Transcript: NSC Advisor Rice Briefs on War on Terrorism, Missile Defense
(U.S. must not pause its military action in Afghanistan, she says)
(5550)
The United States wants to make certain that the war against the al
Qaeda terrorist network in Afghanistan is successful and that means
"we cannot afford to have a pause" in the military action during the
upcoming Muslim holy month of Ramadan, National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice told reporters at a White House briefing November 1.
"We think that the best thing that we can do for the world, for all of
the allies in the coalition, whether they are Muslim or not, is to
make certain that this war on terrorism succeeds. And that means we
have to finish the mission," she said in response to a reporter's
question.
"We do not believe that al Qaeda or the Taliban or any of their kind
are likely to be ones who are going to be observant of any kind of
rules of civilization. They've never demonstrated that they were
observant of any kind of rules of civilization before.
"This is an enemy that has to be taken on and taken on aggressively
and pressed to the end, and we're going to continue to do that. We
have to continue the military action," she said.
Rice reminded reporters that the United States is acting to defend
itself. "The United States was attacked on September 11th with
incredible brutality," she said, and it continues "to be concerned
about further attacks."
"We have no choice but to try to go both to the source of this in
Afghanistan and to try to root these organizations out wherever we
can. And we have to get about that business. We can't afford to have a
pause."
In response to another question, Rice said the Bush administration is
getting "very good cooperation" from the government of Pakistan. "We
are in constant discussion with them," she said, pointing out that
they have had a number of high-level visitors lately, and will have
more soon.
President Bush, she said, will update the American public on the war
on terrorism in a speech in the coming week. He also will speak from
Washington by satellite to a gathering in Warsaw of Central European
states meeting there to talk about how best they can support the war
on terrorism.
Bush "wants very much to thank the Polish government for arranging
this gathering," she said.
The President also will meet next week at the White House with several
heads of state, Rice said, including Britain's Prime Minister Tony
Blair; French President Jacques Chirac; India's Prime Minister Atal
Bihari Vajpayee; Brazil's President Fernando Cardoso; Ireland's Prime
Minister Bertie Ahern; and Algeria's President Abdelaziz Bouteflika.
And, on Saturday, November 10, President Bush will deliver a speech in
New York to the United Nations General Assembly.
Asked if there was a tentative agreement with Russia on the
administration's plans to test a limited missile defense system, which
could conflict with the existing Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty,
the National Security Advisor said the United States and Russia "are
making progress on redefining our new relationship." But she cautioned
against "expecting any particular deal at any particular time."
Both President Bush and Russia's President Vladimir Putin, she said,
"have made clear that they want to come to agreement, that they want
to move forward together, but we haven't come to an agreement on what
the form of that should be."
Rice told reporters not to jump to any conclusions "about precisely
how this is all going to come out, or when there's going to be an
agreement.
"I think that would be a mistake," she said.
Bush and Putin are to meet mid-November in Washington and at Bush's
ranch in Texas.
Following is the White House transcript:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
November 1, 2001
PRESS BRIEFING BY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR CONDOLEEZZA RICE
The James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
11:47 A.M. EST
DR. RICE: Good morning, everyone. I would like to take a few minutes
just to talk a little bit about the President's activities over the
next week, including a series of speeches that he will make updating
the American people and our coalition allies on the progress on the
war on terrorism. And then, of course, I'll be happy to take your
questions.
The President thinks it's vitally important to make certain that the
American people are kept informed about the nature of the threat that
we face, and the progress of our response. I'm going to leave the
timing and logistics of the exact timing of the President's speeches
and briefings to Ari, but let me just give you a sense of what he
plans to do.
Next week, the President will address the American people about
homeland defense and security, and our status and progress on this
front, the home front, on the war on terrorism. He will speak to the
American people about the ways in which our everyday lives have
changed necessarily since the horrific events of September 11th, and
his optimism and resolve that, despite these changes, American values
are constant and impermeable. The President will also take an
opportunity next week to announce new progress on the financial front
against terrorism.
