APEC Summit: Latin American and Economic Issues

 Real Audio of Briefing

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Just -- the president will be traveling this weekend for the APEC summit in Los Cabos, Mexico. APEC summits have been happening since 1993. They involve the countries of Asia Pacific, including Canada, the United States, Mexico, Peru and Chile, from the Americas. While they have traditionally dealt with economic and trade issues and have a long-term agenda for free trade within the region. Beginning with last year, they dealt with counterterrorism as well. We expect there will be the traditional leaders' statement. There will also be something on counterterrorism.

       Why don't I stop there -- (to colleague) -- and do you want to say anything?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Only that this is the first time that Mexico hosts the APEC summit and it is considered to be quite an important event in Mexico; and that in line with the terrorism -- the counterterrorism theme and the way the world has changed since September 11th of last year, one of the items that certainly will come up in, I'm sure, several different fora is the fact that both Canada and Mexico have taken great strides to work with the United States on smart border action plans -- that is, the modernization of our border areas -- to permit the most free flow of people and commerce at the same time that we modernize everything having to do with security and immigration and customs. This is a -- this is quite a -- it's quite a task in both border areas, but it is being undertaken.

       And it is Governor Ridge who is working with his Canadian and Mexican counterparts in the action plans for border modernization.

       MODERATOR: They'll be glad to take your questions. Let me remind you to please use the microphone and introduce yourself and your institution, please.

       Q Hello. My name is Maribel (sp) Gonzalez, and I'm the correspondent of Reforma, a Mexican newspaper. My question is for you. I wonder if you can tell us little bit about your meeting yesterday night with Mr. Berruga from Mexico, and if you discussed the agenda the presidents are going to have in the bilateral meeting in Mexico; and also, if there is something else besides Iraq.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: I met with Undersecretary Berruga last evening, and Undersecretary Berruga and Ambassador Bremer met with Condoleezza Rice today at the White House. The subject of the meeting was, unsurprisingly, the Asia-Pacific economic summit that is being hosted by Mexico. And as usual, we had the opportunity to review the broad panoply of the very rich U.S.-Mexican agenda.

       The president of Mexico and the president of the United States are scheduled to have a bilateral meeting in Los Cabos this Saturday. As a matter of fact, it will be the first thing that the president does after he gets to Los Cabos. And that meeting will be -- I believe it is the seventh bilateral meeting that the presidents of Mexico and the United States have had since President Bush assumed the leadership of this -- of the government here in January of last year. There is a very rich bilateral agenda to be covered, and it -- it, of course, goes beyond -- it includes Iraq because Mexico is a member of the U.N. Security Council, but it goes to a list of issues that any of you following U.S.-Mexican relations knows is covered when the two presidents meet.

       MODERATOR: Yes, in the back?

       Q (Name inaudible) -- from the Mexican News Agency. My question is regarding the meeting of President Bush and Fox on immigration.

       How much can both presidents do or try to do on immigration before the mid-term elections in the United States? Is it going to be another photo op just to hear President Bush say something nice about immigration? Or what is the real issue behind this meeting?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: As you all know, President Bush and President Fox have had many opportunities to discuss the whole panoply of U.S.-Mexican bilateral relations, of which immigration is one of them. Very early on in this administration, the two countries formed a high-level working group, on the U.S. side chaired by the secretary of State and the attorney general, with their Mexican counterparts. That high-level working group has been functioning since last year at several levels, and continues to function.

       The fact of the matter is that this -- the president of the United States is committed to working with Mexico toward -- the basic approach is toward a more orderly, a more humane, a more safe and legal migration as we consider various aspects of this very important issue that involves the two countries.

       The high-level working group recommended -- it was last year -- a temporary worker program that would provide some path to some citizenship. It was recommended. And as we move forward with shared responsibility, we have found that the Mexican government is working very constructively with the United States government on all aspects of the border part of the relationship, the security part of the relationship, and the immigration part of the relationship.

       Very important to keep in mind is the following: That the subject of undocumented immigrants in the United States is a matter in which the United States Congress has a very strong interest.

