White House Gaggle

By Tony Snow, and National Security Advisor, Steve Hadley
MR. SNOW: All right. First, just a read out. I think you're familiar
with what's going on tomorrow, but I'll go ahead and give you a read out
anyway.



The President tomorrow, the public schedule begins with a meeting with


the President of Austria. There will also be a meeting with the
Chancellor and a meeting with European Union leaders. For all those we
will have stills and host TV at the top. There will be pool available
for a U.S.-EU meeting; closed press U.S.-EU working lunch; a U.S.-EU
press availability tomorrow afternoon.



Then the President will have a roundtable with foreign students, you
guys are all kindly invited, also a tour of the National Library. And
then off to the airport and to Budapest. So there you have your quick
sort of line up.



Questions.



Q Can you elaborate a little bit more of what kinds of consequences
North Korea might face if they do test fire this missile?



MR. SNOW: No. I'll restate what I've been saying the last few days,
which is it's our hope that there is no missile firing. North Korea
made a commitment back in 1999 at a summit with the Japanese that they
wouldn't do it, and certainly there are many options and we are simply
not going to tip our hand as to what the possible response should be.



The other thing to keep in mind is it's not us and North Korea.
Anything that happens is going to be part of sort of joint operations,
if you will, or joint negotiations with the other five nations, or the
other four nations that are involved with us in dealing with North Korea
in the six-party talks. So we don't want to be drawn into any
perception that somehow it's the United States responding solely and
unilaterally to anything the North Koreans may do.



Q But, obviously, you bring up the notion of consequences to try and
give them, you know, a nudge away from taking this action. So how does
that really have teeth if you don't talk about what that means?



MR. SNOW: Doesn't mean they don't hear it, just means you don't.



Q How are they hearing it, then?



MR. HADLEY: It's interesting, the Japanese have indicated publicly that
one of the things they would consider doing is sponsoring a U.N.
Security Council resolution. So it underscores Tony's point that there
are a lot of actors in this process; a lot of folks are sending messages
to the North Koreans this would be a bad idea, they shouldn't do it.
And a lot of these countries are going to have ideas about what we do
should North Korea ignore the advice of the international community and
go forward with this launch.



Q Have they, in fact, fueled this missile? What do we know about
what they have done?



MR. HADLEY: It's hard to tell. They seem to be moving forward towards
a launch, but the intelligence is not conclusive at this point.



Q Do you think they're trying to take attention away from the U.S.
efforts to contain the Iran nuclear program? What's your interpretation
of their motivation here?



MR. HADLEY: It's hard to interpret their motives. All you can do is
look at the history, and we've seen these kinds of things before in the
past. There tends to be a desire to create a sense of crisis; they seem
to think that's something that works for them. And they've done these
kinds of things to get attention before. They did a missile launch in
1998.



And what we've tried to convince them is that the kind of attention they
will get is not attention that will be constructive towards getting back
to the six-party talks, getting implementation of the September
agreement, and really not conducive to the long-term interests of North
Korea or its people.



Q On the soldiers, the missing soldiers, have we confirmed that
they're, in fact, dead?



MR. HADLEY: We have not confirmed. We believe that the two remains
identified are the soldiers. We believe that's what's been announced
by MNF-I out of Baghdad. The remains are being shipped home for
positive identification, but we can't confirm it at this point. They've
announced out of Baghdad that they believe it is the two soldiers, but
we can't be sure.



Q I just wonder what, tactically, you make of that? You know, their
abduction and their apparent death. Does it say anything about the
tactics of the insurgents and terrorist groups at this point that may be
changing in any fashion?



MR. HADLEY: No, I think it's a reminder that this is a brutal enemy
that does not follow any of the rules. It attacks civilians for
political gain, it provokes sectarian violence and it really follows no
rules of warfare. It's a very brutal enemy and it's a reminder to all
of us about what we're up against. And, obviously, any loss of life is
a source of great regret.



MR. SNOW: Let me add one other point, which is, David, as you probably
read, in the aftermath of this there had been military activity. So
maybe the most significant thing is a considerable amount of actionable
intelligence has come out of it. We are seeing evidence that the Iraqi
people are also sick of this. You saw it in some of the communications
that have been aimed towards Zarqawi.



And you see in the aftermath of an episode like this that the Iraqi
people are also stepping forward to try to be of assistance.



