21 November 2002
Rice Calls Developments at NATO Summit Meeting "Historic"
(Addressed new members, relations with Russia, Iraq, 21st century
threats) (4020)
President Bush's National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice
characterized the NATO Summit in Prague as historic, as she briefed
reporters November 21 on the day's events.
"It was an historic summit today, really the most historic summit
since NATO's founding in 1949," she said. "It was extraordinary to see
around that table the new entrants, the seven new countries. It was
remarkable to do this in Prague, which, of course, has been a site of
one of the pitched battles of the Cold War, when Soviet tanks invaded
Czechoslovakia in 1968 to set aside or to end the attempt to find
socialism with a human face, and eventually leading, over time, then
to the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, the dissolution of communism in
East Central Europe and ultimately in the Soviet Union itself.
The 19 NATO heads of state and government at the summit in Prague
formally invited seven new countries to join the alliance: Bulgaria,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.
The decision was announced at the opening session of the North
Atlantic Council, NATO's highest decisionmaking body.
"The remarkable thing about this," Rice said, "is that it has been
done in a framework that allowed not just the entry of the seven new
states into NATO but the reconciliation of NATO with Russia in the new
Russia-NATO Council and, of course, a long discussion today of the
transformation of NATO to deal with the threats of the 21st century."
The NSC advisor said that many of the leaders spoke about September
11th as "a new watershed, a new chapter in understanding the threats
of the post-Cold War period, understanding that any nation that loves
freedom could have sustained the kind of attack that the United States
did on September 11th; and that the countries that love freedom -- and
NATO, as an alliance, of course, is dedicated to those values of
freedom and liberty -- any nation that loves freedom has to be
committed to dealing with terrorist threats, to dealing with threats
of weapons of mass destruction."
Among topics discussed by the summit leaders, Rice said, was "an
important discussion of capabilities, the importance of a rapid
reaction force, which was an American proposal that was adopted by
NATO today" and "a very strong statement on Iraq, supporting the U.N.
Security Council resolution, supporting effective action against Iraq
should Iraq fail to disarm."
"The alliance made this very powerful statement" on Iraq, she said.
"It is really too early to talk about what military action will be
needed or what military contributions might be needed. The important
thing right now is that this is, along with the U.N. Security Council
resolution, a strong statement to the Iraqis that the world is united
in the demand that Iraq disarm," Rice said in response to a reporter's
question.
"The United States is at this point talking to countries, consulting
about what might be necessary, what capabilities might be necessary,
if military action takes place. But, as the president said, military
action is not his first choice, and we are trying very hard to send a
strong signal to the Iraqis that there is only one way out of this,
and that is to disarm fully," Rice said.
But if Iraq's leader does not comply with the U.N. demand that he
fully declare his weapons programs by December 8, "we have to be
careful about wasting the time in ... hunting and pecking all over the
country," she said.
NATO's statement on Iraq deplored Iraq's failure to comply with past
U.N. resolutions and called the new U.N. Security Council resolution
"a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations." It
called upon Iraq "to comply fully and immediately with this and all
relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions."
Rice also discussed President Bush's planned meeting November 22 in
St. Petersburg with Russia's President Vladimir Putin, saying
"obviously, he is going, first and foremost, to St. Petersburg to
demonstrate that what happened today ... is a new chapter that is
favorable for Russia and its people. Because to have stable
democracies at the door of Russia as it transitions to a stable
democracy can only be for the good. So that's the primary reason for
the trip."
Following is the transcript of Rice's remarks:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Prague, Czech Republic)
November 21, 2002
PRESS BRIEFING BY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR DR. CONDOLEEZZA RICE
Hilton Prague
Prague, Czech Republic
DR. RICE: Hi. I'm happy to take a few questions. Unfortunately, we
don't have very much time. But let me just say that it was an historic
summit today, really the most historic summit since NATO's founding in
1949. It as extraordinary to see around that table the new entrants,
the seven new countries. It was remarkable to do this in Prague,
which, of course, has been a site of one of the pitched battles of the
Cold War, when Soviet tanks invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968 to set
aside or to end the attempt to find socialism with a human face, and
eventually leading, over time, then to the dissolution of the Warsaw
Pact, the dissolution of communism in East Central Europe and
ultimately in the Soviet Union, itself.
