U.S.-European Relations on the Eve of the President's Trip

MS. JONES: Thank you. Thank you, Peter, very much for inviting me to come here today outline the key elements of the president's first official trip to Europe. He will use this opportunity to emphasize his vision of a Europe whole, free and at peace. And the trip will include the following themes: NATO as an anchor of U.S. engagement, transatlantic security and a force for stability throughout Europe; the U.S.-EU partnership for security and prosperity; the enlargement of the sphere of freedom, security and democracy. And the president also looks forward to his first meeting with President Putin and advancing an agenda for a constructive and realistic relationship with Russia.

Security has been the bedrock of the transatlantic relationship for over half a century. The long-standing U.S. engagement in NATO remains the strongest element of the U.S. commitment to Europe. NATO has adapted well to the dramatic changes in Europe and Eurasia over the last 10 years. It has helped to overcome the division of the continent, it is working with virtually all of the countries of Europe to bring stability to the Balkans and to meet the new challenges of our collective security, like weapons of mass destruction and means for their delivery.

The president will meet with his NATO counterparts at the North Atlantic Council in Brussels. He will discuss further NATO enlargement, the European Security and Defense Policy, and the need for increased defense capabilities, a new framework for strategic stability including missile defense, NATO-led missions in the Balkans, and NATO outreach to Russia and Ukraine. He will underscore his interest in a strong alliance and strong alliance relations.

But the U.S. relationship with Europe involves much more than security. At the U.S.-EU summit in Sweden, the president will consult with his European colleagues on the many other issues on which we collaborate so successfully. The U.S. and EU together promote stability, democracy and economic recovery in Southeast Europe. The president will reaffirm U.S. commitment to progress on the Korean peninsula. We both support launching a new WTO round this year. We want to focus on the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis all over the world. We collaborate on counternarcotics and anti-corruption activities. We are shoulder-to-shoulder in rebuilding the Balkans. We are working as one to solve problems in Macedonia. We are united in support of the Mitchell report to stop the bloodshed in the Middle East and re-start negotiations. We act in concert on Plan Colombia, on Cyprus and on differences with Russia over Chechnya.

That is an impressive list of critical areas in which the U.S. and the EU work together. The U.S.-EU agenda is full. There are trade disputes, to be sure, but as much as they grab the headlines, don't forget that they count for less than 2 percent of U.S.-European trade. Climate change will also be on the agenda at the U.S.-EU summit, and the president will be prepared to address European concerns about the Kyoto Protocol when he is in Sweden.

The stops in Spain and Poland will focus on bilateral issues where the president will celebrate our close collaboration. There will also be bilateral elements of his visit to Belgium and Slovenia.

Spain has become an economic and political powerhouse in Europe with which we cooperate widely. Poland is a great success story of the post-Communist era, and the president will congratulate Poland and its citizens for taking the needed steps to join NATO, to build an active democratic civil society, and to join in the effort to continue to make all of Europe whole, free, and at peace.

In Belgium, the president will see the king and the prime minister, discuss the U.S.-EU trade agenda, the broader U.S.-EU agenda, European security, the question of AIDS in Africa, and the situation in the Congo.

In Slovenia, the president will find a successful country in transition with an excellent record on economic reform and a stable political system. In Slovenia, the president will meet with President Putin for the first time. The president hopes he and President Putin can establish a pragmatic and effective personal relationship. They will deal with general approaches on the various subjects of discussion, the big picture. It's primarily a chance to sketch out a broad vision for our bilateral engagement with Russia.

The president will have an opportunity to discuss with President Putin his vision for security in the 21st century and to explain to President Putin his desire to build a positive and constructive relationship with Russia. He will signal his support for a Russia that is part of Europe and a respected partner in international politics. This is the primary purpose of this first meeting. No formal agreements or communiqu‚s are foreseen.

The presidents are expected to address strategic issues, including U.S. proliferation concerns. They will discuss our economic relationship and the prospects for further economic dialogue. They will cover various important regional issues as well as how future bilateral regional discussions might be structured. They will also address the question of values, issues concerning human rights, the rule of law, and civic society.

I would ask that you address your questions concerning the meeting with President Putin to my colleague, Mr. John Beyrle, as Peter Kovach mentioned, but before I open the floor to your questions, I'd like to anticipate a couple of the issues and address them.

We recognize the very real concerns of our European friends regarding the Kyoto Treaty, arms control, and the death penalty. We have already been consulting closely with European leaders on all of these issues. As Dr. Rice said on Wednesday, we are pleased with the seriousness of the discussions we've had so far on thinking about a new strategic framework for dealing with today's threats and on developing an approach to climate change that is inclusive and takes advantage of new technologies. We understand European feelings about the death penalty, just as we know European leaders understand that this is an issue widely debated in the U.S. in a democratic fashion.

