NSC Briefing for Foreign Media

Real Audio of Briefing

        MODERATOR: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Foreign Press Center. We're delighted to have with us for another briefing Sean McCormack, the spokesman from the National Security Council. And I will hand it over to Sean right away.

       Sean?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Thank you for braving the heat today, coming here. I don't have any opening statement, so why don't we go ahead and start with whatever questions you have?

       Oh, right off the bottom. Okay.

       Q Lambros Papantoniou, Elettheros Typos, Greek Daily, Athens. Mr. McCormack, according to the Insight magazine of The Washington Times dated July 22nd, officials from Skopje, FYROM -- Former Yugslav Republic of Macedonia -- provided to the National Security Council a 79-page report on al Qaeda activity in that area. The report, which was prepared -- according to the report by the minister of interior of that country, lists the names of al Qaeda fighters and outlines the roles of two units: 120 and the other, 250 individuals. I'm wondering if you're aware about this report and, number two, if you could make a comment.

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not aware of the report. I'm hearing about it for the first time here. I would say only, as a general comment, that we know that al Qaeda has a presence in many, many countries around the world. They -- despite the progress we have made in dismantling the base that al Qaeda had in Afghanistan, as President Bush has said, we've got 'em on the run. We know that there's still al Qaeda cells around the world in a variety of -- a number of different countries. And we certainly appreciate all the cooperation we're getting in the war against terrorism from any number of countries.

       And that is -- this actually brings up a very important point, and that is, probably one of the most important things that we have accomplished thus far in this war against terrorism is the coalition of intelligence sharing and information sharing that -- almost this web of intelligence and information sharing that we've established among many members of the coalition fighting terrorism. And this exchange of information is absolutely crucial -- not only to our current efforts but our future efforts.

       And it's something that we're grateful to countries around the world for participating in, and we're going to make every effort to maintain and strengthen that basic cooperation.

       Q To follow up, do you know in that specific country they submitted a report that al Qaeda activity exists? I'm talking about former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

       MR. MCCORMACK: No, I don't have any information on that.

       Q Thank you.

       Q Charlie Snyder of the Taipei Times. Last week, when the head of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, Tsai Ing-wen, was here, there were reports that the -- that America was angry at or upset with Taiwan for not informing Washington beforehand of Chen Shui-bian's remarks the previous Saturday and that Tsai Ing-wen apologized for Taiwan. Could you add anything to that? Can you confirm that?

       And the second question is, in her press conference last Friday, Tsai said that for her point, relations between Taiwan and the United States are the same as before, as strong as ever. Would you like to comment on that?

       MR. MCCORMACK: On the -- I'll take the first part of the question first. In terms of any comment with respect to the visit of the chairman of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, I'd refer you to the Taiwan economic and cultural representative office for more information about that visit. As you're aware, U.S. officials do occasionally meet with Taiwan representatives, but the -- we have a practice, as a government, of not commenting on those -- in details on those contacts.

       As for the relations between the U.S. and Taiwan, I really -- we went over this in detail, really, last week, talked quite a bit about it. I don't really have anything else to add beyond that.

       MODERATOR: This gentleman.

       Q (Off mike) -- for Radio Romania. Last Thursday the European strongly criticized Romania for having accepted to sign the agreement with the United States to protect the American citizens against the International Criminal Court. And Monday the European Union issued another statement, asking the other candidate countries not to sign such an agreement before September, before the European Union would agree within a common position. Can you comment about this?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Secretary Powell talked a little bit about this yesterday at his stakeout after a meeting with the Spanish foreign minister. I would reiterate the points that the secretary has made: that we are availing ourselves of an opportunity provided for in the Rome Statute, the so-called Article 98 agreement, that allow the countries that are non-signatories to the Rome Statute to sign bilateral agreements with Rome Statute signatories that would provide protections for those servicemen and -women of countries that have not signed the Rome Statute.

       We are working with as many countries as we can, including our friends in the European Union and around the world, to negotiate these agreements. We are pleased that we were able to conclude two agreements, with Israel and Romania, to this point.

       But it's important to understand when looking at our activities in negotiating these Article 98 agreements that this is something that we're doing to protect our servicemen and women. It's not intended to undermine the Rome Statute. As a matter of fact, these agreements were provided for specifically in the Rome Statute. So, we look forward to working with our friends around the world, including in the European Union, on negotiating these Article 98 agreements.

       Q Because at Brussels, some EU officials insinuated that by signing that agreement, Romania was in some way disloyal to the European Union, endangered its chances to -- or diminished its chances to become a member of the European Union.