       And the administration works with the Congress at the same time that the administration works with the government of Mexico. This is not something that is dealt with globally, as a big picture; this is something that is dealt with in pieces. It's not the big enchilada. It is the pieces of digestible parts of the agenda that we are, in a very practical way, in a very workmanlike way, attempting to move forward. And that will continue to be the approach.

       Q Just a quick follow-up. (Off mike) -- pieces of the enchilada that you're talking about -- we haven't seen any plan, real plan, from the side of the White House on immigration. And in the Hill, Democrats, especially Mr. Dick Gephardt, has already a plan, present a plan for the regularization of undocumented workers in the U.S. So when we are going to see something real from the White House besides these little pieces of the whole enchilada that you're talking about? We haven't seen any small pieces of that.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: If the thrust of the question is toward amnesty --

       Q No, I'm talking about the real plan.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Oh, I'm talking about real world. (Chuckles.) If the thrust of the question is about amnesty, the president of the United States addressed that in his visit to Guanajuato on February 16th of last year. There is nothing in the works with regard to amnesty.

       There is a good-faith effort being made, through the high-level working group that is chaired by Secretary Powell and the attorney general, on the U.S. side, and their Mexican counterparts, to work through, in a very practical way, pieces of the migration agenda.

       One very important piece is Section 245(i) of our legislation, which is committed to keeping families together. That is something that the president has very strongly supported and that the Congress still has to act on yet. And there are other pieces that have been discussed with Mexico that have been also discussed with the Congress of the United States. It's a work in progress.

       MODERATOR: (Off mike.)

       Q Yes. Dolia Estevez with El Financiero from Mexico. Since you're on background, I would really like to ask you to be more specific on the issue of the agenda for the bilateral between Fox and -- President Bush and President Fox on Saturday, because you sort of just gave us the subjects, the topics -- like for, you know, we knew that before we came here.

       You know, that's what -- the obvious things that you're going to discuss -- that they're going to discuss on Saturday.

       Now, more specific on water. You had meetings with Mr. Barruda (sp) today. And I understand there was also a meeting with the Security Council advisor, Condoleezza Rice. I mean, something more specific on water. There is, you know, uproar in Texas, demanding that Mexico pay some of the debt. Was there any discussion on that, and did you get any commitment, or list, some kind of an idea of what Mexico can do in the short term, since it seems like for the farmers in Texas it's a very pressing issue.

       The other thing, which is very much in the mind of the Bush administration, is the issue of Iraq. And as you correctly said, Mexico is a member of the Security Council. Nevertheless, we don't know how Mexico's going to vote, because sometimes they say one thing, and then they say another thing. Of course, there's no resolution yet, or so there might be already one that the United States government was going to table today at the Security Council.

       Did you get any idea what Mexico's position would be on the issue of Iraq? Abstention? Favor the U.S. position, or the French position? Or anything of that sort? Since you're on background, I mean, I think you should have certain freedom to talk about these issues.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: There was an exchange of views on Iraq.

       Q (Off mike.)

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Yes, there was an exchange of views on Iraq. If you're interested in knowing the Mexican position on Iraq, I suggest you ask the government of Mexico.

       Q Oh, no, I'm not asking you to give me the Mexican position.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: (Laughs.) I --

       Q I'm asking you to give your position vis-a-vis the Mexican, so far, stated position which Ambassador Silva (sp) -- I mean Aguilar Zinser made it very clear last week, during the (marotonic ?) debate they had at the U.N.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: The only thing I can give you is the U.S. position, and the U.S. position I will give you is the president's position, and the national security advisor's position, and the secretary -- as expressed by the secretary of State, which is pretty well known. I'm sure you don't want me to go into that here.

       There was a very good exchange of views about Iraq. With regard to the agenda, those of you who have been following U.S.-Mexican relations, and many of you here obviously have, you know there is a list of bilateral matters that are regularly dealt with, as they should be. This is an active agenda.

       I mentioned one, the "smart border" agreement, which is -- which we're pleased with. It is moving along very nicely.

