U.S. Foreign Policy Update

Real Audio of Briefing

MR. MACINNES: Good afternoon and welcome to the Foreign Press Center here at the National Press Club Building. We're delighted today to have Adam Ereli, the Deputy Spokesperson for the Department of State to give an update on U.S. foreign policy. The last time Adam was here was quite some time ago and we're delighted to have him back and we'll try to hold these more regularly in the coming year.

We also welcome our friends and colleagues from New York who are here via DVC. I'll ask you to turn your cell phones off and when you're asking questions, please identify yourself and your agency.

And now without further ado, I'll just introduce Adam. Welcome.

MR. ERELI: Thank you, Duncan. This is great. I think maybe I'll stay away for long periods of time again so that we'd get a big crowd.

Yes, it has been awhile. It's actually, I think, the last -- I asked our guys to check and the last time I was here it was March 9th, so -- April, May, June, July -- it's like four months. Way too long, my apologies for that. We try to do it more but, you know, a lot has happened in between then and now, and I thought it might be useful just to take stock of what's happened since then.

The Secretary has made a number of very important trips in conducting our diplomacy abroad. The most recent one, of course, was to the Middle East where she gave a very significant speech, I think, on democratization and reform in Egypt.

QUESTION: One after that. To Israel and Palestine.

MR. ERELI: Okay. I stand corrected. (Laughter). The last two trips to the Middle East. The Deputy Secretary has been traveling a lot and I've been traveling with him. We've gone on a number of trips to Sudan, to Iraq, our most recent trip -- a couple of trips to Asia, one to Southeast Asia, the most recent one to China and the ASEAN ministerial in Laos. These have been accompanied by, I think, some significant developments, positive developments in our diplomacy in these regions.

In Sudan, we've seen a Government of National Unity take over pursuant to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between North and South. I think we've seen some important actions taken in Darfur to address the violence there. Obviously, there's a lot more that needs to be done, but thanks, I think, in large part to our active, committed and in-person diplomacy, we've seen important, positive events take place in Sudan, in Darfur.

The momentum, the positive momentum, the forward momentum in Iraq continues. We see the Iraqis taking over more and more responsibility for their own security. We see progress on the economic reconstruction front and we see forward movement on the political front, most obviously in the events that are going on today and in the coming week as the Iraqis discuss and draft a new constitution for their country.

In India, we have seen the emergence and the formalization of a new strategic partnership covering energy, covering cooperation for peaceful nuclear activity, covering economic entrepreneurship, economic development, a wide range of initiatives and partnering that symbolize and give real meaning to a strategic partnership, I think, that is important not only for our two countries but important for the region and the world.

Looking ahead to the months that come, well, you don't have to look ahead very far. You just have to look ahead about a week and you'll see a number of important developments on the horizon. As I mentioned earlier, you've got the Iraqi constitution, which should be drafted. And over the course of the coming weeks and months, the Iraqis will debate that constitution, will vote on that constitution on a national referendum and will move to the election of a permanent government. So that is something that' we will be very much involved with and support of as we have all the way through the process and working with our partners in the international community on behalf of the Iraqi efforts.

Gaza withdrawal -- Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West Bank will begin shortly. This, as you know, has been the subject of much of the Secretary's diplomacy in the last weeks and months, as evidenced by her travel there, but also as evidenced by the work of General Ward on the ground, the work of Quartet Special Envoy Jim Wolfensohn. Obviously, the first couple of weeks are going to be important, but this is a process that we look at over the long term and something that we will be working with the parties on, not only to see that the withdraw itself is effected successfully, but that the Palestinians and the Israelis take advantage of this withdrawal to strengthen their cooperation, strengthen their institutions and improve the lives of the Palestinian people.

And another big item on the agenda, which has been, I think, a big news topic in many of your countries is UN reform. We've got the annual UN General Assembly meeting coming up this September. UN reform will be a very important item on the agenda. It's something that the Secretary has spent, as she has said, many of her working hours on. We finally have a Permanent Representative up at the UN, John Bolton, who got there late but certainly better than never and is now hard at work on behalf of the United States, focusing on UN reform and how we can make that institution more modern, more effective and more responsive to the needs of its members. And that will be a big focus of our activity through the UN General Assembly and moving forward, working in partnership with all of our colleagues in the UN.