Concerning the war abroad, the President will consult with the members
of the coalition. He does this regularly in phone calls each morning,
but he'll have a couple of special opportunities next week. He will
speak to a gathering in Warsaw, Poland of Central European states that
have gathered to talk about how they can best support the war on
terrorism. And he wants very much to thank the Polish government for
arranging this gathering. He will talk about the importance of world
leaders and coalition allies, he will define the nature of the global
response to terrorism, and update the progress on the war on
terrorism, talking about the responsibilities of those who have joined
the coalition.
The President will also have several heads of state here next week. He
will visit with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain who will come
here; with President Chirac of France; with Prime Minister Vajpayee of
India. He will also meet with President Cardoso of Brazil and Ahern of
Ireland. And also, of Algeria -- Bouteflika from Algeria.
Finally, the President will deliver his first speech to the United
Nations General Assembly on Saturday. So it's going to be a very busy
week, both in talking about the home front and in talking with members
of the coalition about the progress in the war on terrorism. And now
I'd be glad to take your questions. Ron.
Q: Just a follow up to the homeland defense speech. Are you saying --
is that a prime-time or an Oval Office or a Congressional address?
DR. RICE: I'm going to let Ari address the logistics with you. But the
President is going to take an opportunity next week to update the
American people on homeland defense.
Q: I'm assuming Poland is a satellite speech, by satellite?
DR. RICE: That's right. He's not going to Poland. That's right, he's
going to be on satellite.
Q: Is there a tentative agreement on missile defense?
DR. RICE: The President has been very consistent, going all the way
back to the time that he was elected, that he had certain principles
that he believes should guide us as we've thought about the new
environment in which we find ourselves with Russia, at the end of the
Cold War.
Those principles have not changed. First of all, he's said that he
believes very strongly that the United States ought to do a strategic
nuclear review, a review of its offensive forces, and bring those
forces to a level consistent with our own deterrence needs, not as a
matter of negotiation, but as a matter of restructuring our nuclear
forces.
Secondly, the President has made clear that he believes that we're
going to have to move beyond the ABM Treaty for two reasons: first of
all because it constrains our ability to fully explore the
possibilities for missile defense, and secondly because he believes
that it is not representative of the kind of relationship that we have
with the Russians.
Now, obviously, we've been talking with the Russians at the head of
state level, at the ministerial level, and at the expert level for a
number of months now. We believe that we are understanding each other
better, that we're making progress. But I would caution against
expecting any particular deal at any particular time.
We have a series of meetings that we have been having with the Russian
President -- Ljubljana, Genoa, the recent meeting in Shanghai. And as
you know, President Putin will be here shortly. So I would caution
against expecting any particular deal at any particular time. But we
do believe that we and the Russians are making progress on redefining
our new relationship.
Q: Are you denying -- are you denying that there has been a tentative
agreement on the range of nuclear reductions?
DR. RICE: I am just saying, Ron, that I would caution against
expecting any particular deal at any particular time. As I said to you
many, many times, let's not try to keep score, that it's 1-0 or 2-0,
or that it's the ninth inning. We are building this relationship over
a long period of time with the Russians, and we are making steady
progress.
Q: Can I follow on that, Dr. Rice? There was a sense out of one of the
meetings that Secretary Powell had while he was in Shanghai, that the
Russians had indicated to us that there's a lot more that we can do in
terms of testing within the framework of the ABM Treaty than we think
we can do. Did this sort of notion of -- not an agreement, but some
sort of understanding, fall out of those conversations?
DR. RICE: Well, I think that we are getting to understand each other
better over this long period of time. I think that the expert
discussions have really told the Russians precisely the kinds of
things that we are thinking about doing. We have said that we are
going to be transparent in our testing program; we have said that the
Russians should know precisely what we are doing to move toward
limited defenses. And so I don't think it should be surprising to
anyone that there is a better understanding, and perhaps more comfort,
with how we are going to move forward.
But I am not going to put words in the Russians' mouths as to
precisely what they think of our testing program. We will see how the
discussions go over the next several months.