       The action plan was announced during the visit to Monterrey, and both sides are working very actively on it. There has been some cooperation on the part of the United States to provide monies for expenditure to modernize the border area. Again, the emphasis is on the movement of people and the movement of commerce at the same time that we improve security in the border area.

       Another new initiative of the United States and Mexico is called the Partnership for Prosperity, which was also -- it was announced last year at the time of the state visit, and it has moved along very nicely. There is an emphasis of the public and private sectors -- American and Mexican public and private sectors -- to put an emphasis on the development of Central and Southern Mexico both in terms of infrastructure and in terms of attracting private investment.

       There are trade issues that are out there that are all part of the NAFTA arrangements and it is a very -- there is a list of specific trade items there. There is, of course water. And we already talked about the migration issue. But those are just -- that's just a handful of items on the U.S.-Mexican agenda.

       Let me emphasize that the level of contact -- at the highest levels, at medium levels, at working levels -- is very rich and it's very active. I would point out that next month, in November, the Binational Commission is going to be meeting in Mexico to move the agenda along even more.

       It's a rather exciting time in U.S.-Mexican relations. It's a creative time. It's a positive time. And the whole mood of the relationship comes from these two still new governments -- the Fox administration and the Bush administration -- that are working with a lot of goodwill to work through a variety of issues, some of them rather difficult, but moving ahead.

       So for us, the glass is much more than half full in our relationship with Mexico, and we look forward to another good meeting between the two presidents as they move ahead on -- working with their respective bureaucracies on their respective agenda.

       Q With all due respect, sir, you didn't answer the question on water.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: I'm sorry. With regard to water, there are treaty obligations on the part of Mexico. The United States expects Mexico to fulfill its treaty obligations. And at the same time, there are some new approaches to water that are being looked at on both sides. There is an organization called NAD Bank, that also has a new, more creative role to play in dealing with border development issues, including water issues.

       So it's -- there are issues to be resolved in water and we're working on them.

       Q Yeah, hi. Pablo Basholet (ph) with Reuters. I have a couple of questions, but one actually to follow up with what you just said. You said a binational committee is going to meet next month. Could you -- I mean, I'm not familiar with this. What kind of -- who is going to be on it? What does that entail?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: It is the established Binational Commission process that the United States and Mexico have had for several years. It will be headed by the secretary of State. The attorney general will be also involved in it. This is a group that meets once a year. The last time they met was during the state visit of President Fox; they met in the White House. And there will be other Cabinet-level -- other Cabinet people who will be participating in the binational meeting as well. They will be meeting with their Mexican counterpart. I believe the EPA -- Governor Whitman and her Mexican counterpart will be participating.

       (To other briefer.) Secretary of Agriculture is that -- or do we know?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Secretary Veneman? I don't know.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Well, okay. But those -- it's Cabinet level. It will take place in Mexico this year.

       Q Okay. I have another question regarding Brazil. Lula is probably going to win this election. November 1 there's a meeting at Quito and the trade ministers will meet. And after that, the U.S. and Brazil will both chair the free trade process.

       How do you see the likelihood -- the possibility an agreement on the free trade areas with Brazil, with the new Lula administration or, potentially, new Lula administration?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Okay, we're talking the Asia Pacific Economic summit, right? (Chuckles.)

       Q (Off mike.)

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Okay. Brazil's on the Atlantic side.

       But at any rate -- (chuckles) -- the question has to do with the administration's trade agenda. President Bush's administration is committed to a free trade area of the Americas by the year 2005, by January 2005. That is something that the president outlined even before he became president. The objective of an FTAA was laid out while Candidate Bush was Candidate Bush.

       At the Quebec summit last year, the objective of getting to January 2005 with an FTAA was laid out, and all the governments of the hemisphere -- all the leaders of the hemisphere agreed to it.

       There are several ways to get to a free trade area of the Americas. One way goes through the WTO process. And happily, we have an international economist who participated in the Doha round, so he could talk to you a little bit more about how important agriculture issues are at the world level in terms of the interests of the countries of the Western Hemisphere.