So that's my short introduction. A lot has happened between the last time I was here and now. And we certainly have a lot of things to look forward to and, as always, I'm happy to answer your questions.

In the front row, Mr. Dimitry, right?

QUESTION: Dimitry Kirsanov of Russian News Agency, TASS. Adam, to follow up on the topic of foreign trips by the State Department officials, will Secretary Rice be traveling to Bishkek to attend the inauguration of the new Kyrgyz President Bakiev on August the 14th?

MR. ERELI: August the 14th?

QUESTION: Right.

MR. ERELI: That's four days from now? Safe to say, I don't expect that she'll be traveling.

Yes. Mr. Dawoud.

QUESTION: Adam, thank you. I have two questions. The first one is on the Middle East peace process. Secretary Rice, when she was in Israel and Palestine two weeks ago, she mentioned something about an international conference, there to be attended by the Quartet members and Arab countries and Israel. So I was wondering will we have any update on that issue?

And the second one is actually on a different topic -- Iran. And what shall we expect to know in terms of moving the issue over to the Security Council in light of Iran saying they are not violating the NPT itself by enriching uranium? Thank you, sir.

MR. ERELI: On the international conference, you know, that's an idea that people have discussed and are looking at and certainly believe it's useful at the appropriate time. I wouldn't get too far ahead of things, however. I mean, the first priority is to get through at least the first stages of withdrawal and deal with the -- and make sure we're managing the opportunities presented by that effectively.

And then, you know, obviously there will be opportunities, I think, to get together in a group forum to talk about ways of building on the progress made by Gaza withdrawal and the following activities by the Israelis and the Palestinians. And in that context, I think there are discussions about an international gathering, but really, I don't think it's something that's imminent.

As far as Iran goes, frankly, the way we think about it and the way I would encourage you to think about it is, this way: that Iran's explanations of its activities, I think, ring increasingly hollow in the sense that they say one thing and they do another and the conclusion that the rest of the international community takes away from all that is that there's more to this than meets the eye.

And by that I mean they say one thing, look we've got a civilian -- peaceful civilian nuclear program, but they do another thing. They don't answer questions from the IAEA about what that program consists of. When they do provide information it's often false. They deliberately concealed an enrichment program that they denied they had, and then when evidence came that they had it, they kind of admitted it but they didn't fully disclose it. And they continue to fail to fully share information and agree to a meeting the standard of safeguards that international organizations and international treaties oblige them to.

So there's a real gap, like I said, between what they say and what they do. And the conclusion that we draw from that is, they're hiding something, number one. Number two, that their intentions are not what they say they are. And number three, that this taken as a whole is, to put it mildly, worrisome, at a minimum worrisome. But in our view very dangerous, very threatening.

And what we're trying to do -- and when I say "we," I mean the international community, most prominently at this point, the EU-3, but with our strong support -- what we're trying to do is basically ensure that Iran is not manipulating the situation to develop a nuclear weapon under the cover of a peaceful nuclear program. And based on the deceptions and obfuscations that they have engaged in up to now, the focus of the Board of Governors meeting, the focus of our follow-on activities is to find practical ways to, frankly, keep them honest, which they haven't been up to now.

One aspect of that would obviously be, if they continued to engage in activity that the IAEA has said that they shouldn't engage in, and if they continue to refuse to cooperate with the IAEA in ways the IAEA has asked them to, then obviously, UN Security Council referral is something that would be appropriate, that would be called for. That is an element in the diplomacy and it's what's being discussed now in Vienna. And I think what we all agree on is: (a) that what they are doing and what they have done up until now, and this has been expressed in five Board of Governors resolutions adopted by consensus, is of serious concern, does not respond to what the IAEA has asked of them. And what we're specifically, I think, calling for them to do now is to resume the suspension of enrichment activities because these enrichment activities raise more questions than they answer and are very troublesome, given Iran's refusal to answer questions in the past and their attempt to deceive about their activities.

So calling on them to resume the suspension of this activity until they can adequately respond to the questions and concerns of the international community; failing to do so, that's a matter of serious concern and we'll have to look at next steps.

MR. MACINNES: New York, please.

