National Security Council Briefing for Foreign Media

Real Audio of Briefing

       MR. MCCORMACK: I don't have any opening statements, so why don't we got right into the questions? Right. We'll start with Samir.

       Q Do you have any --

       MR. MCCORMACK: You have to wait for the microphone.

       Q Oh, I'm sorry. Samir Nader with the Middle East Radio Network -- (inaudible). Do you have comment on the report in the Washington Post about the al Qaeda may obtain the chemical weapons from Iraq --

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. Right.

       Q Anything new?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I -- that's a perfect lead, and I guess I don't have anything new. We don't ever comment on intelligence reports or intelligence matters. But as a general comment, I can say that we have been for quite some time concerned about al Qaeda and its attempts to obtain chemical and other types of weapons. To date, we have no credible evidence that they have actually succeeded in that, in those attempts.

       Andrei?

       Q Andrei Sitov from Tass, from Russia. I have questions on Ukraine -- Ukraine and proliferation and Iraq, the radars. Except for the infamous tapes, do you have any other evidence that the radars have actually been delivered to Iraq by the Ukrainians? And I have a follow-up.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. I think that we've talked at length about the trip of the U.S.-U.K. experts to Ukraine and their findings. I don't really have anything beyond that, beyond the same as we made just after their trip. If -- I believe that this is also an ongoing inquiry, and I think once it has been concluded, certainly those experts will have their conclusions to share with you.

       Q The follow-up is of a political nature. It looks to many outside observers, especially in Russia, that the United States in this instance is already running a presidential campaign in Ukraine two years ahead of time, on its own, so to speak. Don't you think that it may actually hurt the chances of your presumed candidate in that race, who is not the current president, when people realize what's happening in Ukraine? Because nobody wants outside interference in such matters.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

       Q Thank you.

       MR. MCCORMACK: I guess I would dispute the premise of your question that the United States has a candidate in the election in a foreign country. We of course never comment on domestic politics of another country. This is -- the upcoming election and who will run and who the people will ultimately vote for and elect is, you know, completely a matter for the Ukrainian people, and certainly not for the United States or any other country.

       Yeah, Lei Jing (sp)?

       Q Hi. Thanks. I have two questions. One is, I heard that President Bush sent President Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao letters to congratulate them on the new positions after the 16th party congress. Do you know what day he sent out the letters?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I don't have an exact date. I do know that the president expressed his congratulations to Mr. Hu on his new position. Ari Fleischer did that from the podium at the White House. You can check the White House transcripts for that.

       Q Okay. And secondly is on the latest North Korea development. What does the States expect from China on the North Korea policy?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, in terms of North Korea, we've had very good cooperation with China on the approach that we, as well as the international community, has (sic) decided to take to North Korea. The international community has made it very clear that North Korea needs to change its behavior.

       It needs to end and then dismantle, in an open and verifiable way, its nuclear weapons program.

       We saw the international community united in sending this signal to North Korea on several occasions. The two most recent occasions I think I would cite for you are the statement out of the APEC meeting, which the leaders called upon North Korea to end its nuclear weapons program, as well as at the most recent ASEAN meeting.

       So this is an example of the international community coming together, working together, speaking with one voice on an issue of common concern. I think that we have talked to the Chinese government as well as other friends and allies in the region about the need to work together to make it clear to North Korea, and really use their resources to make it clear to North Korea that they need to change their behavior and end these weapons programs.

       Q Yoichiko Mikea (ph) from Kyodo News. Will you tell me how the United States will respond to North Korea's decision to resume operations of nuclear facilities and whether the United States take a tougher stance against North Korea?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think, in response to the first part of your question, we are going to work very closely with our friends and allies in terms of consultation on what next steps would be appropriate to take in response to this latest move by North Korea.

       Our approach is unchanged with respect to North Korea, and I was just talking about it. But just to recap for you, in terms of this latest action, we have said that we find that North Korea's statement that it plans to resume the operation and construction of nuclear facilities regrettable.

       We believe that this announcement really flies in the face of international consensus, that the North Korean regime must fulfill all of its commitments, and in particular dismantle its nuclear weapons program.