But it is not these issues that define our relationship. It is the deep commitment to a set of common values and mutual endeavor that defines the U.S.-European relationship.

John and I are happy to take your questions.

MODERATOR: Please wait for the microphone and introduce yourself by your name and organization.

Q Gian Piero Ramaglia (sp), Italian News Agency, ANSA. In which way will the president address the European concerns on global warming? There will be new ideas, new proposals, or just the same attitude that you've already shown?

MS. JONES: I think you'll see that -- the president dealing with this issue in a very serious way. There is a very senior Cabinet- level review under way as to how to address climate change. There's no question that climate change is a difficulty, that it is a problem. The president has said this many times. The question is how to address the problem in a way that's effective.

Before the president goes to Europe, I think you'll see that there will be an elucidation of the president's views on how one might address the climate change problem.

Q Jim Berger, from Washington Trade Daily. Can you confirm that the United States will suggest that there will be a once-a-year summit meeting with the European Union, rather than the normal twice a year? And has there been any type of EU reaction?

MS. JONES: It's one of the issues that we've had under discussion with the European Union for some time. Our goal is to make the discussion with the European Union as effective and as results-oriented as possible. It's an issue that we hope to address during the summit. So we do not have -- I cannot say that we have a firm EU reaction at this point to how we might ensure that the U.S.-EU agenda is addressed in a serious way that produces the kinds of results that we all look forward to.

Q Can ask I a related question? It's related, but it deals with Russia. I think Moscow and -- I don't know if President Putin has really addressed it, but there has been a willingness on the Russian side to continue, or wanting to continue a formal relationship like the previous administration had on a sub-Cabinet level. Is that going to be a subject of discussion? Do you have anything to say about that?

MR. BEYRLE: Well, as Beth said, I think one of the things the president wants to talk to President Putin about is a way for us to structure our dialogue more effectively on a whole range of issues -- strategic, economic, regional. The feeling of this administration is that probably the dialogue that we've had with Russia has sort of matured past the point where we need a formal high-level structure to guide it or to keep it moving productively. I'll give you one example.

Dan Goldin, the NASA administrator, if he has an issue or an idea or a question, a problem he needs to solve, he can pick up the phone and call his Russian counterpart, Yuri Koptev, the head of the Russian Space Agency, because of the relationship that was built up over the last five, six years through the Gore-Chernomyrdin process.

This is just a healthy and normal way the two states conduct relations. So I don't think we're looking so much for a new structure to replace the Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission as we are looking for a way to invigorate the actual dialogue that takes place between Cabinet secretaries and their Russian counterparts.

Q Thank you. I'm -- (name inaudible) -- from Slovak Republic daily Pravda. I would like to ask you one question about NATO because this will be probably one of the crucial parts of Mr. Bush's visit to Europe. Will it make it clear, more clear than it is today about the future of Slovakia and NATO membership? Thank you.

MS. JONES: There will be a discussion at the NATO meeting about -- about NATO enlargement, about the whole issue. But this is not a moment during which there will be specific -- a specific discussion of specific countries. That would be incorrect. The goal as far as NATO is concerned and as far as the entire Vilnius group is concerned is to assure that the capabilities of the 10 aspirant countries is developed in a way -- along the lines of the membership action plan so that it is clear to what extent each of the aspirant countries can actually contribute to NATO goals.

Q Excuse me. My name is Paul Koring. I'm with the Globe and Mail of Canada. A NATO question. Notwithstanding the latest round of, sort of, post-Kosovo promises by the European allies that they were going to both upgrade and integrate their forces, both transportable forces and air forces, very little has occurred in the ensuing period. Does the president plan to raise that issue as part of his broader agenda of leap-frogging into a new security posture for the 21st century, which he mentioned again this morning in his speech?

MS. JONES: Are you talking about the European Security and Defense?

Q Not specifically in terms of European defense structures, but rather European defense spending and readiness, which continues to lag behind both promises and what the U.S. administration apparently thinks is necessary.

MS. JONES: There is no question that there will be a discussion of how best the NATO countries, the Europeans and the United States can continue to pursue their common objectives in Europe and beyond. There has been a tremendous amount of work done on this issue.

The president's primary goal is to consult with his European allies and counterparts to get a better understanding from them of their concerns on this particular point.

And it's also, as I said in my opening remarks, an opportunity for him to explain to them how he sees the development of the security framework for Europe in terms of the new threat.