The remarkable thing about this is that it has been done in a
framework that allowed not just the entry of the seven new states into
NATO, but the reconciliation of NATO with Russia in the new
Russia-NATO Council, and of course, a long discussion today of the
transformation of NATO to deal with the threats of the 21st century --
an important discussion of capabilities; the importance of a rapid
reaction force, which was an American proposal that was adopted by
NATO today; a very strong statement about one of the first threats of
the 21st century to deal with a hostile state like Iraq armed with
weapons of mass destruction and attempting to further that arming of
weapons with weapons of mass destruction -- a very strong statement on
Iraq, supporting the U.N. Security Council resolution, supporting
effective action against Iraq should Iraq fail to disarm.
So, all in all, a very important summit, historic summit. And I think
when the President said that not only did today add to the military
capability of the alliance, but it refreshed the spirit of this great
democratic alliance. I can tell you that you certainly felt that in
that room this afternoon.
Q: Two quick ones. Number one, what does it mean, the mission shift
for NATO, what does it actually mean, that NATO is going to be taking
on this anti-terror role?
And, second, the President said yesterday that if -- that there will
be a reduced chance of a war with Iraq if there is the assurance that
NATO is willing to step up and play its part, should military action
be required. Does the President leave here assured that his NATO
partners would play their role if it comes to that? And if so, in what
way did he receive that assurance?
DR. RICE: What the President said -- and I think it was echoed by
several leaders in the room and certainly during other sessions -- is
that Iraq is only going to be convinced to disarm, and therefore
create us a possibility of a peaceful resolution to this crisis if
Iraq believes that the world is united in insisting on disarmament of
Iraq. And what you saw in the NATO summit statement was an insistence
by the world that Iraq disarm. Many people talked about the importance
of a strength of that statement, of the unity of that statement as a
signal to Iraq that it doesn't have any other option, that no one will
support Iraq's lack of compliance or the kind of behavior in which
Iraq has been engaged over the last several years.
The alliance made this very powerful statement. It is really too early
to talk about what military action will be needed or what military
contributions might be needed. The important thing right now is that
this is, along with the U.N. Security Council resolution, a strong
statement to the Iraqis that the world is united in the demand that
Iraq disarm.
And as to the transformation of NATO for the future, obviously
September 11th -- many of the speakers today spoke about September
11th as a new watershed, a new chapter in understanding the threats of
the post-Cold War period; understanding that any nation that loves
freedom could have sustained the kind of attack that the United States
did on September 11th; and that the countries that love freedom -- and
NATO, as an alliance, of course, is dedicated to those values of
freedom and liberty -- any nation that loves freedom has to be
committed to dealing with terrorist threats, to dealing with threats
of weapons of mass destruction.
The rapid reaction force rapid deployment force, is for specifically
the purpose of being able to be flexible, to be facile. You will hear,
I think, a lot more about the transformation of NATO's capabilities.
And, of course, intelligence is an important part of that. But NATO
began this transformation today. It was a strong statement of support
for that, but it has a ways to go.
Q: Could have a quick follow? Can I follow?
DR. RICE: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Q: You said that it was too early to talk about military capability.
Can you comment for us or provide us any information on the half-dozen
or so countries that are confirmed receiving a letter from the United
States asking for specific military assistance?
DR. RICE: The United States is at this point talking to countries,
consulting about what might be necessary, what capabilities might be
necessary if military action takes place. But, as the President said,
military action is not his first choice and we are trying very hard to
send a strong signal to the Iraqis that there is only one way out of
this, and that is to disarm fully.
Q: The December 8th deadline will be very important as the President
discussed it. To what extent are you worried that Saddam Hussein may
try to file something of a misleading report, that he may put a lot in
there in terms of declarations, may make a public display of
destroying some weapons in an attempt to -- world opinion. How do you
anticipate it, how do you deal with it if it happens?
DR. RICE: Well, the U.N. resolution is very clear that this is to be a
full and complete declaration. Now, we've had experience with Saddam
Hussein in declarations before, and it is true that he's not tended to
file ones that are anywhere that one could concern or one could call
fair and full and complete. But he has an opportunity to do that.
There are many sources for evaluating that declaration and we would
expect that we will -- that the inspectors and others will take a look
at what he files. But the first test clearly is that he should not as
the President said, he should not begin this with a lie; he should
begin this with a full and complete declaration of what he has.
Q: Could I just follow up on one point? If there are omissions or
half-statements in that declaration, is this government prepared to
prove that lie today, or will we have to rely on the work of weapons
inspectors on the ground?
DR. RICE: I think, David, it's not the time to get into hypotheticals.
There's a whole range here of what could happen with this declaration.