Q: Can you at least say, or perhaps explain, that it's acceptable to
lower the overall number of warheads?
DR. RICE: Oh, the President has said from the very beginning -- in
fact, he said during the campaign -- that he believed that American
offensive nuclear force levels were probably too high for the task of
post-Cold War deterrence. And he launched, upon becoming President, a
strategic nuclear review. That review is moving toward conclusion. And
the President's also made very clear that he believes the
restructuring of American nuclear forces and numbers that are
consistent with the deterrent mission is a matter of military
planning; it's not a matter of negotiation. And so, sooner or later,
those talks will be done internally.
Q: But just to explain to the American people, I mean, you apparently
are exploring going below 2000 --
DR. RICE: What we're doing is looking at the level -- and this is an
internal review; this is not a review with the Russians that says we
have to match warhead for warhead. We really believe the old arms
control agreements in which you had to match warhead for warhead,
system for system, ignoring geography, ignoring history, ignoring the
threats around you, was the old way of thinking about this.
We think that the best way to do this -- and the President said it
several times -- is to ask the Pentagon to review America's needs for
deterrence and move America's forces to a level that is appropriate to
our deterrent needs. And we would expect that the Russians would do
the same.
Q: Dr. Rice, it seems to me that your phraseology of moving beyond the
ABM Treaty has been purposely vague all along. Are you willing to
accept amending the ABM Treaty, or are you determined to scrap it
entirely?
DR. RICE: Look, we have said all along that we need to find a way to
achieve two goals. One is to give ourselves maximum flexibility for
exploring the technologies that might give us the chance of an
effective limit to defense. The ABM Treaty is constraining.
The President's also made clear that he does not believe that this
treaty is appropriate to this period of time, and that we need a new
strategic framework with the Russians that is appropriate to this
time. This was a treaty with the Soviet Union, signed in 1972.
Now, we are working with the Russians and trying with the Russians to
come to a better understanding of what that might mean, how it is we
move beyond the ABM Treaty. But that's what's going on here. The
President's views have not changed.
Q: So you could accept either amending it or scrapping it, and that's
still under negotiation?
DR. RICE: I've said that -- it's not a matter of negotiation, it's a
matter of principle -- that there are two reasons that the ABM Treaty
is problematic. One has to do with testing, the other has to do,
however, with the nature of the relationship.
And I think that both Presidents have made clear that they want to
come to agreement, that they want to move forward together, but we
haven't come to an agreement on what the form of that should be.
Q: Condi, pursuing that same point, say, if you take your two
different issues, one of them is an immediate one; the testing one,
you need to move forward with the testing in a relatively short period
of time if you're going to meet your own schedules. The new strategic
framework is a longer-term issue. Could you foresee a situation in
which you had a two-phase agreement, in which the first phase has to
do with testing, but keeps in place the ABM Treaty, the second phase
deals with the ultimate disposition of the ABM Treaty, and your
framework?
DR. RICE: David, I think we just have to continue to explore with the
Russians how we meet these two goals that the President set out
sometime ago. I do think that all of the time that we've spent in
discussions with the Russians, all of the time that they've spent with
us, that we are understanding better each other, and what our own
constraints and demands are.
But I would not jump to any conclusions about precisely how this is
all going to come out, or when there's going to be an agreement. I
think that would be a mistake.
Q: Dr. Rice, the administration has said the military campaign on
Afghanistan is going according to plan; yet some in Afghanistan, some
in Pakistan, some even in Europe are confused as to what the plan is;
why hasn't more been achieved through the air campaign, when is the
ground campaign going to begin in earnest? And there is some concern
that this isn't going as well as the administration had originally
advertised, or led the American people to believe. It's even caused
anxiety in the stock market, causing, in some cases, share prices to
go down.
What can you tell the American people about the plan, why it's going
so well, and deal with those skeptical voices, not only in the region,
but among some of our European allies?
DR. RICE: I would say several things. The first is that the military
portion of this -- and I want to be very clear that the President made
very clear early on that military power was only one element on the
war on terrorism -- and in fact this is a different kind of war, he
said, don't expect this to look like the Gulf War. This is going to
take time to achieve the objectives that he laid out.