Q Toby Harlan (sp) from the London Daily Telegraph. Is President Bush concerned that ESDP proposals might in fact undermine NATO rather than lead to Europe contributing more to NATO? And just as a supplementary question, is there any frustration within the Bush administration that European leaders and European commentators keep bringing up this question of the death penalty, which is essentially a domestic issue?

MS. JONES: Let me take the first question first. The president is quite satisfied that with the assurances that he's received from his various European counterparts, that there is no intention for Europe to do any kind of military planning or the European Union to do military planning outside the context of NATO, as appropriate. And whatever discussion there will be in NATO on that point will emphasize our acceptance of those kinds of assurances.

In terms of the death penalty, I would not characterize the attitude of the administration as frustration of any kind. I think there is a very clear understanding that this is an issue of debate within the United States, it's not a matter for international negotiations.

Q Thank you. Ben Bangoura, Guinea News. Days ago in Johannesburg, secretary of State said he was cautiously optimistic about peace in Congo. On that, what should be expected from the meeting Bush will have with his European counterparts and Belgium officials?

MS. JONES: His -- the president's goal in discussion of this issue with Belgian officials is to assure a common understanding of what the issues are. I'm going to have to beg off that. I'm not as well- briefed on that as I should be. I apologize.

Q Tomasz Zalewski, Polish Press Agency. I would like to ask a question about Poland as a new member of NATO because General Ralston, NATO commander, when he was in Poland he complained publicly that Poland doesn't spend enough money for the armed forces, doesn't modernize its army fast enough, and there are also other opinions, unofficial opinions, that these new members are more security consumers than providers. Do you agree with that? How do you assess these new members?

MS. JONES: We see Poland as a leader among the new members of NATO, and certainly as a leader among the aspirant countries in terms of helping them understand how they can develop their capabilities to comply with the kinds of requirements that are in the Membership Action Plan.

There is always more work to be done, there is always more work to be done by every NATO member in terms of assuring interoperability, upgrading capabilities, of assuring that capabilities are focused on the kinds of challenges that exist in Europe and elsewhere as those challenges change.

So we have discussions with every NATO member and all the aspirant states about how capabilities might be improved, but that's not meant to be a criticism, it's simply a way to assure that the alliance is as healthy as we would like it to be.

Q My name is Takehashi (ph) from NHK, Japan Broadcasting. I think the many European states is very skeptical about what is the real purpose of the missile defense, and some of them are saying that it might be to protect the United States from China, from Chinese attack. So do you expect that issue on China would be coming up on the agenda in the series of talks?

MS. JONES: The issue on missile defense relates to the new threats that we perceive from terrorism, from terroristic use of weapons of mass destruction, from use of ballistic missile systems. We do not expect -- there's a -- it's sort of -- it's gone that there's an expectation that nuclear weapons would be used between Russia and the United States, or by any of the great powers, China included.

The discussion underway in Europe on missile defense relates to a definition of the new threat and a definition -- better understanding of how one might protect oneself, all of us, the entire world, against this new threat.

Q Andrei Sitov from Tass, from the Russian News Agency. I wanted to play a little with this idea of a dividing line in Europe and ask you basically about your new job, about your office. (Laughs.) How do you define Europe? There was a time when the Americans were talking about Europe going all the way to Vladivostok. And is Kazakhstan, where you served recent -- is it Europe? (Laughs.) Is Turkey Europe? Are there different categories of citizenship in Europe? Are there first-class and second-class citizens of the Europe of today?

MS. JONES: There are not first- and second-class citizens in Europe. The new bureau will be called Europe and Eurasia. The principle behind bringing these two large groups of offices together under one assistant secretary is because there is -- there are common goals among all of these countries. There are common objectives. There are common values. Not all, but virtually all of the countries in Central Asia and the Caucasus have been focused since independence on how to participate in European institutions, how to contribute to European institutions, how European institutions can help them develop their democratic values, develop economic reforms, and speak to the needs of the people and their countries. That is the underlying principle for bringing these two parts of the world together under one geographic bureau.

Q Polojac from the Croatian News Agency. Would you please address a little bit more an issue of American military -- but I would say even more political -- presence in the Balkans, especially in view of recent developments in Macedonia?

MS. JONES: I think the best way to address it is the way Secretary Rumsfeld addressed it very recently in talking with his defense partners in NATO. We -- the United States is in the Balkans with NATO, and we will not leave without NATO. We will stay there as long as NATO is there.