QUESTION: Okay. My name is Andrej Dobrowolski. I am with Polish section of Radio France Internationale. Most countries, which belong to European Union, are included in the visa waiver problem. What do you think -- what are the chances that Poland will be included in this program, too?

MR. ERELI: This is obviously a subject of ongoing discussion between the United States and Poland. We recognize that it's a matter of great importance to Poland and something that Poland feels very strongly about. I would say a couple of things:

One is, Poland is a great friend and an important partner of the United States and that participation or not participation in the visa waiver program, it's no reflection of the importance or the value or the strength of our relationship. Participation in that program rather follows a set of fairly technical criteria that countries either meet or they don't meet. It's not a political issue; it's a technical issue.

So we are working with our Polish friends on clarifying the technical issues involved, working on ways to help Poland meet those criteria, and then once they do, down the road, discussing what steps would be appropriate. But I think there's an unfortunate confusion between the status of this program and the status of the relationship. They're completely separate. And Poland is a friend. Poland is an ally. We will work to address their concerns on this issue because we understand that they're important to Poland and we value, you know, we value Polish sensitivities; but at the same time, we would urge you not to confuse the program with the value of Poland to the United States.

We'll go in the middle. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. My name is Arshad Mahmud and I represent the Prothom Alo in Bangladesh. You said the strategic relationship between India and the United States is very important, that it is also quite significant for the rest of the world. Could you please just elaborate a little bit more on that?

And I just also want to add that there are other countries in the region, which don't feel very comfortable with India and if you could address that thing. Thank you very much.

MR. ERELI: Let me address your second question first. We certainly do not see any cause for concern on the part of India's neighbors for the relationship that is developing between the United States and India. To the contrary, this is a relationship that holds the promise of greater stability, greater prosperity and greater prosperity for the entire region. The way to look at it, frankly, is that the closer the integration, the greater the synergies between individual countries in a region, the greater the benefits for the region as a whole. This is both in terms of trade because you've got goods flowing more freely, you've got economies of scale that work more effectively, that leads to increased employment, increased productivity, and increased income.

So on the one hand, when you've got an economic power, like India, which India undeniably is, working together with another world economic power, the United States, to maximize scientific research, to maximize -- to enhance agriculture. There are going to be, for example -- and these are parts of our developing relationship -- there are going to be ripple effects that have a positive impact on countries like Bangladesh, like Nepal, like Sri Lanka, like Pakistan. So I think that this is a forward movement that not only serves as an example and will help to support closer ties between countries of the region and the United States, but it also has a very real economic impact.

In terms of security, you know, let's call a spade a spade. India is a rising power and the best way to deal with rising powers is to integrate them into partnerships, international institutions, international cooperative ventures because that channels the energy and the impulses of a developing power in positive, mutually supportive, mutually beneficial directions. And that really is, I would say, the philosophical premise of what we're doing and in that respect, countries -- India's neighbors, I think, should welcome this partnership, should see it as a move towards responsible cooperation that will help ensure that India's and the region's development -- scientific, technical, economic -- develop in ways that are constructive, that are integrated well into world systems, that are responsive to the needs of the people of India, needs of the United States, needs of the region, and consistent with the direction that the rest of the world is moving in.

QUESTION: I just want to be --

MR. MACINNES: I'd really like to not have follow-on questions. We have a lot of people that have to be heard. New York?

MR. ERELI: Okay. I defer to Duncan's very able stewardship.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. My name is [inaudible] with Malaya Philippines News Daily. I'd like to know what is the latest on the stand of the U.S. Government regarding President Arroyo? And related to that, how soon are we going to have Ambassador-designate Kelly to the Philippines? When he serves -- confirmation hearing and -- when will she be in the Philippines?

MR. ERELI: Ambassador Kenney?

QUESTION: Kelly.

MR. ERELI: To the Philippines?

QUESTION: Yeah. Ambassador-designate. Yeah. Thank you.

MR. ERELI: I think it's Kenney.

QUESTION: Kelly.

MR. ERELI: First name? Kristie? Kristie Kenney. K-E-N-N-E-Y. First question about President Arroyo, I presume you're talking about her political fortunes. Philippines is a democracy. Philippines has democratic processes and practices and established institutions and constitutional processes. As the Philippines works its way through its -- the political life of the Philippines precedes according to those practices and institutions and they will -- we certainly expect events will unfold accordingly, as they do in other democracies.