But the best thing that could happen with this declaration is that
Saddam Hussein could finally demonstrate that he's prepared to
cooperate. What this declaration does is it starts to set the stage
for whether or not he's prepared to cooperate. Because we have said
several times, we do not expect the burden of proof to be on Hans Blix
and Mohammed ElBaradei to go and hunt and peck all over Iraq looking
for weapons. We expect Saddam Hussein to give a full and complete
declaration -- that's the demand in the U.N. resolution -- and to
therefore demonstrate that he's prepared to cooperate. Because if he's
not prepared to cooperate, we have to be careful about wasting the
time in the world and hunting and pecking all over the country. We
will take our time and see what he does on December 8th.
Q: Can you tell us a little bit about the President's agenda tomorrow
with President Putin and specifically on the subject of Chechnya?
DR. RICE: The President will discuss a range of issues with President
Putin. Obviously, he is going, first and foremost, to St. Petersburg
to demonstrate that what happened today is a new chapter, and it is a
new chapter that is favorable for Russia and favorable for its people.
Because to have stable democracies at the door of Russia as it
transitions to a stable democracy can only be for the good. So that's
the primary reason for the trip.
He'll also talk about they'll talk about the war on terrorism and
Iraq. And I'm certain that they will talk about Chechnya. The
President has been very clear that he understands and he and President
Putin both understand the need to take on terrorism wherever it's
found. The President has said that what happened in the Moscow theater
should be blamed on the terrorists because they are the ones who put
innocent life at risk. The Russians were faced with a difficult
situation.
He will encourage the Russians to work toward a political solution
with the Chechen people, because there are aspirations there that need
to be understood and need to be met. He will ask the Russians to work
to make certain that human rights are upheld and that humanitarian
conditions in Chechnya are addressed, and he'll say that terrorism in
the service of any cause -- cannot be in the service of any cause.
Terrorism is always, by its definition, wrong. He will ask President
Putin to consider the road to a political solution, because
ultimately, that's the way to resolve this conflict.
Q: The President and Chancellor Schroeder have had a couple of
opportunities to get together. Have they gotten over this bad spot in
the relationship?
DR. RICE: They shook hands last night. The President described it to
everyone as a cordial discussion. And the work of U.S.-German
relations goes on and will continue to go on. It's an important
relationship. We have important work to do. As you know, the
Chancellor and the President talked on the phone before he came to
discuss the role of Germany in the ISAF and ISAF III, and appreciates
that contribution very much.
Q: Have you seen any difference, any change in the German position on
Iraq during this meeting?
DR. RICE: I'll have to let the Germans speak for themselves, but there
is a U.N. Security Council resolution, and there is a NATO statement.
And since NATO works by consensus, the Germans are, of course, a part
of that consensus that produced the statement.
Q: These consultations with 50 or 52 nations -- are any of them
turning us down? Have any of them said, we really don't want to be a
part of this? And can you further quantify the ones that have given us
support?
DR. RICE: I'm not able to do that at this point. We are in the process
of talking with a number of countries. I think you will find that, as
the President says, that you will find a coalition of willing nations
that want very much, but we all want very much to see this resolved in
a peaceful way; understand that there will have to be consequences for
Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime if they decide not to carry
through this time.
One of the very important themes that emerged from this meeting is
that everybody understands that this is a test of Saddam's willingness
to cooperate, but it's also a test of the credibility of the
international community, of the U.N., to be able to act and to have
that action taken seriously. It's an important signal to a lot of
other states around the world that might want to go the route that
Saddam Hussein has gone.
Q: But so far, no one said no?
DR. RICE: I really can't report to you on it. We've just been out
discussing with states, and I believe we're getting very great
interest on the part of a number of states.
Q: Could you talk about the President's meetings today with Tony Blair
and Chirac? And, also, if you could answer a larger question about if
you -- this is now the President's third trip to Europe, and if you
think there is a difference in the way he is perceived here or
received here since his first trip in 2001?
On the latter, the last point, of course, they now know this President
in ways that they did not know in the first trip. They know that he is
a thoughtful, resourceful, tough-minded colleague and ally who has
strong views and strong principles and is prepared to lead from them.
We have now experienced how he dealt with September 11th and
Afghanistan. A couple of people said today that the measured pace of
the U.S. response to Afghanistan, even after sustaining the horrible
attack, was a demonstration of the way that America intends to lead.
I think everybody was very complimentary, and probably found it
remarkable how well the U.N. coalition was built to get a 15-0
resolution telling Saddam Hussein that it was time to disarm. And
everybody understands that that began with the President's September
12th challenge to the United Nations, but that he did work the
diplomacy and he worked very hard at it, and we got a good resolution
out of the U.N. So I think that there is -- they know him better, they
respect him, they still know him as somebody who is going to lead from
principle and is going to do what he needs to do.