       MR. MCCORMACK: It's really not for me to comment on the chances for any given country to join the EU. I can only reiterate what I said, that we are quite pleased that we were able to conclude this agreement with Romania, as well as Israel, and we look forward to working with as many countries around the globe as possible to conclude similar agreements.

       Q (Name inaudible), with Reuters. There was a newspaper report today that said that U.S. satellites had picked up a convoy of about 60 vehicles around a suspected bioweapons plant in Iraq. Can you confirm that? And also, what might that suggest? Is there any indication that there's some ramping up of activity in terms of biological weapons?

       MR. MCCORMACK: It's going to come as a great disappointment to you for you to hear those words: We don't comment on intelligence matters.

       But with respect to the issue, the larger issue of weapons of mass destruction and Iraq, we've made quite clear that this is a regime that is pursuing weapons of mass destruction. We believe that it already possesses certain weapons of mass destruction and is continuing aggressive efforts in all of those -- in all the areas, chemical, biological and nuclear. They have made a practice of hiding these -- their efforts, both in terms of the development and the storage of.

       This is nothing new. Even when weapons inspectors, U.N. weapons inspectors, were in the country, the regime in Baghdad expended a great deal of energy and focus not on complying with its U.N. mandates, but making every effort to obstruct and obfuscate.

       So, you know, again, I don't have anything particular on that report. But certainly we've talked in detail about our concerns of weapons of mass destruction development programs in Iraq.

       Q (Name inaudible). I'm with Southeast Europe New Service. Do you have any comment about yesterday's statement by President Kostunica in Belgrade? He said that Yugoslavia is not ready to accept your proposal for agreement about Article 98, ICC. I suppose it must be a very special concern, keeping in mind that more than one-half of the U.S. peacekeepers are stationed in Kosovo, which is still a part of Yugoslavia.

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not familiar with those remarks. Again, I would just reiterate that we look forward to working with as many countries as possible around the globe.

       There are certain provisions under U.N. peacekeeping mandates that are -- that do serve as actual protections for United States forces participating in U.N.-mandated peacekeeping operations. But those protections are limited only to the area of operation for those peacekeepers.

       We have wider concerns as those troops participate in other types of potential peacekeeping operations as well as other deployments around the globe.

       Q Secretary Powell said yesterday that U.S. government is engaged in a friendly discussion with allies and partners throughout the world regarding this problem. Yugoslavia is hardly a member of this group, I mean of partners or even allies, because two years ago it was your adversary. So how -- is there any plan how you are going to deal with Yugoslavia if they refuse to accept the agreement?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we're in the early --

       Q I mean, they are not pursuing any military aid at all. There are no economic relations and they are under sanctions more or less.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Sure. Well, this is -- again, we're in the very early stages of this effort. This agreement only, I think, came into force last month. So we're working hard, we're working with dispatch, and with as many countries as we can. But again, we're in the very early stages of talking to countries, friends and allies around the globe about these issues. This is not a coercive process.

       Certainly, as you know, the Congress has recently passed certain legislation which does touch on the ICC and the questions of military aid. And as Secretary Powell said yesterday, there are certainly within that certain waivers and prerogatives that the president retains under the law with respect to military aid and cooperation with countries.

       And certainly -- I don't have an exact road map for what we're going to be doing with each country and every contingency that might arise, but we are going to make a good-faith effort to try to negotiate these agreements, and we certainly hope that other countries will view it as such.

       Q Parasuram, Press Trust of India. I believe that not only the United States but also India is very concerned with the ICC because Indian troops also function under the U.N. in many countries where there is no rule of law or independent judiciary and all that. And I was wondering whether you are coordinating your activity with those of like-minded countries?

       And secondly, why did the United States agree to the creation of this in the first place when it's a member of the Security Council and you could have easily prevented this coming into existence?

       MR. MCCORMACK: As for discussions specifically with India on this matter, I know that last month, during Security Council deliberations, we were talking to a number of different countries, both members of the Rome Statute and those who had not signed it. And as you pointed out, India is one of those countries that has not signed it and that shares some of our concerns. I don't have any information on a particular context we've had with the Indian government, but I have seen press accounts that the Indian government has shared some of the very same concerns that we have.

       And there was another part to your question.

       Q Why did the United States not exercise the veto and prevent the ICC coming into existence?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I do not know for a fact that that was actually a possibility. I do know that this agreement, as far as the United States is concerned, was signed during the previous administration, though President Clinton, at the time, said that he did not intend to submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification in the form in which he signed it.