Those objectives are to make certain that the al Qaeda organization
and its leadership are not capable of carrying out the kind of
training, financing of terrorists that they've been carrying out for
the last several years, to root them out, to root them out wherever
they might be, to make certain that secondly, Afghanistan, which has
been a country that they hijacked for their own purposes, to harbor
terrorism, that Afghanistan can no longer be a sanctuary for
terrorism, and that the Taliban understands that it made the wrong
choice in continuing to harbor terrorists -- and thirdly, that we have
to think about there's a broader war on terrorism. You can't be in
favor of one set of terrorists and continue to harbor other
terrorists.
Now, on all of those fronts the President believes that we are making
progress. On the front of making certain that a Qaeda can't train, we
have gone after and destroyed many, many al Qaeda training sites. They
are not going to have the kind of access to those training sites that
they have had in the past. We have made great -- good progress against
the Taliban's military assets, and we have made good progress against
the goal of making certain that Afghanistan, when this is over, is not
going to be a place that you can harbor terrorism.
But let me be very clear: The military campaign is only one part of
this. Every time you see people being arrested and rooted out in
countries all over the world, you are seeing cells that are
potentially being broken up, that are perhaps out there waiting to
commit terrorist acts. That's extremely important.
This is the first time in international history that you have had the
kind of concentration of intelligence assets, law enforcement assets
from around the world, on a network like this. They are not going to
be able to hide, because the scrutiny and the pressure from the
international community, from law enforcement, and from intelligence
around the world is not going to let them hide. They are not going to
be able to get significant financing, because we are shutting down
their financial networks.
So, as the President said, this can't be thought of as just a war of
military power, although our military power is having good effect. You
have to look at the total picture here, and we think we are making
tremendous progress on all of these goals.
Q: Can I follow up just for a second? So are you telling the American
public that actually deterrence is the first goal, and it may -- the
public and the European allies and the coalition powers may have to
wait longer than they ever imagined to actually get the Taliban out of
power?
DR. RICE: The President said this is going to be a long war. And he
made clear that his standard is that we have made certain that the
Taliban can't -- I'm sorry, that the al Qaeda cannot do what it has
been doing, that we've made certain that they can't be harbored, and
that we've made certain that other countries that might be considering
harboring terrorists, or might be harboring them, understand that
there is a significant price to pay for harboring them. But he made
clear, he said, this may be one year, it may be several years, it may
be more than one administration. He's been very clear about that from
the beginning, and that is what we are seeing. This is going to take
some time.
Q: Two quick questions. First of all, in your internal review of the
arsenal, nuclear arsenal, has the administration reached a decision in
and of itself as to what number it wants to bring that arsenal down
to?
DR. RICE: The review is very near completion. But I want to caution
that this is not just about a number. This is to structure American
forces in a way that they can meet deterrent needs. The President has
also been concerned, for instance, about the infrastructure for our
nuclear weapons, about making certain that we can keep them safe and
reliable.
All of this has been discussed in this review. And to the degree that
as you come down in numbers, you also want to make sure that you're
more safe and reliable. We spend equal time worrying about that as to
any specific number. But I want to caution that a specific number,
rather than a draw-down over time, is not exactly the right way to
think about it.
Q: Can I try you on this?
Q: Just one other question on the -- do you -- there is a report that
Pakistan is giving ammunition and assistance and working that into
Afghanistan to help the Taliban. Can you comment on that?
DR. RICE: We believe that we're getting very good cooperation from the
Pakistani government. We are in constant discussion with them. In
fact, they've had a number of high-level visitors lately. They will
have more high-level visitors very shortly. We believe we are getting
good cooperation with the Pakistanis, and that they are doing what
they can to avoid the situation that you are talking.
Q: While you're exploring with the Russians, are you talking numbers?