       The United States and the international community seek a peaceful resolution to the situation that North Korea has created by pursuing a nuclear weapons program. And President Bush has made it very clear -- and we've reiterated this several times -- that we have no intentions of invading North Korea.

       The international community has made it clear that North Korea's relations with the outside world hinge on the elimination of its nuclear weapons program. The next step is for North Korea to dismantle -- end and dismantle its nuclear weapons program in a visible and verifiable manner.

       And I'd just like to end, in response to your question, on one last point, and that is that the United States has always made it clear, has always been open to dialogue in principle and was prepared for a comprehensive approach to improving U.S.-North Korean relations before the disclosure of North Korea's clandestine uranium enrichment program.

       However, we have to make it very clear that the United States will not enter into a dialogue in response to threats or broken commitments, and we will not bargain or offer inducements for North Korea to live up to the treaties and agreements it has already signed.

       In essence, we've said before that, you know, bad behavior will not be rewarded. So, again, we find this latest statement regrettable, and we are going to work very closely with our friends and allies, and in particular with Japan and South Korea, on what next steps would be appropriate in response to this latest action.

       Q If North Korea proceeds to resume their nuclear facility and that is actually proton reactors, do you take into consideration to attack North Korea or just targeting the nuclear facility, to terminate the nuclear development program?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I don't believe that that was the focus of the North Korean statement, what you're talking about. You said that they had plans to resume operation of these nuclear reactors. And I don't have anything beyond what we've said, that we're going to be -- in terms of actions that we're going to take. We're going to be consulting with our friends and allies.

       But I want to make the point perfectly clear that we seek a peaceful resolution to this situation. And President Bush has made that point very clear from the start, from the initial moments after North Korea acknowledged that they had a clandestine highly-enriched uranium nuclear weapons program. He made it very clear that we want a peaceful resolution to that situation.

       And we have been, from the very beginning, pursuing a strategy of working with the international community to bring to bear all the possible levers and inducements we can to change North Korea's behavior, to encourage them to change their behavior and to give up its nuclear weapons program. And certainly today's statement of their intended action doesn't change that strategy at all.

       Q Michael O'Malley (sp) from Tokyo Broadcasting. To continue on the same theme, a couple of points. North Korea has said that they did this action because of the U.S. stopping of the fuel shipments. But many experts have suggested that they did it because they wanted to pressure the United States into negotiations. And you have said you would not go into negotiations because of any type of pressure.

       Do you view this as a move by North Korea to try to pressure the United States? And, second, some people have suggested we're now starting to move into a crisis situation with North Korea if we're not already there. Do you see us approaching a crisis with North Korea?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I think, on the first of your questions, that you've clearly noted the fact that we will not respond to threats or broken commitments in talking to the North Koreans. They need to live up to their original treaty obligations and the commitments that they've already made before we can have discussions about moving forward in terms of the relationship.

       I don't -- again, you're reporters. You say that you're writing the first drafts of history. It's not for me to describe whether something is a crisis or not. I certainly would not apply those terms to the current situation.

       Again, this is a situation where we are working to resolve it. It's a difficult, complex issue. But we're working closely with our friends and allies on this issue. And, again, you know, our focus is on a peaceful resolution to the current situation.

       Anybody else? In the back. Okay.

       Q Also, on the same subject, what is your response to North Korea's specific contention that they have to reactivate their reactor because they will need additional new energy source for the severe winter?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think that, again, we would call upon North Korea to live up to its commitments, treaty commitments. Under the agreed framework, there was a provision where they were provided heating fuel oil in exchange for their abiding by their commitments under the 1994 agreed framework.

       They themselves, in the meeting on October 4th with U.S. officials, said that the agreed framework was nullified. So this is really -- this is a situation of North Korea's creation. It's not the United States. It's not South Korea. It's not Japan. It's not China. It's not anybody else's. This is a situation that they themselves have created by the actions that they have taken to nullify -- using their words, to nullify the agreed framework.