The point of the discussion, however, is how best to accomplish our goals in each of the countries under discussion. There are developments, there are positive developments in each of these countries, that would allow us to change the missions that NATO and the European Union and the United States decide that they wish to engage in in these countries so that there may be times when we no longer need to rely on NATO troops to accomplish some of these missions. But there is no intention on the part of the United States to leave early or leave our Europeans in the lurch -- European colleagues in the lurch.

We are working very closely with the European Union. The European Union is in the lead in Macedonia in working with the Macedonian government to develop solutions to the inter-ethnic challenges. High Representative Solana is arriving as I speak, I believe, in Skopje. One of my colleagues has been there for a couple of days and has been working with his -- with Mr. Solana's EU counterparts -- EU colleagues.

The goal there is to try to work a political track to facilitate the ability of the Macedonian parties to resolve -- really, to address some of the difficulties of the Albanian minority in Macedonia.

Q Arkadi Orlov, with the Russian News Agency RIA, and my question is to John Beyrle. In Slovenia, Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin are supposed to discuss economics. Could you be more specific what they're going to talk about?

MR. BEYRLE: Yes. I think as we look at Russia's promise for the future, it lies in continuing the kind of economic reforms that will lead to greater prosperity, which will then translate into greater stability -- not just stability inside of Russia, but stability in Asia and Europe as a whole. And there are definite ways that Russia, I think, to our mind, could accelerate some of the processes under way that underlie some of the economic reforms that have been followed for -- certainly for the last six or seven years and even since President Putin took over.

He has a very strong economic team, in our mind. And we'd like -- I think the president would like to hear from President Putin how the president -- how President Putin intends to put priorities on certain aspects of the structural economic reforms that need to take place in Russia -- banking reform, for example; what sorts of plans could President Putin describe for improving the investment climate so that more investment could flow into Russia -- it's not just investment from outside of Russia, but also internal investment.

These are all things that we see very much in our interest, the Europeans see very much in their interest, that we -- as we hope to see Russia continue to prosper. So there's a fair amount of scope there, I think, for a very detailed and substantive discussion.

Q A follow-up on that? Andrei Sitov again. What you described to us, though, involved mostly President Putin speaking, President Bush listening about President Putin's priorities and plans. What about an input from the American side?

MR. BEYRLE: Well, first of all, I think President Bush would consider it very healthy if he listened to President Putin as much as President Putin listens to him. I'm sure there'll be a good exchange over a two-hour discussion from both of them talking and listening.

The input from our side, specifically to economics, would be ways that we would like to see Russia accelerate its own priority to joining the WTO; ways in which the United States, our European allies could be helpful as Russia pursues that path; ways that we can take some of the good development, some of the positive steps in economic reform that we see and make those more widely known to American investors, for example.

Q Mary Dejevsky from the London Independent newspaper. I'd like to ask, how is President Bush preparing to -- preparing himself to counter the widespread impression in Europe that he is not very well informed about Europe and maybe not very sensitive to their concerns?

MS. JONES: He's doing a tremendous amount of preparation, a tremendous amount of reading. He's talked with a tremendous number of people. And he is preparing himself to listen also quite a bit to his European colleagues to understand better the sources of their concerns. But he, at the same time, is prepared to address their concerns and try to explain more clearly the positions, the policies that he is pursuing at this early point of his administration.

Q Could I just follow up? Could you give us maybe some specific examples of some of the things that have been on his reading list in the run-up to his European trip. (Laughter.)

MS. JONES: I honestly can't. That's a question for Dr. Rice to answer. She's the one who's in charge of that.

Q Polish Public Radio. I wonder if you expect the president to sign any bilateral agreement during his visit to Poland?

MS. JONES: There has been discussion of a signature or two, but I'm honestly not in a position to tell you for sure whether any of this will actually happen. That's still in the discussion stage and the planning stage.

Q ANSA the Italian news agency. Just a point of program. With the president's bilateral meetings with European leaders during the trip, specifically will he meet the new Italian prime minister, Mr Berlusconi?

MS. JONES: That -- to be perfectly honest, the issue of bilateral meetings is something that's being handled by the White House. There is every possibility that he will meet -- every possibility that he will have bilateral meetings, but I can't honestly tell you which ones they are or certainly not when they are.

But keep in mind that he has quite a number of opportunities for discussion with his colleagues both in the formal sessions in Brussels and in Goteborg, but also at a variety of meals in both places and as they go from one meeting to another and that kind of thing. I think he'll have really ample opportunity for formal and very informal discussions with each of his European counterparts.

MODERATOR: I would very much like to thank Assistant Secretary Jones and Mr. Beyrle, and to thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your good questions. Have a good day.

MS. JONES: Thank you.

Copyright (c)2001 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202)824-0520.