       So there's the WTO process. There's the subregional process, and the United States has launched a preparation for a free trade agreement with Central American countries. Very importantly, the United States and Chile are involved in a free trade agreement negotiation, and we're getting close to the culmination of that negotiation, hope to have it by the end of the year. So the road to the FTAA is on the world level, is on the subregional level, is on the bilateral level. Also, with the Mercosur countries, which includes Brazil -- that's four-plus- -- there's the four-plus-one process that's taking place with consultation.

       So very importantly, the president of the United States now has trade promotion authority. The Andean countries have the Andean Trade Preferences Act, which is much more robust than it was over the past 10 years.

       So things are moving in a direction -- in a free trade direction. The United States and Brazil assume the chairmanship in November of this year, following the Quito ministerial. Both Brazil and the United States are committed to this process. And we have seen every indication and we have received every assurance from the government of Brazil -- and I think the candidates have spoken to the issue in Brazil -- that they intend to go forward with the FTAA process.

       So the United States is looking forward to getting all the issues out on the table. If Ambassador Zoellick were here, he would say everything should be put on the negotiating table. That's the U.S. approach. And everyone will have to negotiate seriously, and the United States is prepared to do that. And we're expecting others to do it as well.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: (To other briefer) You should be answering that question.

       Will somebody please ask him a question? (Laughs.)

       Q Jose Carreno with Universal of Mexico. Just a very small, easy technical question. To what degree will this meeting be, for the United States, more to deal with North Korea or with Iraq than with the economic and development concerns of the region?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: You know, the APEC Leaders' Meeting is a meeting to deal with two major themes. One is advancing the economic progress in the region, going towards what in APEC is called the Bogor goals -- coming from an APEC meeting in Bogor, Indonesia. We also will deal with counterterrorism issues similar to the Smart Border initiatives that we have with Mexico and Canada, because as part of expanding trade, opening trade, we also have to have put in place the measures so we can have safe trade in this post-September 11th world.

       In addition, we will have -- you know, the president will have a series of bilateral meetings and a wide range of things will be discussed in those meetings. But this is the Leaders' Meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic grouping, and that is the purpose of the meeting. As in all these meetings, other issues of the world are factors that are discussed.

       Q (Why do I ?) feel that the other issues will be more important?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: A great deal of time will be spent discussing the issues that are on the agenda dealing with the trade issues, dealing with new initiatives there, dealing with our new initiatives on counterterrorism. There are also a series of bilaterals. I think they were discussed in more detail yesterday here. Those things are realities. So there will be a wide discussion on several issues.

       Q (Name and affiliation inaudible) -- Argentina. You just mentioned the concept that's novel to me; that is, this called "safe trade." I've heard of free trade, fair trade, now it's safe trade. Can you explain it? And what does it mean in terms of the regional -- the Western Hemisphere trade?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: I think the best way to put it in the sense is what we have tried to do with Mexico and Canada, which is as we have put in place security measures after September 11th, we have put them in place with a philosophy that we want to enhance the movement of people and goods; we don't want to stifle the movement of people and goods.

       I'm not trying to equate safe trade with free trade, fair trade, any of these other phrases. But it is that you need to set up mechanisms so that you -- for example, with containers, so you have some measure of the security of the containers. These are very practical, very -- programs designed to ensure the integrity of the system, of the infrastructure of trade. It's not a new philosophy of trade, I would say.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Yeah, there are lots of examples out there. For example, pre-clearance of containers. For example, you have a lot of manufacturing in both Mexico and Canada that gets shipped to the United States. You establish procedures within the factories to ensure that the containers are sealed and checked, and then they go right across the border without having to be stopped by Customs people on the other side of the border. That's one example.

       The best way to get a feel for this is to look at the "smart border" action plan -- the U.S.-Canadian Smart Border Action Plan and the U.S.-Mexican Smart Border Action Plan -- and you will find a variety of examples of things that are being done to modernize, to use technology, to use development, spending money in the border areas to improve the facilities that contribute to it.

       MODERATOR: Two more questions. The lady here, and the gentleman over there.

       Q It is a very easy one. Maria Isabel Gonzalez with Reforma from Mexico. I wanted to know who is traveling with President Bush to Los Cabos.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Okay.