       MODERATOR: As a reminder, please, when you ask your question, identify yourself and your news organization.

       MR. MCCORMACK: We'll come back, Andrei. Yes.

       Q (Inaudible) -- Italian news agency, ANSA. On another subject, if I can. Yesterday President Bush called Mr. Rasmussen, the actual president of European Council. Did he make other calls today to European leaders? And what do United States expect from the European summit? And why are you so interested in the European enlargement?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, this is -- yeah, a couple of things. President Bush talked yesterday to Prime Minister Rasmussen, as well President Chirac. And he reiterated in those phone calls what we have said in public, is that he urged the European Union, in considering this expansion, to work with Turkey on a date, naming a date for beginning accession talks to the European Union.

       Turkey is a strong friend and ally. It is part of NATO. It has associations with European countries. It expressed a strong desire to begin accession talks with the European Union. We strongly support that.

       We have, from the very beginning of this administration, going back to President Bush's first trip to Europe in his speech that he gave in Warsaw, talked about the importance of a Europe whole, free and at peace. We welcome the expansion of NATO, as you saw during the president's most recent trip to Prague, Lithuania and Romania, as well as Russia.

       We believe that a unified, stable, growing, prosperous Europe is good for Europe, good for Europeans and good for the world. And it's good for the U.S.-European relationship as well to have a strong, unified Europe that is cohesive and stable.

       So in the framework of those ideas, an expanded European Union that is inclusive, and includes those countries that meet the EU requirements that they have set out, is a positive thing. We believe that certainly one derives strength from including a diversity of different groups within a democratic framework. We ourselves, the United States, have benefited greatly from this. We believe the European experience also shows the same thing.

       So while this is very clearly a decision solely for the European Union and its member states, (a take ?) we certainly have an interest based on our close relations both with the organizations in Europe, NATO and the European Union, as well as the individual member states.

       Yes, in the back.

       Q (Inaudible) -- Korea, going back to North Korean issue. North Korea said yesterday it was reactivating the nuclear plant. Do you interpret the announcement as denial of the agreed framework or any changes of your position on the status of the agreed framework?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, a couple of things, to reiterate the point that I made earlier, and that is that the North Koreans themselves, in the meeting on October 4th, said that the agreed framework was nullified. Now, with respect to the agreed framework and those things that are called for under the agreed framework, we are consulting very closely with South Korea and Japan, as well as with the KEDO executive board.

       The one action that we have decided on that is related to the agreed framework is that we have decided to -- and this is in conjunction with all the members of the KEDO board -- to suspend the oil shipments. With regard to any other aspect of the agreement, this is something that we're discussing both within the U.S. government, as well as with our friends and allies.

       Any other first-time questioners? We'll come back to Andrei, then back here.

       Q Andrei Sitov again. To build upon the previous question about North Korea, President Putin, after a visit to China, discussed North Korea with President Bush, as you know. And, generally speaking, Russia seems to be angling for a seat at the table in the Korean talks. So why do you kind of not include Russia when you talk about the countries inside involved in those talks?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Certainly there's no intent to omit Russia from that group of friends and allies that we're actively working with on the Korean issue. When I mentioned the APEC segment, certainly, President Putin's input to that was included.

       And when I talk about the international community, certainly Russia has an important role to play in this regard. And we're working very closely with Russia at a variety of different levels, up to the presidential level, on the issue of North Korea.

       President Bush, in his most recent conversation with President Putin, specifically asked President Putin, when they were in St. Petersburg, to call because he wanted to talk about his most recent trip. And certainly they did discuss North Korea during that call.

       Yeah? Back here.

       Q Since North Korea's confession on highly enriched uranium program, the United States has said a diplomatic approach to North Korea. But it doesn't seem to be working to North Korea. They go further and further, up to the brink, up to the cliff. And I think the United States and other friends and allies diplomatic approach seems to be not working. What -- at this point, what is the option? North Korea is not persuaded by diplomatic approach. So what is option?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right. Well, I don't know that I would describe the situation in such perilous terms at this point. You have to understand that President Bush has committed -- committed us to this strategy and this path. And you have to understand that President Bush is a patient, focused person, and he will work tirelessly with the international community, our friends and allies, to -- on this approach to ensure that we achieve the goals that we've set out for ourselves. And what are those goals? And that is a North Korea that has dismantled its nuclear weapons program.

