3:00 P.M. EST
Real Audio of Briefing 
MR. ERELI: It's great to be back to continue our tradition of having us come to you as opposed to you listening to us from the State Department.
I wanted to start off by just saying a few words about the Secretary of State and his condition, since that's what seems to be on most people's minds these days, as opposed to high-policy.
He is doing very well. As you may have heard, the day of the operation, he was on the phone at about 3:00 p.m. The next day, which was yesterday, he called the Deputy Secretary twice before 7:00 a.m. And today, he called the Deputy Secretary again at 20 minutes to 6:00 in the morning, so the Secretary, even though he's not out of the hospital, I would say he's definitely in the saddle in terms of being attentive to the affairs of the Department of State. He's in fine form, and we're looking forward to him coming back soon.
With that, I'll take your questions.
Yes, Dmitry.
QUESTION: Dmitry Kirsanov, Russian News Agency TASS. Fred Hyatt, in his piece in yesterday's Post reported that the U.S. State Department refused to grant asylum to gentleman who calls himself foreign minister of Chechnya, Ilyas Akhmadov. I wonder if it's true if you really refused to do so. If yes, why? And what's the status of this process?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, that article was inaccurate in a number of ways. Number one, the State Department does not on these cases of asylum in the United States. It's the Department of Homeland Security. The Department of State plays an advisory role.
Number two, we do not comment publicly on, on individual asylum requests.
Number three, I think it's fair to say that the Citizenship and Immigration Service of the Department of Homeland Security will handle this case fairly and impartially, in accordance with applicable U.S. law and precedent, and with due consideration of the conditions in the asylum seeker's home country.
I would say -- and this gets to, I think, the heart of the question -- that no information detrimental to Mr. Ahkmadov's now-publicized petition for asylum has been supplied by the Department of State.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Jenjey Chen, Central News Agency Taiwan.
Mr. Ereli, is it any clearer to you or to the U.S. Government that there will be a referendum in Taiwan come March the 20th? And, if so, would that referendum fall into the category of things that the U.S. Government says you would oppose? And, if so, will there be any actions taken?
MR. ERELI: Those are three -- those are, what, two if's, and I generally don't answer “if” questions.
The first question was: Is it clearer to us now than before whether there'll be a referendum by March 20th? The answer to that is no. No way to know. What we've said is what is our position on the proposed referendum. The President, I think, spoke to that quite clearly during the visit of Premier Wen. I don't really have much to add to that.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Maria Elena Matheus, El Universal, Venezuela.
In Venezuela there is a democratic and constitutional electoral process. The President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez has said that the petition-gatherers for a recall referendum of his presidency is a mega-fraud. Is the U.S. Government going to show any hemispheric solidarity towards a democratic process in Venezuela?
I would like some comments. It's well known that Ambassador Charles Shapiro, the U.S. Ambassador in Venezuela, is here, or was here in Washington this week for consultations, so I suppose there is something new about it.
MR. ERELI: It would surprise me that there would be any doubt or questioning of the United States' commitment to democracy and democratic principles anywhere in the world, but particularly in the Western Hemisphere and Venezuela. We have been outspoken on this subject from the very beginning. We have recognized the importance of heeding the will of the people, of following constitutional procedure in a transparent and equitable way, in expressing support for the people of Venezuela, for the Organization of American States and for the process that has been developed by the Friends of Venezuela.
With regard to the collection of signatures for a recall petition, that procedure is underway. It is following the constitutionally mandated process that's been set out in Venezuelan law, and we commend that and we respect it, and we look forward to it continuing consistent with law and the expectations of the Venezuelan people.
Yes, in the back.
QUESTION: Thank you. Sonia Schott, Globovision, Venezuela.
Do you consider that the process has been transparent, the electoral -- the gathering of the signatures and everything has been transparent?
Thank you.
MR. ERELI: We have said publicly that the latest collection of signatures seems to be going well, and have not, not seen any great irregularities or cause for concern.
Yes.
QUESTION: Jae Hyun Choi of Korean Broadcasting System. Reuters reported that United States is seeking a new UN resolution to -- in order to stem proliferation of WMD. Is it true?
MR. ERELI: Yes, it's true. I think the President spoke to this in his address before the General Assembly in September, presenting our views that a resolution on the issue of international proliferation would be useful for international peace and security.
We have begun circulating the text of a draft resolution that is aimed at bolstering international efforts to curb the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The Permanent 5 members have the text, and the experts are meeting tomorrow, on Thursday, to discuss it. We expect to provide the text to the rest of the Council soon. After everybody has had a chance to look at it, we'll take their comments on board and we'll move forward.