       (To other briefer) Do we know?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Do we have a final list? We'd have to explain traditionally APEC how they do it.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Yeah. I mean, what you have going on right now in APEC is the ministerial in Los Cabos, and during the ministerial, both Ambassador Zoellick and Secretary Powell will be there. When we move to the leaders meeting, Secretary Powell will be there, Dr. Rice will be there, Secretary Card, other members of the White House staff.

       Q Powell, Rice and who else?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: I said Secretary Card, the chief of staff at the White House.

       Q How about Zoellick?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Ambassador Zoellick is there now. The ministerial phase is right now.

       MODERATOR: Okay. Let's move on to Venezuela, and then --

       Q (Name and affiliation inaudible.) My question is, the United States and Venezuela are going to sign an agreement, an oil supply agreement for 20 years. If that means that the relationship between both countries are in good health, and do you have any details of the agreement?

       And, I have another question. Do you have anything on the new Venezuela ambassador to the United States?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: With regard to the first part of your question, neither (name deleted), nor I, are aware of any 20-year oil supply agreement between Venezuela and the United States. There is none. It doesn't exist.

       Q (Off mike.)

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: What we do have is -- what we do have is an energy relationship between the United States and Venezuela that goes back many years, uninterrupted -- uninterrupted. There is no special bilateral agreement.

       What there is are established relationships between Pedevesa and the consumers of Venezuelan oil here in the United States, a large amount of which is a corporation called Citgo, which, by the way, is 100 percent owned by the government of Venezuela. So, you have Venezuelan oil being produced in Venezuela, being shipped to Citgo's refineries in the Southern United States, and distributed through Citgo gasoline stations. That's one of the many sources. There is also importing of Venezuelan crude by a variety of big U.S. and European -- for example, British Petroleum -- energy companies.

       So the energy relationship is an old one, it's an ongoing one, and it is one that is involved in -- last time I checked, it was based on kind of free-market relationships, as opposed to any treaty. Now, the government of Venezuela has announced that it -- and it does so often -- that it pledges to be a good supplier of energy to a very old and good customer, which is us.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: (To colleague.) And the Venezuelan ambassador.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: Pardon? Oh. Yeah. There's a nomination that is going through the agrement process. I'm not free to divulge --

       Q You're not?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: I'm not free to tell you what the name is. It would be better for you to ask that question to the government --

       Q No, the name -- I know that. I just want to know if the placet has been given.

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: There is a process that is -- that goes on. But there are no problems. (Chuckles.)

       MODERATOR: Last question, the gentleman right here.

       Q Yes, thank you. Jose Lopez of Notimex. I would like to jump back a little bit to this matter of the water issue.

       When is the U.S. expected to fulfill its commitment to open the border to the U.S. to the Mexican trucks, as it was established in the NAFTA agreement?

       And on the water issue, it's been clear from the U.S. position that they want Mexico to fulfill its commitments under the treaty. Is the U.S. satisfied up to now with the level of response in the last time that the Bush administration requested this fulfillment? Or should we expect that President Bush request, as he did in Guanajuato to President Fox, that he fulfill this type of obligations of the bilateral water treaty?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: With regard to -- let's do it in reverse order. With regard to the water, there are outstanding commitments, and the United States is expecting fulfillment of the treaty obligation, very simply. And the United States and Mexico have worked very hard on this issue, most recently over the past several months, and are continuing to work very hard on resolving it.

       I think the important thing is that both governments are approaching this in the spirit of the best goodwill, to get something workable.

       That said, there are treaty obligations on the part of Mexico that we expect -- we --

       Q (Off mike) -- satisfied with the level of response by the Mexican government?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: There are treaty obligations which we expect will be fulfilled. There are still outstanding deliveries that have to be made. The treaty establishes the levels of those deliveries. Okay? So that's point one.

       Point two has to do with trucks. That is something that is being worked on, actively, and it's being worked on even as we speak.

       Q Where? Can you be more specific?

       SR. ADMIN. OFFICIAL: I can't be more specific than that at this point, but I can tell you that this is an active issue.