       So we are -- again, you have to go back. This is the middle of December. We first -- the North Koreans first acknowledged that they had a clandestine nuclear weapons program on October 4th. So this is really not that long a period of time that we've been working on this approach on this particular issue. This is a relatively new issue that's before us.

       So we're patient, we're focused. We're working very well with our friends and allies. I think that if you see the statements out of the South Korean and Japanese governments, as well as other governments today -- I believe the Chinese and the Russian governments as well -- you'll see a consistent message and a consistent theme. You know, again, the international community is united in this approach. I think the international community is resolved in following this path. And we are going to work together to see that this approach succeeds.

       Yes, sir? You haven't had a question yet. Go ahead.

       Q My name is Ogata, Kyodo News correspondent. Your friends and allies, basically they want to maintain the KEDO operation. They want to keep the agreed framework. And the big issue coming up next will be the LWR project, the light-water reactor project. What's this problem stands right now? And is the direction to scrap this? I think your friends and allies are very worried about that, the United States might propose very seriously to press to scrap this whole thing.

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, again, we talked about -- we talked earlier about the one action that we have decided on. We're taking a very deliberate approach with respect to the agreed framework and what actions we may or may not decide to take.

       I wouldn't presume to prejudge the outcome of discussions either within the U.S. government or with other members of the KEDO executive board. I would urge people not to leap to any conclusion about what may or may not be done with respect to any aspect of the agreed framework. You know, we are where we are right now, and we're continuing discussions and consultations.

       Yeah? First time. Back there.

       Q My name is Kashim (ph) of Japanese newspaper Sankei. You mentioned earlier that you are not going to have a negotiation with North Korea. But at the same time, yesterday the State Department spokesman, Mr. Boucher, said the New York channel is still open. I wonder whether you have had some contacts with North Korea recently in New York?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I am not aware of our most recent -- what our most recent contact was with North Korea. I believe it was just after the October meetings. But you'd have to check -- check with Richard. He would have the best read on the last time there was a conversation through the New York channel.

       Okay, yeah? We'll come back.

       Q I just wanted to thank you for this day that there was no other briefings, coming for this special briefing on North Korea. (Laughter.)

       MR. MCCORMACK: Sure! It's happenstance.

       Q In Japan, Prime Minister Koizumi said that -- he asked for calm in this situation. And he said that if you read the North Korea statement closely, that it shows that North Korea is seeking a peaceful settlement to this issue. Would you agree with that?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Oh, I certainly have no reason to differ with the Japanese prime minister. I think that, you know, we are -- you know, I can only say from our perspective that we want a peaceful resolution to this issue, and we hope that that is also in the minds of the North Korean government as well.

       Yeah, Samir. We have to wait for the microphone.

       Q Samir Nader, Radio -- Middle East Radio Network. Secretary Powell said today that the president is expected to discuss the Middle East peace plan on Tuesday during the meeting of the Quartet in Washington. Do you have any guidance you could give us about this coming meeting and what the president is expected to do?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I certainly -- certainly going to let the meeting take place, and the president will, I'm sure, send a strong message to the other members of the Quartet that he is absolutely committed to moving towards and taking steps in a practical, real- world way towards the implementation of the vision that he outlined for peace in the Middle -- peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians in his June 24th speech. And the core of that is really two states living side by side in peace and security. So the president in his June 24th speech gave us a framework in how to get there. What the road map -- road map does, or will do, is in a practical way lay out those steps along the way in the context of that framework towards that goal that the president outlined.

       Now, we are continuing work on the agreed framework with other members of the Quartet. We're making good progress. I know that we have talked to parties in the region about it, about its content. We're going to continue to do so. But beyond that, I think I'm just going to let the meeting take place and we'll let the president make any news.