I think what we can say about the draft at this point is that it reflects President Bush's call, as I mentioned earlier, the one he made at the General Assembly, for states to criminalize the proliferation of such weapons and to establish domestic controls, including tightening borders and enacting stricter export controls consistent with international standards.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Hi. I'm Nadia Chow with the Liberty Times, Taiwan. From what you just said, the U.S. was not sure that Taiwan would have a referendum next year, but President Chen already said that, you know, repeatedly, he will have a referendum on March 20. I'm just wondering that, when you say no, it means that U.S. does not have enough information to confirm that or you are waiting for something like a specific wording or the version of the referendum. Thank you.
MR. ERELI: This is a very simple answer that has been made complicated. It's not the position of the United States to confirm that something may or may not happen in a foreign country. And there's no way I can do it. It's not possible. I don't know what's going to happen in a foreign country, nor is it our role or position to say something is going to happen or is not going to happen. That's up to the people of that country to decide. And I can't predict what they're going to do.
Yes.
QUESTION: Giampiero Gramaglia, Italian News Agency, ANSA. Yesterday, a prominent cardinal in Vatican had very sharp criticism of the American behavior in Iraq. Could you comment on that, please?
MR. ERELI: I think you're referring to comments that Saddam Hussein was not being treated in a fair manner, and I don't know what basis anybody would have for saying that. It's not true.
Yes.
QUESTION: With due respect, sir, the U.S. Government comments on, you know, things that happen in foreign countries all the time, and as President Bush did during his meeting with Premier Wen from China, what the President said was that he, you know, the U.S. would oppose any attempts by either side to unilaterally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. My -- if I may repeat my question, my question is, President Chen has made it very clear that there will be a referendum. And I just don't know why the U.S., you know, is still saying that it is not clear that there will be a referendum. Are you waiting for something --
MR. ERELI: You're asking me -- time out. You're asking me to confirm whether an event is going to happen in another country in five months. That's impossible. Can't do that. I cannot confirm to you what another country may or may not do. That's the premise -- I don't think there's really -- should be much argument with.
QUESTION: I'm not asking you to confirm that something will happen. I'm asking you to comment on, you know, the statement that there will be a referendum. You know, my question is whether you have any comments.
MR. ERELI: We have commented on the idea of a referendum. The President commented on it. He said what he said. It's a matter of record. I don't have anything to add to what the President said about the U.S. views of a referendum in Taiwan. That's point one. The U.S. views on the idea of a referendum in Taiwan are well known and publicly stated by the President of the United States. If you want to know what we think about that, go to see what the President said.
Question number two. If you ask me, "Is there going to be a referendum in Taiwan," or "Ddo you think there's going to be a referendum in Taiwan?" The answer to that question is, I don't know. There's no way to know that.
QUESTION: But President Bush did not specifically mention that he or the U.S. Government would oppose a referendum. He didn't use the word referendum.
MR. ERELI: President Bush was asked what he thought about the referendum and he said quite clearly what he thought about the referendum. Look at the record.
QUESTION: All right.
MR. ERELI: Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Reha Atasagan with the Turkish Television, TRT. On Cyprus, President Denktash says he favors a national government. Do you have any comment on that? And do you have anything on the, you know, forthcoming -- it's not scheduled yet, probably, maybe, but the Prime Minister Erdogan's forthcoming visit to Washington?
MR. ERELI: I don't have anything for you on President Erdogan's possible visit to Washington. On the elections in Cyprus, what I would -- or northern Cyprus, what I would say is that we believe that the results of the elections -- December 14th elections -- expressed the desire of Turkish-Cypriots for a comprehensive Cyprus settlement that will enable them to join the EU next May alongside Greek Cypriots.
We would note that a Pro-solution Party won the greatest number of votes, and more than half of all voters supported candidates who favor having a settlement approved by Cypriots in a referendum by May.
So the point now is that it's up to a new administration in northern Cyprus to be formed as soon as possible, and to reengage and move forward on the Annan plan.
In the back.
QUESTION: My name is Kashiyama, Japanese newspaper Sankei.
We are very happy to hear that the Secretary is recovering. But for some of the people in the city or in the United States said that Secretary Powell might step down in the case that President Bush is reelected next year. So is he going to stay his position or?
MR. ERELI: Yes. The answer to that question is that Secretary Powell serves at the pleasure of the President and he will continue to serve on that basis.
From the front, and then we'll go to you. In the front, yeah.
QUESTION: Hi. Brian Knowlton with the International Herald Tribune.
Some countries, including some of our coalition partners, have expressed some concerns about President Bush's comment saying he would favor the ultimate justice, ultimate penalty, for Saddam Hussein, and there are questions of possible backlash. Are there any concerns about these hesitations from some of our allies?