Q Mr. Hadley, how does the administration feel about the Japanese
announcement today about the self-defense force?



MR. HADLEY: The Japanese ground force, self-defense force was in
Muthanna province. As you know, what is happening in Iraq is as the
Iraqi security forces get trained up and can take more security
responsibility, the coalition has been turning over the lead to Iraqi
security forces in increasing portions of the country. That's sort of
step one.



Step two is then getting various governance of the 18 governance [sic]*
in a position where the provincial governments there are in
responsibility to take political responsibility for security in the
province. So it's a two-step process. And what we're seeing is that
process move forward.



Yesterday the Iraqi government announced that Muthanna would now be
returned from the coalition to provincial control of security. That
means that the mission of the forces there, the Japanese forces there
have been successfully completed. So the Japanese now are doing what
we'd all be doing over time -- as the Iraqis stand up, we can stand down
-- they're transitioning to a new way of contributing to success in
Iraq.



And the Japanese have talked about maintaining and, indeed, expanding
their air activities there. They're going to look at providing C-130
service up to Baghdad and elsewhere in support of MNF-I and also in
support of an expanded U.N. role. They continue to be very active.
They've pledged over $5 billion to Iraq.



So what we think is useful is it's an indication, it's a measure of the
progress, it's an example of what it means, Iraqis stand up, we can
stand down, and then our mission then begins to transform and how we can
support the government transform. So we think that this is a positive
step.



Q I see your point. Do you worry, though, that eventually we're
going to become a little lonely there?



MR. HADLEY: No, because as the Japanese have made clear, they're
staying in with a mission. They're actually expanding their air role.
We think there is going to be a lot of opportunities for countries to
change their missions. As you know, we're developing provincial
reconstruction teams; some of those are going to be led by the United
States. Some of those allies have indicated they're interested in
leading, as they've done in Afghanistan. And some of them, of course,
Iraqi forces are going to be taking the lead on.



So I think what you're seeing is a transformation, if you will, of
various ways where we can adapt the support we provide, we all provide
to the Iraqi government, to the requirements of the government as the
situation on the ground changes.



MR. SNOW: Mike, let me add one other point. I don't know if you saw
Mr. al-Rubaie's piece in The Washington Post this morning, but he talks
about three other provinces where he thinks they're going to be ready --
Maysan, Irbil and Sulaymaniyah -- all of which may follow Muthanna's
lead in allowing the Iraqis to take over primary responsibility very
soon.



So this is not a bailing out on the part of the Japanese. It's, in
fact, responding to conditions on the ground and helping in other ways.



MR. HADLEY: Can I say one other thing about some of the debate that's
been going on, on Capitol Hill? I read some of the press coverage today
about that debate.



One of the things that's interesting about what we've just been
discussing is there's been sort of a suggestion out there that somehow
there's an open-ended commitment by the United States to Iraq. And, of
course, the President has talked about stand up/stand down so our men
and women can return with the honor they deserve. So I don't know what
people mean when they say an open-ended commitment of our forces.



Secondly, there's this notion that somehow the Iraqis have to be
pressured to take responsibility for their own security. And I think
what's interesting about the editorial that Tony talked about is it's
further evidence -- and there's been a lot of them -- that the Iraqis
want to take responsibility for the security of their country when
they're ready to do so. And their concern is that we will move, draw
down our forces too quickly, before they're ready. But I think there is
no question that the Iraqis want to be able to take responsibility for
their security.



And I think, finally, on that report that Tony talked about, what we
have is an opportunity now for MNF-I to talk with the Iraqi government
-- we have a new Minister of Interior, new Minister of Defense -- and
talk about how this process of stand up/stand down can proceed going
forward.



Q I want to ask you about Vice President Cheney's remarks yesterday.
How can the White House justify him standing by his remarks that the
insurgency is in the last throes? Can you just explain that, how that
could --



MR. HADLEY: The Vice President explained it yesterday.



Q Well, then I didn't --



MR. HADLEY: You can talk to him about it; I thought it was a good
explanation.



Q Why do you think it's a good explanation?



MR. HADLEY: It's a good explanation, it speaks for itself. I think it
points to the fact the significance of what has happened politically
over the last two years, that as he said, we are at a point where we
have a duly-elected government, a constitution drafted and ratified by
the Iraqi people, that is a unity government that has a plan for going
forward. And I think you've seen in the last two weeks a lot of efforts
by that new government to provide leadership. They're moving forward
with a security initiative in Baghdad. They've talked about their
objectives going forward, in terms of electricity and security. We are
making great progress on this international compact, which you've been
writing about.