So other than just stating the obvious that the Philippines are a democracy and the will of the people and the views of the people will be heard and the government will be responsive to them, I think that's what we see happening in the Philippines and that's a normal, natural thing in the life of a democracy.

As far as the arrival of the Ambassador goes, you know, that -- you know what, that follows a sort of an executive legislative process here in the United States that everybody is very familiar with. The President nominates, the Congress provides advice and consent and events flow from there. So I don't want to prejudge what's going to happen and when it's going to happen. We are where we are in the process and you'll just have to be patient and let it unfold as normal.

On to Venezuela. Remember, you've got one question so make it a good one.

QUESTION: Only one?

MR. ERELI: Only one.

QUESTION: (Laughter). Well, this is on Ecuador and Venezuela. The Ecuadorian Government claimed that they haven't received any response to designate an Ecuadorian Ambassador to Washington.

My question is, is this because Venezuela provides some kind of monetary or financial aid to Ecuador? Is this being said, so I just want to clarify any answer because Venezuela is also trying to reach some energy ties in the region. And at the same time, President Chavez is calling President Bush, "Mr. Danger." I just wanted to know, are you taking serious those comments from President Chavez and how serious? Are you going to plan any specific political --

MR. ERELI: Those are --

QUESTION: -- political policy toward Venezuela. Thank you.

MR. ERELI: Okay. Our policy towards Venezuela, I think, is well known. I don't have much to add to that.

As far as the question concerning the status of the Ecuadorian -- Ecuador's nominee for Ambassador to the United States, I'll answer the same way I answered the question about -- the lady's question about the nominated American Ambassador to the Philippines. There is an established procedure for providing agrément. I don't know where we are in that process, frankly.

But what I can tell you is that our consideration of country's nominees for -- or a country's request for Ambassador agrément to the United States, are based on bilateral considerations. And we will look at and act on Ecuador's request on the basis of our relationship with Ecuador, not on the basis of our relationship with some other third country. So that's not a factor, that's not a consideration.

Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: On Venezuela, too. Maria Victoria Verde from VTV, Venezuela. The State Department has claimed Venezuela is using its oil wells to destabilize country in the region; that the State Department has refused to see evidence in these accusations. That means that the United States has a policy toward Venezuela of making accusation, been willing to back them up? Because Venezuela Government doesn't accept the urging of the U.S.?

MR. ERELI: The United States is concerned about actions that Venezuela is taking that do not contribute to stability in the region. These actions includes support for rebel groups in Colombia, actions taken with regard -- or not taken with regard to fighting narcotrafficking, which I spoke about in our briefing yesterday.

So they're really a function -- we base our policy on what nations do, not what they say. And in the case of Venezuela, Venezuela is doing things and in some cases; and in other cases, failing to take actions that are inconsistent with a commitment to peaceful resolution of disputes, a commitment to fighting terror, and when we see that, we speak out on it.

Let's go to New York.

QUESTION: Hi. I am Nizumo, New York correspondent to Japan's daily, Asahi Shimbun. My question is concerning the UN Security Council reform. The United States has been against any voting on Security Council reform before September UN summit.

What kind of language do you expect to be included in the outcome document at the UN summit? And is the United States preparing table any resolution on this issue after September summit?

MR. ERELI: Well, we certainly look forward to the report of the Secretary General ahead of the General Assembly because that will, I think, provide the basis for discussion. Our view on UN reform is, I think, has been very well articulated and very clearly articulated that there are a number of areas of the UN that need change. You mentioned the Security Council, yes, that's one of them. That's probably the most widely discussed.

But there are other important areas: the human rights commission, the way the UN is managed -- the management of the UN, of peacekeeping. And our view is that you can't speak of one of these areas in isolation from the other. You have to look at them as a package because we're talking about not one part of the organization but the whole organization, the way the entire organization functions.

So in our discussions with our partners in the UN and in response to the, I think, the reports of the Secretary General, we are going to be guided by this principle of comprehensiveness and interconnected.

Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: Min Lee with Taiwan Television. My first question is --

MR. ERELI: One question. (Laughter).

QUESTION: Oh. Please.

MR. ERELI: Sorry. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, then, that's very hard. Taiwan's President Chen Shui-bian recently proposed a four-stage theory regarding Taiwan's sovereignty in which he restated that the Republic of China is Taiwan. Do you find this new statement helpful to the current cross-strait relation?

MR. ERELI: I hate to plead ignorance, but I will. I haven't seen the statement. I've heard about it, but our reaction to statements in the past from the Taiwanese leadership or from the leadership in Taiwan is that what the United States wants to see is, number one, a dialogue between those in Taiwan and People's Republic of China on resolution of their differences and that that dialogue lead to a peaceful solution.

As you know, we are opposed to unilateral moves by either side, so to the extent that any idea consists of unilateral actions is something we oppose. But clearly, the way to solve this problem is through dialogue and through mutually acceptable solution. And those are the criteria by which we evaluate any statement or move by either side.

Yes.

QUESTION: John Zang with CTITV of Taiwan. Adam, China and Russia are going to have their biggest military -- joint military exercises later this month, the biggest in half a century. Are you concerned about the -- any implications for Taiwan security?

And also, President Chen is planning to transit the United States next month. What are the chances of the United States linking the issue of which cities he can transit through to movement on the arms purchase --

MR. ERELI: That's a -- I would say that there was [more than] one question there. I could choose to which one I would answer. (Laughter). I'll try and answer both but give you very brief answers. (Laughter).

The second question is, I kind of want to say out of line because you're mixing apples and oranges. We have a criteria for evaluating travel requests and those are, I believe, you can look at the record, I think they're for the safety and the convenience of the traveler, but there should be no -- anything political read into them. So it's not connected to any sort of -- any other extraneous issue such as you raised. It's a technical criterion that we follow, I think, very assiduously.

Second of all, as far as the Chinese-Russian exercises go, those are matters between China and Russia. Our actions and policies are guided by the Taiwan Relations Act and the three communiqués.

Let's go to you, ma'am.

QUESTION: My name is Deniz Enginsoy. I'm with Turkey's Anatolia News Agency. Do you have anything on the trilateral meetings which took place in Washington on the PKK terrorism last weekend? And who represented the Iraqi Government at that meeting? And there are also some press reports about the future visit by the U.S. officials to Turkey for further discussions.

MR. ERELI: I would recommend you read the transcript from our briefing on Monday where I got both those questions and I gave a readout of the meetings. They were very good meetings. We had an excellent discussion on counterterrorism between the United States, led by our Deputy Assistant Secretary Matt Bryza, the Government of Iraq, the Government of Turkey. We spent a lot of time talking about the PKK and how we could work together to prevent attacks against Turkey from this terrorist organization using Iraqi territory and how we could cooperate to move against what we all recognize as a common threat. There were agreements to have follow-on discussions and to establish working groups to work on technical issues between now and then.

And as far as who represented the Government of Iraq, you know, I did know at the time, I haven't looked into between now and then because it really is something for the Iraqis to answer. I don't know. I would ask their Embassy here, frankly.

Yes. You, ma'am.

QUESTION: This is on Latin America. This is Ione Molinares from CNN en Espanol.

MR. ERELI: Molinares.

QUESTION: Ione Molina from CNN en Espanol. Okay. In anticipation to the summit of the Americas, some governments like Argentina, has expressed already a different view of what the summit should be focused on and is different from the United States.

My question is, how do you see this ideological discrepancies reflection of an increasing difference of opinion that is building up between a lot of countries in Latin America and the United States? I mean, we're months away from the summit, but there is already discrepancies. How do you see that?

MR. ERELI: Well, I mean there are two ways to look at this. You can look at this as a sign of division, you can look at this as a sign of diversity and frankly, I would look at it in a positive light. The job of the press I think is to make sometimes make a story when there isn't one or take some facts and make a story out of it. I think, frankly, it's a statement of the obvious to say that not all countries in the hemisphere think alike -- that's a good thing and that's certainly something that we welcome.