       As for the possibility of Security Council veto or any action in the United Nations, I'm not aware of what might have been done at that point.

       MR. : Maybe if I could just add to that. That, in fact, was one of the objections that the United States had against the ICC, is that it was not created by the Security Council to deal with a specific issue, but it was created by a conference of countries meeting in Rome and it was very broad based. And that's part of our concern. So this is not an issue that came before the Security Council.

       MODERATOR: The gentleman back there.

       Q (Name inaudible) -- with Power TV of Taiwan. Sir, I'm not going to ask you about the Taiwan official's visit in Washington. You have covered that quite extensively. But it is Taiwan-related, though, the question. The government in Taiwan is pursuing a -- what is known as proactive diplomacy or offensive diplomacy, meaning top leaders in Taiwan are trying to visit foreign countries.

       The premier is in Central America. The vice president is in Indonesia. And the president himself is trying to plan a visit to South Korea or Southeast Asia. Some of these visits involve the United States, like a transit visa and things like that. Does the United States sympathize with and support Taiwan's effort to expand its brief in international space? Thank you.

       MR. MCCORMACK: This is really a matter for the Taiwan government to comment on. I don't have anything particular to say about it.

       Q Hi! Chen Fou (ph) from China Youth Daily. My question is regarding the resumption of the talks between U.S. and the North Korea. Will U.S. meet the North Korea compensation claims? And also, if North Korea does pull out of 1994 deal, what would the U.S. respond? Thank you.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, as for the compensation claims, I believe you're talking about delays in -- due to delays in building the reactors in North Korea? Our position on that is that there is no such basis -- there is no basis for such demands, and that the United States has scrupulously abided by its obligations under the Agreed Framework, and we would certainly expect the North Korean government to do so as well.

       I think that addresses your second question as well. We intend to abide by the obligations that we signed up to under the Agreed Framework, and we expect North Korea to do so as well.

       Q Hi! Chris Cockel, from the China Post, Taiwan. This relates to (John's ?) previous question. For the 10th year running, Taiwan is making a bid to gain representation at the United Nations. Does the Bush administration plan to endorse Taiwan's bid for observer status there, as it has done before?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I think you'd have to check with the State Department on that.

       Q Actually (I asked ?) specifically about the White House, because previously Bush -- President Bush said that he did endorse Taiwan's bid for representation there.

       MR. MCCORMACK: I don't have anything for you on that.

       Q Andrei Sitov, from TASS in Russia. Sean, the two presidents, the Russian and the Belarussian, met in Moscow, apparently made some steps towards a more rapid union between the two countries. Given that the United States has repeatedly urged Belarus to move towards democracy and market economy, and apparently if the union happens, then apparently that would be the result of that, would you consider movement toward such a union as a step in the right direction?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Andrei, I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the particular agreement that you've referred to. So I really -- I can't offer any comment.

       Q Thank you.

       Maria Egusquiza, Teleres (ph) International, Sean. By the end of the month, President Fox and President Bush are going to meet in Texas, and security had become one of the most important issues for the United States -- to prevent, you know, more attacks happening again. Securing the border is one of the issues that -- I understand that it's going to be raised in that meeting. Can you elaborate on that -- how Mexico is working with the United States to make the border even stronger than it was before? Because measures have been taken to prevent illegal aliens to come into America. Now there's DEA officers going to the border. They're assigned to the border to do anti-terrorism work. Can you elaborate on that a little bit, please?

       MR. MCCORMACK: First of all, we haven't talked about President Fox visiting President Bush. We -- in that regard, when we have something to announce officially, we'll certainly look forward to doing so. We always look forward to welcoming President Fox to the United States.

       The issue of the borders both with Canada and with Mexico is -- it's really one of the great success stories in cooperation, I think, in this war against terrorism. And it's nice when it comes right in the neighborhood here. We've worked very closely with the Mexican as well as Canadian officials to ensure that we have secure borders for all of us -- Mexico, Canada, the United States -- all the while ensuring the safe passage for people -- legitimate travel, as well as ensuring that the flow of commerce continues between the two countries, because that really would've been one instance where the terrorists would've won -- if they had succeeded in closing the borders and shutting down that commerce that's vital to our way of life.

       As to DEA agents, I --

       Q (Inaudible) -- actually, there's -- (off mike) -- United States will (include ?) a anti-drug agents along the border with Mexico. There was a press release from the DEA that was put out here yesterday.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. Right.

       Q And I understand that they're going to be doing some anti- terrorism work in the border. I wonder what -- I mean, why DEA?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. I think the DEA or the Office of Homeland Security, over in the White House, would be better equipped to provide an answer to your question.

