incursions and the terrorism.

       What we need to do is address this issue of terrorism, first of all -- the incursions need to end. President Bush has pointed that out. We need to de-escalate the situation. And at a certain point, the two sides, India and Pakistan, need to address the underlying issues which have led in large part to the current situation. And in 1972, both India and Pakistan agreed that this was an issue to be worked out between India and Pakistan. Certainly, we and the international community want to play a role in trying to help both sides find a way out of the situation in which they find themselves. And President Putin has offered to meet both in the trilateral as well as in bilateral sessions with each of -- you know, the leaders of India and Pakistan. And certainly, any participation from the international community in facilitating dialogue and trying to resolve the current situation between the two is welcome.

       Q Just to follow up: The U.S. will not be a mediator in this whole thing?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I think this is -- again, I've tried to describe our role, you know, at the moment. And that is to facilitate a solution to the current situation -- the immediate situation, which has led to the tensions and the buildup of troops along both of those borders. But again, this is a way to help the two sides ensure that there are no misunderstandings between the two exactly, have a complete and thorough understanding of the situation and what each side is doing and then work with each side so that they can take steps to de-escalate the situation.

       MODERATOR: Andre.

       Q Andre Citafan (ph). To ask a question on a much lighter subject: Does the president follow the World Soccer Cup -- (laughs) -- in any way? And what are his hopes for the outcome aside from the American participation?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I haven't asked him whether or not he's watching the World Cup, but I feel safe in saying that he's rooting for the American team -- (laughter) -- and rooting for them to do very well and make it all the way through to the finals, which I think we -- (laughter) -- don't laugh so hard! (Laughter.)

       There must be some Argentinians and Frenchmen.

       MODERATOR: Over here.

       Q (Name inaudible) -- from Radio Romania. In his speech on Saturday, President Bush said we have to -- we must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his path, and confront the worst threats before they emerge. Will it mean that the United States are prepared to strike first? And if yes, will the United States cooperate with their allies? Will the United States ask for the agreement of the Security Council?

       MR. MCCORMACK: There are a lot of -- there's a lot in that question. On the issue of -- actually, I'm glad you brought up the president's speech at West Point. It was actually an important indication of the -- a new framework for a national security strategy that the U.S. will have, and it does start to lay out some of the foundations for that.

       I think let me back up one step and kind of take a look at the speech as a whole. There's a lot in the speech and I urge you all to read it if you didn't hear it on Saturday. The way to think about -- to think about the speech is, you know, essentially three -- with three basic -- three basic pillars; and that is, talking about -- you know, defending, defending the United States and its friends and allies. And the portion of the speech that you're referring to is about preemption, talking about preemption. It falls under that -- under that kind of general part of the strategy.

       The second part is extending the values that the president talked about, the respect for the individual, the principles of the free market, you know, essentially finding ways to exploit the potential of each individual, you know, based on a set of values and -- values of freedom. And the last part of the speech really talked about protecting the peace, and that is, protecting the peace through cooperation, not confrontation. So you have to -- you have to really kind of take these three parts of the speech together and look at them as a whole.

       I think the president -- you know, I'm not going to try to improve upon the president's words in terms of talking about preemption. I guess the only thing I would say is that there are certainly cases -- and I would emphasizes cases -- where the best defense is a good offense, and that you cannot wait for evil to gather and be ready to strike you; there are -- there may be times in which you have to strike first in order to preempt any sort of -- preempt an act of terrorism against the United States or its friends and allies.

       And this is -- and why is this relevant to the world that we live in now? And I think the president talked about that in terms of it's a different type of threat. First of all, it's a different type of world that we live in now, and he talked about that. It's the first opportunity since the rise of the nation state that we have great powers that are coalescing around a set of -- a set of basic principles, and that we are going to work together with the great powers to get these great-power relationships right in order to bring peace and stability to the international system.

       So I guess that's kind a long-winded, long way -- -winded way of answering your question, I hope.

       MODERATOR: Follow-up?

       Q I did ask you that because it seems that during President Bush's European tour there were some disagreements between the United States and the European allies about preemptive strikes on Iraq, for an example.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, yeah, I know a lot of -- you know, I talked to a lot of people about the president's speech on Saturday, and I know that there were a lot of people who wanted to apply the case of Iraq directly to that speech. So you should really view that speech as an overall doctrinal statement. It is not -- it was not necessarily an -- the passages in the speech were not necessarily directed at any one country in particular, but it's more -- it was intended more as a statement -- a doctrinal statement and of laying of foundations of our overall security strategy framework.

       As for Iraq, I think we've -- you know, we've talked about Iraq quite a bit. Nothing has changed since the president's trip to Iraq. He doesn't have any plans on his desk. He has none proposed to him with respect to -- military plans proposed to him with respect to Iraq.

       But I think that certainly our European friends and allies understand the true nature of this regime that is in Baghdad. It's a regime that's gassed its own people. It's a threat to its own people. It's a threat to its neighbors. It's a threat to the people of Europe as well. It's pursuing development of weapons of mass destruction.

       So what we have said is that we will deal with the regime in Baghdad in the manner and at the hour of our choosing. Certainly we'll -- we are -- have been, are and will continue to consult very closely with our European friends and allies, as well as our friends and allies around the world, concerning Iraq.