MR. ERELI: I think, you know, let's be clear that how Saddam Hussein is going to be handled, brought to justice, is a matter for the Iraqi people. They set up a tribunal. That tribunal is going to be empowered and enabled to dispense justice. And I think what President Bush also said was that he's got -- he said, and I'll quote, "I've got my own personal views of how he ought to be treated, but I'm not an Iraqi citizen." Don't forget. You know, don't forget he said that. "I'm not an Iraqi citizen. It's going to be up to the Iraqis to make those decisions."
So he clearly said that he's got his personal views. Fine, those are his personal views. But he also said that it's up to the Iraqis to make the decisions, and that's what's going to happen. And we're going to help them create a process that is fair, transparent and credible, meets the standards of international justice, so that there's no doubt that whatever happens to Saddam Hussein reflects respect for the rule of law and human rights.
QUESTION: Can I follow up?
MR. ERELI: Yes, sure.
QUESTION: But meanwhile, you know, Saddam Hussein is being questioned by CIA. And when do you think the Americans will hand over him to the Iraqis?
MR. ERELI: I'm not real sure. I just don't know. I think people sort of want a timetable, like, you know, there's now a timetable for the political -- for the transfer of sovereignty from the CPA to Iraq. And they're looking for a timetable for what's going to happen to Saddam Hussein. I just can't do that at this point. There's too many variables.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Yes, I'm Khalil from Associated Press of Pakistan.
India and Pakistan have recently taken steps towards normalization. How does the U.S. perceive or could there be any suggestions to maintain the momentum with regards to normalization?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, I would note that we have publicly acknowledged these steps and welcome them. The Secretary spoke, I believe, on Sunday with Foreign Minister Sinha of India, and the Deputy Secretary spoke with the Foreign Minister of Pakistan either on Monday or yesterday. So I would say that we are both publicly and privately actively engaged with both parties to help them move in the direction that they have, on their own, chosen as in their mutual best interests, and we'll continue to do that.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Giampiero Gramaglia, Italian News Agency.
May I go back just for a moment to the procedures problem of Saddam judgment? I am correct that if the judgment is up to the Iraqi people, under the Iraqi law, in an Iraqi tribunal it means that it has to happen when there will be an Iraqi authority, so after the transfer of power, and not before?
MR. ERELI: I think it's safe to say that this process is going to take some time. That's an assessment that I think I'm fairly comfortable with.
MR. ERELI: Yes, Dmitry.
QUESTION: Do you have anything on Iranian statements that they will sign additional protocol to NPT tomorrow?
MR. ERELI: Yeah. I'd say a couple of things. First of all, let's wait until tomorrow. Second of all, you know, obviously we'd welcome them signing the additional protocol. And third, I'd point out that even if they do sign the additional protocol, that's really only one step toward resolving the many open questions that the international community has regarding Iran's nuclear program, and that a number of things need to be done in order to increase international confidence that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful.
One of those things is the suspension of all uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. I would also note that, you know, in addition to signing an additional protocol, Iran has to ratify it in order to bring it into force. The International Atomic Energy Agency Board has called on Iran to move swiftly towards ratification and to implement an additional protocol.
In our view, Iran has a proven track record of deception that goes back nearly 20 years so that, really, it's only after full implementation of the additional protocol for a significant period of time that, in our view, the international community will be able to have confidence in Iran's declarations.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Mr. Ereli, my name is Tsung-Chih Chen with the United Daily News, Taiwan. I have a question on Taiwan, too. Well, the President of Taiwan said in an interview with The Financial Times today that he will abandon his "four noes plus one" pledges once there's any missile testing by China. Do you -- do you think this new statement by the President of Taiwan has deviated from his pledges?
MR. ERELI: Didn't you ask Richard Boucher this question today?
QUESTION: No.
MR. ERELI: You didn't? No? Okay. Well, maybe it was a different questioner, but I'll give you the same answer. And that is, we've made it clear on numerous occasions that we oppose any attempt by either side to unilaterally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. We urge both sides to refrain from actions or statement that increase tensions or makes dialogue more difficult to achieve. And we also believe that the use of force to resolve cross-strait differences is unacceptable.
So I think that answers the question both in terms of what we think about the threat of Chinese missile launches as well as Taiwanese steps.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: If I may beat a dead horse a little bit more.
MR. ERELI: Go ahead.
QUESTION: To make sure it's dead.
MR. ERELI: I bet you it is.
QUESTION: Or is going to come alive next week, I'm sure. Since President Bush's remarks on December 9th, the Government of Taiwan has been saying two things: one is that there will be a referendum. The second thing is this referendum does not fall into the category of things that the U.S. Government or U.S. Administration says it opposes or it doesn't want to see happen. Now, what do you make of it? And is there any possibility that the U.S. Administration would change its mind or its position once there has been enough, you know, communication from Taiwan, enough explanation on exactly what kind of vote that there will be? Thank you.
