11:15 A.M. EDT
Real Audio of Briefing 
MR. DENIG: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Washington Foreign Press Center. We'd like to extend an especially warm welcome to ten visiting Canadian journalists who are in Washington for several days, and two members of the Canadian Embassy. Bienvenu, and welcome.
I'm pleased today that we can welcome to our podium Ambassador Roger Noriega for his first briefing here at the Foreign Press Center since his confirmation as Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. He will provide a scene setter for us today on the Organization of American States' Special Conference on Security, which will be held next Monday and Tuesday, October 27th to 28th in Mexico City.
Ambassador Noriega will have opening remarks to make, and after that will be glad to take your questions.
Mr. Ambassador.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NORIEGA: Thank you very much, Paul. I welcome this opportunity to brief you on a meeting that will be held in Mexico City the 27th and 28th -- an important meeting for addressing the essential security challenges, threats and concerns that we have and share as an Inter-American community to take stock of those threats, concerns and other challenges -- as well as the existing mechanisms that we have within the Inter-American system for addressing them.
We know that peace in the hemisphere is built on the pillars of democracy, prosperity and security, and our nations must take steps to defend these essential pillars. We will, in the meeting in Mexico City, be taking commitments to one another as a community to safeguard peace in the hemisphere by building confidence between the peoples of our states as well as within these states, and by strengthening cooperation among these states to address the threats and new challenges we face.
Because the Americas have fully embraced democracy, conflict between our states and among our states is significantly diminished. But we will take stock of those challenges and threats and concerns that we have in common. For example, we will consider a document, which has been negotiated over the last several weeks, that would be approved by ministers, that would identify these new threats, concerns and other challenges, among them: terrorism, transnational organized crime, the global drug problem, corruption, asset laundering, illicit trafficking in weapons and the connections among these activities.
We will also take stock of the threat of extreme poverty and social exclusion of broad sectors of the populations, which directly affect stability, democracy and governability. We will take note of the fact that extreme poverty erodes social cohesion and undermines the security of states. We will consider the natural and man-made disasters, including HIV/AIDS and other diseases. Other health risks and environment degradation also are concerns to us all. We will consider the problem of illicit trafficking in persons, attacks on cybersecurity, the potential damage done by an accident or incident during the maritime transport of potentially hazardous materials, including petroleum, radioactive materials and toxic waste, as well as the possibility of access, possession and use of weapons of mass destruction by their means of delivery by terrorists.
The document that we will consider will include and contemplate the mechanisms that are available to us: confidence- and security-building measures that are intended to lower tensions among states; institutions that exist within the Inter-American system: the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission, the Inter-American Commission Against Terrorism and others that contribute to better understanding, communication, cooperation among our states for the sake of advancing a better security climate that we all benefit from.
I want to emphasize that the document that we will approve was negotiated, as I said, over the last several weeks by all of the 34 active member-states of the OAS. It was negotiated by them, with considerable dialogue, give and take, and it represents a consensus document that really underscores the shared values and common approaches that we have to the security issue in this forum, and a general acceptance, as I have explained, that security has a very multi-dimensional characteristic in the Americas; and that we're not just speaking of the traditional threats to security or tensions among and between countries, but also social and security tensions that exist within countries that we all want to address in common and as a community.
We are not imposing any particular vision here. It is one of a shared vision of security and how we go about addressing these threats.
With that, let me note parenthetically there will be, we expect, at this conference, a separate declaration on the issue of Colombia and the solidarity of all of the countries of the Americas with the Colombian Government in confronting the security threats that it faces.
With that very brief opening statement, I will take questions that you might have.
MR. DENIG: Let me remind you to please turn off your cell phones. Also limit your questions, or focus them on the topic of hemispheric security. And use the microphone, please, and introduce yourself and your news organization.
QUESTION: Yes, I --
MR. DENIG: Just a minute. You have to wait for the microphone. We'll start with him. That's fine.
QUESTION: Ruben Barrera with the Mexican news agency NOTIMEX. Talking about this document, we understand that there are two points in the documents where over the United States delegation at the OAS expressed -- how can I put it? -- well, they are not accompanying these two paragraphs. One regards the presence of anti-personnel mines in the hemisphere and the other one is regarding the change in the climate.