       MODERATOR: Here.

       Q Right here?

       MODERATOR: In the middle.

       Q Hi. Hanan El-Badry, Egyptian Television and Rose al-Yussef magazine, Egypt. As you know, President Mubarak will be here in a couple of days, and also Mr. Tenet and Mr. Burns will be back. Are you -- is the American administration still debating how they will go for an effective plan for the peace process, or you would wait also till President Mubarak comes and then it will be kind of putting touch-up or final touch for your plan? This is the first.

       MR. MCCORMACK: First? Okay. This is like being back at the White House with all these follow-up questions!

       As you pointed out, Secretary Burns and Director Tenet are traveling in the region. They're consulting with our close friends and allies in the region in the context of the framework the president outlined in his April 4th speech. And they're going to be coming back to the U.S. soon. They're going to report back to the president. They're going to talk to the president and the president's going to talk to his foreign policy, national security team about ways that we can move forward, charting a way forward. That's a multi-part process. It's been going on for some time.

       The president has met with a number of important leaders from the region, starting, I think, most recently with his -- we can trace it back to his meeting with Crown Prince Abdullah down at Crawford; met with King Abdullah of Jordan, King Mohammed of Morocco. And meeting with President Mubarak is part of that consultative process about charting a way forward, and that's something we're working very hard on, both within the U.S. government, and in talking with our friends and allies in the region. And I know the president looks forward very much to welcoming President Mubarak and his wife to Camp David. They look forward to spending some personal time with them, as well as time talking about these very important issues that face us today.

       Q (Off mike) -- we are close by announcing a kind of new initiative or new step to go ahead and let's go for the peace process as it is, for everything, not only for the security (file ?) as you always say?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. You know, I don't think that I really want to get into a process of putting a time line on when things may begin. This is -- what should drive this is not necessarily a specific hard deadline that, you know, I, from the podium, arbitrarily set, but it should come out of the -- derive from the results of our consultations both within the government and with our friends and allies in the region. Now, we're working very hard on that. I think that certainly we, since April 4th, when the president laid out his framework, his vision for the Middle East, we've made progress and we're going to continue working very hard on that. And certainly, when we have something to lay out for you in public, we will come back here and talk to you guys.

       Q Lubra Kasavic (ph), Daily Nalusti (ph), Belgrade.

       A question on Yugoslavia: How do you see the situation in Yugoslavia, given the latest movements towards agreement between Serbia and Montenegro and also the time some calls from Kosovo leaders on independence? And secondly, how would you characterize overall relations between United States and Yugoslavia at this point?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'm afraid on this one I'm going to have to defer to my State Department colleagues. I promise next time I come back here I'll have a better readout for you.

       Q Hassam Azad (ph) -- (inaudible).

       Is there any change of the U.S. position on the ESDP? Secondly, what is U.S. expecation on Cyprus issue, especially -- (inaudible) -- on the issue?

       MR. MCCORMACK: On the second, I don't have an update for you. But with regard to the ESDP, I can say that the United States supports a European Security and Defense Policy within the EU in a way that is NATO friendly and compatible. And we see these efforts to strengthen NATO capabilities for combat operations as reinforcing the EU's efforts to develop deployable forces for crisis-management tasks.

       MODERATOR: In the back. We'll take two more questions.

       Q I'm Kwong Chirgo (ph) with the Korea Economic Daily.

       You told us you haven't set the date for the dialogue with North Korea. But after North Korea told the U.S. they will resume the dialogue is as (sic) late April, do you see any progress with North Korea? Do you see any kind of change that kind of they are starting exporting the weapons of mass destruction or something like that? Do you see any kind of change or any kind of progress in that?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think that what we're going to do is -- before offering any commentary in that regard is, we're going to go ahead and let the discussions take place. And right now we're -- you know, as I described to you, we're working on the modalities of those discussions with the North Koreans -- you know, a necessary step before that is talking to our Japanese and South Korean allies about those discussions with the North Koreans. So they have an understanding of the areas that we would like to discuss, and as soon as we have a date, an agreed date, time and place, kind of the who what, when and where -- we'll go ahead and make an announcement in that regard. It'll probably come out of the State Department.

       MODERATOR: Last question? Let's take two more, actually.

       Q My name is Satoru Suzuki with TV Asahi of Japan.

       Japan's chief cabinet secretary, Mr. Yasuo Fukuda, recently hinted that Japan could abandon its three non-nuclear principles of not possessing, not producing and not allowing the entry of nuclear arms into Japan.

       The Chinese, the South Koreans and other Asian neighbors have reacted very angrily to his comments. Is there any reaction from the White House?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I haven't -- I haven't seen those comments, so before I offered any reaction, I think I'd prefer to take a look at exactly what he said.

       MODERATOR: Last question.

       Q (Name inaudible) -- with RCN from Colombia. I would like to ask you, sir, do you have any date when is going to be the next meeting between President Bush and the new Colombian president, Alvaro Uribe Velez, and what we can expect about that meeting?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, as we always do with meetings and so forth, we don't -- at the moment I don't have anything to announce. As soon as -- if and when we have a meeting to announce, we'll go ahead and make that announcement from the White House.

       Okay. Thanks very much.

       MODERATOR: Thank you.

       Q Thank you.

Copyright (c)2002 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202)824-0520.