And the United States for its part, I think, looks forward to listening, working to understand and appreciate the views and concerns and ideas of our neighbors and finding common ground. We operate from a very simple principle, and that principle is: in diversity there is richness and that certainly applies to the hemisphere. It certainly applies to some of America. And what we're looking toward is finding common ground.

And I think if you look at the Monterrey Consensus, which really forms the philosophical foundation for how we approach hemispheric issues, what we're trying to do and I think what we agree with most of the nations in the hemisphere, including Argentina, is to try to translate the development that's try to translate and graduate the progress we've made in democracy, to have a meaningful impact on the lives of the people in the hemisphere in ways that provide them opportunity, provide them ways to enhance their own future and that there are a lot of ideas out there for doing that. But the goal I think is the same.

We can talk about programs. We can talk about policies. We can talk about ideas, but there really is, I think, a common understanding and a common consensus that we need to consolidate progress made and translate it into tangible, meaningful improvements in the lives of people and that's a really good basis on which to have hemispheric cooperation.

Yes, sir, in the very back.

QUESTION: Yes, thank you. [Inaudible] RCN TV, Colombia. The U.S. Government State Department has been very supportive of the Colombian Government and the dissembling of a rightwing paramilitary group, AUC, to obtain a lasting peace in Colombia.

Now what is the U.S. position on the proposal from President Uribe and his government to create a very small area for a short period of time to negotiate the humanitarian exchange of kidnapped citizens in Colombia for FARC members that are now in jail?

MR. ERELI: I don't know. To be honest with you, I don't have an answer to that. I don't know.

Yes, ma'am. Yes from Italy -- I'm sorry, Turkey.

QUESTION: Thank you. Reha Atasagna with Turkish Public Television. Can you update us on your policy on the Kyrgyz issue, and especially how do you relate the increase in the Kurdish population?

MR. ERELI: Well, there's no update really. Our policy today is what it was yesterday. And that is this is an issue that we believe needs to be solved by the Iraqis on the basis of negotiations, on the basis of discussions and in full consideration of the rights and needs of all the citizens involved.

Right behind you. Sir, did you have a question? Yeah.

QUESTION: Hi, I'm Mike McCarthy from DPA. I was wondering if you've been able yet to come up with a figure on the amount of USAID being withheld from Mauritania?

MR. ERELI: They're working on it back at the Department. I don't know what they've come up with. I'd refer you to the press office.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Giampiero Gramaglia, Italian ANSA. I feel terrible, Adam, because I have to ask to you about an Ambassador but I will try. Could you confirm that Ambassador Spogli was already confirmed by Senate will arrive shortly in Italy, let's say next week?

MR. ERELI: Well, whether he's confirmed or not is a matter of public record, so I don't need to confirm that. When he arrives -- I just don't know what his travel is, so I couldn't tell you.

Yes. Sir. You're double-dipping. (Laughter).

QUESTION: Thank you. Shingo Ishida, TV Asahi. And just a really quick and easy one, since the six-party talks went into recess a few days ago, have we had any contact with the North Koreans in the New York channel? Thank you.

MR. ERELI: Not that I know of. I think -- not that I know. I mean everybody's pretty much sleeping it off after Beijing.

Let's go here. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Yeah. Avian Tumengkol, Waspada Daily, Indonesia. Currently, the Indonesian Government is actually in talks with you in regards to the U.S. embargo for military assistance.

MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: And more specifically, the lethal weapons. Can you give us an exact update on that, on the status?

MR. ERELI: There's not much to update really. I think we continue to have those discussions. They continue to be informed by actions the Indonesian Government is taking with regard to following up on human rights abuses and acting in response murders of American citizens. I would note that as a result of not only visits by the Deputy Secretary to Indonesia but the policies of President Yudhoyono and the progress made in Aceh and really throughout the country in terms of the policies of a democratically-elected president of Indonesia.

The bilateral relationship is in good shape, so that we have a good basis on which to have these kinds of discussions and in which to, you know, have a frank and honest exchange about the issues that the two countries face. And I think that's the important point to back here, is that as we engage in this kind of discussion of this specific issue, it is informed and influenced and takes place in context of mutual respect and an admiration for what the president and his government is trying to do in Indonesia.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. Kin-ming Lin from Hong Kong's Apple Daily. On Monday you said you had raised the case with China -- the jailed journalist Ching Cheong -- and you also said you intend to seek additional information from China. Have you any update on this?