I would like to know a little bit further what was -- or why the U.S. decide to take this position? And also, don't you feel that in some way, being the United States the only country who object in some way the entire document, this will send the wrong signal in Mexico as U.S., you know, not be part of the commitment 100 percent?
AMBASSADOR NORIEGA: No, I think, as a matter of fact, that singling out two paragraphs from a 52-paragraph declaration and suggesting that somehow we're not part of the consensus is what sends the wrong signal. And I'm sure you don't intend to do that. We, on the landmine paragraph, have noted simply that we have a review underway in our country in that area, and therefore, since there are too many variables in our policy review, we just simply can't join on a static statement on that issue.
We didn't block the other countries from reaching a consensus, and I think they would tell you that we engage very constructively on that theme as well as on the paragraph regarding the global climate change. We could probably reach a consensus if we had more time to do so on that statement. I think it's well within our reach to do that.
We simply believe that the particular paragraph on global climate change mischaracterizes the threat. It's certainly not a hemispheric issue, and the hemisphere isn't uniquely susceptible to global climate changes as a threat. We could have probably address that if there were adequate time remaining.
That is to say, I don't think the gulf is huge. But I want to emphasize the remarkable fact that, in spite of the fact that the United States as the world's lone, remaining superpower has unique responsibilities on the security front in the world, that we're still able to come to a consensus document, a 52-paragraph document, explaining in some considerable detail our shared commitment that we have with countries of varying sizes and points of view.
So I think it's rather remarkable that we have a consensus document and I prefer to focus on the commitments that we share, the values that we share and advance in this document. I think that's what history will certainly record as we go forward.
MR. DENIG: Let's go to the lady in the second row here, please.
QUESTION: Good morning. Rosanna Rodriguez, National Radio of Venezuela. Ambassador Roger Noriega, General James Hill said this week that he doesn't have any proof that Venezuela is cooperating with the guerrilla and terrorism in Colombia or any other countries. What do you think of that?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NORIEGA: I don't have any reason to dispute that General Hill says he doesn't have any information, any evidence.
MR. DENIG: Let's take the gentleman in the first row here please.
QUESTION: Yes, Paulo Sotero, from O Estado in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Mr. Secretary, I -- if I recall well, this conference originated from a Mexican initiative to rethink the mechanisms of collective defense in the hemisphere after Mexico denounced unilaterally the Rio Treaty, I believe, on September 7th, 2001.
You mentioned that -- I think, at the opening, I think you touched on the subject -- what happens at that discussion? Will any of the -- you know, the discussion on the Rio Treaty, the collective mechanisms of defense in the hemisphere, will that be addressed in some way? Is there a new code?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NORIEGA: Right. Paulo, just for the sake of the record, this conference did not grow out of a Mexican initiative. It was the result of an April 2001 statement out of the Quebec Summit that called for this sort of a conference. As a matter of fact, I think the Mexicans may have actually not joined the consensus on that paragraph. After September 11th, I think the Mexicans wanted to demonstrate some leadership on the security issue and were very eager to offer to host the conference. And that's where we're headed. Actually, Mexican President Fox on September 7th, I think, actually offered to host this conference then.
So that, I think, is a very healthy development that we're moving together as a community, in spite of our remaining difference over the issue of the Rio Treaty. I'll note that no country has followed Mexico out of the Rio Treaty. As a matter of fact, several countries have talked about joining the Rio Treaty since September 11th, because they recognized that the Rio Treaty demonstrated its relevance and flexibility. It was invoked on September 19th after the attacks on the United States, and countries, I think, recognize the utility of having a binding legal instrument, the only one of its kind within our system, to address security threats. Certainly, the sort of horrific attack that took place on September 11th was unimaginable in 1947. But nevertheless, the Rio Treaty demonstrated its relevance. Brazil, as you know, took the lead in invoking the Rio Treaty, and I think the consensus among the states' parties certainly is that it is a relevant document and contributes in a unique way to the security system.
But the declaration, I think, also addresses a commonly held view that the Rio Treaty is not enough in terms of addressing the new and emerging threats and concerns and other challenges that we face, and that we, in point of fact, have other instruments available to us in consultative mechanisms, commissions, a robust system of confidence- and security-building measures between our countries, initiatives on the subregional level in the Caribbean and in Central America. And I think the document that we'll approve in Mexico City will demonstrate a certain amount of satisfaction at how comprehensive our security cooperation is in addressing the new threats that weren't contemplated in the Rio Treaty.