MR. ERELI: I don't want to get into predicting the future. I'll stick with the present. And at the present time, let me state clearly and unequivocally that we would be opposed to any referenda that would change Taiwan's status or move toward independence. Now you can hypothesize all you want about what the referenda may do or may not do or may say or may not say. I don't want to engage in that kind of speculation.
What I will say is that our position now is what is has always been, and that is: opposed to referenda that would change Taiwan's status or move toward independence.
Yes, sir. I'm sorry, one more. Go ahead. One more on Taiwan.
QUESTION: Thank you. Ping Liu of China Times.
Just a follow-up. You and some other spokesperson of the U.S. Government said more than once that you appreciate Chen Shui-bian's "four noes" pledge and you take his words seriously. But do you think President Chen takes your words seriously?
MR. ERELI: I hope so. But I guess President Chen will have to speak for himself.
Yes, Brian.
QUESTION: At President Bush's press conference the other day, he was asked, as I recall, whether the capture of Saddam Hussein might help the U.S. to further expand international support for the coalition and so on. And he pointed out that there were 60-some countries involved in the coalition. He also twice made the point, he said that when people spoke of opposition, they seemed to be speaking only about France and Germany, which seemed to me to be narrowing somewhat the number of countries that were in opposition, including -- not mentioning countries like Russia and China.
How are we to understand his repeated references just to France and Germany in this context?
MR. ERELI: I'd have to look at the full transcript. I think that maybe France and Germany were mentioned in the questions, actually.
So, but I think the point here to make is that, you know, the questions dealt with increasing international cooperation. And the point that is important to make here and that the President was stressing is that; let's not start from the presumption that there isn't international cooperation already. There is. There's a lot of international cooperation -- 60 countries involved in helping to rebuild Iraq. That's a lot.
And what we want to do is we want to build in that very, very strong and broad foundation. That is not to say that there was not opposition to the coalition's going into Iraq. We recognize that. We've also said we want to put that behind us and we want to move -- and that the rebuilding of Iraq is something that is in the international community's interests. And we are working with the international community to expand involvement in Iraq beyond the 60, and we welcome the contributions of those who are not as actively involved at the present time so that the people of Iraq can have a brighter, better future, and that the region and the world can be safer and more secure.
Yeah, in the back. Sure.
QUESTION: Brian Yang from Nippon TV.
Regarding the North Korea, the six-way talks, have you heard something back from Chinese? And as, you know, the Chinese part suggested the U.S. should take more flexible attitude towards North Korea, and what's your comment on that?
Thank you.
MR. ERELI: On whether we've heard from China, I would say that diplomatic communications and contacts between all the parties at various levels are pretty continuous. So it's not as if, you know, you put a letter in the mail and you want to get a letter back. There's a lot of contact, a lot of dialogue going on at a variety of levels all the time.
On the question of flexibility, I would note what's been said publicly a number of times before, that the Chinese point was that all sides need to show flexibility. And that's fine with us. I mean we're pretty flexible. We're the ones that say we don't have any preconditions. I don't know what's more flexible than that. We don't have any preconditions. We want to go to talks, you know, now. We're ready to go to talks now, as soon as someone -- as soon as the North Koreans say they 're ready, we're ready. So I'd say that's pretty flexible.
Ma'am, did you have a question?
QUESTION: Gruenwald, Austrian Press Agency. I have a question regarding Saddam Hussein. Is there any doubt that Saddam Hussein, the captured one, is the real Saddam Hussein? Are there any further tests or is it, in your -- is it absolutely sure that he is real former president? I'm asking this because of Austrian politician Joerg Haider said yesterday in an interview he thinks it might be -- could also be a double and not the real Saddam Hussein.
MR. ERELI: Yeah, I would say there are those who doubt that Neil Armstrong landed on the moon in 1969. And maybe those are the same people that doubt that it's Saddam Hussein. You know, there are always going to be people that doubt what is a proven fact. And it is a proven fact that the man arrested is Saddam Hussein: The DNA matches. So if people have reasons to doubt that, I would suggest that they're very self-serving reasons.
Yes.
QUESTION: My name is Yunzhao, Pan from China's Xinhua News Agency.
My question is about Mr. Saddam Hussein. You know, Iraq has no constitution now, so how can he be put on trial?
MR. ERELI: He's not going to be put on trial now. As I said, there are a number of things that need to be done, I think, before he's brought to trial. You have to have a judiciary that is capable of handling a complex, complex process like this. You have to have a legal code, or you know, a body of law that is applicable to this. You have to collect the evidence, present the evidence, prepare the cases. This is, as I said to the gentleman before, this is a process that will take time.
So I wouldn't presume that Saddam Hussein will be brought to trial before a constitution or before the enactment of some body of law that would pertain to his case. That's not a presumption I would make.
Thank you.