MR. ERELI: I don't have any update. Frankly, I don't know what their response was. I can -- if you ask me tomorrow, I can endeavor to find it for you.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: I'm Jose Briseno with Reforma newspaper in Mexico. And as you may --

MR. ERELI: Did we talk yesterday?

QUESTION: No. My boss. (Laughter).

MR. ERELI: Okay.

QUESTION: But as you may know, Mexico is facing presidential elections next year and for the first time 40 million Mexicans living abroad will have the chance to cast their ballot through mail, mostly in the U.S. And three weeks ago, the President of Mexico's Independent Election Commission visited Washington and had a meeting with officials at the State Department. We haven't heard anything about the State Department regarding this process and, well, basically the question would be is there any concern about Mexico doing politics here in the U.S. or would you just have, you know, a welcoming attitude to this process?

MR. ERELI: You know, first of all, I think this is development to be welcomed. Anything that increases participation by a country's citizens in the political process is a positive development and is something that should be welcomed and is certainly the case here. I would note that Americans abroad vote in elections, in U.S. elections and it's right and good and proper that citizens from other countries have the same privilege.

As far as the meeting with the Mexican official goes on the elections, our role in the State Department really is just to help facilitate contacts between government officials of one government and local government officials in the United States. So it's, as you can well imagine, a complicated undertaking to organize the registration and voting of a large number of citizens in the United States. So our role here is to help the Mexican Government make those arrangements with local authorities in the United States.

And, no, I certainly don't see any negative or troublesome implications of that. I mean it's a logistical undertaking but doesn't have political implications in any way.

Yes, sir. Oh, I was going to go in the back. Let's do two more, you and the guy in the back. Go ahead, you first, you first and then --

QUESTION: I'm Khalil from Pakistan. There is a crackdown on madrassas and extremism in Pakistan.

MR. ERELI: A what -- crackdown?

QUESTION: Crackdown on madrassas and extremism -- extremists, you know. And what's the level of cooperation within the United States and Pakistan?

MR. ERELI: There's a lot of cooperation, but there's also a lot that Pakistan is doing on its own and let me explain it this way. The United States and Pakistan -- ever since September 12th, Pakistan has made very clear where it stands in the fight against terror -- September 12th, 2001, let me be specific. Because it didn't take President Musharraf long to declare what was the right side of this issue, and that was the side of standing with all of us in fighting the extremists who believe that killing innocent people is a legitimate form of carrying on some ideological struggle. So in that sense we're partners. And we've worked closely in a number of ways to track down and apprehend terrorists and to prevent them from doing their dirty work in Pakistan, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Now, as far as the current campaign goes, Pakistan is a sovereign country. Pakistan is responsible for what happens within its borders. And the Pakistanis, I think, have shown time and again that they are aggressive, they are determined and they are willing to make sacrifices of blood and treasure to protect their citizens and to protect their neighbors and to act as a responsible member of the international community in removing a threat that targets the people of Pakistan and it targets the people of the region and the people of the United States. So we are both working together as partners in a global war, but the Pakistan Government is taking strong sovereign action in its own territory in pursuit of commonly shared goals.

Final question, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. I'm Carlos Chirinos with BBC World Service in Spanish. Venezuela -- on Venezuela again. And the country is apparently building itself as a big player in the region. Why can't you just engage with Venezuela the way you just said yourself, you can do it like in India, for example, in Asia. Why can't you just play along with Venezuela to engage and to --

MR. ERELI: Well, I don't think it's a question of engagement or playing along. I think it's a question of working in support of common interests and shared goals. And unfortunately, what we see in Venezuela and under the current policy and the policies of the current government is that there are fewer, fewer shared goals -- that there are areas in which our two governments disagree.

Now, the United States has always -- has consistently made clear that where we stand on issues of democratization, citizens' rights, civil society, regional security, economic security, economic cooperation and to the extent that Venezuela shares those views and Venezuela wants to cooperate with us and with its neighbors in a productive way, you know, that would be great. But on a whole host of issues, they're taking actions and following policies that are inconsistent with what we believe are commonly held goals, commonly held interests of us, and others, in the region.