MR. DENIG: Let's take the gentleman in the second row here, please.
QUESTION: Thank you. Fernando Canzian da Silva, Folha de Sao Paolo, Brazil. In your speech to the Congress three days ago, you said that U.S. and the Americas share economic destiny and said that trade is very important for security purpose. I'd like to ask you see the Brazilian position on the FTAA negotiations now?
AMBASSADOR NORIEGA: The Government of Brazil presides, with the United States, over a Free Trade Area in the Americas process, and I think the Government of Brazil takes very seriously its commitment to keeping up momentum behind that multilateral process because there is something unique about the multilateral process in terms of its benefits to those partners who are involved.
Bilateral accords are, in some cases, not ideal, and sometimes they leave gaps. The United States is certainly committed to a kind of a multilateral agreement. We are continuing our consultations with the Brazilians on how to go forward. I think that there's a certain recognition that we should do everything we can to reach a regional accord.
I'm convinced that we will, sooner or later, reach a regional accord that encompasses all the Americas, and that that sort of economic development is essential to the security of the hemisphere.
MR. DENIG: Let's go to Sonia.
QUESTION: Thank you. Sonia Schott, Globovision, Venezuela. Mr. Secretary, do you think -- it's been said that the Plan Colombia put in risk the relationship between Colombia and the neighboring countries. I just want to know your opinion on that, or your perception. And my second one is, do you think that Venezuela is sharing the same commitment as the U.S. in the region? Thank you.
AMBASSADOR NORIEGA: Well, the Venezuelan delegation was at the table when this declaration was negotiated, and has participated robustly in the discussions, and I have every expectation that they will join the consensus in approving this declaration in Mexico City. So, I can say that as a fact.
I haven't heard anybody say that our support for the democratically elected government in Colombia somehow puts at risk Colombia's relationship with its neighbors. The real threat is the transnational organized crime -- including narco-terrorist groups -- that operate, not just in Colombia, but in Peru and Bolivia and have an impact in other countries as well.
That's the real threat, and it's one that the Colombian Government has taken considerable leadership in confronting in its territory, but the same could be said of other countries: Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador are all confronting this very acute threat to the rule of law in their own territory. And as a matter of fact, we've noted that in the last year, a statement of Central American countries, coordinated by Panama, of solidarity with Colombia, a statement in Cusco at the Rio Group meeting of solidarity with Colombia, a statement at the OAS General Assembly in June in Santiago of solidarity with Colombia, and recognition that all of the countries of the region have to confront this threat and to help one another confront the threat. That was repeated in Asuncion on the margins of the (inaudible) Procession, the inauguration of President Duarte Frutos, and we, importantly, expect that that solidarity will repeated in Mexico City with the declaration on Colombia.
MR. DENIG: Are there any questions from Canada? No? Okay. Let's go to the gentleman on the second row.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, Everett Bauman, El Universal of Caracas. You've given a rather upbeat appraisal of things and you did in your testimony to the House the other day. However, in that testimony, you recognized that there are, in too many cases, there are leaders who are trying to take the opposite direction from free markets and democracy. The -- would you, would you care to expand on that a little bit?
There's growing evidence that some of these leaders have been disregarding the Charter of Americas with reference to freedom of the press and perhaps interference, financial aid to movements that are contrary. For instance, Mr. Chavez is pushing another kind of trade agreement, which would exclude the United States.
Would you comment?
AMBASSADOR NORIEGA: Well, my statement noted the reality that there were, in these countries, democratically-elected leaders who were committed to free market principles and that recognized that trade and investment and rule of law were important to economic development. But there are other forces at work in some of these countries that want to take their countries in a very different direction, which we think would be very bad for those countries and would undermine economic development in the region.
That is true. You characterized it as an upbeat assessment. I think that I recognized the challenges that we confront in the region, and I think it was an accurate and realistic appraisal that's forward-looking and constructive, by all means, and that we do have some genuine challenges in terms of persistent poverty in the region, all of which has to be addressed through sound policies, economic policies, strong democratic and economic institutions in these countries.
And these are things that these countries have to do for themselves. And they recognize that and they're prepared to do those things. And what's healthy is that the United States is prepared to demonstrate leadership in the area, but that we're dealing with partners that want to do the right things, by and large.