I think what the Vice President was saying is things are happening that
give in evidence, as our prior discussion does, that this new Iraqi
government is stepping forward and taking responsibility. That's a good
thing.



Q I'm sorry, how does that comport with the insurgency being in its
last throes, all of what you just said?



MR. HADLEY: The Vice President talked about the significance of what
we're talking about and what it will mean over time for the insurgency.
It's what I think Tony showed, the fact that the Iraqi people are tired
of it, they're ready for peace, they're talking about a reconciliation
process, but a reconciliation process in which people lay down their
arms.



They've also got a government that's stepping forward, taking
responsibility for security and the leading of that reconciliation
process. I think that's a big development of 2005, 2006, very important
as we look forward in Iraq.



Q Just to be clear, the President would agree with the Vice President
that the insurgency is in the last throes?



MR. HADLEY: What I said was the Vice President has explained his
comments yesterday, and I have tried to provide a little bit more
context for that explanation.



MR. SNOW: Let me add another point. He's not saying the war is over.
You need to be clear about that. But, again, Steve is just pointing out
you're seeing increasing evidence of assertiveness on the part of Iraqi
citizens and the Iraqi government. You've got Operation Forward
together, it involves 50,000 Iraqi police and military forces going into
Baghdad. You've got other operations around the country.



You do have -- and our military commanders have talked about it --
increasing intelligence. We had another key al Qaeda operative who was
taken out, I believe it was yesterday or today. General Caldwell was
briefing on that this morning. The fact is that we're getting
intelligence at a level that continues to increase and continues to be
useful in going after them. Are they gone? No, of course not. But on
the other hand, it does -- you do have a very clear sense that the Iraqi
people are speaking not only at the ballot box, but also in cooperation
with U.S. forces. And now that you've got Iraqi forces, they feel an
even greater comfort level in talking with Iraqi forces and saying, [to
their security forces] okay, you can find them [insurgents] over here.



Q The President said a couple weeks ago that he expected Iran to
reply to the incentives package in weeks, and not months. Do you get
any -- are you concerned at all that this is going to just drag out and
they're going to stall and we're going to get into this, you know, kind
of extended period of a cat-and-mouse game? And is there something that
the U.S. and EU can do tomorrow, you know, some sort of message to be
sent that this -- you know, Iran needs to come forward and accept this
deal?



MR. HADLEY: Well, I think you've heard it from U.S. spokesmen and also
others involved, that it is weeks, not months. And why do you say that,
why do you get that out early? And we got that out pretty early. It
was to set a marker down that we need to hear from the Iranians a
response to this offer. And I think that's been something that has been
clear by statements we've made, and others made, and it was one of the
things that Secretary Rice talked about and got an understanding that
the EU3 - U.K., France and Germany, and also Russia and China -- in the
meeting she had in Vienna.



Q Are you confident that all the Europeans are with you on this
demand that the Iranians must completely shut down their centrifuges
before?



MR. HADLEY: Yes, we are, actually. And they've been good on it. One
of the things -- people forget about it is, of course, the suspension
was part of the Paris agreement from November of 2004, that the Iranians
subsequently walked away from. And the requirement for return to
suspension is actually a EU3 requirement, not ours. It was a
requirement that was affirmed by the board of governors of the IAEA --
the International Atomic Energy Agency -- and also is reflected in the
U.N. Security Council Presidential Statement.



So this is something that reflects not just our position. In some
sense, we've adopted and followed the lead of the EU3 on it. And so
far, in terms of what we've seen publicly and what we hear privately,
people are pretty firm about it.



Q And when the President talks about progressively stronger
sanctions, could you elaborate a little bit on that? Will he use this
trip to try to build support for that?



MR. HADLEY: Well, we've already got an understanding, as we've said,
that if Iran does not accept this offer, then we return to the U.N.
Security Council. So I think that's all a part of the way forward.



What we want to emphasize, though, and what the President tried to
emphasize yesterday is the opportunity for the Iranian people, if their
government will take this offer that is before them it can result in
avoiding this crisis, it can result in strengthened relations and
economic relations that will have a real benefit for the Iranian people.
There's a terrific opportunity here. And what we've been focusing on is
urging the Iraqi [sic] regime to take advantage of the opportunity
before it.