       We are certainly working very closely with the Mexican government on, you know, a number of different initiatives, ways -- you know, biometric, safe border initiatives as well. And on top of that we're also continuing our efforts on discussing safe passage for immigrants and on immigration issues with the Mexican government. So those -- all of those issues continue as well.

       Q Just to follow up, please, Congress had asked President Fox not to go to the meeting with President Bush, because they -- so far the United States government -- neither the Texan government have been -- respect the Vienna Convention related to the protection of foreigners. And in the case of Suarez Medina, you must be familiar with -- his rights have not been protected, because the authorities, according to the defense, did not notarize (sic) the Mexican consulate, in order to give him a fair trial. Can you assure that the United States respects that treaty? I mean --

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. While we are certainly signatories to the treaty, we abide by our obligations to the treaty, and we expect other countries to do so as well, in the specific case, I really hesitate to comment, because I know it's an issue before the courts at the moment. And it really -- it involves the State Department in some small regard, but primarily the state of Texas as well, the governor and the clemency board as well. So it's not really an issue that I would feel comfortable in commenting on.

       Q Thank you very much.

       Q Norman Fu with the China Times of Taiwan. I do want to take you back to the Taiwan issue. I wasn't here when you gave the briefing last time. I know you did cover extensively the issue. But however, you know, since that briefing, Taiwan has sent to Washington the top official in charge of mainland affairs, Dr. Tsai. And she met with administration people.

       So my question covers three short questions. First, as a result of her visit and explanation, is the U.S. satisfied? That's one.

       Two, any advice that U.S. gave her as to how -- (laughs) -- the president of Taiwan, Mr. Chen, you know, talks about this sensitive in the future?

       Third, what are the incidents that close the chapter or close the book, as a result of the visit -- an explanation?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, as I stated, I think, in one of the first few questions I got today, we don't talk about the details of these meetings that we have. They occur on occasion, but we don't discuss the details.

       As for -- I'd be happy to repeat what I said last week about -- you know, about this particular issue, if you'd care to hear it again, or you can check the transcript from last week. But I really don't have anything to add to what I said from last week.

       Q Hi. (Inaudible) -- TV of Hong Kong. Taiwan-related. But this Saturday is the 20th anniversary for a China-U.S. Joint Communique that in most part deals with Taiwan issue. In the communique it said the United States will reduce arms sales to Taiwan in terms of both quality and quantity. That was in 1982. Now, 20 years later, especially this administration, have promised more arms sales and upgraded the quality as well. What's your comment on that? Is there going to be any promise to fulfill this communique?

       MR. MCCORMACK: With respect to arms sales to Taiwan, I believe the governing law is in the Taiwan Relations Act -- and this is, again, we have and we will abide by our obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act. Last year we did go through the process in which there was a request; the request was considered, the defense needs of Taiwan were examined. And we went back to Taiwan with a list of items that we were willing to sell. That, I believe, is still an ongoing process. The Department of Defense is working to fulfill those obligations that we said we would undertake under that.

       Also, as part of that exercise last year, the Department of Defense decided, in consultation with the rest of the administration, that we would change our practice with respect to these arms sales, that they would be considered on a rolling basis, as opposed to a set point each year. I'm not aware of any other requests at this point. You might check with the State Department or Department of Defense. But again, we're still continuing to fulfill our obligations that we committed ourselves to last year.

       Q May I follow up?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Sure.

       Q Fulfill your obligations you committed last year. But are you fulfilling your obligations that you committed 20 years ago?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not aware of this communique that you're referring to. You might check with the State Department if you're looking for any further comment.

       Q Dobra Kosavic (sp), Belgrade daily, Novosti. On ICC again. It seems that country candidates for NATO and Partnership for Peace are in a specific position. Do you think that the situation with ICC, in case that countries refuse to sign this agreement could affect their eventual membership in NATO and Partnership for Peace?

       MR. MCCORMACK: As for NATO-aspirant countries, I know that they are working on a membership action plan and we are in continuous discussions with those countries and they update us on their progress in meeting the goals of the membership action plan.

       And on a separate track, we're also, I assume, talking to them, or will talk to them, about ICC and the Rome Statute. I'm not aware of any direct connection that we have made between those two activities.

       I believe that they're separate tracks, as a matter of fact, and that we're, on the NATO track, working towards a summit in Prague this November, at which we will -- NATO member countries will discuss the possible expansion of NATO.

       MODERATOR: The gentleman in the back.