President Chavez may have a different view on the trade issue. He has stated that view since the meeting in Quebec in 2001, where he didn't join consensus. There are varying opinions, frankly, on how to go forward on trade. He has one opinion. Other countries have some differences. But we'll work them out, I'm sure. It's in the interest of Venezuela, President Chavez and all of the countries in the hemisphere that we find a way forward on trade. All of our peoples stand to benefit from the income that's generated by trade and investment among our countries.
So I prefer to be optimistic about countries doing the right things that are good for their people.
MR. DENIG: Let's take the lady in the second row here, please.
QUESTION: Yeah. Ana Baron from Clarin from Argentina. There is a long debate in Latin America about how to consider terrorism or narcotraffic, if it is a defense issue and the armed forces should participate in the battle against them, or if it's only a security issue.
I was wondering how did you solve this dilemma in the final declaration? And what was the position of the United States?
AMBASSADOR NORIEGA: Well, we think the threat of terrorism and narcotrafficking is a transnational threat that has manifestations within countries, and we addressed them in various ways. We noted in some countries where governments have chosen to use elements of their army to patrol urban streets to control the results of drug trafficking. And we have, in some countries, gendarmerie that are part of an army apparatus -- security forces that also have a law enforcement profile.
The United States itself grapples with this issue inasmuch as our military, even our National Guard, has to have a very restricted role in these kinds of law enforcement activities. So we've grappled with that even since September 11th.
What we do in the document is recognize that we have a variety of threats -- they're transnational, they move across borders, they operate within national territories, and we have to respond to them in creative ways and that countries are responding to them in their own way. We don't proscribe or impose any particular approach for dealing with that threat, but we recognize that it is one that we share a responsibility in addressing the international elements that move across borders and threaten all of us.
But you're going to see, within this document it's perfectly contemplated that sort of international bilateral/multilateral cooperation to fight drugs, and a recognition that drug trafficking has a domestic impact as well, and countries are confronting that within their own national territories.
MR. DENIG: Let's go to the lady in the back.
QUESTION: Maria Elena Matheus, El Universal, Venezuela. This week, there was a hearing at the Congress organized by two subcommittees, and you were part or you were there analyzing the threats of al-Qaida groups in the region. How much a threat it is, can you tell us? And which countries are most vulnerable?
AMBASSADOR NORIEGA: Well, I've never addressed that issue publicly and don't recall doing so, and I don't recall anybody else bringing it up other than to say that there are certain elements that exist in the Americas that tend to have contact with organizations, terrorist organizations of various kinds. I will not name al-Qaida explicitly because I haven't seen any evidence on that.
But there is concern about particular fundraising activities, corrupt activities that generate income that is then channeled to elements that we suspect have terrorist orientations or motives and intentions. I have not seen information or evidence that links particular activities in the Americas with a particular terrorist attack or even planned terrorist attack, in the world. But it is something that is of some concern, I think, since September 11th we've been very satisfied that countries are taking this very seriously, that they're using their law enforcement means and they're cooperating across the border to deny safe haven to terrorist groups and to deny terrorist groups the resources that they need to carry out their, their nefarious activities.
MR. DENIG: Let's take the lady in the middle, please.
QUESTION: Yeah, good morning. Jilma Prada from El Panama America, from Panama. Mr. Secretary, this coming on the October 27 the Department of State and USTR and other agencies are meeting with government officials in what is called the Trade and Investment Council. What is the most important issue for the United States to start negotiating a free trade agreement with Panama? Is security and a fair judicial system issues?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NORIEGA: Well, the rule of law is an issue and transparency is a particularly important issue in these kinds of trade and investment arrangements. In order to have genuine, sustainable trade arrangements, you want to see transparency and accountability and rule of law operating among the partners. I don't want to get into any detail here on that subject.
MR. DENIG: Final question? Okay, back to Argentina.
QUESTION: I was told that financial instability was going to consider about the new threat for security in the region. Is that so?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NORIEGA: Financial instability?
QUESTION: In the sense debt?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NORIEGA: I am not familiar with that being included in this. Now, we do talk about the manifestation of extreme poverty and social exclusion. Those issues are contemplated, but in terms of being part of the consensus document, no, I don't recall that those things are explicitly mentioned. We had very broad-ranging discussion where someone suggested that the price of tortillas as a threat to security --only in the OAS. (Laughter.) But that wasn't a view that was shared widely enough to make into the final document.
MR. DENIG: Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.