Q Iranian regime.



MR. HADLEY: Iranian regime, sorry. Thank you.



Q Steve, you talked last week about the meeting tomorrow being sort
of a chance for the President to shore up, make sure that everybody is
on the same page. And I don't remember your exact words when you were
talking about --



MR. HADLEY: I talked about -- people were asking whether there was
going to be big news coming out of this. And I think my answer was that
the framework that we're operating under is already fixed. I mean, the
President will obviously have conversations about it. But, one,
remember, this is with the President of the EU Commission and the
President, if you will, of the Austrian presidency as the leader at this
point of the EU. The French, the Germans, the U.K. are not there. So
the parties with whom we've been doing this Iranian initiative are
really not going to be there.



So I think sure, there will be some discussion about it, but the
framework is clear. What is missing is a positive Iranian response.
And that's, of course, what we're looking for.



Q You make it sound like Iran really isn't a big piece of the
discussion tomorrow.



MR. HADLEY: I think that's correct.



Q Can I ask you a quick question about your earlier comments about
the open-ended commitment in Iraq? What's the furthest you've gone, or
what's the most you've said about the likelihood of bases in Iraq for as
long as we can foresee?



MR. HADLEY: I'm sorry?



Q Permanent military bases in Iraq, do you expect those?



MR. HADLEY: We haven't talked about that. What we've really been
focusing on is this process of training, turning over responsibility for
security at the military level, and then the taking of responsibility by
political authorities in Iraq. That's what we really need to be
focusing on, and that's what we focused on, and the progress, we hope,
that that will afford in dealing with the security situation there.
That's really what we've been focusing on.



Q I could be completely wrong about this, I think there was a New
York Times story about bases not too long ago, and I don't think you
guys have ever tried to dissuade us of the idea that there likely will
be troops of some sort in Iraq for as long as we can foresee.



MR. HADLEY: We're going to have a relationship, we would hope, with a
free and democratic Iraq for a long time. Iraq has an opportunity to
come and be part of the family of nations, as the President -- of the
democratic family of nations, as the President said, the example in the
region and an ally in the war on terror. Does that mean that we expect
to have good relations with Iraq going forward for a long time? You
bet. Obviously, over time, it will become the kind of normal
relationship we have with countries.



Q Can I ask you a question about trade? Is the President bringing
any new -- anything new to advance the Doha talks to the table? And, if
not, what can you expect to accomplish there?



MR. HADLEY: Well, he will of course underscore the importance of Doha
and the opportunity we have to close out this round by the end of the
year.



You know, the great beneficiaries of the Doha round are the developing
countries, and what trade can contribute to raising people out of
poverty. This is why it's the development round of Doha. And we will
want to keep focusing on that.



The President made a very bold offer, with respect to agricultural
subsidies that you all know about. It was an effort to jump-start the
negotiations. And what we really need to see is a response from the
G20, the group of 20 countries, and from the Europeans that is
comparable to this offer. If they can move in that direction, we're
going to be in the zone of getting an agreement by the end of the year.
And I think you will see the President encourage everyone he talks to on
this trip not to miss this terrific opportunity to advance trade and
advance development and help raise people out of poverty.



Q Which countries have not followed through on their pledges to help
the Iraqis, the monetary pledges?



MR. HADLEY: Look, I don't want to get into specific names, but it is
something we --



Q Are they European countries?



MR. HADLEY: You know, if you go through the list, there are countries
in every region of the world that have made pledges.



Q They know who they are. (Laughter.)



MR. HADLEY: Some of them have done better than others, and some are
clearly lagging. And we will remind countries if they have forgotten
about their pledges, and the importance to get this money to this new
government now. Because the opportunity this government really has is
to show for the Iraqi people that it can make a difference in their
daily lives. That will strengthen this government in a way as few
things will. And these resources getting to the government now can make
an enormous contribution and we will try and remind people of that and
urge them to seize this opportunity we all have.



Q Do you want to set up the Hungary speech now, or are you going to
brief tomorrow?



MR. SNOW: We'll brief on it tomorrow.



Q You were nice to do this. It was very interesting and helpful.



MR. HADLEY: Nice to see you.



Q Can you just tell us on background what some of the names of some
of the countries --



MR. HADLEY: I don't want to do that.



END 12:29 P.M. EDT