Are you talking specific numbers? Are you talking about the two sides
proceeding -- oh, if the Russians care to, but certainly we care to --
test? After all, you've cancelled the suspended parts of tests that
violate the treaty. I'm trying to get to today's event. You say,
exploring, exploring, exploring. Are you talking numbers to them? You
know where they want to go. You know we have too many. Are you talking
to them about a range of numbers, and are you talking about it linked
-- linked however you mean -- to going ahead with tests?
DR. RICE: First of all, the "linkage" was made sometime ago by the
President, that he believed this had to be both about offensive
forces, lower numbers of offensive forces, and about beginning to
incorporate defensive forces in, too. We have, in the now considerable
consultations that we've been having with the Russians, talked a great
deal about all of these things.
Now, I want to repeat, about the offensive forces. This is not an arms
control negotiation, in which we and the Russians need to try to match
warhead for warhead how many we have or how many we don't have. What
we want to talk to the Russians about is how we see our deterrent
needs, in terms of levels, in terms of the period of draw-down, in
terms of on how they're structured. But we consider this not a matter
of negotiation, but a matter of how American forces ought to be
structured. And we expect the Russians to have the same concerns.
Q: I asked about a range, not matching warhead to warhead, a very wide
range of possibly 500 warheads. Are you talking specific numbers? Is
Mr. Powell talking specific numbers? Will Rumsfeld talk specific
numbers?
DR. RICE: There is going to be a completion of the review that the
President -- that review is nearing completion. I think that the
Secretaries will be talking to their counterparts about some of the
findings of that review. But I just want to reemphasize, this is not
an arms control negotiation in which we try to equalize the numbers.
Q: What evidence does the United States have right now that --
specific evidence that Osama bin Laden is somehow displaced or
disrupted in his activities?
DR. RICE: Well, first of all, David, I don't want to comment on what
we are or are not seeing. And I think you'll understand that. But I
will say this: when you look at what has happened in Afghanistan, when
you look at what has happened to al Qaeda camps and to al Qaeda
strongholds, when you look at the scrutiny that al Qaeda cells are
under all over the world, it is very hard to make a case that they are
operating like they were on September 10th. And that is the purpose of
what we're doing. Our purpose here is to disrupt, is to make it harder
for them to do what they were doing on September 10th, and to
eventually make it not possible for them to do it.
Now, I want to warn -- you know, the President, and I think Attorney
General Ashcroft, has made clear that we don't think that we are out
of the woods in terms of potential attacks against the United States.
But every time we round up in some country -- thanks to
intelligence-sharing, thanks to law enforcement efforts -- a group
that might have been planning something, or a piece of a cell that
might have been planning something, we are accomplishing precisely
what we need to accomplish.
Q: Can I follow up in a different area? Why is it that the United
States is now prepared to engage the Germ Warfare Treaty in a
different way, and why does the U.S. not think it's salvageable?
DR. RICE: Well, first of all, the United States has been a strong
adherent of the BWC Convention since its inception. And we made clear
early on that we thought it was important to try and strengthen the
convention. We just thought that the particular protocol that was
being discussed was not addressing the problems that biological
weapons pose.
For instance, we have not believed that the kind of inspection regime
that was there under the Biological Weapons Convention made sense.
Now, we thought that -- we have been in these discussions with our
allies and friends for sometime. A meeting was coming up; we thought
it was important now to put some proposals on the table. But I can
tell you that the proposals have been developed, were being developed
all the way back into the summer.
We now think that if we can move toward a system of strengthening the
Convention that focuses on criminal activity and underground activity
that can make more effective the kinds of things that we're doing,
that that's really what we want to do. So we are establishing
procedures for compliance concerns, talking about criminalizing acts
that might -- much, in the way, by the way that we're doing with
terrorist conventions -- making states responsible for dealing with
scientists and others who might engage in this kind of activity. We
want to have strong national oversight mechanisms.
There is a lot going on here. I can say, too, David, I think that
there has been a positive reception to a lot of these ideas, and we
just think that it's time to move on with this.