       Q (Name and affiliation inaudible.) What about the road map, you know? It was supposed to be announced on 20th of December. Why it was cut? What is happening?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not aware that anybody had -- you know, anybody in a position of responsibility had put a date on when something may or may not be announced in terms of the road map. Setting dates and deadlines in that regard is a tricky business, because what you want is you want something like the road map or other initiatives to be announced, be unveiled when they're ready to be unveiled. Right now we're continuing to work on the road map. We're making good progress and we'll see what comes out of -- we'll see what comes out of the discussions between the president and the other members of the Quartet.

       Q But if the so-called postponement of the road map has nothing to do with the election -- I mean, the Israeli election --

       MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

       Q You don't want to put pressure on the Israelis or anything like that --

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I again, I, you know, I differ with your premise that this is in fact a postponement. Let's wait to see what the president has to say and what the other members of the quartet have to say in their meeting on the 20th.

       MODERATOR: Okay. Another question. I'll just go -- let's go back here, and then we'll come back up.

       Q (Affiliation inaudible.) Regarding this North Korea shipment of scud missile for Yemen, U.S. government let the vessel go on without changing -- adding anything to the cargo. Does that mean that the U.S. government considers this particular case closed? Or do you intend to pursue this issue in any way at all from this point on?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think on this discreet particular issue, the Yemeni government has claimed these missiles as theirs. So under international law, there's no standing for any country, the United States or any country, to retain the missiles or the ship. So it will proceed on to Yemen.

       I would just make it very clear, as I've seen some reporting out there talking about the boarding of the ship done by the Spanish military, let's be very clear; this was a -- under international law, this was a legal action. The ship in question was not flying a flag, had its markings painted over. So under international law, this was a stateless ship that we had -- and the Spanish government had reason to believe was engaged in suspicious activity. They did -- the Spanish military performed in an excellent manner. This was a terrific operation by the Spanish government. We did not -- at that time did not know the final intended destination for the ship or its contents. We certainly had concerns that the contents may have been destined for a rogue state or perhaps, you don't know, a terrorist organization. At that point, we just didn't know.

       Subsequent to the boarding and the examining of the cargo, the Yemeni government has claimed it, and the ship is going to be proceeding on. I believe it probably already is on its way towards Yemen at the moment.

       Q (Name and affiliation inaudible.) Yesterday White House said that the United States has no clear authority over -- to seize the shipments of missile. And then if North Korea exports the short- to-medium-range missile, within the MTCR regulations to the other countries, that their missile exports can be legalized by the international community.

       Yesterday's United (States ?) measure could be understood like that. They -- if it -- what is the comment on that?

       MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think the only thing that we could say is that you're correct in saying that this is -- this was in fact, you know, a transaction that couldn't be stopped, as evidenced by the fact that the ship is now proceeding on to Yemen.

       Certainly the United States and other members of the MTCR, the Missile Technology Control Regime, have discouraged such transfers. But there -- again, as I said, there's no provision under international law prohibiting Yemen from accepting delivery of missiles from North Korea.

       I would say only that, you know, the large majority of the international community has long opposed the proliferation of ballistic missiles. The United States has identified North Korea as the principal purveyor of such missiles, and the North Korean actions exposed by the interception of this shipment demonstrate clearly the concerns raised by the United States.

       Yes? In the back.

       Q Thank you. Patrick Jarreau, Le Monde. Do you consider the statement of the -- by the Iraqi government deeming as ridiculous the story in this morning's Washington Post about the handing -- possible handing of VX gas by the Iraqis to a terrorist group? Do you consider the statement by the Iraqi government as a sound one, and is it the end of the story, in your view?

       MR. MCCORMACK: I guess I don't have any particular comment on the statement coming out of the Iraqi government. But in -- I don't know if you were here before, but previously we -- in response to a question that I was asked about that very story, we said that we've had long-standing concerns about al Qaeda and its clear intent to pursue development or acquisition of chemical and other weapons. But to date we have no credible evidence that they have succeeded in that regard.

       Okay? I think that's it. Thanks very much.

       MODERATOR: Thank you.