But the leadership that the President has demonstrated after September
11th on the U.N. resolution, and I might add at the Warsaw speech,
going all the way back to that first trip when the President laid out
a vision of Europe whole and free and at peace not just with itself,
but also with Russia -- that has come to fruition. The President at
that time said the alliance, when it came to expansion, needed to do
as much as it could, not as little. And bringing seven countries into
the alliance today was doing as much as it could, not as little as it
could.
The Russia-NATO Council was doing the work of bringing Russia into
reconciliation with Europe. I think the President's leadership agenda
has been out there and I -- we got a lot of comments that it's much
admired.
Q: And Chirac and Tony Blair
DR. RICE: Oh, Chirac and Blair, both excellent meetings. Both meetings
discussed Iraq to a certain extent; quite a bit about the Middle East;
the importance of trying to move forward with Palestinian reform and
with the road map and understanding that that is difficult, but that
the President remains fundamentally committed to a two-state solution.
They talked about the horrible events in Jerusalem and the fact that
this clearly shows that there are those who do not want peace, but
that terrorism has to be fought and fought resolutely by everybody in
the region; yet the vision for peace has to be kept out in front, and
they had an opportunity to talk about that. They also talked about
Afghanistan and the importance of continuing the reconstruction
efforts there.
Q: What is your understanding of the phrase "effective action" in the
NATO statement, and why shouldn't we view that as being deliberately
ambiguous?
DR. RICE: Well, "effective action" means action that will be effective
-- (laughter) and what's going to be effective is to do whatever it
takes to make sure that Saddam Hussein is disarmed. It's in that
context that one has to understand "effective action."
I think that we have to realize that we're not yet at the stage of
talking about military action. The President has clearly said and
stated all the way back on September 12th, that there are really only
two ways that this ends. Either Saddam Hussein cooperates and thereby
voluntarily disarms, or we're going to have to disarm him. And so you
keep your eye on the goal here, which will be to disarm Saddam
Hussein. This is a statement, I think, that we will need to do what we
need to do to disarm Saddam Hussein.
Q: Is it still the view that in order to disarm him, you have to
remove him from power? And was that discussed today? And is that
definition of disarmament, removing him from power, is that something
that the NATO statement endorsed today or that it falls short
DR. RICE: The NATO statement endorsed the U.N. Security Council
resolution. And you know what the terms are of the U.N. Security
Council resolution. The policy of the United States has been regime
change for one important reason, which is that it has the United
States, going back to '98 -- and I think this administration certainly
agrees with the statements that were made in '98 -- has been skeptical
that it is possible to get disarmament and compliance with the U.N.
resolutions with this regime in power.
We're going to have several tests of that. The first thing that needs
to happen is Saddam Hussein needs to make up his mind that the world
is united against him, and if he is going to take advantage of this
last chance, it's time to do so, and it's time to do so in a way that
doesn't try to drag this out, play cat-and-mouse and play the kinds of
games that he has in the past. But I don't think there's any -- we've
tried to make a secret of the fact that we're deeply skeptical that
this regime is ever going to fully live up to the U.N. Security
Council resolutions to which it signed.
I've got to take two more quick questions.
Q: A senior American official briefed right after the President's U.N.
address, asking whether you really thought whether -- anyone thought
he would really disarm. Has that estimate changed or modified?
DR. RICE: We haven't seen anything yet which suggests that Iraq --
that this is a leopard that's changing its spots. We will know because
there are several opportunities for the Iraqis to cooperate and
cooperate fully. But I want to be very clear: If Iraq tries to shift
the burden of proof on to the inspectors, that would be a great
mistake, because the burden of proof is not on the inspectors, the
burden of proof is on Saddam Hussein to show the world that he not
possessing programs for weapons of mass destruction, that he's
destroyed everything that we know that he has had and pursued, and
that he doesn't ever intend to pursue them again.
That's a pretty tall order. I might mention that there are other U.N.
resolutions to which he also signed on, and none of us should forget,
as we sit here today to celebrate the spread of freedom across this
European continent, we should not forget that there are people in the
world who still live in tyranny and despotism, and of course, the
people of Iraq are among those people.
I think I have to go. Sorry, I've got another engagement. Thanks very
much. There are, however, other officials coming who will be glad to
take the remainder of the questions.
END 5:25 P.M. (Local)
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