Q: Dr. Rice, I want to ask you two questions about the coalition. The
first one has to do with Ramadan. If the military action continues
after the start of Ramadan, how will this affect how Muslim allies --
members of the coalition and the Middle East situation, the violence
hasn't stopped -- how is that affecting our coalition with the Arab
and Muslim nations?
DR. RICE: Well, we've been on a track on the Arab-Israeli issues -- or
the Palestinian-Israeli issues for quite a long time now. And we
continue to believe that there are things that both sides can do to
make possible entry into the Mitchell Process. And we work that every
day. And I think that nobody has been more dedicated to that than the
President and Secretary Powell. But we do not see the
Israeli-Palestinian issue as a part of the coalition effort.
I would just point you to what Yasser Arafat said about Osama bin
Laden trying to hijack the Palestinian issue. Where was he for 30
years, and all of a sudden the Palestinian issue is al Qaeda's issue?
I think that we need to be very careful not to link these in our own
minds, and -- but we work the Israeli Palestinian issues in their own
right, because we think they are important to security in the region.
In terms of the Afghanistan -- I'm sorry, you asked about --
Q: Ramadan.
DR. RICE: Yes, Ramadan. We think that the best thing that we can do
for the world, for all of the allies in the coalition, whether they
are Muslim or not, is to make certain that this war on terrorism
succeeds. And that means we have to finish the mission.
We do not believe that al Qaeda or the Taliban or any of their kind
are likely to be ones that are going to be observant of any kind of
rules of civilization. They've never demonstrated that they were
observant of any kind of rules of civilization before.
This is an enemy that has to be taken on, and taken on aggressively,
and pressed to the end. And we're going to continue to do that. We
have to continue the military action. I just want to remind everybody,
this is an action in self-defense. The United States was attacked on
September 11th with incredible brutality. We continue to be concerned
about further attacks. We have no choice but to try to go both to the
source of this in Afghanistan, and to try to root these organizations
out wherever we can. And we have to get about that business; we can't
afford to have a pause.
Q: The coalition has involved the United States working very closely
with some countries that are very different from our own. You've been
at the center of what must be some unimaginably excruciating decisions
in the last six weeks about how to structure that coalition. Can you
tell us: Will the United States work with any country that's willing
to offer help, or are there some countries whose past practices or
habits are so abhorrent to American values that they're just somehow
considered to be on the tail? And can you help us in how you're guided
in making those decisions?
DR. RICE: It's a very important question, because what the United
States is not prepared to do is to sacrifice either long-term interest
or values in short-term goals. We do recognize that we need help. The
way that we were attacked on September 11th, if the President of the
United States did not do absolutely everything that he can to try and
root out these terrorists, to try to make it not possible to use
Afghanistan, he would simply be shirking on his first responsibility,
which is to protect and defend the United States.
So we have to do whatever we can to deal with that. And we are willing
to accept help from all comers concerning al Qaeda. What we have been
very clear, though, is that it is not enough to say you want to help
us on al Qaeda, and hug other terrorists. That's not appropriate. And
so whenever we talk to countries that have a past, so to speak, and
maybe even a present in harboring terrorism, we are very clear that
it's fine that you want to help with al Qaeda, but to really be a part
of this coalition, the responsibility to deal with all terrorism is a
part of the responsibility of this coalition.
We also have tried to be very clear that we believe that in the long
run, the countries that are both best going to deal with these issues
will be countries that respect the rights of their own people, that
respect their own people, that respect religious and ethnic
minorities, and don't willy-nilly turn them into terrorists in order
to hide certain kinds of activities under the terrorist banner.
So I believe that we have been in exactly the right place here, which
is to be, as the President said in the speech that first night to the
Congress, if you continue to support terrorism, you are making the
wrong choice. We've never wavered from the point of view that you
cannot be on both sides of this. We've never wavered from the point of
view that there are no good terrorists and bad terrorists. And that's
been our guiding principle.
The President is doing everything that he can to try and achieve these
goals, so that the United States, in self defense, can protect itself
from the kind of thing that happened to us on September 11th.
Thank you. Got to go.
END 12:14 P.M. EST
(end White House transcript)