       Q Jose Carreno, El Universal, Mexico City. You have touched on a very broad array of issues, so -- and recalling very interesting debate, academic, political debate, now in Washington and the United States, I would like to ask if you can give us the U.S. government position on the debate, which is, is the United States an empire?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Is the United States an empire? (Laughter.) Wow! Did I just walk into a graduate school seminar or what? (Laughter.)

       Is the United States an empire? Now, does the word "empire" have any particular connotations to it in the context of your --

       Q An empire. (Inaudible.)

       MR. MCCORMACK: The United States is certainly aware of the fact that many countries around the world look to it as an example and they look to it for leadership on a variety of different fronts.

       That said, the principles that the United States was founded on are very important in our foreign policy as well. For instance, the importance of freedoms, democratic values, religious freedoms, the -- you know, good governance, transparency in government; these are all things that are important to us. These are things that President Bush talks about in his foreign policy. And we will have in the future good relations and the best relations with those countries that share in those principles.

       These are not -- it's not a coercive exercise. Merely, we say that these are our values; we think that they're important for stability in the international arena. But by no means is this a coercive exercise. That is not the way the global system is structured now. It's structured -- it's based on free trade -- the growth of free trade. Increasingly, it is based on shared values of belief in democracy and human rights and the freedom of -- and freedom of worship.

       And President Bush talked about this in his speech at West Point on May 4th. We really have, right now, as a result of September 11th, we have the tragedy that surrounds September 11th, but it's also, if you will, one of these kind of tears in time, where you have -- you have also opportunities to really reshape the way the world relates, countries around the globe relate to one another. And those are the -- that's the -- those are the opportunities that the president sees coming out of this tragedy, and he's talked about these extensively, various conflicts around the globe.

       So, but that is -- you cannot reach your goals for a more peaceful and more stable world without working together. And that's what the United States -- that's what we have done, participating in international organizations and building this coalition to fight terrorism. So, it's a -- kind of quite to the contrary of the connotation of an empire with -- surrounded by the walls and inflexible and unforgiving. It's really quite the contrary, the role of the United States in the international system now. That's my graduate school answer to your question.

       Q Mr. McCormack, do you have any update on November 17 terrorist organization since the operation of arrest is going on with the full cooperation with Americans and British officials?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I don't. I have no other updates.

       MODERATOR: One more?

       Q Chris Cockel from the China Post of Taiwan again. A China- related question: Is the Bush administration at all concerned about the apparent unwillingness of China's President Jiang Zhemin to step down at the end of the year? And do you feel that President Bush can play a role in persuading Jiang to make way for the new generation of leaders in China?

       MR. MCCORMACK: This is really a matter for the Chinese leadership to decide and the Chinese people. (Laughter.) I don't have any particular comment on that.

       MODERATOR: The -- (off mike).

       Q Andrei Sitov again. I just wanted to ask you about China, since the topic came up. There have been reports on and off about how the White House or the president himself directed the Pentagon to reestablish the full scope of military relations with the Chinese. And frankly, I wasn't following that very closely, so I don't know whether that's true or not and whether that directive was something special, something unexpected. Can you comment on it?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we've talked about this, I think, over the past couple of weeks. And the president believes that military-to- military relations between the U.S. and China, based on a foundation of mutual exchange and mutual benefit, can be quite useful. And that's something that the Department of Defense is working towards and working with their counterparts in China on. As for any further comment on specifically what they're doing, I think DOD has a better handle on that.

       All right, we've gotten into repeaters. We have any first- timers, or are we pretty much done here?

       Q (Off mike) -- (in your government ?)? (Laughter.)

       MR. MCCORMACK: One more. Who's going to get it? Wei Xing (sp)? All right.

       Q Non-China-related, I promise.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Oh! Bless you. (Laughter.)

       Q (Laughs.) Well, this other thing that we're doing -- this Irani (sic) opposition party this morning had this presser at the Willard Hotel about two nuclear sites discovered in Iran. And they were saying the current authority in Iran's a bigger threat than Iraq. Is there a rundown list of which one you hunt down first -- Iraq first or Iran first or whoever?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Mm. Mm. I think that in terms of development of weapons of mass destruction -- that we have concerns about a number of countries around the globe. We've made them quite clear. The president has talked about them a number of times. The CIA has put out reports on the issue. They've testified up on the Hill about it. And we have concerns about Iran's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. And they're well known, and at the moment, we don't see any abatement in those concerns. So they continue.

       That's it?

       Q (Off mike.)

       MR. MCCORMACK: What's that? No, that's it. Done.

       Thanks very much.

       Q Thank you.